The arguments about riders devolve into arguments about whether to have the argument in the first place. I'd rather spend my breath/pixels demanding a better testing regime which would certainly give us a more believable product than what we have today.
Did anything ever come of Vaughters' proposal in a CN op-ed in February? He said teams and race organizers could afford up to $40M a year for anti-doping and currently only spend $4M. He insisted the money be given to a totally independent body that has no stake in the success of the sport. Only focused on doping. That's a great start.
Let me suggest they take that money and spend it on:
- RESEARCH: $5M for research to develop new substances and new tests
- TESTING: $10M for testing. In-competition, out-of-comp, random, targeted, blood, urine, etc.
- INTEL: $20M for an "all-seeing" secret police force
The INTEL division would carry out both covert and overt surveillance of the peloton. Stake-outs, wire-taps, bugging hotels and offices, trash sifting. They would develop a vast network of spies and informants through payment or coercion. They would infiltrate every level of the sport from RIDERS to TEAM STAFF to UCI to RACE ORGANIZERS to the MEDIA.
I give the most money to the INTEL division because they prevent doping on multiple levels:
- BETTER TESTING & RESEARCH: the information they gather would inform the targeted testing carried out by the Testing Division, provide information about how cheaters beat tests, and what new substances are being used
- FEWER DOPERS: the presence of the secret police force would prevent risk-averse would-be cheaters from doping
- INCREASED COST TO DOPE: additional barriers to doping would force committed dopers to act at higher levels of secrecy and within smaller rings of trusted individuals. In practice, this would increase the cost of successfully doping and evading detection.
All this performed with consent of the teams/races, and their money, but none of their input.