Instead of doing random testing, they should test everyone. It is getting harder to catch the new performance enhancing drugs, but sports are getting ridiculous now with all the allegations that ar popping up.

That would be the most stupid action to make. Boycotting important cycling races would destroy the sport.

It's funny to see how people now suddenly attack cycling, while ignoring the fact that doping is a problem just as big in other sports.
During the tour, how many riders got positive results after doping tests? Only 3: Vinoukorov, Sinkewitz and Moreni (rasmussen got kicked out of his team because he lied to the team managers - het got 14 doping test and all of them were negative).

So that's only 3 from the +/- 200 riders that participate(d) in the tour. 1-3% is also the average amount of doping users in other sports (athletics probably even higher).
The difference is that cycling has got a bad name when it comes to doping, and the media are more than willing to accuse riders (like "l'equipe" destroyed Floyd Landis - probably undeserved: why else would he spend all his money to clear up his name?)

Not true, cycling is the dirtiest.

I'm not having a swipe, nor am I saying other sports are clean, but cycling is widely known as being the dirtiest sport going. It's also one of the most physically demanding, and those two points are not mutually exclusive.

Lots of "dirty" cyclists (and athletes for that matter) also pass drug tests. Drug tests do not confirm that you're clean, they can only identify beyond any doubt that you're definitely dirty. And there is a big difference. The reason for this is legal. They will not accuse you if they have any doubt. The only way people ever get off after a failed drug test is on a technicality (which great lengths are gone to to avoid, hence there are very few successfully appealed failed drug tests)

Seasoned dopers are expert at timing of when they drug up. They know when they are more likely to be tested, they know how long they can have the effect of the drug in their body as they build muscle etc and would show up in a test etc.

As for thinking Floyd Landis is clean - ;D Undeserved? When he failed his test, his testosterone:epitestosterone level was 11:1. The average person is about 1:1, athletes can naturally get up to 2:1 or even in some cases 3:1. I think the limit for failed drug test is 4:1 (it used to be 6:1, think it changed though).

There's not a remote chance his body produced that naturally. Everything he was saying after was purely PR, he was never going to get off.

And don't get me started on Lance Armstrong... (although I do consider him an incredible athlete, and he was coming back from cancer in against generally filthy competitors. Let's just call it a level playing field, except that he had to battle cancer as well. His Tour de France victories are still amazing)

Feck, do you have an idea what the testosterone boost does for an athlete. I have yet to hear an explaination why Landis would have overdosed on testosterone for just that one mountain stage, wasn't he clean when he tested earlier in the same tour....I heard some doctors say testosterone does not have an immediate effect on your performance and would not be a cyclists preferred boost drug ? cheers

appreciate it

When my cousin quit cycling to move into Water polo, he sad that he'd never seen so many cheats in a sport before

boycotting the tour? it's not like anybody (in the u.s., at least) is paying much attention to it without lance armstrong being in it.