Rob Hayles (and David Brailsford)

[the big ring]

I was looking for something else and stumbled across a comment from squeaky clean team manager, David Brailsford.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jul/27/tour-de-france-team-sky-wiggins-cavendish

Not that Brailsford can be sure these riders are doping. "I can't say that but, if you're taking a no- risk approach, as we are, then we can't take the chance. But we know ourselves it can be flawed. We had Rob Hayles [at last year's world championships] post a false positive but he is clean. There's a margin of error, it's not a black-and- white science, but you look at some guys' levels and think, no, we don't want to go there."

What's with the "false positive". It wasn't a drug test, so there was no B sample to redo the test. I searched CN for mention of it, and Liberty Seguros and Black Cat made mention of it:

50.3% hematocrit, March 2008.

The track world cycling championships were held in Manchester, England that year, from the 26th to the 30th of March.

News Posted: 11 April 2008

Great Britain Cycling Team member Rob Hayles has been handed back his racing licence by world cycling governing body - the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). Rob had been removed from competition for 14 days on 26 March when the results of a routine health check showed an anomaly.

Commenting on the news, British Cycling performance director Dave Brailsford said: "British Cycling is very pleased that Rob has regained his licence from the UCI and will be able to continue his racing programme. We can now continue to concentrate on preparation for the Olympics in Beijing."

In light of this experience, Rob has voluntarily put himself forward to undergo two more weeks of screening to seek a dispensation certificate from the UCI to confirm that Rob has a naturally high haematocrit level, thus avoiding any potential recurrence of this situation in the future

The 50% haematocrit rule was introduced in 1997 - Rob Hayles represented the UK at the 1996 Olympics games. It's the first few months of the first year that the ABP has been implemented (2008). Rob has been racing 11 years and this is the first time he's ever tested higher than 50%.

The result of a dope test from the same day came back negative (seriously? bfd!). His hematocrit results during that 2 week suspension are described thus: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/347216/blog-andy-jones.html

During the two week suspension Hayles underwent numerous blood tests, which all returned a haematocrit value of between 45 and 48%

What's the likelihood that someone's hematocrit varies between 45% and 48% over a 2 week duration of suspension. ie training, possibly, although he'd have been peaked for Worlds. Not racing as he had no license. Look how far we've come though; everyone here knows you need the ret% and Hgb values to say for sure what is going on.

By contrast, Ryder Hesjedal's Hct varied from 42.3 to 43.4 during the final 2 weeks of the 2012 Giro.

What's with the "tested high"? It was a routine health check, did everyone get tested, or only a selection? Only 2 were pinged (a Dutch rider, Pim Ligthart had anomalies but not high haematocrit ).

Brailsford again: http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/update-blood-test-puts-brit-out-of-world-track-champs-15321/

Brailsford said Hayles, who won his first world championship medals in Manchester eight years ago in the pursuit (bronze) and team pursuit (silver), had naturally high haematocrit levels.

"It's relatively high, it always has been."
...
However, with Britain in the track spotlight after winning seven gold and 11 in total at last year's competition, Brailsford said the news had been unwelcome.

"It's the opening day of the worlds, and it's not what we want."

Compare and contrast:

March, 2008:

He said the British team will now work alongside the UCI to determine the cause of Hayles' result, and said they will take the necessary action if required.

"At this moment in time I think it's important for everyone to take a look at the situation. We'll supply all the data we have, and we have a lot. Rob was last tested on March 4, and he's been tested hundreds of times throughout his career," added Brailsford.

"We just want to establish the facts, and we will react based on that rather than speculation and opinion."

Appropriate action. Hmmmm. Hayles won the British road title, but was not selected for the Beijing Olympics.

July, 2012

I categorically, 100 per cent say that there's no risk of anything untoward happening in this team since he has been with us," said Brailsford. "I've seen nothing and neither have the full-time medics. I'd put my life on it. He's done nothing wrong here, but we have a reputational risk. We have had discussions with him and once we've established the facts, we will take the appropriate action."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling...-at-critics-20120712-21x1y.html#ixzz26LKg5IMg

Still waiting on the facts from that discussion, Dave.

 

[bpickford]

So what exactly is your point in this new thread? Are there not enough Sky threads already?

 

[the big ring]

So what exactly is your point in this new thread? Are there not enough Sky threads already?

