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

[DirtyWorks]

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co....sport-turned/story-20331628-detail/story.html

Ooh dear

But, this part is important:

The only explanation is that the UCI’s case must relate to blood tests taken either during his victorious Tour of Britain week or when he joined Team Sky for training before he signed a two-year deal with them last December.

The UCI is taking blood before joining a team? Either that, or they drew blood at the time of his wins. It would be incredible, but not surprising, if there really are no ToB-era samples.

I still don't know why JTL gets the attention while a guy like Horner taunts the UCI/ASO.

 

[Benotti69]

But, this part is important:

The only explanation is that the UCI’s case must relate to blood tests taken either during his victorious Tour of Britain week or when he joined Team Sky for training before he signed a two-year deal with them last December.

The UCI is taking blood before joining a team? Either that, or they drew blood at the time of his wins. It would be incredible, but not surprising, if there really are no ToB-era samples.

I still don't know why JTL gets the attention while a guy like Horner taunts the UCI/ASO.

If they only have his samples from 1 race how can they have found anomalies. I thought BP needed a certain amount of testing over a certain period? What are they comparing his ToB bloods with?

 

[DirtyWorks]

If they only have his samples from 1 race how can they have found anomalies. I thought BP needed a certain amount of testing over a certain period? What are they comparing his ToB bloods with?

WT Samples from 2013.

I'm operating under the assumption this is a longitudinal positive, so some metrics fell out of non-positive range and flagged him. it seems like he failed the IQ test and must have done so spectacularly for the case to get this far.

 

[thehog]

Samples from 2013.

I'm operating under the assumption this is a longitudinal positive.

Correct and how do we know that 2012 is abnormal and not 2013? It's just that the one 2012 is not normalising with the 2013 baselines.

If JTL says sickness then it won't be sickness winning the Tour of Britain but in his poor performances this year at Sky.

If it is low recs then it's a personalised range.

 

[MartinGT]

I'm guessing here

ToB and WC and data from 2013?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Samples from 2013.

I'm operating under the assumption this is a longitudinal positive.

see, if we had any confidence in UCI's anti doping outfit noone would ever mention the possibility of an outright positive test.

Still think the whole thing is triggered by a neutral source (at UCI) who has had enough of all the BS.

 

[The Hitch]

"But there is going to be a point when enough is enough, and we need to get on and start talking about the good things in the sport and the great racing that's getting missed now because we're harping on about what happened 10 years ago."

September 2012 was 10 years ago?

This is not the first time Froome or Wiggins have said that. Their willingness to promote a totally bull**** statement like that stinks to high hell and is one of the major questions the likes of Walsh and brailsford need to be confronted with.

Soon we will hear though how Froome saying that actually proves he is clean because Brailsford is really really clever and he would never allow someone that dumb to dope.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co....sport-turned/story-20331628-detail/story.html

Ooh dear

But, this part is important:

The only explanation is that the UCI’s case must relate to blood tests taken either during his victorious Tour of Britain week or when he joined Team Sky for training before he signed a two-year deal with them last December.

The UCI is taking blood before joining a team? Either that, or they drew blood at the time of his wins. It would be incredible, but not surprising, if there really are no ToB-era samples.

I still don't know why JTL gets the attention while a guy like Horner taunts the UCI/ASO.

I don't really get why the article is saying "how can there be a biopass violation if there's no biopass until 2013"? It's fundamentally flawed. I will use hct% because that's the one that's easiest to understand since the 50% rule was implemented, and also cos I don't know all the ins and outs of reticulocyte count and its implications.

I have a theoretical rider. He wins a stage of a race at 2.1 or 2.2 level a couple of years ago. Tested, his hct% is 42,1%.

This year, my theoretical rider has raced for a biopass compliant team. His hct% over the course of 7 tests in the first part of the season registers a high of 43,2% and a low of 40,9%.

Last year, he won a bunch of races but the only time we were able to get him in for testing he registered a hct% of 49,5%. At the time, the % seemed high but there was no evidence of any wrongdoing and the % alone was not enough to hang a guy on.

