Remco Evenepoel

Page 18 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I don't get it... what's the "illicit data" Lappartient is suspecting? What kind of data - sent from a rider to his own car during a race - could give said rider an unfair advantage? And why do they immediately think it was illegal? Surely Bramati's comment about Evenepoel's data having stopped could very easily simply refer to his - completely legal - data regarding position. I'd imagine that would have stopped too; either completely cutting out, or showing that Evenepoel had come to a very sudden stop.
 
Doesn't this just seem like Lappartient trying to mute possible negative coverage of pro cycling (and the UCI) and appear resolute by [injudiciously!] encouraging CADF to investigate Evenpoel?
So let me get this right: in order to silence talk about doping he's encouraging talk about doping? Better still, in order to silence talk about doping, he's opening up a whole other front and bringing in a problem most fans and all the hacks don't even think about?
 
Reactions: Salvarani
On the flip side, if you are told to empty his pockets you do it. You don't make a call on what stays in his pockets
This is a fair point. But if I was told to empty a guy's pockets, I'd be checking the contents of both pockets and not seemingly just reaching into the top of one and taking a single item out. Now, for sure, there might be video before this and there might be video after this showing the rest of the contents of the pockets being taken out and surreptitiously trousered by Bramati and of course we should give the guy the benefit of the doubt and assume the existence of such video in the same way we make all the other assumptions that support whatever explanation we're coming up with for this. But, you know, it strikes me that neither side in this debate is doing themselves much credit with the amount of assumptions they're coming up with to explain what they're seeing and tell the other person they're not seeing what they think they're seeing.
 
The UCI rule:
Any bicycle may be fitted with onboard technology equipment (including but not limited to telemetry, transponder units, GPS units and video-cameras) that has the ability and purpose to collect or transmit data, information or images provided that it complies with the following conditions:

1. The system to install the equipment must be designed for use on bicycles and shall not affect the certification of any item of the bicycle;

2. The system to install the equipment must not allow the equipment to be removed during the race and the equipment will be considered nonremovable;

3. Any and all data stemming from a rider’s onboard technology equipment must not be transmitted during a race to a third person.

Any intended use by a team or rider of onboard technology equipment shall require prior authorisation by the UCI or the organiser, with UCI’s consent. Requests for authorisation shall be assessed, inter alia, on criteria of equal access to equipment, sporting fairness and integrity, and shall also comply with article 1.3.006.

The UCI shall not be liable for any consequences deriving from the installation and use of onboard technology equipment by licence holders, nor for any defects it may hold or its non-compliance.

For the sake of clarity, point 2 above does not apply to removable computers / rider information systems.
 
So let me get this right: in order to silence talk about doping he's encouraging talk about doping? Better still, in order to silence talk about doping, he's opening up a whole other front and bringing in a problem most fans and all the hacks don't even think about?
I didn't specifically refer to "doping". Rather, I wondered if DL might have hoped to blunt or preempt criticism of the UCI and the sport in general, and certainly the Tour, by signaling that the UCI was taking seriously allegations of possibly nefarious conduct (which have been described as possibly involving illicit data transfers and/or doping).
 
If the UCI were to launch an inquiry everytime Pat said something stupid it'd be a rolling investigation that never stops. Coincidence is not causality.
Have you followed what's happening lately? This is not a minor deal. Lefevere (DQT), Plugge (TJV) and the guys from Sunweb are trying to get more people on board to launch an independent safety organization, outside of UCI. How on earth do you reduce that to "saying something stupid"???
 
I didn't specifically refer to "doping". Rather, I wondered if DL might have hoped to blunt or preempt criticism of the UCI and the sport in general, and certainly the Tour, by signaling that the UCI was taking seriously allegations of possibly nefarious conduct (which have been described as possibly involving illicit data transfers and/or doping).
Again, work with me on this cause it's early and I've only had one coffee: on the eve of the sport's biggest race, and with the all the media attention attaching to that, the UCI seeks to silence something by drawing everyone's attention to it?
 
Again, work with me on this cause it's early and I've only had one coffee: on the eve of the sport's biggest race, and with the all the media attention attaching to that, the UCI seeks to silence something by drawing everyone's attention to it?
Mute criticism of the UCI itself as having ignored cheating for years. A accomplish by responding aggressively to an
Fringe incident, thereby showing UCI can berelied upon now to fight against behaviors. (I'm not saying this is likely to be a successful approach btw!)
 
Again, work with me on this cause it's early and I've only had one coffee: on the eve of the sport's biggest race, and with the all the media attention attaching to that, the UCI seeks to silence something by drawing everyone's attention to it?
Why is this so hard to consider? By starting an investigation, they are showing that they are fighting for a clean sport, even if it's only for show. That way they can prove to the cynics and Vayers of this world, that "they're on top of things".
 
DQS:
“As has already been stated publicly, the item that was captured being removed from Remco’s pockets was a small bottle containing nutrition products and was removed in order to help him to be placed more comfortably by medical staff on the stretcher,” a statement from the team said.
So, not a piece of paper, and not an empty Yoplat bottle squashed flat. Well done Clinicians, you've excelled yourselves.
 
Something like sugar/glucose tablets makes all the sense in the world given the point of the race and what Bramati already said. Ketones a possibility, too, sure.

It amazes me, we've had more than 50 years of anti-doping in this sport and some folk are still trotting out this misleading line.
What illegal doping products do you know that can provide noticeable effects within minutes so they would useful to take before the end of the race though? Apart from tramadol I can't think of anything.
 
I just find it odd that it looks like he knew exactly what he was looking for and simply took it out. Not like he just emptied the trash or searched if there was something more in his pockets. He just took that item out pretty swiftly.

I find it quite amazing that a person can have the calmness and fast thinking in that situation to notice/see there is something in his pocket. "Best I take it out before he goes on the stretcher, so it does not hinder him." You know, just have the whereabouts in that situation. From what I can see it was just before the paramedics had even arrived. It looked like a fan/staff member and Bramati next to him. It wasnt the moment where they are about to put him on a stretcher and just happen to see an item big enough in his pocket, that it would be best to take it out. So it does not hinder him or cause discomfort for him.

In this case it doesnt even look it was even the biggest of items either. It looks small and flatish, maybe. It just looks like he knew exactly what it was and immediately put it in his pocket. He didnt search for anything else that "could hinder him". I mean,... someone that doesnt know what it is would probably take it out, think for a second, hold it in his/her hand, before realizing I got nowhere to put it except for my pocket. It is usually a 3-5 seconds human reaction. It is not like it was the receipt you get from cashier that you immediately put in your pocket or throws away.

It just makes me curious about what it might have been, that could have been so important. Valuable even.

Im also sure there are things that you could take in small doses, for a short reaction/sensation, that doesnt show up in a test, that could be masked in things they eat/drink quite easily. I mean there is only a split second from when they take it out from a pocket and puts in their mouth, or a sip from a bottle. How could it ever be proved? Only if someone tells.

And thats the same thing here. Nothing can be proved by that video. So for now, it is only a conversation that will only go in circles. Thats what I gathered from the last pages at least.

I would also like believing not quilty, until proven otherwise.
 
What illegal doping products do you know that can provide noticeable effects within minutes so they would useful to take before the end of the race though? Apart from tramadol I can't think of anything.
This misleading element is that you'd be taking a product that would show up in testing, at any time. It's a dumb statement, like saying X wouldn't dope as he'd have to much to lose if caught, or asking why Y would bother doping when he's already won so much.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts