Jonathan Tiernan-Locke written to by UCI, asked to explain blood values

[IndianCyclist]

You get a rider to show up and document an illness or something along those lines that explains those values. Easy.

Just to make sure the rider is defenseless before litigation. They donot want to lose.

 

[zigmeister]

That's my point and really a question. Maybe I'm not familiar with the procedural request and elements involved.

But it seems to me the UCI needs to say, hey, this is representative of doping this and that. But what exactly is any rider with a clue going to say?

Well, me and my experts say your passport is garbage and doesn't prove anything. Prove I am dirty.

We know the passport doesn't prove anything. Which makes the entire thing silly it seems. Of course, they can then say to the naysayers and World. Hey, look, we are trying to fight doping, see what we did here. We sent a guy a request to help us figure out what is going on, because we really don't know! But, we are trying!!!

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I really don't comprehend the passport request. Sir, please explain these values!

Ummm...I'm not a scientist, what am I supposed to explain UCI???

You are assumed guilty, so please come explain why you are not!

This is why the passport is a joke and completely unreliable. It doesn't
actually prove anything. So you get the rider to show up and convict himself?

Post of the thread, chapeau.

And I mean it, that was not sarcastic.

BP = propaganda

 

[hrotha]

That's silly. Just because something doesn't magically fix everything and solve all the problems, it doesn't mean it's useless. It's often compared derisevely to the 50% hematocrit cap, ignoring that the hematocrit cap was a huge step forward.

If nothing else, the BP makes it easier to be caught due to a miscalculation.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I really don't comprehend the passport request. Sir, please explain these values!

Ummm...I'm not a scientist, what am I supposed to explain UCI???

You are assumed guilty, so please come explain why you are not!

This is why the passport is a joke and completely unreliable. It doesn't
actually prove anything. So you get the rider to show up and convict himself?

Jesús Rosendo might be an example worth pointing to. Flagged on the biopassport, presented medical justification, acquitted, back to racing, no fuss. He was flagged at the same time as Pellizotti and Valjavec.

 

[red_flanders]

That's silly. Just because something doesn't magically fix everything and solve all the problems, it doesn't mean it's useless. It's often compared derisevely to the 50% hematocrit cap, ignoring that the hematocrit cap was a huge step forward.

If nothing else, the BP makes it easier to be caught due to a miscalculation.

I think you make very good points. I think it's also fair to say that the BP has been hyped as some kind of proof that cycling has been doing more than any other sport. The implication of course (unstated) is that cycling is cleaner, which is of course silly. There is truth in the statement that they're doing more, but it misses the point which of course is that it was as dirty or dirtier than any other sport, and that the BP does not fundamentally change that given issues with implementation and sanctions based on BP values.

 

[Benotti69]

That's silly. Just because something doesn't magically fix everything and solve all the problems, it doesn't mean it's useless. It's often compared derisevely to the 50% hematocrit cap, ignoring that the hematocrit cap was a huge step forward.

If nothing else, the BP makes it easier to be caught due to a miscalculation.

The 50% cap had 1 benefit and that was to stop riders from dying. Apart from that it meant that those who responded better by boosting as close to 50% won the races and those who didn't respond or had a naturally high HcT lost out big time.

 

[hrotha]

The 50% cap had 1 benefit and that was to stop riders from dying. Apart from that it meant that those who responded better by boosting as close to 50% won the races and those who didn't respond or had a naturally high HcT lost out big time.

And before that, the situation was that those who combined being better responders with having more of a death wish came out on top. How was that not a step forward? The super responders before and after 1997 would still be the guys with naturally low hematocrits - the difference being they could only boost it up to the low-mid 50s instead of the high 50s-low 60s like before. Guys with naturally high hematocrits weren't worse off.

