Latest comments
- That's not how an expert in eating DISORDERS classified it to cyclists.
Definitions:
1 A lack of order or regular arrangement; confusion.
2 A breach of civic order or peace; a public disturbance.
3 An ailment that affects the function of mind or body.
It's obviously not 2, and obviously not 1. The only argument you could make is 3, and it would have to be an "ailment" first. The only way an athlete could really have an "ailment" would be if it were affecting their athletic performance (which does happen), but gives immediate feedback that something is wrong.
So, the benefit of weight loss in an athletic context is that, unlike outside that context, it's pretty much self-correcting.
- Hmmm, is that why he decided to “pay taxes” in Monaco? I would say he is at least in two minds about the money side so I think you’re confusing the origin of the embarrassment.
- this is really just for SCOTTG, and before i go on i’ll clarify that my point in mentioning this is just the inconsistent standard some cycling fans apply when it comes to doping, seeing some dopers as evil incarnate who deserve to be impaled (the really yucky way, you know?) and THEN drawn and quartered, while others. like eddy and sean kelley. are treated as beloved heroes with nary a mention of their darker pasts. i don’t really hate anyone for cheating via chemicals. i wish it didn’t happen. i think it’s really unfortunate. it definitely makes it hard, for me at least, to choose heroes, but i don’t hate anyone for it. i dislike lance in particular because he’s just a horrible human being who was more then willing to destroy lives to keep his image clean, but i don’t hate him for doping. and i don’t hate dopers for lying about having doped. because if you’re gonna dope then duh, you’re OBVIOUSLY going to lie about it, or what’s the point?
anyway, here goes… Eddy tested positive THREE TIMES: in 1969 during the giro (2 positive tests); in 1973 after lombardia; and in 1977 after la fleche wallone. he ALWAYS denied it, saying he didn’t need drugs to win. in 2007 he was one of a handful of riders asked to stay away from the world’s because of his doping record.
- Yes, on two of his three positives he was caught using a type of amphetamine, the third positive was for a appetite inhibitor, which was probably why Merckx was using amphetamines. These are just the three times he was caught, I'm sure there many other things he used, again, probably to try and lose weight because he was overweight most of his career.
- not sure what you mean by “blind speculation”? care to clarify?
- you don’t read very carefully and you make wild, absurd assumptions. but have a swell day.
- yeah - those huge cyclocross fields certainly are impressive.
- Neither is blind speculation that you so elegantly exhibit, lol
- Oh brother. The only dopants that existed in the Merckx era were mostly amphetamines. Merckx had a long career so chronic amphetamine usage can be ruled out- unlike Maertens who was text book case of abuse.
it's pretty sickening that you disparage the guy who probably had the greatest cycling career in history just because you don't like him.
- La comparaison n'a aucun sens. L'époque de Merckx n'a rien à voir avec celle d'aujourd'hui. A l'époque tout au plus 6 nations qui se disputaient chaque épreuve (Belgique, Espagne, Italie, France, Allemagne, Hollande), aucun coureur des pays du Bloc soviétique, d'Australie, d'Amérique du Nord ou du Sud... Bref le volume de la concurrence par rapport à celui d'aujourd'hui était très petit. Dans la situation actuelle et avec la qualité d'entrainement des tous les coureurs, en particulier du World Tour, il est certain que Merckx serait très loin des résultats qu'il a fait à l'époque.
ScottG13-08-2025