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

[Catwhoorg]

Every athlete deserves an uninterrupted block of personal time, but we know it's turned into the perfect opportunity to dope.

I'm a little reluctant to advocate closing this huge hole. Maybe there are lots of other ones to close before that one. (ex. T/E ratio)

I do wonder if/when we will see a case using the steroid passport module.

 

[Race Radio]

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/b...-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

Excellent article from Shane Stokes. Sky's lack of due diligence is staggering, especially in comparison to Garmin's policies.

 

[hrotha]

From that article I gather Sky tested him but didn't even look at the results.

 

[Race Radio]

From that article I gather Sky tested him but didn't even look at the results.

yup. They tested him after they signed him and either did not look at the results or did not understand them. It does appear they have changed their process but it looks primitive in comparison to Garmin's.

 

[sniper]

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/b...-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

Excellent article from Shane Stokes. Sky's lack of due diligence is staggering, especially in comparison to Garmin's policies.

thanks for the link.
Vaughters hanging JTL out to dry in that article.

“The thing with Tiernan-Locke was that we tried to do that in February or early March of that year, when he was in a real high performance period, but he wouldn’t come down to Girona,” Vaughters said. “We kept saying, ‘okay, you need to be here tomorrow for the test,’ but he would say, ‘oh no, I’m busy, I have got this or I have got that.’ He would always put it off, put it off, put it off.

“Finally he agreed to come down. We did the test in late April or early May. At that point in time all I can say is that the haematology was normal but his power test was average at best. It certainly wasn’t the guy who was ripping Philippe Gilbert and Dan Martin off his wheel at the Tour of Med. It was a power test of a very average professional rider

vaughters playing the "he sure as hell wasn't fooling me" card.
which is fine, but it compares oddly to vaughters' repeated suggestions that froome is a clean rider with crazy adaptive physiology.

 

[sniper]

yup. They tested him after they signed him and either did not look at the results or did not understand them.

or they did understand them and hired him all the same.

 

[neineinei]

From that article I gather Sky tested him but didn't even look at the results.

Or they looked at it and it looked just like any other test they look at.

 

[Scott SoCal]

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/b...-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

Excellent article from Shane Stokes. Sky's lack of due diligence is staggering, especially in comparison to Garmin's policies.

Sky... marginal gains, lol.

More like a case of more money than brains.

 

[hrotha]

Or they looked at it and it looked just like any other test they look at.

Unlikely. No matter how much you dope, you can't have it be so obvious in your tests.

 

[the sceptic]

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/b...-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/

Excellent article from Shane Stokes. Sky's lack of due diligence is staggering, especially in comparison to Garmin's policies.

why is this a surprise to anyone? we already know that sky have no problem with hiring dopers.

 

[sniper]

Unlikely. No matter how much you dope, you can't have it be so obvious in your tests.

funny also that in garmin's tests there was apparantly nothing wrong with his offscore.

vaughters: "all I can say is that the haematology was normal"

is that plausible? perhaps he stopped blooddoping for the garmin tests, then started doping again as soon as sky showed interest in hiring him?

 

[neineinei]

It is a bit unimpressing that UCI's bio data monitoring didn't seem to pick up on the absurdly high numbers right away. They should have made the alarm go off in the CADF headquarters, so they could have their experts look at it and have more tests done right away. But it took two months until they tested him again.

 

[the sceptic]

JV only talks about doping when it makes him look good.

You never hear him comment on epo positives, or other things that makes him look stupid with his new generation stuff.

 

[neineinei]

Unlikely. No matter how much you dope, you can't have it be so obvious in your tests.

By (eventually) eliminating doctors who had been working in cycling in the dark past Sky might also have eliminated from their medical staff some basic knowledge of what doping looked like. Like a 50+ htc.

 

[hrotha]

funny also that in garmin's tests there was apparantly nothing wrong with his offscore.
is that plausible? perhaps he stopped blooddoping for the garmin tests, then started doping again as soon as sky showed interest in hiring him?

