What would we find out about football, basetball and baseball if the testing were similar to cycling. Before you see some of the measures, know that the list of banned substances is so pervasive, you need permission to take Neosporin.
Here is the testing.

Random throughout the year. You must supply your whereabouts at all times (usually 30 days in advance) in season and off season. At any time, someone can show up and demand a sample. Refusal or just not being where you said you would be is an automatic positive.

Every race you win you are tested

In a stage race, every day you are in the lead (eg., wearing the yelow jersey in the Tour de France) you are tested

Randomly tested during a race.

Most cyclists end up getting tested 10 times a year. Top cyclists (Lance) can get tested up to 40 times a year.

Football – you get tested once a year in preseason and you get a head’s up.

Baseball. Basically the same as in football.

Basketball they test only for pot.

Penaltities – first offense in cycling is basically a 4 year ban. (2 from any kind of racing, and 2 more from the elite ProTour)

Thoughts?

Is the drive to be the best in cycling really that serious? Is the Tour de France trophy REALLY the end-all and be-all of sports? Are we Americans just so backward that we think that at least 6 other trophies in sports played in our own countries are more important than the Tour de France title?

Apparently. Why else take so many drugs to try and win it.

I think Americans look at cycling the same way they look at soccer: they take a mild interest every time there’s a heroic story, but the rest of the year, they simply don’t give a damn.

Whether or not Floyd is guilty, you just have to ask all these Tour de France riders to get a reality check. Is their sport really all that important, in the big picture?

Just because a lot of atheletes maybe taking illegal performance enhancing drugs this doesn’t make it right nor does it mean we should rollover a lower our standards. The point of testing is catch cheats out and therefore those left competing are playing on a level playing field.

But as far as I’m aware the 2nd sample hasn’t been confirmed as yet so Landis isn’t proved guilty.

The fact that you don’t care? Speaks to your character.

1) Whether he actually did use performance enhancers

2) If he did, will he do Public Service Announcements telling kids to say no to drugs, or will he “let people make their own decisions”?

i think accepting drug use in any given sport just because it’s allegedly widespread is basically saying “i give up”.

ehh i could write more but i hope that you get the gist.

2.) landis wins and lemond claims this year’s tour to be the best in history because of the dramatics and because landis is “CLEAN” and a “really good guy”…

3.) lemond is a tool

Technically, MJD, he only beat the guys who weren’t disqualified before the event. The guys who were disqualified before the race, including some of the pre-race favorites, might have been faster, but they didn’t get the chance to show it. If they don’t get a chance to win because of doping, then neither should anyone else who used performance enhancers. It’s only fair.

I understand that he was competing against a bunch of guys, some of whom were probably using the same stuff that he (allegedly) was using, and he did come out on top. But what if the runner-up was clean, and would’ve won if the winner had also stayed clean? Rewarding someone that was doping would be punishing the guy who stayed clean, and giving him and everyone else a powerful incentive to start doping. That cannot be allowed.