The Secret Pro

While I disagree with the name calling above, your position is pretty naive. Think of a mid pack domestic, who does their job well but doesn’t exactly rack up the protour points themselves. If that rider makes a few comments that don’t sit well with team management there’s a very good chance they will be looking for a new contract next year. Hell you don’t even need to go to hypotheticals, just look how Fuglsang’s season went this year once he made a few comments that didn’t sit well with RadioShack.

No this rider isn’t risking his life, but there is potential risk to their career.

Let’s see, we shouldn’t play this game but how about:
Rider X seems to be suffering this year since his doctor has changed

And I don’t know where you get the idea that Pro’s are all well paid, educated and have access to resources, some are, some tick only 1 or 2 of the three.

There’s lots of examples of issues which might be dealt more candidly with secrecy. Whether this can be considere “crucial information?” Blah, no. This is a cyclist on an internet blog. No one is disclosing the Illuminati’s machinations or suppression for the cure of cancer.

Basically, any issue that might be “interesting” or “gossip” but would get the source in trouble or discomfort with his team or the peloton in general.

a) anonymous rider is peeved that a rider b is “sat” under dubious circumstances due to point system or “medical” conditions.
b) a rider is suspended internally for misconduct. We rarely know why until much later. You could then find that someone’s actually sleeping around with podium girls. Or how many drinks they actually took before being sent home from a grand tour.
c) a rider tells our anonymous source some of the “chops” being dealt at the end of a race to sort out results. Not that most cycling fans don’t know about this, but if you take a look at the US CX penalties last weekend, still unlikely to be disclosed openly.
d) maybe some on-the-spot tidbits on how contract negotiations are brokered.
e) an individual perspective on tours/routes/transfers/race surfaces that might not be the most popular or correct. e.g. criticizing some of the route complains from the Giro. We hear that some climbs are “too hard, inhumane”, some descents too risky, etc. Mostly by the patrons and team leaders. Maybe an anonymous voice (even by a teammate!) would say “oh grow up. It’s just a switchback”

Like I said, none of these are life-changing things for you or I. If you are uninterested by the gossip in the peloton or the “cloak and dagger” stuff offends you, maybe we can request Cyclingtips to label these clearly so you can avoid these posts. I only do quick reads on the Aussie cycling scene- not because they are poor, they are just not very relevant to me.

I’ll give them a read.