But now, despite that he was not on the biopassport when he registered that high score, it is anomalous, and we now have eight tests over a two year period that suggest that his natural hct% should be far below where it was on that test. Therefore, an explanation is demanded.

Ergo, biopassport violation, post-dated to when the biopassport is.

This is what I think was the case with the Portuguese riders. I don't think that Barbot, Louletano-Dunas Douradas and LA-Antarte are all fully biopass compliant. Ribeiro and Amorim rode for the latter two teams respectively last season, but both raced for Barbot in 2010, where the anomalies date from. It seems to me that tests since leaving Barbot have shown significant differences from the time there, which has raised red flags from the authorities which the riders have been unable to satisfactorily explain. We would need to know WHY the UCI denied JTL a biopassport when racing for Endura to know whether there is anything of note in it or not.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Correct and how do we know that 2012 is abnormal and not 2013? It's just that the one 2012 is not normalising with the 2013 baselines.

If JTL says sickness then it won't be sickness winning the Tour of Britain but in his poor performances this year at Sky.

If it is low recs then it's a personalised range.

If it were possible to be logical about the UCI and anti-doping, some values must be really bad is the only possible logical reason why the UCI would stay on the case.

As has been said many times, the UCI chase some athletes around the world and banish others to continental racing and let others plainly dope in the WT with little rhyme or reason linking any of it.

 

[gooner]

"But there is going to be a point when enough is enough, and we need to get on and start talking about the good things in the sport and the great racing that's getting missed now because we're harping on about what happened 10 years ago."

September 2012 was 10 years ago?

Cavendish was saying the same sort of stuff in his interview on BBC Hardtalk yesterday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V40dvdB6TM

 

[DirtyWorks]

I don't really get why the article is saying "how can there be a biopass violation if there's no biopass until 2013"? It's fundamentally flawed.

I agree, the premise of the article is fundamentally flawed. Blood metrics are blood metrics regardless of when sample was taken.

See my last post for the usual warnings about UCI's anti-doping.

 

[MatParker117]

That is very compelling.

So when was he blood tested for the BP in 2012? When training at Tenerife with Team Sky? In prep for the worlds? At the worlds?

More questions than answers to be honest.

Garmin tested him in April and Sky after the WC.

 

[thehog]

Garmin tested him in April and Sky after the WC.

And appears he doped at the WC whilst riding for BC.

And after a Sky lead Tenerife training camp mind you.

Is Brailsford BC?

 

[TANK91]

This is not the first time Froome or Wiggins have said that. Their willingness to promote a totally bull**** statement like that stinks to high hell and is one of the major questions the likes of Walsh and brailsford need to be confronted with.

Soon we will hear though how Froome saying that actually proves he is clean because Brailsford is really really clever and he would never allow someone that dumb to dope.

Yeh becuase these 2 are only one's who make this sort of statement? Give me a break Hitch. Wow at the hate on this site it seriously as almost drove me aways from this site you guys are fascinated by Sky even now, now lol? Will you guys be on here on Christmas day lol, wondering what Sky are upto. Seriously sad lives people lead.

 

[barn yard]

tank91 your signature is the most amazing thing i have read on this site for a long time!

 

[dolophonic]

But, this part is important:

The only explanation is that the UCI’s case must relate to blood tests taken either during his victorious Tour of Britain week or when he joined Team Sky for training before he signed a two-year deal with them last December.

The UCI is taking blood before joining a team? Either that, or they drew blood at the time of his wins. It would be incredible, but not surprising, if there really are no ToB-era samples.

I still don't know why JTL gets the attention while a guy like Horner taunts the UCI/ASO.

Horner operates within the guidelines set forth, never tested positive blah blah.
JTL got big results at races where there was no testing .. There is a big difference (according to the uci and Sky and D. Martin) the questionable blood values came to light once he had a bio passport no?

 

[thehog]

Horner operates within the guidelines set forth, never tested positive blah blah.
JTL got big results at races where there was no testing .. There is a big difference (according to the uci and Sky and D. Martin) the questionable blood values came to light once he had a bio passport no?

Explained below from VN article.

JTL is trying to say that in 2012 winning ToB and doing well at WC is "normal". He obviously submitted a defence that he was sick through 2013 and overtrained. And that the 2013 results are "abnormal" due to those factors.

