quote:
Actually, there still isn't. They just test whether you have too high of an oxygen level. And by that standard, they had EPO testing back in the 90s, and ntire teams were caught. French authorities also have the right to raid hotel rooms and search persons without probably cause. To argue that cycling has not aggressively gone after doping until a few years ago is false.

Man you're all over the map. For one thing, you evidently haven't been keeping up with the sport because there's been a test for EPO for about the last ten years. Before then, cycling only tested for a cyclist's hematocrit level, and if it was over 60%, he was suspended from racing until he got his level below the 60% threshold. But for the last ten years or so, there's been a direct test for EPO and here's a link to the latest on EPO testing:

LINK /

Also, I never said or implied that the UCI didn't aggressively pursue dopers, only that before an EPO test was developed, the UCI was powerless to stop EPO usage. As a matter of fact, I said just the opposite. Here are my exact words on the subject:

"I know for a fact that the testing in track and field and cycling are much more thorough than the testing in baseball, football and basketball. For example, Eric Reid and Kimberlyn Duncan are two LSU athletes who just wrapped up their college careers and they should both have successful pro careers provided they stay healthy, but Duncan will likely get tested more times in 2013 than Reid will get tested in his entire career."

During the Armstrong era, the entire peleton knew that there would be no repercussions as long as they didn't overdo it with EPO. How do you think Bjarne Riis got the nickname Mr. 60% anyway? Marco Pantani was the only cyclist that I can remember who was reckless enough to show up at a Grand Tour over 60%.

quote:
In fact, it's the fact that cycling had such effective testing that they actually caught people. And that's why they have the rep as a "dirty sport": there testing caught people. A sports league that actually catches dopers actually has ineffective testing, as it taints the sport. You want NFL testing: the illusion of tight controls and the whole league on incredible PED's, unless you believe offensive linemen put on 50 pounds on average, as a group, in the span of 10-20 years.

You must be confusing me with someone else, because I agree with everything you've said in this paragraph.