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

[Catwhoorg]

My read of the WADA code is the sanction applies. Maybe I'm wrong.
Remember when Wonderboy tried to show up at a FINA-sanctioned swim meet? The federation stepped in and stopped that nonsense. Same idea.

A way around the issue is he's not officially entered or some other clever nonsense. If the event were not sanctioned by BC, then he's definitely free to ride.

A swim meet is actual racing
A subtle difference to a supported group ride.


I am sure BC aren't happy about it, but I ma not sure about what they can do.

 

[laurel1969]

BC looks terrible in this situation.

Only to the uninformed and ignorant.

Its nothing to do with BC.

BC offer a marketing package for sportive event organisers. They aren't 'accrediting' the rides in any way, just selling an online entry system, a third party timing system, a central listing venue, insurance and organiser resources.

 

[westerner]

I found a quote attributed to the promoter: Exmoor Beast promoter, Marcus Di Vincenzo, said: “If the United Kingdom Anti Doping findings, or should I say lack of them, went before a court of law, they would be kicked out on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

JTL said he would love to appeal the decision but is simply lacking in funds. Perhaps this promoter could put his money were his mouth is and use some of his event profits to help raise funds for something like an "I believe! JTL fairness fund"

 

[Race Radio]

Only to the uninformed and ignorant.

Its nothing to do with BC.

BC offer a marketing package for sportive event organisers. They aren't 'accrediting' the rides in any way, just selling an online entry system, a third party timing system, a central listing venue, insurance and organiser resources.

Ah, got it. Thanks. On the UK cycling website it does say licenses are not required for Sportives.

In Italy and France most GF require a license to compete. Those license also would insure a rider like JTL would not be allowed to compete while banned. You can also get a one day if you have a doctors exam paper, but still JTL would not be allowed.

Doubt the organizers will pull him, like they did in Spain
http://www.marca.com/2014/06/23/ciclismo/1403533461.html

 

[thehog]

Only to the uninformed and ignorant.

Its nothing to do with BC.

BC offer a marketing package for sportive event organisers. They aren't 'accrediting' the rides in any way, just selling an online entry system, a third party timing system, a central listing venue, insurance and organiser resources.

The license provide insurance. AS BC provides insurance to the individual with each license. Fondo's in Italy etc. will allow a medical certificate instead of a license which covers their indemnity.

 

[laurel1969]

A license is not needed to ride a sportive in the UK. Nothing is needed other than a bike and an often exorbitant entry fee.

The insurance I am referring to is event insurance, not rider insurance.

 

[DirtyWorks]

BC offer a marketing package for sportive event organisers. They aren't 'accrediting' the rides in any way, just selling an online entry system, a third party timing system, a central listing venue, insurance and organiser resources.

In the U.S. that makes it an event sanctioned by a federation that is supposed to be WADA compliant. Therefore, various WADA regs might apply depending on the non-racing event.

What if I offer payback to top-5 in my non-racing, but timed BC event? Still no WADA anything?

I guess it's just different.

 

[thehog]

A license is not needed to ride a sportive in the UK. Nothing is needed other than a bike and an often exorbitant entry fee.

The insurance I am referring to is event insurance, not rider insurance.

100000% agree.

 

[laurel1969]

A sports federation that supposed to comply with WADA standards doesn't and nobody minds? Okay.

Rather than wailing and flailing your arms around in a desperate effort to generate a controversy, why don't you go and inform yourself first.

UK Sportives are not regulated by WADA, the UCI, or BC. In fact they aren't regulated by anybody, not even the law. There are no stipulations within the Road Traffic Act 1988, or through the Licensing Act 2003. Organisers don't even need to inform the authorities.

British Cycling isn't just about racing. It has positioned itself to take up hobby cyclists, weekend warriors, and even commuters who are disenchanted by the only other national cyclist organisation, the CTC. Their involvement in sportive is as above.

Edit: I see you've edited your post and stopped wailing and flailing

 

[laurel1969]

Anyway, quite why JTL is riding a sportive is anyone's guess. Maybe he's getting a kickback.

 

[TheSpud]

Anyway, quite why JTL is riding a sportive is anyone's guess. Maybe he's getting a kickback.

I'd imagine he'll get a lot of local support - its not far from where he's from, and judging by the local rag he is seen as having been wronged by the judgement.

 

[Benotti69]

Anyway, quite why JTL is riding a sportive is anyone's guess. Maybe he's getting a kickback.

he was 'invited', whether that means he gains financially, the sportive is certain getting the publicity they obviously craved.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Only to the uninformed and ignorant.

