The Medieval Paradigm in Pro Cycling

In bygone days (and still sometimes at bizarre theme restaurants), kings and other royalty called local knights and other chancers to compete in martial arts tournaments, sword fighting, jousting, etc. The participants were sponsored in their efforts by wealthy patrons, and of course, many of them were injured, disfigured or killed as part of the fun.

It strikes me that we may have gotten the doping era(s) all wrong, in the sense that we focused our approbation on the riders, and to a lesser extent on the teams, when the corporate overlords happily poured their money in and looked the other way. This IS what modern professional sport is afterall, a minstrel show conjured by the mega-wealthy for their own profit/amusement/reputation enhancement. That we would castigate the riders rather than those who put all the incentives in place to create the crisis in the first place is perfect.

Plausible deniability is very much a currency of wealth.

“Stars and Water Carriers” is a 1973 documentary that follows riders through the 1973 Giro d’Italia, and it’s a classic of the cycling canon. To “carry someone’s water” is to do their work, most often subservient tasks, usually politically. “Star and Water Carriers” is famous for elucidating the hierarchical roles of racers within a road team, but maybe, just maybe, even the stars themselves were carrying someone’s water.

Today, we have teams in the pro peloton sponsored by petro-states like UAE and Bahrain, a chemical giant (Ineos), and then an array of other multinational companies. Even in this benighted “post-doping” era of pro cycling, a high-level sports squad will be more popular than an entity reaping billions from the destruction of the environment. That’s just PR math.

The ancient Romans, nearing their unforeseen fall, also ran this playbook, gladiators and lions, actual sea battles, inside the Coliseum. And so we know that religion has not been the sole opiate of the masses historically.

Sponsors will say they themselves are also victims of sport’s darker machinations, their names besmirched on the fronts of jerseys and team cars, but they must know what goes on. The phrase ‘due diligence’ wasn’t coined by the poor. No, I suspect there is a brutal calculus at work. It was Oscar Wilde who said, “There’s only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”

We can pillory the young racers who wreck their bodies on the altar of ambition, but they’re only so many champions sent into mock battle for the amusement of the lords and ladies of true wealth. A very select few will come away with some small measure of their own wealth, but no matter what transpires between the start and finish, in training camps and hotels and on team buses, none will ever sit atop the empire they’ve been sent to glorify. Even Eddy Merckx was just a water carrier.


Join the conversation
  1. bart says

    I like that you pull examples from ancient times as well as the older days of cycling that we seem to want to believe we’re simpler and therefore better times. I think if you follow this logic further, ultimately the responsibility lands on the “fans”. We’re the ones who fuel the whole system with our time and $. What bugged me the most about Armstrong wasn’t that he doped/cheated and lied about it but that he actively and deliberately destroyed other people along the way. We “fans” want to maintain the illusion that sport is pure and true in some way, but, when you turn over the rocks and look underneath, the incentives for participants, owners, media, etc is to cheat where you think you can get away with it. I would argue that has always been true and I think it will continue to be true as long as human are humans. I don’t think this makes the stories any less compelling. But sometimes we encounter things under the rocks that break the spell and cause us to get uncomfortable.

    Yesterday I was talking with my 11 year old daughter about her basketball game. She was telling me that she though a player on the other team was deliberately pushing her and even deliberately tripped her at one point and the refs didn’t call any fouls against this other player. My response; “Well, she got away with it, so more power to her. Push her back in a way that gives you an advantage, but don’t trip her as that could cause injury, until the refs start calling the fouls. Then you’ll know what the rules actually are for this particular game with these refs, and can adjust accordingly.” We’re all adjusting accordingly – all the time.

    Maybe I’m cynical. Maybe I should try to be more pure. Personally, I like to know the rules and compete within the roles, even the unwritten ones. I’m the only one who really knows how much I’m stretching or pushing the boundaries. I sleep better at night when I know I’ve stayed clearly within the rules and the spirit of the competition. But, writing that now, it sounds rather subjective and like I’m justifying my own choices. Clearly, I’m a bit confused about all of this but I like the exploration and consideration.

  2. Pat Navin says

    Great piece, Robot. It reminded me of the New Orleans Saints scandal where players were paid a bounty for injuring opponents.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/sports/football/nfl-says-saints-had-bounty-program-to-injure-opponents.html

    The NFL and team owners don’t give a rat’s ass about the players, yet the players are incentivized to harm one another — and they do. It’s one of the reasons I and so many others can no longer watch football (at any level).

    I watched an interview that Anthony Walsh recently did with Tyler Hamilton. Great interview. Walsh really digs deep and Hamilton speaks freely. What Hamilton says goes to your point. The doping was a creeping thing. Hamilton says he believed that some riders didn’t even know they were being fed performance-enhancing drugs at first (though he clearly understood). Worth a watch:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/sports/football/nfl-says-saints-had-bounty-program-to-injure-opponents.html

    Walsh’s podcast is excellent. His two interviews with Greg Lemond were stellar.

  3. Pat Navin says

    Oops. Wrong second link. Here’s the Hamilton interview:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCCcAW390Is

Leave A Reply

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More