's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

The 2002 women's podium looks like all women!!!(27 posts)

The 2002 women's podium looks like all women!!!PODIUMBOUNDdotCA
Sep 30, 2002 8:55 AM
The world championships finished off this weekend... and to my suprise the 500 m podium looked like all women. No such people like Tammy Thomas. I'm happy to see that.

Comparison to last years podiumPODIUMBOUNDdotCA
Sep 30, 2002 9:34 AM
After thinking I realized this thread could be taken the wrong way which is shouldn't since it isn't meant in any way to attack female track sprinters. But last years podium with Tammy Thomas just shows that drug testing in sport isn't all that effective at times.

Talk about a five o'clock shadow. nmJuanmoretime
Sep 30, 2002 9:39 AM
Last years podium can scare a preg woman into premature birth!!taar44
Sep 30, 2002 1:21 PM
Do I see what I think I see on the right?Captain Morgan
Sep 30, 2002 9:45 AM
Looks like she's got her brights on.
Huzzah! They sure do! nmrwbadley
Sep 30, 2002 11:19 AM
question for you guysDougSloan
Sep 30, 2002 11:24 AM

An answer from the guysspookygeek
Sep 30, 2002 11:40 AM
No, just the ones that look like men.

fwiw Doug I agree with what Nick is doing herelonefrontranger
Sep 30, 2002 11:40 AM
And as a female I find the responses non-threatening, thank you. Mildly voyeuristic and juvenile, certainly, but I'm adult enough to either ignore it if I'm offended or appreciate it if it's done with humor and a modicum of taste. As George Carlin said so many years ago, if you don't like what you're hearing, you have the right to TURN IT OFF.

I agree wholeheartedly with Nick's T. Thomas rants, and have held the same opinion of Miss P. Pezzo for years (oh, sure it was the beef, my Aunt Thelma, how stupid does she think the cycling public is?). If you think Nick's jabs are harsh, then consider that both T. Thomas and anyone else in the public limelight who's been repeatedly proven of illegal substance abuse deserves whatever criticism they receive. T. Thomas also alienated the USA Cycling community by the sheerly frivolous lawsuit she enacted to try to gain a spot on the 2000 Olympic team, so she's popular in nobody's book. If you find Nick's rather gentle disapproval offensive, well then you should read Mike Creed's unvarnished diatribes on similar subjects...

Unless and until the cycling public at large is willing to keep the subject of doping high on the radar screen, riders will continue to blatantly get away with it.
Sep 30, 2002 12:03 PM
I gathered that the focus of the post was the women's looks, not simply the drug aspect. I certainly agree that illegal drug use is fair game for relentless exposure and ranting.

Some of the comments above strayed from anything remotely connected to the drug issue, too, and were more juvenile; maybe not offensive, but not exactly welcoming.

LFR, I think you are one of the more thick-skinned among the contributors, here, too. While that's great, I'm sometimes concerned that these types of threads get out of hand and alienate other women. I don't want to seem patronizing or "protective", but I value the contributions of many of the women, and I'd hate to see them run off. BTW, I'd probably react the same if someone were posting things that would alienate any other group, too (well, except maybe journalists :-).

And before you guys start shouting "censorship", I want to make it clear that I am certainly in favor of free speech; but that does not mean I can't express my opinion about the speech, right?

Clarification of the point I'm trying to get atPODIUMBOUNDdotCA
Sep 30, 2002 12:34 PM
My point has nothing to do with the women in the sport nor women at all... my point has always been that someone who was banned for drugs in the past remained under the radar when it can be speculated she was still on drugs. Its never been my intent to focus on the women. The thing is that female sprinters who use performance enhancing drugs such as Tammy Thomas can be seen fairly obviously and hence can be pointed out. If only the same could be done for any athlete whether male or female... sprinter or endurance.

This is where I have a problem w/the discussion,TJeanloz
Sep 30, 2002 12:49 PM
I don't understand why you believe that you can 'spot' a drug using female by appearances. Is somebody's subjective idea that she looks man-ish really being used as evidence that she uses drugs? I'm not defending Ms. Thomas, or saying that she didn't use steroids, but I think it's relatively childish to believe that you can do a drug test by sight. Being hairy, muscular and ugly does not necessarily mean that the person is using steroids- they could just be ugly.
I never said that...PODIUMBOUNDdotCA
Sep 30, 2002 12:58 PM
I know it can be misinterpreted that she looks manly so she must be on drugs! But its not. In Tammy Thomas's case it can be said it does look as though she were on drugs... and she tested positive. The point I'm getting at is Tammy Thomas may only be the tip of the iceberg within cycling and sport in general. And who knows how big the iceberg beneath the water is that you never see. But she is part of the problem you can see along with people such as Marco Pantani, etc. High level athletes push their bodies so hard and with great genetics they can do amazing things... but noone knows where this line stops for some and drugs are used to help their performance.

Then what's your point?TJeanloz
Sep 30, 2002 1:19 PM
If the point of the "looks like a woman" posts was not to insinuate that man-ish woman are on drugs, than what is it? Are you trying to point out that these three women may also be on drugs, despite the fact that this time they at least had the good sense to mask their drug use by at least not being ugly?
I have to agreepmf1
Oct 1, 2002 4:10 AM
Nick is basically saying that since she took drugs, she looks like a man. I'd bet she would not look any different had she not ever taken drugs. Its OK to not give someone slack if they are cheating (taking drugs), its not OK to post juvenile posts about physical appearances.