I don't see why it's funny. Jonathan Tiernan-Pecharromán disappeared until he emerged again late in the season.

According to JV, he put off the test when he was in the middle of his winning streak and only went through it at a time he was very average again, which could suggest he feared they might find something weird in his test in late winter/early spring but was confident there would be no problem in late spring. Whether or not you believe JV, his story is internally consistent and makes sense.

By (eventually) eliminating doctors who had been working in cycling in the dark past Sky might also have eliminated from their medical staff some basic knowledge of what doping looked like. Like a 50+ htc.

Maybe, but the veteran dopers themselves would still have that knowledge and therefore their tests wouldn't look like JTL's.

 

[DirtyWorks]

It is a bit unimpressing that UCI's bio data monitoring didn't seem to pick up on the absurdly high numbers right away. They should have made the alarm go off in the CADF headquarters, so they could have their experts look at it and have more tests done right away. But it took two months until they tested him again.

That's assuming the UCI responds equally to positive values. We know they don't in some cases. In other cases we know they've sent "you need a vacation" letters. And still in other cases, "please explain these scores" letters. Other cases, no letter.

We know now JTL's case was a relatively easy sanction based on values, so maybe the rest aren't so easy?

Also, I don't agree it's possible for Sky to have a lack of medical knowledge. If the idea was a legitimate medical staff actually just tracking health factors, then there's no shortage of those. Where these doctors are challenged is dealing with whacky values thanks to doping and not only keep quiet, but work around the values.

 

[Merckx index]

As for the September 24 reading from Sky’s own blood test, the level of 127.8 had the risk of a false positive of between one to 1,000 and one to 10,000.

“As an OFF-score of 129.2 is the 1:10,000 cut-off. I would be very concerned about this score,” he said.

If that was the only value JTL had recorded, he might have gotten off. He certainly would have under the old pre-passport system.

Yet some people still complain that the anti-doping system is biased against the rider. That couldn’t be further from the truth. You have to be far, far over the line before you can be sanctioned.

[Sky’s spokesman] accepted that the OFF-score reading [which, again, is a relationship between mature and immature red blood cells] was not calculated.

He said that this reading only came to light when it was worked out by the experts working on the rider’s case.

Unbelievable. As if you need an expert to calculate an off-score.

 

[Digger]

If JV was here I would have one question for him - seen as I am not ripping into him anymore.

I think his comments on JTL and that whole process are fair.

However I would have another question based on those comments.


As regards Sky, this isn't incompetence in my opinion. This is, at best, wilful ignorance and simply is not plausible.

Joke of a team.

 

[Bronstein]

Sky's signing of Tiernan-Locke shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone. It's only consistent with their hiring of Leinders, Rogers, Yates, etc. If Sky had actually cared about whether Tiernan-Locke was a doper, they would have conducted testing similar to that done by Garmin well in advance of any signing.

Whoever made the decision to sign Tiernan-Locke may have seen him as another Froome. Good responder and able to manage his own doping program. The obvious difference between Froome and Tiernan-Locke is that all of Tiernan-Locke's 2012 results were achieved whilst he was riding for a Continental level team (no biological passport). It seems strange that Sky either didn't realise or didn't care about whether or not Tiernan-Locke was able to fool the passport whilst still maintaining his 2012 program. Perhaps no one trusted Tiernan-Locke enough in order for them to be honest with him and possibly offer support in relation to beating the passport.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Unbelievable. As if you need an expert to calculate an off-score.

Of course you do. The only time it can be calculated is by an WADA contracted expert while working on a case. Ever.

If it could be proven Sky was calculating off-scores, then suddenly Saint David's program doesn't look so good in many, many ways.

And BTW, the sky super-scientific PR image lives on anyway.

I'm assuming this is more Shane Stokes work? Good on Shane for making what's been discussed here it a little more official.

 

[Race Radio]

If that was the only value JTL had recorded, he might have gotten off. He certainly would have under the old pre-passport system.

Yet some people still complain that the anti-doping system is biased against the rider. That couldn’t be further from the truth. You have to be far, far over the line before you can be sanctioned.



