Oier Lazkano

[Netserk]

Yeah that really stuck out, seemed like a double standard no? Here are all the talking points I’ve seen in various articles and on social media this morning regarding this;

- “3 out of 5 years” the rider was tested for at Movistar all came back clean.

- Lazkano connected to shadowy figures outside the team.

- Didn’t see ABP data

- Lack of diligence by RB

In my opinion Movistar are bang to rights, but they are getting their story out there, hammering their points home in the media, trying to get ahead of things. Meanwhile we first found out Lazkano was no longer with RB from a sidenote in a random article.

They could come out of this well, get all their guys out there talking about how none of his anomalous readings pertain to the past 10 months, about how their internal testing clearly stifled a lone wolf connected to actors outside the team, we stopped him racing and kicked him out as soon as we knew. They knew this was coming, they have had months to figure out how to handle it. Where is the strategy, and if it’s this, then do they realise that regardless of how well-meaning it might be it makes them look guilty, where’s Denk going on the attack, fronting up.

Maybe my social media algorithm is just Hispanic and they are doing all of these things. Or maybe we will get a carefully worded committee led version of events, 2 weeks later, when everyone apart from like 4 guys on here are past giving a ***.

I think the story dries up quicker if they stay quiet.

 

[Tim Cahill]

I think the story dries up quicker if they stay quiet.

The cynic in me thinks it dries up in a few days regardless of what is said, short of them blowing open a criminal underworld.

All that matters now is what team is front and centre when you google “Lazkano doping” 5 years down the line. Not hapless old Eusebio, the kindly Spanish uncle who just bungled the admin, if anything he’s the victim here.

 

[search]

related to the APB, I found interesting that Fiorelli recently said, that on top of ADAMS (so he seems to have provided his password), he was able to provide a lot of additional data to Visma, as Bardiani did their own blood pass to be on the safe side.

So if Bardiani is able to do something like that, you would normally think a WT team is even more so...

 

[Ilmaestro99]

5 years of blood doping and 5 years of passing doping tests.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yeah that really stuck out, seemed like a double standard no? Here are all the talking points I’ve seen in various articles and on social media this morning regarding this;

- “3 out of 5 years” the rider was tested for at Movistar all came back clean.

- Lazkano connected to shadowy figures outside the team.

- Didn’t see ABP data

- Lack of diligence by RB

In my opinion Movistar are bang to rights, but they are getting their story out there, hammering their points home in the media, trying to get ahead of things. Meanwhile we first found out Lazkano was no longer with RB from a sidenote in a random article.

They could come out of this well, get all their guys out there talking about how none of his anomalous readings pertain to the past 10 months, about how their internal testing clearly stifled a lone wolf connected to actors outside the team, we stopped him racing and kicked him out as soon as we knew. They knew this was coming, they have had months to figure out how to handle it. Where is the strategy, and if it’s this, then do they realise that regardless of how well-meaning it might be it makes them look guilty, where’s Denk going on the attack, fronting up.

Maybe my social media algorithm is just Hispanic and they are doing all of these things. Or maybe we will get a carefully worded committee led version of events, 2 weeks later, when everyone apart from like 4 guys on here are past giving a ***.

The last issue Movistar had was Jaime Rosón where they were on the receiving end of the same problem that Lazkano has provided for Red Bull. They got Lazkano from the same source so they're trying to pass the buck over in the same direction and the years on the report allow them the chance to viably do that.

Largely because often the guys who jump up a level and then get busted on the biopassport are caught because they aren't able to maintain the kind of blood levels they were using previously while under higher levels of scrutiny. Examples would be like Jonathan Tiernan-Locke or Giovanni Carboni from Continental to ProConti or WT, or Jaime Rosón and Franck Bonnamour from PC to WT. Caja Rural themselves have been on the receiving end like this, with Alberto Gallego back in the day, although that was a straight-up positive test before he could flag the biopass. Or, hell, someone like Alex Diniz when his team stepped up from Conti to ProConti and had to become biopassport compliant, he couldn't keep his blood levels at the level he'd doped up to as a Conti rider when he just had to be within the legal limits at isolated tests. Similarly you have those riders who suddenly stop delivering when they have to be under biopassport compliant teams, like Danilo Celano.

