In the cycling world, there is no crime more serious than doping. Many top riders have been accused of doping by former teammates, competitors and the media. Every year, dozens of riders are convicted of doping and are punished. Some riders are under constant suspicion of doping.
One would think that after winning seven consecutive Tour de France titles you would be considered a great athlete. However, in the eyes of some, Lance Armstrong is nothing but a cheat. After winning his first tour in 1999, allegations arose that Armstrong participated in doping, but not once has he been found guilty.
Despite officially retiring from international competition, Armstrong still faces accusations, with the most recent one coming from former teammate Floyd Landis. Armstrong is not the only top-class rider receiving criticism in the past year.
Another prominent rider that has faced allegations is Spanish Tour de France champion Alberto Contador. Contador tested positive for doping after winning the 2010 Tour de France. Officials are proposing a one-year ban and stripping of his victory. However, Contador claims he tested positive due to meat that he consumed prior to the test.
While we cannot be sure if Contador is telling the truth, either way, the one-year ban is too lenient, as the rules state a rider receives a two-year ban for a positive test. So the proposed one-year ban will not satisfy either side. If Contador is telling the truth, but still receives the ban he will be falsely stripped of a championship, while, on the other hand, if he did participate in doping, he is getting off easy by only receiving a one-year ban.
The rules for doping receive both praise and criticism from those in the cycling community. The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) defines doping as the presence of a prohibited substance, its metabolites or markers in a rider's bodily specimen; or the use or attempted use by a rider of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method.
Nowhere in the rules set forth by the UCI is there a threshold for the amount of a banned substance that can be found in a rider's body. Contador tested positive for a trace amount of a substance that is known to be found in meat products so it is very possible that this substance did enter Contador's body through the ingestion of meat.
If this is the truth, it shows the doping rules are flawed. I understand that they are in place to prevent riders from gaining an unfair advantage, but if these substances can enter the body through natural means like eating, then the rules simply need to be changed.
Many cyclists and those involved in cycling have called for the rules to be updated, stating that with the current level of scientific testing levels of these banned substances that do not increase the ability of athletes are being detected. Proponents of a rule change also cite that the list of substances used by athletes to gain an advantage is constantly growing, and it is increasingly more difficult to eliminate every substance on the list from the body.
A limit needs to be imposed in regard to the amount of these substances that can be found in a rider's body. By setting a limit, there will be little controversy over bans; if a rider tests over this threshold, a ban is required.
As it stands now, an innocent rider is in danger of receiving a ban just from eating some meat, and in the case of Alberto Contador, in danger of losing his Tour de France title. By no means am I advocating for the intentional use of banned substances in cycling, but the rules are flawed and need to be fixed to prevent an innocent rider from suffering a ban.
Do you think cycling's doping policies need to be re-evaluated? E-mail Matthew at mdkleist@wisc.edu.
