UCI helped Froome with illegal(?) TUE at Romandie

[thehook]

Quick question. If he does not get tested that morning and wins a stage/leads the race at anytime. Would he be tested then? And would that test check for cortisone? Could it show then? Or could it be cleared or masked by then?

His/SKY's actions in that time period are WAY suspicious!!!

And for Cookson to even defend this stuff is ridiculous!

I'am NOT a SKY/Froome fan. Dude is looking like a stone cold liar/doper/ ad for pharmaceuticals.
And the Mrs is either totally complicit. Or bat **** dumb?

 

[thehog]

No, it wouldn't be OOC.

When you get tested they fill out the paperwork.

There's no way they go back and change the paper work post-test because the rider pulled out.

That's why you change it in ADAMS as you were not a "confirmed starter".

Besides once called for the control you can simply tick the box that you're no longer a starter and in training & withdraw.

Fairly straightforward.

 

[thehog]

The above snippet is simply the definition of In-competition as used in the UCI ADR. Page 75.

Simply?

Wrong page, wrong document. But matters little. The point is well made.

 

[thehog]

Quick question. If he does not get tested that morning and wins a stage/leads the race at anytime. Would he be tested then? And would that test check for cortisone? Could it show then? Or could it be cleared or masked by then?

His/SKY's actions in that time period are WAY suspicious!!!

And for Cookson to even defend this stuff is ridiculous!

I'am NOT a SKY/Froome fan. Dude is looking like a stone cold liar/doper/ ad for pharmaceuticals.
And the Mrs is either totally complicit. Or bat **** dumb?

The answer is "yes" he could be tested. But............ one thing to remember with dope testing; they do not test for all drugs and any one time. Only a select few for each test.

ie they may not always test for EPO etc.

Of course if a rider has a TUE then they won't be tested for that substances or not generate a positive.

My feeling is Cookson wasn't so much defending Froome but the dodgy process which gives the UCI flexibility over TUE administration.

I get the feeling Cookson probably wants to wash his hands of these two jokers (Cound/Froome) but is up to his ears in it with a Sky there's not much he can do.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Simply?

Wrong page, wrong document. But matters little. The point is well made.

Uh huh...

 

[thehog]

Uh huh...

Good boy. But still I'm taking it from an alternate document. And again matters little because I'm not sure what point it is you're trying to make.

What point is it you wish to put forward?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Good boy. But still I'm taking it from an alternate document. And again matters little because I'm not sure what point it is you're trying to make.

What point is it you wish to put forward?

You're trying to say Froome's test from the morning (IC) of Liege will be considered OOC because he did not compete.

Here's the status you referred to above:

Calling me boy etc and trying to get a rise is all well and good but your theory that Froome's sample won't be tested for XYZ because he quit the race is wrong. I also notice you do not link to the alleged document the In-competition quote you posted came from?

 

[thehog]

You're trying to say Froome's test from the morning (IC) of Liege will be considered OOC because he did not compete.

Here's the status you referred to above:


Calling me boy etc and trying to get a rise is all well and good but your theory that Froome's sample won't be tested for XYZ because he quit the race is wrong. I also notice you do not link to the alleged document the In-competition quote you posted came from?

Tiring. As per the ADAMS link above, the athlete can "override" the race entries placed by the team if they "withdraw" from a race.

The wording of "in-competition" is open for interpretation as you have to be a "confirmed starter" which Froome was not. He was not "confirmed" as starting.

Race Radio has has been at pains to point out the use of cortisone during training is legal and does not require a TUE.

The question that we hope is asked is; have you use Predisnone or similar during training? Kimmage touched on it in part 1 with Fromme muff diving the response.

Let's see.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Tiring. As per the ADAMS link above, the athlete can "override" the race entries placed by the team if they "withdraw" from a race.

The wording of "in-competition" is open for interpretation as you have to be a "confirmed starter" which Froome was not. He was not "confirmed" as starting.

Race Radio has has been at pains to point out the use of cortisone during training is legal and does not require a TUE.

The question that we hope is asked is; have you use Predisnone or similar during training? Kimmage touched on it in part 1 with Fromme muff diving the response.

Let's see.

Also, in that same line of questioning Froome was making noises that he "thinks" you still need a TUE for that in training/OOC because it's banned. He underscored this with a comment declaring that he had only asked for two TUE's in 6 !/2 years. In essence did he just not close the door on a 'yes' answer that he's used it OOC?

 

[thehog]

Also, in that same line of questioning Froome was making noises that he "thinks" you still need a TUE for that in training/OOC because it's banned. He underscored this with a comment declaring that he had only asked for two TUE's in 6 !/2 years. In essence did he just not close the door on a 'yes' answer that he's used it OOC?

That's a good observation. Indeed correct. He didn't sound convincing either way. Lance used to do similar, pretending he knew nothing about how EPO worked etc.

Additionally the comment that he didn't know Predisnone was performance enhancing.

 

[mewmewmew13]

If you put all of his idiotic comments in front of him they do not add up.
His cape is unraveling...what can he say now?

I hope Kimmage went for his throat.

 

[argyllflyer]

Also, in that same line of questioning Froome was making noises that he "thinks" you still need a TUE for that in training/OOC because it's banned. He underscored this with a comment declaring that he had only asked for two TUE's in 6 !/2 years. In essence did he just not close the door on a 'yes' answer that he's used it OOC?

I interpreted that as being 'I have used TUE twice, one in and one out'. Kimmage asked if it was needed and Froome said he thought so. i.e. he assumed he needed one OOC as he would be taking a substance on that occasion that a test would show up, so he got it anyway.