Not to mention the single most important factor: it laid down the framework for blood tests, which weren't done before.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I think you make very good points. I think it's also fair to say that the BP has been hyped as some kind of proof that cycling has been doing more than any other sport. The implication of course (unstated) is that cycling is cleaner, which is of course silly. There is truth in the statement that they're doing more, but it misses the point which of course is that it was as dirty or dirtier than any other sport, and that the BP does not fundamentally change that given issues with implementation and sanctions based on BP values.

Wasn't the BP brought in in XC skiing before cycling anyway? Or about the same time?

 

[red_flanders]

Wasn't the BP brought in in XC skiing before cycling anyway? Or about the same time?

No idea, don't follow XC skiing at all.

 

[maltiv]

We know the passport doesn't prove anything. Which makes the entire thing silly it seems. Of course, they can then say to the naysayers and World. Hey, look, we are trying to fight doping, see what we did here. We sent a guy a request to help us figure out what is going on, because we really don't know! But, we are trying!!!

Depends how you define "prove", but you can prove that a person is guilty with a certain probability. They can easily calculate how likely a certain pattern is with a clean rider. If the probability of this pattern occurring is extremely low, then said rider is questioned.

Note that a rider being questioned means that several experts have concluded that "“it is highly likely that a prohibited substance or prohibited method had been used and unlikely that it is the result of any other cause”".

 

[DirtyWorks]

Wasn't the BP brought in in XC skiing before cycling anyway? Or about the same time?

In terms of summer Olympic sports signing onto the WADA system, cycling was dead last. The UCI fought it at every turn and agreed to do the WADA system way beyond the last minute. They were going to be excluded from Games.

I don't know about winter sports.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

That's silly. Just because something doesn't magically fix everything and solve all the problems, it doesn't mean it's useless. It's often compared derisevely to the 50% hematocrit cap, ignoring that the hematocrit cap was a huge step forward.

If nothing else, the BP makes it easier to be caught due to a miscalculation.

So we agree the anti - doping tests are still a test of intelligence of the riders/doctors in the peloton.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So we agree the anti - doping tests are still a test of intelligence of the riders/doctors in the peloton.

Pretty sure the machines they use are around $200k. Compare that to the price of a GT rider's salary, budget for a pro team, or the income of a pro athlete "trainer" with a medical degree, and it makes a lot of sense to track parameters for legitimate reasons that could spill over into maintaining a parallel ADAMS style database of values for athletes.

If I wanted to game the system and make money at the same time, it would be the FIRST thing I would do - get a Sysmex or similar.

 

[hrotha]

So we agree the anti - doping tests are still a test of intelligence of the riders/doctors in the peloton.

Obviously. Why would any sane person disagree with that?

Bear in mind however that while Hamilton did say the controls were IQ tests, he also said statistically the chances of eventuallyfailing one down the line at his level were relatively high. Any test that increases those chances is a step forward.

 

[MartinGT]

When does JTL have to come clear himself?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

When does JTL have to come clear himself?

It will go on and on until they find traces of bite marks from the Tasmanian Tick or a similar predator. It will be Contador/Schleck 3.0.

 

[zigmeister]

It might help to target testing of certain athletes, in hopes of a cold stone bust OOC. But otherwise, it doesn't prove anything.

They likely created the passport due to Floyd and what he told them, and what to look at based upon the methods he explained they used to avoid detection.

So if all we know, there is some other doping methodology, the passport doesn't have a clue to look at it misses entirely.

Science and medicine really don't know jack about the human body for the most part.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Obviously. Why would any sane person disagree with that?

Bear in mind however that while Hamilton did say the controls were IQ tests, he also said statistically the chances of eventuallyfailing one down the line at his level were relatively high. Any test that increases those chances is a step forward.

This sortof gets to the heart of the matter.

The BP is effective. But only if used correctly, which is where the problems lie with it. It can establish that a rider is likely doping, but it is extremely difficult to build it as a stand alone test, basically it has to satisfy a very high threshold before it can be used to sanction someone.

While that still favours the athletes it does mean they cannot be blatant with their doping. Where it should be effective though is identifying riders for more OOC tests, which is still the most likely way of catching someone.
Either way means that there is a higher chance of being caught so an athlete has to curb their PED use.