The problem for them is that, of course, unlike Tiernan-Locke (or guys like Pecharromán, Popovych, Celano etc.), it's not like Lazkano suddenly dropped off at Movistar. Rosón had not yet delivered much of great value at Movistar and they could claim adequate distance from the violations. Cobo likewise gives them that option, because he was dreadful in both of his stints with the team, the first time admittedly heavily influenced by his mental health struggles and the performance difference was beyond the level of clean/dirty. They can't do that with Lazkano. Rosón signed for them after winning the queen stage in Croatia and Turkey and finishing on the GC podium in Croatia, on the podium in Coppi e Bartali and top 5 in the Vuelta a Burgos, results which outstrip what he managed with Movistar; by comparison Lazkano's dramatic improvement came under Movistar's watch. His best results with Caja were a stage win in the Volta a Portugal and a 15th place in the Tour de Luxembourg.

 

[Tim Cahill]

The last issue Movistar had was Jaime Rosón where they were on the receiving end of the same problem that Lazkano has provided for Red Bull. They got Lazkano from the same source so they're trying to pass the buck over in the same direction and the years on the report allow them the chance to viably do that.

Largely because often the guys who jump up a level and then get busted on the biopassport are caught because they aren't able to maintain the kind of blood levels they were using previously while under higher levels of scrutiny. Examples would be like Jonathan Tiernan-Locke or Giovanni Carboni from Continental to ProConti or WT, or Jaime Rosón and Franck Bonnamour from PC to WT. Caja Rural themselves have been on the receiving end like this, with Alberto Gallego back in the day, although that was a straight-up positive test before he could flag the biopass. Or, hell, someone like Alex Diniz when his team stepped up from Conti to ProConti and had to become biopassport compliant, he couldn't keep his blood levels at the level he'd doped up to as a Conti rider when he just had to be within the legal limits at isolated tests. Similarly you have those riders who suddenly stop delivering when they have to be under biopassport compliant teams, like Danilo Celano.

The problem for them is that, of course, unlike Tiernan-Locke (or guys like Pecharromán, Popovych, Celano etc.), it's not like Lazkano suddenly dropped off at Movistar. Rosón had not yet delivered much of great value at Movistar and they could claim adequate distance from the violations. Cobo likewise gives them that option, because he was dreadful in both of his stints with the team, the first time admittedly heavily influenced by his mental health struggles and the performance difference was beyond the level of clean/dirty. They can't do that with Lazkano. Rosón signed for them after winning the queen stage in Croatia and Turkey and finishing on the GC podium in Croatia, on the podium in Coppi e Bartali and top 5 in the Vuelta a Burgos, results which outstrip what he managed with Movistar; by comparison Lazkano's dramatic improvement came under Movistar's watch. His best results with Caja were a stage win in the Volta a Portugal and a 15th place in the Tour de Luxembourg.

Yeah I think that this is coming from Arribas in particular at least confirms what the Abarca line of attack is going to be. Whether it is going to work is a different story.

Another issue that concerns me is the fact that the writer waited until the coast was clear to report on it, he is no virgin after all, and no doubt knew what was going on (as others also did). Reporting on whether there is an ongoing investigation is not libel, as truth would be the ultimate defence in this circumstance. (Quid Pro Quo?)

There is a tragicomic element to how this has developed, that forum troll Roberto Pistore, who posts as "UncleCycling" on twitter was the only one talking openly about this stuff in the past month is as worrying as it is funny. It's like if Digger was the one to break the Froome positive. As others have remarked on here, 5 years of biopassport data, device seizures and a lengthy bureaucratic minefield is what it's taking just to catch out the 147th best rider in the world, and he didn't even test for a substance. What's it going to take to get someone who has friends and money when the methods seem so far ahead and when so few are asking the questions.

Anyway there is surely more to come on this, apparently Lazkano has gone into isolation, so the chances of him throwing his arms up in the air and giving it the old 'You got me!' are slim, Red Bull I think will put something more substantive out there.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

5 years of blood doping and 5 years of passing doping tests.

That's hardly a record. Valverde managed to do it for 84 years.

 

[HashRouge]

Larry Warbasse is on the latest episode of the Cycling Podcast and he and Daniel Friebe talk quite a bit about the Lazkano case. The most interesting bit for me was just their general conversation about the biological passport and how it works. Larry said that riders don't get access to their blood data anymore, which I found hard to understand. Does that mean teams can't see it either? How would that then work for a rider moving to a new team? If anyone can shed a bit more light on it, I'd be grateful!

They also said that even people close to Lazkano didn't seem to know what had been going on with him this year. So it really does seem to have been kept very quiet until the UCI announcement.

 

[peterfin]

Larry Warbasse is on the latest episode of the Cycling Podcast and he and Daniel Friebe talk quite a bit about the Lazkano case. The most interesting bit for me was just their general conversation about the biological passport and how it works. Larry said that riders don't get access to their blood data anymore, which I found hard to understand. Does that mean teams can't see it either? How would that then work for a rider moving to a new team? If anyone can shed a bit more light on it, I'd be grateful!

