• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Bordry's comments re doping tests at TdF

Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Visit site
Is Pierre Bordry right, when he states that "The tests are arranged so that the riders know in advance" when they will be subject to anti-doping scrutiny????

In my humble opinion, this is serious, serious ***, and is just so not what the sport needs now. In many respects, coming from Bordry, this is more serious than the Landis-letter.
I believe Bordry just got himself and AFLD a new job doing doping tests this summer.
 
Jun 16, 2009
647
0
0
Visit site
hektoren said:
Is Pierre Bordry right, when he states that "The tests are arranged so that the riders know in advance" when they will be subject to anti-doping scrutiny????

In my humble opinion, this is serious, serious ***, and is just so not what the sport needs now. In many respects, coming from Bordry, this is more serious than the Landis-letter.
I believe Bordry just got himself and AFLD a new job doing doping tests this summer.

Yes. Look how noone got caught last year when AFLD weren't involved

Fat Pat McQuack's only concern is to keep the circus going, and ensure nobody gets caught.

He has a direct financial interest in ensuring as few riders as possible get caught....except maybe a few out of contract about to retire Italians...
 
hektoren said:
Is Pierre Bordry right, when he states that "The tests are arranged so that the riders know in advance" when they will be subject to anti-doping scrutiny????

In my humble opinion, this is serious, serious ***, and is just so not what the sport needs now. In many respects, coming from Bordry, this is more serious than the Landis-letter.
I believe Bordry just got himself and AFLD a new job doing doping tests this summer.

I think he's mainly mirroring what Landis said about USPS paying for the info on when testers were coming.

But one of the things he's def been talking about is the frequent delays when test were being performed by the UCI, which makes a lot of sense considering the info about clearing times of micro doses.

One of the big problems to me is the thing about not getting the whereabout info. Unless there's some legitimate confidentiality issue (with regards to UCI giving away that info), this is pure obstruction on UCIs part. Whether they are trying to protect dopers or their own interests as being the main testers it's far from good...

He also seems to insinuate that rules on delivering whereabout info is not enforced equally on the teams. Or that it's not enforced strictly. That's quite interesting in my eyes as well...
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
Visit site
Who can forget Triki Beltran riding across a field in the 2008 Tour in an attempt to dodge AFLD testers. He was surprised because he was used to the UCI's lax procedures after a stage. Or maybe he was used to preferential treatment. The sample he gave that day was positive for EPO.
 
Epicycle said:
Who can forget Triki Beltran riding across a field in the 2008 Tour in an attempt to dodge AFLD testers. He was surprised because he was used to the UCI's lax procedures after a stage. Or maybe he was used to preferential treatment. The sample he gave that day was positive for EPO.

The UCI testers would have invited him for coffee.
 
Jul 1, 2009
320
0
0
Visit site
Bordry gives more weight to Landis`accusations concerning the UCI.
Wonder if Pat gives a rebuttal. It could be wise to plead the 5th for his own sake. It doesnt look too good on him this.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Epicycle said:
Who can forget Triki Beltran riding across a field in the 2008 Tour in an attempt to dodge AFLD testers. He was surprised because he was used to the UCI's lax procedures after a stage. Or maybe he was used to preferential treatment. The sample he gave that day was positive for EPO.
Ricco also tried to go AWOL on a test within a day or two of that I think.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Visit site
mikkemus23 said:
Bordry gives more weight to Landis`accusations concerning the UCI.
Wonder if Pat gives a rebuttal. It could be wise to plead the 5th for his own sake. It doesnt look too good on him this.

We have two organizations here, with one big, common goal (or at least, on the surface of it, so it should be); getting rid of doping within cycling. Why aren't they able to cooperate towards a common goal? Is it down to cultural differences, territorial disputes or bragging rights? Seemingly the UCI and AFLD is involved in a pi$$ing contest, won't agree as to which organization should check the riders' pi$$, and manages to get all cycling fans pi$$ed off. With the recent information from Michael Ashenden concerning microdosing and blood transfusions, why can't the AFLD and UCI chisel out a common working strategy for doing tests that might reveal this mode of PED use?

Pat can't let this slide by....
 
Jun 16, 2009
647
0
0
Visit site
hektoren said:
We have two organizations here, with one big, common goal (or at least, on the surface of it, so it should be); getting rid of doping within cycling. Why aren't they able to cooperate towards a common goal? Is it down to cultural differences, territorial disputes or bragging rights? Seemingly the UCI and AFLD is involved in a pi$$ing contest, won't agree as to which organization should check the riders' pi$$, and manages to get all cycling fans pi$$ed off. With the recent information from Michael Ashenden concerning microdosing and blood transfusions, why can't the AFLD and UCI chisel out a common working strategy for doing tests that might reveal this mode of PED use?

Pat can't let this slide by....

because fighting doping would mean big scandals, and the UCI looking like the head of a truly rotten organization. And the big names who make Fat Pat McQuack rich would be toppled.

They have 2 different aims:

AFLD - Catch and punish all dopers

UCI - Make sure there are as few doping "incidents" as possible
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
hektoren said:
We have two organizations here, with one big, common goal (or at least, on the surface of it, so it should be); getting rid of doping within cycling. Why aren't they able to cooperate towards a common goal? Is it down to cultural differences, territorial disputes or bragging rights? Seemingly the UCI and AFLD is involved in a pi$$ing contest, won't agree as to which organization should check the riders' pi$$, and manages to get all cycling fans pi$$ed off. With the recent information from Michael Ashenden concerning microdosing and blood transfusions, why can't the AFLD and UCI chisel out a common working strategy for doing tests that might reveal this mode of PED use?

