Triki Business

Last Friday’s big news — that Manuel “Triki” Beltrán apparently tested positive for EPO — raises an interesting question: Will it ever be possible to have a Tour de France (or other major cycling/athletic event) that is completely free of doping? News of Beltrán’s results certainly was disappointing, but it hasn’t provoked the kind of coverage that previous scandals have.

Is it because cycling has turned a corner or because the media and the general public are suffering from — for lack of a better term — doping fatigue? Have we finally gotten to the point where a story like Beltrán’s no longer provokes great howls of outrage from all the usual suspects? Or is it something else? Bonnie D. Ford, in an article on ESPN.com, offers a number of insights into the current situation in cycling. As she writes:

The revelation of a tentative positive might have sent shock waves through the race if it had involved a young, charismatic rider or one outspoken about being clean, but Beltran is old (37) and apparently old school. His test result and subsequent detention by French police were also old news by the time 24 hours had passed. Under the terms of a contract signed by all Tour entrants, Liquigas is liable for a $150,000 fine and would be ejected from the Tour in the event of a second positive result.

Perhaps it is the character involved, and not the news, that limits the story’s impact. Imagine if the positive test had been for a rider like Bradley Wiggins, who’s be quite vocal about his clean status, instead. Beltrán, after all, is an older rider, who — if the B sample backs up the A — could be looking at a two-year ban, effectively ending his professional cycling career. Wiggins, on the other hand, is still in the beginning stages of his time in the peloton.

The irony of a strong opponent of doping testing positive might well have an entirely different impact than, as Ford calls it, Triki’s “tentative positive.” The tentative part being lost on many others who’ve already reported on the story. Earlier on, she noted that for riders of a certain generation, certain practices were a means to an end.

The line between dopers and non-dopers is not entirely generational. But without smearing specific teams, it’s fair to say that Beltran, who rode for Spanish powerhouses Mapei and Banesto in the mid-to-late ’90s before he became one of Lance Armstrong’s faceless foot soldiers from 2003 to 2005, came of age at a time when support riders earned their slots by whatever means necessary. Domestiques are a dime a dozen in Europe, and we now know from anecdotal and hard evidence that many have crossed the line to keep their jobs.

In presenting this information, Ford takes us a step beyond those who’ve merely connected the dots in a game that we might (with apologies to a certain Mr. Bacon) call “The Six Degrees of Lance Armstrong.” Supposing Beltrán was doping during some parts of his career, it would be in some ways understandable. Given the tenor of the times, I can easily imagine that Beltrán (or any other rider in his position) might succumb to the temptations of doping in order to survive the cutthroat world of European pro cycling. That’s not to excuse the behavior, however, but merely to understand where it came from. And until Beltrán tells us his story, or until someone can offer rock-solid proof of certain actions, we need to be careful in what conclusions we draw from either the tentative test results that led to his removal from the Tour, or from the teams and riders he was associated with in the past.

Could it be that the coverage of Beltrán is colored by an acceptance that doping exists, and it will likely always exist. Think back to your days in school — whether that’s primary school, secondary school, college or even grad school. Somewhere along the way, if you look closely, you’ve no doubt known of someone who cheated on a test, bought a term paper and passed it off as his/her own work, or somehow cut corners in order to get a better grade. No matter that it’s against the rules. No matter that there are pretty severe penalties if one is caught. The temptation to cheat is there. It’s human nature.

So, when 180 athletes line up to start a three-week test of endurance, strength and determination, what’s the likelihood that a few might be performing with a bit of a boost from something that’s not allowed? I’d say it’s pretty good. As testing improves (one hopes) and as more athletes are tested, it’s a good bet that those who are tempted to cheat will eventually be caught. What’s needed when that happens is fair and balanced coverage. Coverage that doesn’t lapse into a knee-jerk hysteria because yet another cyclist/athlete has tested positive.

Yes, doping exists. Depending on who you ask, it’s either a very, very large problem, or it’s a small but significant problem. But real data on how prevalent it is is, well, hard to come by. The hysteria that has often been whipped up by a combination of factors — leaks from various sources, rabid reporting by those who merely keep the echo chamber going, verbal clusterbombs set off by various officials on various sides — exacts a toll. If the hysteria builds to a crescendo, not only will the guilty (and probably a few innocents) be run out of town, entire sports will wither away and die.

And yet, in the midst of the hysteria over the last few years, Team Columbia (formerly High Road and T-Mobile) and Team Garmin-Chipotle have acquired new title sponsors, as has Team CSC/Saxo Bank. Apparently, some sponsors aren’t so afraid to enter the sport even with the seemingly non-stop tide of doping stories. (To be fair, all three teams have implemented stringent anti-doping programs, which may have calmed any potential fears the new sponsors might have had.)

As David Millar observed:

“Professional sport, there’s going to be doping,” Millar said, munching a rice cake outside the Garmin-Chipotle team bus Saturday morning. “As long as there’s doping controls, there’s going to be positives.

True, that. It’s how those cases are written about, and how they’re addressed within cycling (and all other sports) that determines where we go from here. Millar went on:

“Now what we have to do is handle it, and carry on and do the right thing,” Millar said, his accent thickening as it does when he gets intense. “What we’re doing with our team I think is the future of the sport, and so is CSC and so is Columbia. I think there’s many other teams going the right direction. I think what the sport is doing as a whole now is great. There’s always going to be guys who are doing it the wrong way, but it’s up to us to do it the right way. And eventually we will be, I think we already are, the majority.”

What a world of difference a year makes, eh? Last year at this time we had the Vino/Sinkewitz/Moreni trifecta. This year, after a couple of news cycles, the Beltrán story fails to elicit much excitement in the media. Perhaps that’s an indication of a positive change in the sport, or in the media’s handling of doping stories. Or, perhaps it’s just a matter of a rider at the end of his career, and who’s not a big star and not charismatic or outspoken, doesn’t really draw the kind of attention that a younger, vocal opponent of cycling would.

The pessimist in me suspects that it’s only a matter of time before some outspoken anti-doping advocate gets popped for using a banned substance, perhaps as a false positive What will happen in that case? Will the story go into a downward spiral of hysterical reaction from the mainstream press, or will it get the balanced coverage such a story demands.

If we have more writers like Bonnie Ford covering cycling and sports in general, I’d hope for the latter. I’m afraid, however, that such a story could draw a different kind of coverage. Coverage that echoes and amplifies a certain drumbeat, while failing to actually delve into the specifics or the background needed to truly inform the public. Coverage that inflames rather than informs. But as long as there’s a writer or two who are willing to go beyond the cheap, easy shots, the possibility exists that media coverage could one day be truly balanced and informative. Should such a day arrive, we will all be the better for it.