Its nothing to do with BC.

BC offer a marketing package for sportive event organisers. They aren't 'accrediting' the rides in any way, just
1. selling an online entry system,
2. a third party timing system,
3. a central listing venue,
4. insurance and
5. organiser resources.

How you can say this has nothing to do with BC and then essentially say they are running the show is beyond me.

A. They will be charging, per rider for this "nothing" package
B. Using a "big name" like JTL will draw more riders, and thus more fees to BC

 

[thehog]

One of the craziest parts of that article, actually. He was hit what, four times in the five months after the Sep 22 test? So if they didn't touch him for two months, that's four ABP tests in three months?

I asked before about whether the frequency of those tests was abnormal, or whether it was just the normal base-line testing (experts do offer different views on how many tests are needed for a baseline). Me, four tests in three months does look like you're looking for something.

A correction for your assessment. And a two part post.

Firstly; It’s important to distinguish between ABP testing and regular OOC and in competion testing. It appears you’ve confused the two.

ABP testing doesn’t “look for something” as you state, it is not a dope test per se but a test to record “markers” within the blood. As DirtyWorks rightfully points out, testing passport parameters more frequently doesn’t necessarily provide you with a more accurate dataset for the passport. A more evenly spread testing schedule over a longer period of time provides a more meaningful assessment of an athlete’s blood parameters.

In-competition and OOC urine testing is when a anti-doping body could be “looking for something” under the guidance of “target testing”. A term used when the passport may suggest doping but may not be a passport case in itself, whereby the UCI/CADF can instruction regulation testing to collection of samples via urine at given time.

JTL is unique in the process because his first ever test in the passport was his “anomalous” reading rather than in other cases whereby “anomaly” came during their passport and not at the start.

The point JTL was making was if the UCI thought the first reading was “irregular” then why didn’t they “target test” him for EPO etc. in the proceeding 2 months? It probably mattered little as if ABP or target testing took place his values would have returned to normal (assuming no further doping)and they no longer would be finding EPO that long after taking it (assuming he took EPO).

The part which JTL missed was that the UCI more than likely doesn’t perform ABP and/or target testing that late in the season simply for the fact that if athletes are doping they generally wouldn’t be doing it in the off-season at season’s end. A better time to start would be “2 months” later when riders are beginning their training again and possibly begin to dope. There’s also the fact that riders are resting, on holidays and their bodies would show different levels when not under the stress of training and racing.

I assume what JTL really meant is that if you have an “outlier” result in your passport and it your first reading and if you target tested for EPO etc. shortly after the ABP irregular test that you could potentially prove or disprove the “10-14 day” theory put forward by the UKAD. As his ABP and regular tests was 2 months later which considered ‘non-irregular”, he was put into a position of defending a claim he couldn’t really defend against because a) he couldn’t use the Sky test (not that it provided a glowing reading) or b) has no other recorded data to defend it with.

Still a hard case he was trying to sell to be given an innocent verdict because his readings were so high in the outlier result and that was not explained to level of certainly that would convince the panel.

and part 2; Which in itself raises an interesting polemic for the passport; if only the passport data can be relied upon then how does an athlete ever hope to convince the panel otherwise? The only means is to have experts who are better credentialed and more experienced to change the position from guilty to innocent. Essentially you have demonstrate why your values were they way they were only using the UCI’s data samples.

What is interesting to note that Kreuziger himself who is effectively going for a “dehydration” defence and is using one of the same experts as JTL did, Dr. Kingsley K. Hampton:

““His (Roman) blood profile data at no time exceeded the limit values set by the UCI itself, but only approached the limits on one occasion, which was caused by extreme dehydration after (an unsuccessful) mountain stage of the Giro d’Italia 2012,” and ““Three independent experts contacted by Mr. Kreuziger’s management on the basis of anonymity confirmed independently of one another that the assumption of the CADF expert panel is wrong.”

One of aforesaid “independent experts” is Dr. Kingsley K. Hampton, expert in hematology from Sheffield University, so “the science” is definitely presented on both sides.

The passport is a death sentence if you get to a charged stage with the CADF. Whether JTL or Kreuziger were doping or not the process is a hard battle for any athlete having to defend in the logistics of which the arbitration is set out.

Basically a case of “my experts and my data collection vs. your experts and none of your data collection”, the UCI generally can fund the experts in an unlimited fashion, the athlete perhaps not and you have no recourse to supplementary data sources. I guess that’s where Oleg steps in.