Now who's to say 2013 is doped and 2012 not? Although that's a stretch.

The likely scenario is he doped through 2012. He broke his collarbone and Sky were ready to sign him along with Garmin come ToB time. He couldn't help himself and wanted to perform. He dropped a bag and dosed with EPO. He won the ToB then was picked as the lead rider for WCs due to Wiggins and Froome being DoA from the Tour & the Olympics.

What now? I'd say he topped up on more EPO and risked not winning and being tested. He rode well and was still with Nibali and Gilbert with 2.5km to go.

In defence or Sky and Garmin their testing was probably only a snapshot in time. If his doping had cleared his system then there's little they would find on that front. But they would know he's a chump talentwise and not hire him.

The other issue is BC and Sky are intrinsically linked. If JTL was partying like it was 1999 and attending Sky training camps and riding the Worlds with BC then Endura, Brailsford (Sky) and British Cycling all have something to answer for.

It is understood that Tiernan Locke’s defence of blood level changes was based on claims of illness. However that was not enough to satisfy the expert panel, and the UCI has now requested that British Cycling open disciplinary proceedings against the rider.

When the Sunday Times reported that Tiernan Locke was being investigated, it stated that the suspect blood values dated back to September of last year, the same month he won the Tour of Britain and thus secured a contract with Team Sky.

He had been racing for the Continental team Endura at the time, a squad which was not part of the UCI’s biological passport.

It meant that less blood values were available for him than for riders on bigger teams. As a result it took time to build up a biological passport profile, and thus to detect the anomaly.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...d-from-all-team-activities.aspx#ixzz2nnERvEhV

 

[DirtyWorks]

The other issue is BC and Sky are intrinsically linked. If JTL was partying like it was 1999 and attending Sky training camps and riding the Worlds with BC then Endura, Brailsford (Sky) and British Cycling all have something to answer for.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...d-from-all-team-activities.aspx#ixzz2nnERvEhV

I agree with the entire post. But, that and a few euro will buy you a cup of coffee.

IMHO, Sky/BC is going to make stuff up regarding the bolded to explain away their own accountability. As has been beaten to death already, there's no above-and-beyond processes in their program.

 

[thehog]

I agree with the entire post. But, that and a few euro will buy you a cup of coffee!

The bolded is fundamental to enabling the Sky dream come true.

Correct. Endura have stated they handed over JTL to Sky for the last quarter of 2012 when the doping occurred which just brings up more reg flags.

September 2012 to December 31st 2012 he was effectively a Sky rider.

He then accompanied Team Sky on their Tenerife training camp in May. Team Sky had full access to JTL from the point it was agreed for him to train with them at this camp. This includes the period covering the last quarter of 2012. According to JTL, he undertook physiological tests for Team Sky directly after the World Championships in 2012

http://road.cc/content/news/95413-e...ach-pay-bio-passport-testing-jonathan-tiernan

 

[skidmark]

Explained below from VN article.

JTL is trying to say that in 2012 winning ToB and doing well at WC is "normal". He obviously submitted a defence that he was sick through 2013 and overtrained. And that the 2013 results are "abnormal" due to those factors.

Now who's to say 2013 is doped and 2012 not? Although that's a stretch.

The likely scenario is he doped through 2012. He broke his collarbone and Sky were ready to sign him along with Garmin come ToB time. He couldn't help himself and wanted to perform. He dropped a bag and dosed with EPO. He won the ToB then was picked as the lead rider for WCs due to Wiggins and Froome being DoA from the Tour & the Olympics.

What now? I'd say he topped up on more EPO and risked not winning and being tested. He rode well and was still with Nibali and Gilbert with 2.5km to go.

In defence or Sky and Garmin their testing was probably only a snapshot in time. If his doping had cleared his system then there's little they would find on that front. But they would know he's a chump talentwise and not hire him.