Unbelievable. As if you need an expert to calculate an off-score.

Yup, Pre-passport 127 would result in a warning and 133 a sit down

 

[zlev11]

thanks for the link.
Vaughters hanging JTL out to dry in that article.

vaughters playing the "he sure as hell wasn't fooling me" card.
which is fine, but it compares oddly to vaughters' repeated suggestions that froome is a clean rider with crazy adaptive physiology.

I think everyone needs to re-read that post. He suggest that "FOR Froome to be clean, he would need to have some kind of crazy adaptive physiology", he never states that he IS clean, he clearly states that some kind of crazy adaptive physiology to high training loads would be the ONLY way he could be clean with the numbers he puts out. there's a big difference there, and JV is getting unfairly ridiculed for it on here.

i think the use of the word "crazy" should tip everyone off to what JV really thinks of Froome. (sorry for going off topic)

funny also that in garmin's tests there was apparantly nothing wrong with his offscore.
is that plausible? perhaps he stopped blooddoping for the garmin tests, then started doping again as soon as sky showed interest in hiring him?

did you read the rest of the sentence? he says his hematology looked normal but his power numbers were nothing extraordinary, either. so obviously JTL went there clean and it showed up in the tests that he was nothing but packfill.

 

[Benotti69]

I think everyone needs to re-read that post. He suggest that "FOR Froome to be clean, he would need to have some kind of crazy adaptive physiology", he never states that he IS clean, he clearly states that some kind of crazy adaptive physiology to high training loads would be the ONLY way he could be clean with the numbers he puts out. there's a big difference there, and JV is getting unfairly ridiculed for it on here.

i think the use of the world "crazy" should tip everyone off to what JV really thinks of Froome. (sorry for going off topic)

Bear in mind JV would not talk like that about Froome if he was wearing a Garmin jersey!

did you read the rest of the sentence? he says his hematology looked normal but his power numbers were nothing extraordinary, either. so obviously JTL went there clean and it showed up in the tests that he was nothing but packfill.

JTL did one test out of the 3 that Garmin require a rider to undertake before signing.

Easy to speak in hindsight about how clean or not JTL was.

 

[zlev11]

Bear in mind JV would not talk like that about Froome if he was wearing a Garmin jersey!

it's hard to say, because there has never been a Garmin rider as ridiculous as Froome. JV didn't just come out and say it, though, he was asked by someone on here whether he thought Froomes performances were possible clean, and he gave that answer, which I interpret as him saying there's a very, very low chance that he's clean. some people on here like to take it out of context as a concrete reason as to why JV thinks Froome is clean, but he never even came close to saying that.

JTL did one test out of the 3 that Garmin require a rider to undertake before signing.

Easy to speak in hindsight about how clean or not JTL was.

of course, but the numbers in the test apparently didn't correlate with his performances earlier in the season, which when combined with his normal hematological results, says he was doping then and not when Garmin tested him. i don't see what the argument against JV is here.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I think everyone needs to re-read that post. He suggest that "FOR Froome to be clean, he would need to have some kind of crazy adaptive physiology", he never states that he IS clean, he clearly states that some kind of crazy adaptive physiology to high training loads would be the ONLY way he could be clean with the numbers he puts out. there's a big difference there, and JV is getting unfairly ridiculed for it on here.

i think the use of the word "crazy" should tip everyone off to what JV really thinks of Froome. (sorry for going off topic)

I think you are giving JV too much credit. This is what he first said:

Just to clarify something: I presented you guys an objective manner of thinking and options regards to Froome's climbing speed. There was no skepticism implied beyond the understanding of the numbers and their meaning. And, I'm sorry to say, but if you want my opinion on Froome, not an objective map, but a subjective personal opinion? I think he's clean.

does that mean I'd be shocked if I was wrong? No. Does that mean I'm absolutely convince I'm right? Nope.

But my opinion? My opinion is he's clean. I think he's got some crazy adaptive physiology. And I wish I had identified that more quickly.

That is not the sentence of someone hinting that a rider is not believable.