They also said that even people close to Lazkano didn't seem to know what had been going on with him this year. So it really does seem to have been kept very quiet until the UCI announcement.

They can access his blood so I assume the rider and the team have the relevant data, no? Maybe they don't have the exact measurements of the UCI samples but I assume they know his data. What RBH may lack is historical data if Movistar wasn't as secure in collecting the data.

 

[Rob5091]

Just to make myself clear, Movistar most probably did not know about Lazkano as their own testing (I'm assuming Movistar are as up to date as other teams) would have picked something up. This makes me think that ITA/WADA have some new test or system for the ABP, or maybe ITA have got a whistleblower or info from elsewhere on Lazkano.

 

[HashRouge]

You mean the team could do its own profile? That would make sense, and it would also be logical that some teams would be more thorough than others when it came to collecting data.

They can access his blood so I assume the rider and the team have the relevant data, no? Maybe they don't have the exact measurements of the UCI samples but I assume they know his data. What RBH may lack is historical data if Movistar wasn't as secure in collecting the data.

 

[pastronef]

that forum troll Roberto Pistore, who posts as "UncleCycling" on twitter

wait a minute, "unclecycling" has a forum nickname as Roberto Pistore?
italian cyclist from the 90's. 4th at the Vuelta 1996

 

[Tim Cahill]

wait a minute, "unclecycling" has a forum nickname as Roberto Pistore?
italian cyclist from the 90's. 4th at the Vuelta 1996

Yeah he posted a lot on forodeciclismo about doping way back, sorry to uncle if I'm doxxing, I just assume its common knowledge but it's definitely him, exactly the same style.

 

[search]

Although not saying much, Lazkano has issued a statement as well now:

"(gt)

On October 30, 2025, I received an official communication from the International Cycling Union (UCI).

I want to make something absolutely clear: I have never used doping substances or prohibited methods. I have always respected the rules of cycling and the core values of clean sport. My career, built with effort and dedication, is based on honesty, integrity and daily work.

I am a clean athlete and a complete person.

I will defend my reputation and do everything necessary to prove my total innocence and complete anxienity to any wrongful conduct.

I have instructed my medical-legal team to take the necessary action to protect my rights and demonstrate my integrity, with full respect for the procedures envisaged. I trust truth and sports justice.

I thank those who support me at this time and will continue, with determination and transparency, defending my name and my professional dignity."

Oier Lazkano defiende su inocencia: «Nunca he usado sustancias dopantes, defenderé mi dignidad» | El Correo

El ciclista vitoriano, suspendido de forma provisional por «anomalías inexplicables» en su pasaporte biológico, asegura que es «un deportista limpio y una persona íntegra

www.elcorreo.com

 

[hrotha]

a complete person.

Not "complete" but "upstanding" or "honest"

 

[Ripper]

Something that stuck out to me recently from the Aderlass/Rozman fallout was how riders were constantly sending their bloodwork back to the suppliers laboratory. I believe the role of the modern doping doctor is as much monitoring/regulation of biomarkers as it is administering the stuff itself.

The most probable explanation I think is that Lazkano lost his supplier when he moved teams, or just decided to stop after securing a good contract, thereby tanking his values back to pre-doped levels. Sort of like a reverse-doping positive.

Medical/expert consultants offer services packages. Basic consultative advice would be the lowest level, and ongoing monitoring would be the highest/recommended level. You can pay a little for some basic 'education', or you can pay a lot for ongoing monitoring and support. The ABP goes both ways, and providing countermeasures for what the flags might be can be quite effective. Want evidence? Well, pretty much every indicator looks for offsets due to doping. Addressing the offsets is something medicine is rife with, so it could be quite a list of do this when you do that.

The ABP is a monitoring tool, but it monitors in both directions It has been rare that it becomes the direct reason for a ban ... but it can trigger more focused testing and monitoring. The bar to get popped these days is pretty high ... one needs to be pretty much over the top, 99.99999% nailed. So, lack of monitoring on their own, overly greedy/in a rush, stupid. Or lazy/disorganized (not reporting whereabouts)

Given how corrupt many sports are at the top (FIFA anyone?), I would love to know more about what really happens. I am not into conspiracy theories, but whenever the lid is lifted on sporting scandals, some pretty amazing stuff gets revealed.

 

[Ripper]

The last issue Movistar had was Jaime Rosón where they were on the receiving end of the same problem that Lazkano has provided for Red Bull. They got Lazkano from the same source so they're trying to pass the buck over in the same direction and the years on the report allow them the chance to viably do that.