Pat can't let this slide by....

i don't see it as a pi££sing contest. UCI is corrupt- full stop. accepting money from armstrung/hog proves that.

AFLD i am not aware of anything dodgy about them, but stand to be corrected.

Pat lets it all slide into his back pocket....wonder how big his bank acc is in suisse, probably not as big yet as verboogens or other ioc members past and present....

the doping issue in cycling is so obvious the blind can see it....why because the fans point it out daily.....

other sports are doped to their gills, tennis look at nadal, football look at ronaldo's (real madrid) growth in a year or 2 or players dying on pitches...

other sports fans are in the dark or too fanatic like a lot 'pharmastrungites' to want to see it to dare see it......

if cycling cleans up its act it will force other sports to follow....and when other sports are shown to ba as dirty and cycling was but has cleaned ups act it will attract money back to a clean sport....
 
May 12, 2010
12
0
0
Visit site
I don't get it, does UCI perform the tests?

I thought WADA/AFLD did all the testing independently of UCI/ASO? What is UCI's role in the testing procedures?

Sounds really stupid if UCI can have influence over how testing is done. All they want is to avoid scandals that scares away audiende/sponsors.
 
Aug 4, 2009
1,056
1
0
Visit site
He is French he is arrogant and remember it was the French TDF stars that used to state if you need a pill take it.

Its the French National Tour let them do in France what they want and as they have so much money to throw at it then let the UCI save our money
maybe they will reduce our membership fees next year !!!!!!!!!! Maybe not.
 
Jun 16, 2009
647
0
0
Visit site
brianf7 said:
He is French he is arrogant and remember it was the French TDF stars that used to state if you need a pill take it.

This is the stupidest comment I've seen here for quite a while.

Surprised you can type so well with those grazes on your knuckles.

We're having a serious discussion about two conflicting authorities with the same official aim yet different priorities, and you jump straight in with xenophobic stereotyping and ignorant nonsense.

Now you've edited your post I'm not even sure what you mean....you think Bordry is an arrogant hypocrite, yet you'd welcome AFLD doing all the testing if it saved the UCI money?
 
Aug 4, 2009
1,056
1
0
Visit site
Now you've edited your post I'm not even sure what you mean....you think Bordry is an arrogant hypocrite, yet you'd welcome AFLD doing all the testing if it saved the UCI money?

What I mean is if the French ADFL want the job so bad let them have it and save us UCI members big $$$$. The ADFL think they are better than UCI .
if the job is done properly then so be it .

After all the UCI rely on its grass roots subs and to keep them financial.without that they could not do anything.
I remember the days when all these jobs were done by club members without any mention of reward except the odd thankyou from the event organiser.
 
May 20, 2010
119
0
0
Visit site
mikkemus23 said:
Bordry gives more weight to Landis`accusations concerning the UCI.
Wonder if Pat gives a rebuttal. It could be wise to plead the 5th for his own sake. It doesnt look too good on him this.

McQuaid's rebuttal came today: "pure bull****." Humpty Dumpty about to fall?
 
hektoren said:
Is Pierre Bordry right, when he states that "The tests are arranged so that the riders know in advance" when they will be subject to anti-doping scrutiny????

I think what Bordy is saying is that the structure of the testing allows riders to know when they are likely to be tested. For example, if the early morning tests are always done between 7:00 and 8:00, the riders would then know that they are in the clear between 8:00 and the race start.
 
BroDeal said:
I think what Bordy is saying is that the structure of the testing allows riders to know when they are likely to be tested. For example, if the early morning tests are always done between 7:00 and 8:00, the riders would then know that they are in the clear between 8:00 and the race start.

Or, if they are microdosing, to adjust their time frame to allow for clearing prior to the 7:00 test window.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Visit site
Taken from this article:

"Bordry needs to learn the rules of anti-doping and follow them," he said. "The AFLD has tested riders four times this year when they week not required to do so. The last was just last Friday. They went to test riders from RadioShack who were riding the Dauphine Libere but when they presented a list to the directeur sportif Alain Gallopin, it included the name of a mechanic and a soigneur. How bad is that?"

Good idea Bordry - test the supposed diabetic staff members to see if the prescription medications you keep finding in the trash came from the staff members who are purported to use it. If it's in the riders' urine, but not the staff members' urine, that tells you something interesting.

On the whole, sounds like McQuack is just annoyed that AFLD wanted to test a "protected" team.
 
Beech Mtn said:
Taken from this article:



Good idea Bordry - test the supposed diabetic staff members to see if the prescription medications you keep finding in the trash came from the staff members who are purported to use it. If it's in the riders' urine, but no the staff members' urine, that tells you something.

On the whole, sounds like McQuack is just annoyed that AFLD wanted to test a "protected" team.

Test the staff. Remember Kelly's mechanic!

From USACycling.org:

"Holding a USAC Mechanics' License will tell other groups of cycling professionals that you can be counted on to do what is right, what is accepted in the cycling world, and what is best to convey the positive image of the sport of cycling."
 
"The AFLD has tested riders four times this year when they were not required to do so.

"Required" by whom?

Apparently, if you decide to test an athlete on your own soil without having been requested to do so by McQuack's thugs, then you are in violation of Paddy's "rules of anti-doping".