Having a nice lunch?

It's about Rob Hayles, mostly. The start of the passport and its immediate effectiveness. And another defense of a dodgy incident with the words, "we must establish the facts and only then take appropriate action".

 

[The Hitch]

So what exactly is your point in this new thread? Are there not enough Sky threads already?

His individual case is interesting, seeing as how he has a very controversial test in his history but has gotten away with getting labelled "doper" every time his name pops on screen.

Hes not a sky rider anyway.

Nice try though.

 

[bpickford]

His results from when he rode at Cofidis would hardly suggest he was a rampant doper, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

It just seemed like another thread making veiled digs at Brailsford, of which there are plenty already.

Having a nice lunch?

???

 

[Cycle Chic]

Whenever I see him on TV doing the TDF for Eurosport or ITV4 I think 'there's another one who doped and got away with it'.

And when he started 'training' Cavendish it just reaffirmed that he's 'in the know'.

He has also been on the 'Sky Diet' from the lean body he now has.

Why hasn't anyone interviewed Brailsford about all these unanswered questions ....???? hey CN !!

Just more cover ups....nothing changes.

 

[acoggan]

What's the likelihood that someone's hematocrit varies between 45% and 48% over two weeks

Since hematocrit varies with posture, recent food/water intake, physical activity, how the blood sample is obtained, etc., that would depend on how carefully the conditions were standardized, no?

 

[the big ring]

What's the likelihood that someone's hematocrit varies between 45% and 48% over two weeks

Since hematocrit varies with posture, recent food/water intake, physical activity, how the blood sample is obtained, etc., that would depend on how carefully the conditions were standardized, no?

What I wrote.

What's the likelihood that someone's hematocrit varies between 45% and 48% over a 2 week duration of suspension. ie training, possibly, although he'd have been peaked for Worlds. Not racing as he had no license. Look how far we've come though; everyone here knows you need the ret% and Hgb values to say for sure what is going on.

I've highlighted in red the pertinent bit you've cleverly trimmed from my post. You'll have to be much quicker to catch me out with such a simple edit.

If hematocrit does vary as you claim (and I note you conveniently failed to mention by how much those factors affect it, although it looks like you're implying it could change 45-48% just by slouching, clever clever), it would seem pretty clear that having an arbitrary 50% cut-off seems almost pointless. But apparently noone has ever raised these issues before. huh.

Further to this: if Hct varies so readily, what's the point in saying anything about the values at all, as if it proves he's "clean". You may as well say his hair was 75-85% brushed on all days beginning with a T. Also amazing that Hesjedal's barely moved for the final 2 weeks of a Giro. Something's not right here.

Another red herring.

The same as the colour of my highlighted bit above, where I point out EVERYONE now knows the Hgb and ret% values help tell the full story.

Unless you want to tell me that's wrong too? Perhaps you disagree with the passport and think it's all hocus pocus mumbo jumbo.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I was looking for something else and stumbled across a comment from squeaky clean team manager, David Brailsford.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jul/27/tour-de-france-team-sky-wiggins-cavendish


What's with the "false positive". It wasn't a drug test, so there was no B sample to redo the test. I searched CN for mention of it, and Liberty Seguros and Black Cat made mention of it.
<snipped for brevity>

Hayles? I was mentioning him (& Brailsford) as early as 2009.

Dave Brailsford's comments to Cycling Weekly March 2008 - after Rob Hayles had failed the 50% haematocrit test.

“I’ve known Rob a long time and there’s never been any doubt in my mind that Rob is anything but a fantastic athlete for Great Britain,” he said.
“I’ve spoken to Rob and looked him straight in the eye and he’s devastated as you’d expect. All of our riders are tested and we’ve had thousands of tests done on our squad.”
________

Dave Brailsford's comments to Sunday Times November 2009 - about David Millar.

“You gave an interview to Richard Moore once for his book Heroes, Villains & Velodromes and said this about doping: ‘You can tell from the way people talk if they are hiding something. They come up with far-fetched ******** excuses, but look in their eyes’. . . Why didn’t you see it David Millar’s eyes?”