Largely because often the guys who jump up a level and then get busted on the biopassport are caught because they aren't able to maintain the kind of blood levels they were using previously while under higher levels of scrutiny. Examples would be like Jonathan Tiernan-Locke or Giovanni Carboni from Continental to ProConti or WT, or Jaime Rosón and Franck Bonnamour from PC to WT. Caja Rural themselves have been on the receiving end like this, with Alberto Gallego back in the day, although that was a straight-up positive test before he could flag the biopass. Or, hell, someone like Alex Diniz when his team stepped up from Conti to ProConti and had to become biopassport compliant, he couldn't keep his blood levels at the level he'd doped up to as a Conti rider when he just had to be within the legal limits at isolated tests. Similarly you have those riders who suddenly stop delivering when they have to be under biopassport compliant teams, like Danilo Celano.

The problem for them is that, of course, unlike Tiernan-Locke (or guys like Pecharromán, Popovych, Celano etc.), it's not like Lazkano suddenly dropped off at Movistar. Rosón had not yet delivered much of great value at Movistar and they could claim adequate distance from the violations. Cobo likewise gives them that option, because he was dreadful in both of his stints with the team, the first time admittedly heavily influenced by his mental health struggles and the performance difference was beyond the level of clean/dirty. They can't do that with Lazkano. Rosón signed for them after winning the queen stage in Croatia and Turkey and finishing on the GC podium in Croatia, on the podium in Coppi e Bartali and top 5 in the Vuelta a Burgos, results which outstrip what he managed with Movistar; by comparison Lazkano's dramatic improvement came under Movistar's watch. His best results with Caja were a stage win in the Volta a Portugal and a 15th place in the Tour de Luxembourg.

This is interesting stuff.

There is a case to be made for - is your current doping strategy one you can sustainably pursue, and if so, does it get you to the necessary level? Obviously a "no" on either of those is more likely going to end badly (as in getting popped). And it is very interesting when it might get you signed, but the only way to get faster still would be to change your regimen, which would more likely trigger something. A wee challenge for those who make the jump without full commitment! And it should be noted, obviously having a considerable amount of talent, both naturally and as a responder to the methods, would be highly important!

 

[Unchained]

UCI obviously doesn't know what they are doing, and have learned little to nothing about the cascade of intended and unintended consequences of their actions, not the convicted or accused doping rider. You can see how weak the teams and riders are after UCI blows something up and doesn't take responsibility.
If someone is caught doping that means other riders not the UCI were cheated out of their results, their prize money, their recognition.
When Armstrong is stripped of titles, years,years after the offense the UCI is responsible for the forensic forgiveness to riders who were wronged, denied their results because UCI has a schit system and don't have time, money, motivation and moral compass to do the right thing.. The reason that the UCI has accepted months turn around on test results, taking test results from multiple agencies and each recognized is because it's not costing them anything. Really the guys results from years ago are just now questionable?
UCI test results are so conclusive that they need the guys phone and computer? What? Now Pogacar needs to bring a flash drive and his phone, laptop and tablet and pee in a trailer and still nobody will know for @60 days to @5 years if he is gassed and racing dirty? Ridiculous. Riders union should count samples from years ago as reference but certainly not actionable unless UCI makes everyone whole, goes back to amend all the records, retro actively pay back prize money and damages. I can imagine my full grown dogs getting his nose rubbed in something he did on the carpet, years, years before.. Questions for all involved, dog would not associate crapping on the rug 3 years earlier with me jamming his snout in dry ,dusty old mess...everyone around would ask why didn't you come up with a solution for years.
All of his wins including some national results should be in play. Prize money for team placing in races, individual and team results. The UCI should have enough sense and science to test riders and get timely results, not years later.
The UCI should recognize, take responsibility for trashing the sport, sponsors and general public by lying, lying over and over..are your tests accurate? Can everyone feel confident what they are seeing ( saw) was a clean ride? Or does everyone have to wait years for some complicated database to be superimposed over rider history data to discover wrongdoing? If I went to a doctor or mechanic and they said come back in a few years for conclusive diagnostic data.. I would go somewhere else.

The UCI should have already had ceremonies to award all race wins that were stripped from Armstrong, those results don't evaporate into the ether .
If Lance lost someone else won..post it, tell the world.
If Oier is not the rightful winner, national champion..cool..who is? Hurry up and do the right thing.
UCI fix your processes or don't use them. Can you imagine going to a car or horse race, and people running the show said come back in a few years and we will announce the winner after we use long term data points.
And I completely disagree that teams should be burdened with double checking the UCIs work.