The other issue is BC and Sky are intrinsically linked. If JTL was partying like it was 1999 and attending Sky training camps and riding the Worlds with BC then Endura, Brailsford (Sky) and British Cycling all have something to answer for.



http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...d-from-all-team-activities.aspx#ixzz2nnERvEhV

Sure. What I don't get, though, is why an athlete would dope to high heaven to get a contract, secure that contract, and then dope more. Like, for a change in results the way we're looking at for JTL, that's obvious level dope. Why would he think attracting heat like that towards Sky would be cool? Why would he think he could perform at Sky without it? Did he think he could slide into some program there and he'd be taken care of? I get the pathological 'he just couldn't help himself' explanation, but it doesn't feel right to me. I don't know the mind of a pro athlete at all, though. I dunno, something just doesn't add up.

The more interesting question for me would be, if he got those results post-reasoned decision as a conti rider in an early season race, would Marcel Kittel tweet about it?

That's a good pseudo-zen clinic question: if an unheralded British rider overperforms at an early season race and no one is saying anything about it, does it make a sound on Marcel Kittel's twitter?

 

[Franklin]

I would hope the Brownlee's are spared suspicion: proper Yorkshire hardmen, never happier than training in the cold and wet, dominant in their sport yes but I've never heard any innuendo about them, unless we simply apply the 'they win ergo they dope' paradigm.

I agree with your latter argument, but the former argument is (sorry) useless. Vino was a real hardman, Armstrong knew how to suffer like anyone out there. Hamilton went through hell with a cracked shoulder in the TdF.

 

[argyllflyer]

"But there is going to be a point when enough is enough, and we need to get on and start talking about the good things in the sport and the great racing that's getting missed now because we're harping on about what happened 10 years ago."

September 2012 was 10 years ago?

preceded by...

"I really do think the best thing to do with the whole doping culture of the sport, to move past that image that we've had in the past, is to talk about it, be completely open and say: 'Listen, this was is what happened in the sport back then but it's definitely not happening any more, and these are the reasons. It needs to be talked about and we need to move on from that."

You can't take one quote and ignore the context (well you can, but you have zero credibility for doing so).

He is clearly saying it needs to be discussed BUT there comes a time when you also need to move the narrative on for the good of the sport. Armstrong was 10 years ago and with respect, most doping headlines relate to him, not JTL. Cycling News has two top stories just now: the grilling of Voigt on his knowledge of doping and Verbruggen denying any knowledge of cover-ups in 1999.

All the people who don't speak up, like Cav, seem to have the motivation of protecting their livelihood. The loss of sponsors this year has been pretty devastating.

Anyway, on topic: JTL most likely raced ToB and the Worlds clean but perhaps his preparation for them was not. It's taken a year to set his baseline and now UCI see a case to answer. This makes Sky look more naive than they did hiring Leinders, Barry, Yates etc but it doesn't point to a team-wide programme.

 

[Franklin]

You can't take one quote and ignore the context (well you can, but you have zero credibility for doing so).

Let me go over the other part of your amazing post.

. Armstrong was 10 years ago and with respect, most doping headlines relate to him, not JTL.

What do you think the credibility is of a poster who posts this?

JTL most likely raced ToB and the Worlds clean but perhaps his preparation for them was not.

Yeah, for reals!

This makes Sky look more naive than they did hiring Leinders, Barry, Yates etc but it doesn't point to a team-wide programme.

Agreed, the Rasmussen scandal was the year they hired Leinders at least 10 years ago. There is simply no way that you would do a rudimentary background check on a team manager/doctor of such a low profile case. And sure, it did hit several newspapers and the court order was public domain, but it's cycling! Who would even start to suspect something is fishy with a doctor who was involved with the team implicated in Human Plasma and who was monitoring Mencov who scored pretty high on the suspicion list?

Yeah, I'd say naive really is what comes to mind.

 

[argyllflyer]

Let me go over the other part of your amazing post.



What do you think the credibility is of a poster who posts this?

So you're telling me most of the Armstrong discussions don't relate to the period 99-05?

 

[Franklin]

So you're telling me most of the Armstrong discussions don't relate to the period 99-05?

Even if I'd say yes, you are right... comeback 2.0 sure was never mentioned especially as that was Wiggo's breakout year, I wouldn't dare to face my old teacher if I straightfacedly would say that 2005 is 10 years ago.

But I'm really a silly guy for trying tio argue on facts instead of gut feelings