“Good question, yeah.”
“You didn’t suspect him at all?”
“I suspected him, I think.”
“You did?”
“Oh yeah, let’s be honest, there was a cloud, but on balance — probably because he’s the thoroughbred that he is — I thought he could do what he was doing naturally.”
“You didn’t talk to him about it?”
“Yeah, I asked him if there was anything going on.”
“And he denied it?”
“Yeah ... there was never any admission whatsoever, no, no, no ... And he was tested all the time and there were no anomalies ... there was a cloud of allegations but no facts ...

Also- acoggan quite rightly snipped and responded to your question.
He gave a simple answer to a simple question that you asked.

 

[bobbins]

Whenever I see him on TV doing the TDF for Eurosport or ITV4 I think 'there's another one who doped and got away with it'.

And when he started 'training' Cavendish it just reaffirmed that he's 'in the know'.

He has also been on the 'Sky Diet' from the lean body he now has.

Why hasn't anyone interviewed Brailsford about all these unanswered questions ....???? hey CN !!

Just more cover ups....nothing changes.

Yep.

How many of the team pursuit squads are out of the sport after retirement and how many are still well looked after by the establishment?

 

[the big ring]

Also- acoggan quite rightly snipped and responded to your question.
He gave a simple answer to a simple question that you asked.

I obviously completely disagree. I think you missed an important point in the follow up post. I will leave it at that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I obviously completely disagree. I think you missed an important point in the follow up post. I will leave it at that.

If you have to clarify your points in a subsequent post then it shows that your initial question was the problem, not the answer.

 

[acoggan]

What I wrote.



I've highlighted in red the pertinent bit you've cleverly trimmed from my post. You'll have to be much quicker to catch me out with such a simple edit.

If hematocrit does vary as you claim (and I note you conveniently failed to mention by how much those factors affect it, although it looks like you're implying it could change 45-48% just by slouching, clever clever), it would seem pretty clear that having an arbitrary 50% cut-off seems almost pointless. But apparently noone has ever raised these issues before. huh.

Further to this: if Hct varies so readily, what's the point in saying anything about the values at all, as if it proves he's "clean". You may as well say his hair was 75-85% brushed on all days beginning with a T. Also amazing that Hesjedal's barely moved for the final 2 weeks of a Giro. Something's not right here.

Another red herring.

The same as the colour of my highlighted bit above, where I point out EVERYONE now knows the Hgb and ret% values help tell the full story.

Unless you want to tell me that's wrong too? Perhaps you disagree with the passport and think it's all hocus pocus mumbo jumbo.

So what are you saying - that your question was really rhetorical??

FWIW, I took it as an honest question, and attempted to provide some insight into why it isn't any easy one to answer (at least not w/o knowing more).

As for why Cycling Weekly included that info in the story, the biopassport, etc., I would only note that the story to which you linked is over 4 y old.

Finally, as for how much hematocrit can vary due to the factors I mentioned, it can easily change by several percentage points when going from supine to sitting to standing upright, due to increased hydrostatic pressure in dependent vessels and hence extravasation of fluid from the plasma portion of the blood. It will change even more w/ exercise, especially high intensity exercise, due to this same mechanism (plus the addition of a small amount of RBCs to the circulation resulting from splenic contraction). For example, someone with a supine, resting hematocrit in the low-to-mid 40s will often exhibit an increase to 50 or even higher during an incremental exercise test to determine VO2max.

Of course, no one would measure hematocrit immediately post-exercise and use that value to assess the probability of doping...but you asked how much impact such factors might have, and my point was simply that you need to know the conditions under which samples are obtained to answer your original question.

 

[the big ring]

If you have to clarify your points in a subsequent post then it shows that your initial question was the problem, not the answer.

Not necessarily, no. Communication in the English language can be varied and rarely is simple. Tone is difficult to faithfully convey from the written word, even between colleagues. The trimmed part included the conclusion to the thought stream.

I am sure you will reply and tell me I am wrong.

Andy has no interest in the thread beyond attempting to derail what he perceives to be a question. I am indirectly having a dig at Sky again and he is not defending them again, oh no no. Not at all.

 

[acoggan]

Communication in the English language can be varied and rarely is simple.

"The precise communication of precise ideas requires the precise use of precise terminology." - A. Coggan, ca. 1980.

Or IOW: if your "stream of conciousness" writing style leads to miscommunication, you have no one to blame but yourself...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Not necessarily, no. Communication in the English language can be varied and rarely is simple. Tone is difficult to faithfully convey from the written word, even between colleagues. The trimmed part included the conclusion to the thought stream.

I am sure you will reply and tell me I am wrong.

Ironically - the highlighted is correct.

Here's why.....

Andy has no interest in the thread beyond attempting to derail what he perceives to be a question. I am indirectly having a dig at Sky again and he is not defending them again, oh no no. Not at all.

So, you are trolling?
And you object that someone answered your question with correct information?
Got it.

 

[the big ring]

"The precise communication of precise ideas requires the precise use of precise terminology." - A. Coggan, ca. 1980.

Or IOW: if your "stream of conciousness" writing style leads to miscommunication, you have no one to blame but yourself...

I'll keep that in mind

Besides, it's more fun being the man behind the curtain pulling the strings.

Who is "we", kimosabe?

 

[the big ring]

So, you are trolling?

Did you flag my post as such?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

50% isn't some kind of magic number. Could've been 50.3, could've been 49.7. Just an arbitrary parameter designed to put a lid on crazy doping. Anyway, 0.3 is trivial (probably within Hct error depending on method) and system has mechanisms for dealing with naturally higher Hct. So no need for you to start getting on the trail of another 'doping conspiracy' .

I'm glad it was within error - again - so curious that there was no error for any of the other tests conducted on Hayles for the 8 years before that test.

I'm well aware that 50% is an arbitrary number. It is based on population samples though. I have read and posted the AIS study from the period of introduction more than once. And their findings were only a very small percentage (of any type of athlete) were over 50%. 25% of weightlifters though. Only 2% of netballers. I'm sure that's just error though. Or natural. Or something. I am sure testosterone has nothing to do with it.

I am aware that 0.3 (over 50) is trivial.

I am also well aware of the system in place to handle naturally high Hcts.

Like I said, the two ends of the spectrum are gullibility and cynicism.

Why is a tapered, well-rested, (should be) well-hydrated athlete testing over the threshold (> 50%) for the first time in his well established international-level cycling career? Why does he not have a dispensation given Brailsford claims to know Hayles' Hct has always been high?

I was hoping for much better analysis from you, rata.

 

[blackcat]

indeed, missed this part in my reply on another thread. sry to bother you DW

I'm glad it was within error - again - so curious that there was no error for any of the other tests conducted on Hayles for the 8 years before that test.

I'm well aware that 50% is an arbitrary number. It is based on population samples though. I have read and posted the AIS study from the period of introduction more than once. And their findings were only a very small percentage (of any type of athlete) were over 50%. 25% of weightlifters though. Only 2% of netballers. I'm sure that's just error though. Or natural. Or something. I am sure testosterone has nothing to do with it.

I am aware that 0.3 (over 50) is trivial.

I am also well aware of the system in place to handle naturally high Hcts.

Like I said, the two ends of the spectrum are gullibility and cynicism.

Why is a tapered, well-rested, (should be) well-hydrated athlete testing over the threshold (> 50%) for the first time in his well established international-level cycling career? Why does he not have a dispensation given Brailsford claims to know Hayles' Hct has always been high?

I was hoping for much better analysis from you, rata.

 

[horsinabout]

Yep.

How many of the team pursuit squads are out of the sport after retirement and how many are still well looked after by the establishment?

Good point.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Hayles has a book out soon so we will know the full truth before long.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Hayles has a book out soon so we will know the full truth before long.

Really. What would be the motivation for Hayles to say anything that incriminates himself?

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Really. What would be the motivation for Hayles to say anything that incriminates himself?

Let's wait and see what Hayles has to say before we judge him.

 

[spalco]

I'm well aware that 50% is an arbitrary number. It is based on population samples though. I have read and posted the AIS study from the period of introduction more than once. And their findings were only a very small percentage (of any type of athlete) were over 50%. 25% of weightlifters though. Only 2% of netballers. I'm sure that's just error though. Or natural. Or something. I am sure testosterone has nothing to do with it.

I fully agree with everyone who says 50,3% is extremely suspicious to say the least, especially in an athlete in his prime who doesn't already have a "TUE" (or whatever it's called in a case like this) for a naturally high hematocrit.

But this part has me intrigued - 25% of weightlifters? How does that happen? I don't follow that sport, but I've never heard of a weightlifter getting busted for EPO and google doesn't turn up much on first glance either. I'm surprised there would be a noticable benefit from higher hematocrit for those short efforts. Or is it about recuperation?