I’ll be interested how the Kreuziger plays out purely form a process and procedure point of view.

 

[sittingbison]

...All you have to do is say:

Yup you got me I made it up. Sorry about that gents

BTW I would not try the bullshit and bluster on this one #justsayin

good post hog

PS bolded is pertinent

 

[laurel1969]

How you can say this has nothing to do with BC and then essentially say they are running the show is beyond me.

A. They will be charging, per rider for this "nothing" package
B. Using a "big name" like JTL will draw more riders, and thus more fees to BC

Keep digging, champ.

What BC offer is a zero-fee entry system.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Keep digging, champ.

What BC offer is a zero-fee entry system.

Sure thing.

The Online Entry system is FREE for organisers. All riders pay a £1 admin fee per race or ride entered, irrespective of the total cost of entry.

Regardless, looks like this sportive is completely independent of BC, which would have been a better thing to say in the first place, rather than then adding, BC offer a package to sportives of X, Y & Z, given its potential irrelevancy.

 

[MartinGT]

It just makes me chuckle.

It shows up how hard it is for some of the British people (and yes I am British) to believe that we have cheats and liars in sport.

For some reason there is loads of love out there for Miller and JTL didnt dope rubbish, yet these same people hate Lance et al.

It also makes me chuckle too, if he was innocent and Sky also believed his innocence they would finance his defence, to me, Sky not willing to help his defence says a lot. Although, on the flip side, they do have the "Not on our watch" rubbish which most of the British public believe.

 

[RownhamHill]

It just makes me chuckle.

It shows up how hard it is for some of the British people (and yes I am British) to believe that we have cheats and liars in sport.

For some reason there is loads of love out there for Miller and JTL didnt dope rubbish, yet these same people hate Lance et al.

It also makes me chuckle too, if he was innocent and Sky also believed his innocence they would finance his defence, to me, Sky not willing to help his defence says a lot. Although, on the flip side, they do have the "Not on our watch" rubbish which most of the British public believe.

I thought I'd read on here that Sky did fund his defence?

It's all very confusing.

 

[MartinGT]

I thought I'd read on here that Sky did fund his defence?

It's all very confusing.

So what is he talking about then

 

[RownhamHill]

So what is he talking about then

I don't know - who has been talking about what? I'd love to get some more information on all this, with all the claims that have been going on on this thread!

 

[thehog]

I don't know - who has been talking about what? I'd love to get some more information on all this, with all the claims that have been going on on this thread!

I'm sure if we get a link to P.McQuaid creating & leaking the JTL letter despite his brother being the agent I'm sure we'll be good. McQuaid apparently "targeted" JTL, because he targets the weak. And he's targeted Garmin. (quote, unquote).

Let it drop. It's over.

I'm more interested in this...

What is interesting to note that Kreuziger himself who is effectively going for a “dehydration” defence and is using one of the same experts as JTL did, Dr. Kingsley K. Hampton:

 

[RownhamHill]

I'm sure if we get a link to P.McQuaid creating & leaking the JTL letter despite his brother being the agent I'm sure we'll be good. McQuaid apparently "targeted" JTL, because he targets the weak. And he's targeted Garmin. (quote, unquote).

Let it drop. It's over.

I'm more interested in this...

I'm sorry, but I don't understand a word of this post, apart from the last line. What's Pat McQuaid and Garmin got to do with this???

Even more confused!!!

 

[Catwhoorg]

A correction for your assessment. And a two part post.

Firstly; It’s important to distinguish between ABP testing and regular OOC and in competion testing. It appears you’ve confused the two.

Two further minor additions and clarifications.
Passport samples, and blood samples destined for other analysis are actually handled differently, there is no cross over.

Passport samples are unique in anti-doping a single sample. There is no A and B sample.

If someone was being tested for a Blood EPO test and a passport type test, that would require the drawing of 3 vials. Two for serum analysis (A and B) and a third for the passport.

 

[thehog]

Two further minor additions and clarifications.
Passport samples, and blood samples destined for other analysis are actually handled differently, there is no cross over.

Passport samples are unique in anti-doping a single sample. There is no A and B sample.

If someone was being tested for a Blood EPO test and a passport type test, that would require the drawing of 3 vials. Two for serum analysis (A and B) and a third for the passport.

Thanks and yes passport would only draw one sample of blood.

Seeing as JTL had urine tests at ToB which weren't tested for EPO, perhaps he could have at least asked for his B samples to he tested for EPO?

That would have been a better defense.... if innocent. Would have broken the 10-14 day theorem.