I have been told that I should not do any more posts on cycling until I throw in something on another sport. Thankfully, Bob stepped in with the nice Booing Beckham post (two words: "Manny! Manny!") so I can return to cycling....
Some of you know that I am currently researching cheating in many forms and in several sports, including cycling. Nicolas Roche, the current road champion from Ireland, has been
writing about the Tour and last week described the stage ending in Besançon. He was in an early break but because his teammate had the yellow jersey he was under instructions not to help with the pace-setting.
Italy's Daniel Bennati of Liquigas and his Belgian teammate Frederik Willems gave me tons of abuse, as did the Italian, Daniele Righi of Lampre. They gave me so much abuse it was unbelievable. They called me every name under the sun because I didn't work in the break. The other 10 guys, though, knew they would be doing the same in my position and just got on with it.
Of course, by sitting in the back of the group, Roche would be fresh to make a break for it in the last kilometers and try to win the stage. Roche continues:
With 50 kms to go, Bennati came up to me and said: "You're going to have to pay me a lot of money if you want to win this stage or you will never win, because I will chase you down. There's no way you're going anywhere without me."
There is a long history of cyclists cutting deals and exchanging cash in order to win races. Willy Voet describes it in some detail in his book
Breaking the Chain. But I thought in today's sport scene, and particularly in the Tour (given all the media focus), buying a race was simply not done.
It strikes me that buying and selling a stage victory may be more detrimental to the sport than doping in terms of undermining public trust. And yet the focus on doping continues (see today's
article by Greg Lemond questioning Contador's accomplishments). Buying and selling victories nearly ruined baseball a century ago and cost Pete Rose a chance at the Hall of Fame. Yet it goes on in cycling on a regular basis and is simply accepted as par for the course. Granted, this may be in part because for breaks to form there has to be a strategic complicity on the part of the teams behind and riders will sometimes graciously allow a rival to win, but from there to asking for money to "allow" someone to win?
Which is worse: doping or buying a victory?
Thanks to Scott for the link to Lemond's article.