CADF report 2012

[Dear Wiggo]

Available for download from here: http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI5/layout.asp?MenuId=MjI0NQ&LangId=1

Disappointing that there is no BP data included this time. The 2010-2011 report at least had a summary, and there was a study published with similar information for 2008-2009.

4 months "late" and lots of backslapping for making money out of the foundation, achieving ISO accreditation and conducting ~1000 additional test in 2012 from 2011, but no BP data summary.

PR spin at its best...

 

[DirtyWorks]

...CADF and UCI agreed to change the governance of the
Foundation by creating a new Foundation Board made up of persons not involved in the management of UCI. This project
was proposed to UCI late in 2012 and was approved by the UCI Management Committee in Louisville, January 2013. While the Funding Committee, composed of stakeholders’ representatives, will not change, new persons independent from UCI will be appointed as members of the Foundation Board.

I hear Pepe Marti is not doing anything. Any number of Hein's friends will suffice. Perhaps an Irish Cycling voter or two would like to move up the UCI organization?

 

[DirtyWorks]

2011 statistics here: http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI1/layout.asp?MenuId=MTU2NjQ&LangId=1

This report confirms the suspicion there's a giant loophole where the promoter runs tests for drugs that the athlete probably isn't taking. Specifically, the promoter-paid tests for EPO, collected by the UCI, was only done 21% of the time on in-competition samples. We know this is exactly the wrong time to test anyway as the athlete plans for this. Talk about failing an IQ test!


***OUT OF COMPETITION**
More urine tests in 2012. And FEWER BLOOD TESTS. WADA knows urine tests just aren't that useful at catching cheats and so does the UCI.

***IN COMPETITION**
There were both bio-passport and non-bio-passport blood tests. Overall, the number of blood tests tripled in competition, but not for EPO. Urine tests were unchanged.

The document confirms the promoter pays for in-competition testing. And, only 21% of in-competition samples are tested for EPO. I have to do some statistics to work out some probabilities the test catches an EPO user.

###Other
Road athletes get a disproportionate amount of testing. 78% of it.
The UCI itself does 81% of the testing and collects the vast majority of the Out Of Competition samples.

14,168 total tests, slightly up overall from 2011 mostly due to increased in-competition testing, which the promoter pays, not the UCI.

They do some not-clever remixing of numbers to pretend they are testing more.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

2011 statistics here: http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI1/layout.asp?MenuId=MTU2NjQ&LangId=1

This report confirms the suspicion there's a giant loophole where the promoter runs tests for drugs that the athlete probably isn't taking. Specifically, the promoter-paid tests for EPO, collected by the UCI, was only done 21% of the time on in-competition samples. We know this is exactly the wrong time to test anyway as the athlete plans for this. Talk about failing an IQ test!


***OUT OF COMPETITION**
More urine tests in 2012. And FEWER BLOOD TESTS. WADA knows urine tests just aren't that useful at catching cheats and so does the UCI.

***IN COMPETITION**
There were both bio-passport and non-bio-passport blood tests. Overall, the number of blood tests tripled in competition, but not for EPO. Urine tests were unchanged.

The document confirms the promoter pays for in-competition testing. And, only 21% of in-competition samples are tested for EPO. I have to do some statistics to work out some probabilities the test catches an EPO user.

###Other
Road athletes get a disproportionate amount of testing. 78% of it.
The UCI itself does 81% of the testing and collects the vast majority of the Out Of Competition samples.

14,168 total tests, slightly up overall from 2011 mostly due to increased in-competition testing, which the promoter pays, not the UCI.

They do some not-clever remixing of numbers to pretend they are testing more.

That makes zero sense.
The very reason that you conclude "the riders plan for this" or that it is "the wrong time" is because the (doping) rider knows of the increased likelihood of a test for EPO.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The document confirms the promoter pays for in-competition testing. And, only 21% of in-competition samples are tested for EPO. I have to do some statistics to work out some probabilities the test catches an EPO user.

We did something similar somewhere in the clinic - don't remember where now. It was ~5% chance of being caught during a 2 week training camp from memory.

 

[DirtyWorks]

That makes zero sense.
The very reason that you conclude "the riders plan for this" or that it is "the wrong time" is because the (doping) rider knows of the increased likelihood of a test for EPO.

Maybe I'm missing something. Why would a doping podium contender knowingly come to a race with detectable anything? The premise of the game is to win and not test positive.

That's different than honoring the limits of personal human performance and attempting to win the game.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Maybe I'm missing something. Why would a doping podium contender knowingly come to a race with detectable anything? The premise of the game is to win and not test positive.

That's different than honoring the limits of personal human performance and attempting to win the game.

Yeah. For the same reason, I could not understand why JV was so impressed with Navardauskas being clean and producing good power the day after winning a big U23 race, given winners of said races are up for testing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Maybe I'm missing something. Why would a doping podium contender knowingly come to a race with detectable anything? The premise of the game is to win and not test positive.

That's different than honoring the limits of personal human performance and attempting to win the game.

You are missing something - it is not to catch cheats (which it still occasionally does) but moreso it is to deter them in the first place.

Yeah. For the same reason, I could not understand why JV was so impressed with Navardauskas being clean and producing good power the day after winning a big U23 race, given winners of said races are up for testing.

JV said they gave Navardauskas more than one test for a variety of things - indeed you know this because you went all WADA blood procedure about it.

 

[DirtyWorks]

You are missing something - it is not to catch cheats (which it still occasionally does) but moreso it is to deter them in the first place.

I would argue the determined/calculating cheater is not detered by tests. The goal being to dope to get the podium and still pass the test.

The more honest riders are really detered. They are not the problem.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

JV said they gave Navardauskas more than one test for a variety of things - indeed you know this because you went all WADA blood procedure about it.

More than one test? JV had him blood/urine tested, stuck him on a bike for an hour and then immediately tested him for exactly the same things. You are being obtuse or *** if you think the second set of tests was going to reveal drug inhalation or anything else untoward that the pre-ride tests missed.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You are missing something - it is not to catch cheats (which it still occasionally does) but moreso it is to deter them in the first place.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. From UCI's website:

The UCI anti-doping programme has two objectives:

get rid of cheats (doping detection)
dissuade riders from resorting to doping

In Australian English, "detection" is close enough to "catch" that they can be used interchangeably.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

JV said they gave Navardauskas more than one test for a variety of things - indeed you know this because you went all WADA blood procedure about it.

Hang on. WTF are you talking about?

Do you have a point, or did you just want to take a dig at me?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So there's been no 2013 CADF business report released yet... very late.

Here's what the AFLD, CADF and UCI + UKAD working together for the 2014 TdF will achieve:

Francesca Rossi, Director of the CADF, said: “The anti-doping programme put in place by this joint agreement, and covering this year’s Tour de France, has all the elements necessary to meet anti-doping objectives, both in terms of protecting the cyclists’ health and ensuring the sport’s ethics.”

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...s/UCI/UCI8/layout.asp?MenuID=MTYzMDQ&LangId=1

Healthy riders, healthy ethics.