 

[vedrafjord]

This sortof gets to the heart of the matter.

The BP is effective. But only if used correctly, which is where the problems lie with it. It can establish that a rider is likely doping, but it is extremely difficult to build it as a stand alone test, basically it has to satisfy a very high threshold before it can be used to sanction someone.

While that still favours the athletes it does mean they cannot be blatant with their doping. Where it should be effective though is identifying riders for more OOC tests, which is still the most likely way of catching someone.
Either way means that there is a higher chance of being caught so an athlete has to curb their PED use.

But merely identifying athletes for OOC tests won't cut it. For the last two decades, the two most important means of cheating have been EPO and other stimulants of RBC production, and autologous blood transfusions. The short half-life of microdosed EPO, along with the absence of an effective test for self-transfusions, means that the passport needs to be enough evidence in itself to convict, otherwise it is useless.

We know that athletes have had BP patterns consistent with doping (Hg staying steady or increasing during a 3 week GT, suppressed retics) but haven't been flagged for review by experts.

"We do know that back in 2009 the software was flagging up 10-15 cases a week according to a presentation given by the UCI’s Doctor Zorzoli" (quoting from the Inner Ring website).

We know that the vast majority of those flagged escaped sanction, where being flagged means (direct WADA quote) "it is highly likely that a prohibited substance or prohibited method had been used and unlikely that it is the result of any other cause".

We know that the majority of passport cases happened in its first two years.

We know that climbing speeds are rebounding to vintage EPO era levels following several years of slowdown.

I can only conclude that either a) athletes have learned to blood dope and fly under the passport radar while still getting performance benefits b) doping other than blood doping e.g. metabolic modulators such as AICAR etc. is what's important nowadays or c) both a + b.

It seems that athletes can sail as close to the sun as they like, and if their wax wings melt, they can give some bull**** excuse to the expert panel and the general public is none the wiser. I don't see how the passport can be called effective in any way. Sometimes I wonder would Rasmussen have triggered a passport case if he was around today. One of the most comical dopers of all time, but his haematocrit never even hit 44%.

 

[Von Mises]

In terms of summer Olympic sports signing onto the WADA system, cycling was dead last. The UCI fought it at every turn and agreed to do the WADA system way beyond the last minute. They were going to be excluded from Games.

I don't know about winter sports.

Thats not entirely true. UCI started with BP January 2008, Wada approved its guidelines at the end of 2009. Track&Field started in 2009, rowing in 2011 for example. Though, if you look at history of biological passport, it is very confusing. Skating for instance states that they started with biological passport in 1999, skiing (I think) in 2001, FIFA in 2007, but by same standard UCI could say that they started with passport in 2000. I think that it is fair ti say that UCi was first who started large scale with concrete rules, regulations and sanctions.

Couple of months ago Anja Sutter made a short report where she compared how BP is manged by different organizations.

For instance number of ABP tests per year. UCI - ca 8700, IAAF - 2700, FISA - 250, FIS - ca 1100. Number of athletes in testing pool. IAAF - 3200 /though they say that they concentrate to 200 and running distances 400m+), UCI - ca 1100 athletes.
Cost. UCI - 3,1 million USD per year, IAAF - 150 000 USD per year.

 

[JimmyFingers]

A friend of mine knows his sister. She says it's all ******** (predictably) and believes it was Sky that leaked it in order to push him out the team. Personally I think that's far fetched (seems a pretty risky course of action) but I would guess that's what JTL believes as well.

 

[Ferminal]

Yes! Evil Sky!

 

[JimmyFingers]

If they believe he has been doping presumably it would be an expectedly course of action? From their point of view they signed him on a fat contract on the basis of enhanced performances IF he was doping/

Anyway, just a bit more tasty speculation.

 

[the sceptic]

Didnt they learn anything from Armstrong?

Not that I think JTL has a clue about what is going on with Porte and Dawg