Hey, I'm ugly, muscular and hairy, but I've never taken steroids in my life. Or does that ability to observe steroid use only apply to females?
TJ, are you old enough to recall East German speed skaters?lonefrontranger
Sep 30, 2002 1:18 PM
THAT is what Nick is getting at. Ugly or not, it *IS* easier to spot steroid use in females. Paola Pezzo actually used to be quite attractive before she got Frankenbrow, bad skin, and lost 2 cup sizes on her famous cleavage. Other blatant examples of female elite athlete steroid doping programs include the Chinese women's swim team, Russian women's bobsled team, East German women's luge team, I could go on... Everyone commented on how masculine those ladies looked at the time, and surprise! They were all doping. I agree it's a stretch to say you can tell by appearance alone, but as the saying goes if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
No, but I understand,TJeanloz
Sep 30, 2002 1:25 PM
I'm not old enough to remember the glory days of steroid use, but I'd like to see a scientific test used to determine doping instead of a visual. I understand that people believe that they can spot a doper based on looks, but, having seen many ugly women who I'm sure were not on steroids, I am not convinced that it is possible to tell visually. And if it's not possible to tell, we're doing a disservice by effectively accusing anybody who looks like a witch.

For what it's worth, I never suspected Paola Pezzo of doping based on her looks- her doping was an easy conclusion to draw based on the consistency of her results across the season; nobody can naturally stay at a performance plateau for as long as she did (through the whole season).
Sep 30, 2002 1:51 PM
I guess that they are saying is that only petite, cute girls can do well and not be suspected of doping. I personally know some women cyclists, and non-athletes, too for that matter, who aren't exactly Barbies but never doped. For someone to imply that a woman dopes just because of her looks is likely not only inaccurate, but offensive, too.

Plus, I was griping about some of the above thread that had nothing to do with this issue, too.

TJ, are you blind???taar44
Sep 30, 2002 3:02 PM
Not only are last years womenen butt ugly, but the muscles on these err "ladies" can put a male bodybuilder to shame!
Oct 1, 2002 4:10 AM
I'm not denying that there are physiological changes that happen with steroid use. And if you had a 'before' and 'after' picture, you might be able to say whether somebody were using steroids or not. But on the basis of a single picture, I don't believe you could tell if a woman were on steroids or not. There's a woman in my building sporting a pretty nice moustache, and I'm pretty sure she's not on steroids; appearance as an indicator of drug use doesn't seem to have the reliability that I'd like before I start accusing people of taking P.E.D's. That's a serious charge- and I think we owe athletes the benefit of an actual positive drug test before we level it.

What we're doing here is the equivilent of what the French press does to Armstrong: we have no actual evidence that they're doping, but they've physiologically changed so much, and improved so much on the bike that they must be doping. It is a very weak case to make.
Sep 30, 2002 2:34 PM
The first group I remember seeing and being aghast about was the East German women's swimming team at an Olympics long ago. All of them about 170 lbs. and looking nothing like the other women in the competition.

Actually, there are indicators of steroid use for women: "moustaches", deflated chest (if there ever was a more womanly look), deepened voice, etc. To pretend that any woman who changes her appearance to a more mannish look is just "ugly" is naieve.

Right around the time Florence Griffith Joyner set a world record in the 100 meters in the Olympics, there is a very fine picture of her sporting the nice beginnings to a moustache. To a track fan, that and her incredible improvement in speed in the 100 meters, about .2 of a second, were fairly good indicators of something other than training in her regimen.
Mike Creed- Say it like it ispeloton
Sep 30, 2002 12:49 PM
I don't find Creed's diatribes offensive at all. I think that it is a good thing that an athlete is saying it exactly as he sees it, even if it might p!ss people off. His views on doping are quite outspoken.

I personally find that someone busted for doping deserves our disdain. They are nothing more than a common thief.

What was it Ms. Pezzo was busted for once that got swept under the rug? Deca-durabolin? Hum....
Sep 30, 2002 1:04 PM
I personally think Mike Creed is brilliant. It's cool that a 22 year old guy who insists he's "just a bike racer" can author some of the most mature, unidealistic, intelligent and just plain entertaining diaries in the pro peloton. Compared to Creed, T. Hamilton comes off sounding like Fred Rogers (there's a place for that, too...).

He's ten times funnier and even more ascerbic in person, and I look forward to seeing him back in some of the local races next spring.
Sep 30, 2002 9:31 PM
Please stop with the policing of eveyone's posts, you are pathetic and the guy barely said anything "racey". Get a sense of humor.
ok, LazythinkerDougSloan
Oct 1, 2002 5:54 AM
"Policing everyone's posts?" Come on. I only police a few, mostly yours. Sounds more like you want to "police" my comments. Free speech means I get to participate, too, right? I have no police power whatsoever; I have no more than some meager power of persuasion, just like everyone else here.

Maybe when you grow up you'll realize that there is a difference between a sense of humor and just being crude, or at least that there is a time and place for everything.

Best wishes on the maturation process. If there is anything I can to do help, please don't hesitate to ask.

You guys like Underoos or Grranimals best?? nm128
Sep 30, 2002 12:32 PM
There are visual cluesWalter
Sep 30, 2002 5:39 PM
It may not be PC but a woman roiding will show external manifestations more readily than a man. The reason why should be pretty obvious. Steroids are synthetic hormones, particularly synthetic male hormones. A woman using them in large doses will show external male traits. So in essence "Barbie" is not, nor should be suspected of doping as readily as the woman who is the focus of this thread. At least Barbie shouldn't be suspected unless silicone injections become illegal.

Prior to a motorcycle accident I used to competitively weightlift. Talk about roiding! Thing is you'd walk into the lockerroom before a benchpress competition at Podunk Gym and see guys "going 'round the horn" all the time. Talk about perspective problems.