tehninjo0

@Rockurshoxoff95 Shimano is the perfect example: Most (all?) of their truly innovative product features begin at the highest end of their component line (e.g. the clutch on XTR derailleurs or electronic shifting for DuraAce) and then trickle down to the lower tiered gear with 1-2 years delay. Two things allow for this: 1. Fast initial ROI from sales at a high markup (premium gear); and 2. Process improvements that lower production cost over time. Both of them require people to buy the high tier gear in the first place. Arguably, wider adoption of the product also lowers its perceived competitive advantage but this doesn't really become very relevant until much later when the product becomes standard on the more basic equipment tiers (e.g. SIS).

@mfbeast12 I hear you. Aesthetics are a huge component of our sport - for better or worse. However, as tech advances, you will see a reduction in the number of wires needed. What if one day your entire drivetrain could be electronic and wireless with a battery the size of a 9v block stuck somewhere to your downtube or chainstay, maybe? @Rockurshoxoff95 whether you like it or not, innovative tech always starts at the top of the line and then trickles down. That's just how it works. To say I don't want better tech for anybody else until I can afford to buy it for myself is a bit shortsighted mate. Others buying it before you is what makes it affordable to you in the first place.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and get myself voted below the threshold: As long as the electronics don't actually power my movement bring them on. Shocks that adjust to the terrain without me having to think about it? Hand em on over! Reliable Di2-style electronic shifting for my mountain bike? I will take some of that! A dropper post that can adjusts without a button? Yeah, that too please. Look, I'm all for a pure sport and whatnot but what defines the purity is how hard you charge that hill, not the technology you have to do it with. No electronic gizmo changes that. If you ride easier because you have more efficient suspension then that's your fault.

Function over style all day long.. It looks like it shouldn't work but if it does then I shall tip my hat.

UFC... Boxing... (arguably) Nascar... These are just some of the pro sports that come to mind that people watch to the specific end of seeing someone get messed up in some way or another. As with the high stakes varieties of riding though the fascination with injury is usually only a starting point. As the viewer matures as a viewer (s)he comes to appreciate the finer aspects of the given sport. The finesse in the combo of punches, the skillful block that anticipates an opening, the split second longer on the straightaway... I agree that most people are natural thrill seekers and that if they don't have the nerve to do it themselves they seek role-models to do it for them. I disagree with the conclusion that as we become dulled to the role-model's excesses we inevitably drive the role-model to ever greater excess.

L'Orecup. Because they're worth it.

The lifetime suspension isn't for the fact that he did what a lot (maybe even most) of the others he competed against did. The lifetime suspension is for not doing the right thing when he got his second chance like everybody else and it is bloody well deserved.

TouchUrselfSlowly the point isn't that everybody cheated that point is what everybody did when it was time to come clean. He like a lot of others got caught. Those others came clean and accepted their punishment (a 6 month suspension in most cases) but LA chose to hide what he did behind money, power, and intimidation. That is why he needs to be banned for life, because even when it was all over and he was given a second chance along with everybody else he continued to do the wrong thing.

No, he should not be allowed to compete professionally again. He had numerous chances to come clean but instead he chose to go to whatever length necessary to keep his dirty little secret. He destroyed lives, careers, and dreams of dozens of people directly and who knows how many indirectly. He hurt the integrity of the U.S. Cycling team and the sport of cycling. The fact that he wasn't the only one doping is irrelevant. The fact that he won most competitions he entered is irrelevant. The fact that he raised cancer awareness is irrelevant. He should not be allowed to compete professionally because he has repeatedly shown that he is unable to handle the responsibility competition imparts on a professional athlete. He is and always will be a professional athlete whether he likes it or not. Any race or competition he enters will inevitably put him in a situation where he is given the responsibility that goes along with competing as a professional athlete and he cannot handle it.