 

[bobbins]

This isn't the first time that Sky have been helped with a TUE by the UCI, a backdated one got them out of the *** a couple of seasons ago.

 

[frenchfry]

I know, I was referring to people with genuine asthma. But then being on the road as a pro cyclist, staying in hotels with not so new mattresses and pillows might well make very mild asthma not so mild!

You need a refresher course in Sky's marginal gains.

 

[Netserk]

Tiring. As per the ADAMS link above, the athlete can "override" the race entries placed by the team if they "withdraw" from a race.

The wording of "in-competition" is open for interpretation as you have to be a "confirmed starter" which Froome was not. He was not "confirmed" as starting.

Race Radio has has been at pains to point out the use of cortisone during training is legal and does not require a TUE.

The question that we hope is asked is; have you use Predisnone or similar during training? Kimmage touched on it in part 1 with Fromme muff diving the response.

Let's see.

Froome was a confirmed starter, no two ways about it. He then later DNS, but that doesn't change the fact that he was a confirmed starter. He was on the start list and had a race number.

 

[Hawkwood]

You need a refresher course in Sky's marginal gains.

I know about marginal gains, why do you think I put pillows in the comment?

 

[Hawkwood]

Notable, thanks. Also notable that his personal doctor did not prescribe Prednisone in his case, before the team doctor did.

So I don't know if he was having an asthma flareup, a chest infection, or nothing at all. It's believable that he was prescribed Prednisone and the UCI doctor really believed he needed it.

So he loses 9 seconds in the prologue with what has to be described as "acute" asthma to qualify for the emergency TUE.

Do you believe that's possible? Then he proceeds to crush the field after the Prednisone, according to the stated timeline

So we are to believe that he:
• came off a chest infection despite the original claim that he got the TUE for a chest infection
• rode the prologue for 13th place, 9 seconds off the win
• got an emergency TUE for some kind of acute condition, initially reported as a chest infection but now identified as restricted breathing due to asthma. A condition he claims to have had since childhood.
• The UCI give him an emergency TUE which are granted for "acute cases" in "exceptional circumstances". We are to believe asthma that he knows he has qualifies?
• Goes on to dominate the race, never mentioning the TUE
• Story breaks

It all sounds very fishy to me.

Without knowing the key facts such as peak flow it's difficult to work out why the TUE was granted. I've just checked and the up-to-date British National Formulary is available online via amazon. The terminology has changed a little, and the three levels are now: Moderate acute Asthma, Severe acute asthma, and Life-threatening asthma. All three levels are now diagnosed by a more sophisticated range of symptoms including respiratory rate, pulse, arterial oxygen saturation, and peak flow. In the case of Froome it would have been easy to establish whether or not he was having an ongoing asthma attack using a cheap peak flow meter, but also from looking at his pulse data and oxygen saturation. The British National Formulary is used by all medical professionals in the UK who administer drugs, however other countries will have different ways of describing levels of asthma and probably different drugs regimes for dealing with it.

 

[Hawkwood]

He tells Kimmage



Why wait till his teenage years to treat his asthma if he had it since childhood..........

If my experience is anything to go by this is not a surprise. My first asthma attack that I can remember took place at the age of 5 or 6, I thought such things were normal and never mentioned them. I was first diagnosed with asthma at the age of 28 by an anaesthetist about an hour before being operated on, the first drug I ever took for the disease was Salbutamol, and it was then and there. I went 22 years and probably more with a wheezy chest, breathing difficulties, and colds that knocked me out, and no one over those years ever thought perhaps he's got asthma, and my dad was/is asthmatic so it wasn't exactly unknown in the family. Likewise my sister wasn't diagnosed as being asthmatic until she wound up in an intensive care unit at the age of 35 with a peak flow of about 130.

 

[armchairclimber]

In this case "Has he got a cough?"
Check.
Ok, Prednisolone it is then.

 

[Hawkwood]

In this case "Has he got a cough?"
Check.
Ok, Prednisolone it is then.

A cough wouldn't do it, if the doctors involved followed due diligence then they had to follow what's in the British National Formulary, or whatever formulary was valid for them.

 

[Beech Mtn]

This isn't the first time that Sky have been helped with a TUE by the UCI, a backdated one got them out of the *** a couple of seasons ago.

Most interesting. That would be another parallel to US Postal.

Would honestly like to know how often Zorzoli/UCI provides backdated TUEs to cover up trouble. I would suspect it has historically been not uncommon, given that we know of a couple that made it into the public domain.

In this case "Has he got a cough?"
Check.
Ok, Prednisolone it is then.

Right. This stuff about the British National Formulary, while interesting, wouldn't come into play. We're talking about sports doctors who work for a team making "diagnoses" for professional athletes. It's not the same as a regular doctor/patient deal. It's going to be about working within the rules, or stretching the rules a bit to maximize performance.

 

[thehog]

A cough wouldn't do it, if the doctors involved followed due diligence then they had to follow what's in the British National Formulary, or whatever formulary was valid for them.

Have you seen the actual requirements for the TUE?

It's a lot more stringent than a cough. They want medical records and peak flow readings.

I don't believe he would have provided all of that in the timescales and the fact he wasn't actually sick.

 

[Rollthedice]

Have you seen the actual requirements for the TUE?

It's a lot more stringent than a cough. They want medical records and peak flow readings.

I don't believe he would have provided all of that in the timescales and the fact he wasn't actually sick.

As long as UCI commission is in fact one man, Zorzoli, I think a fax and a phone call solves the problem.

 

[thehog]

As long as UCI commission is in fact one man, Zorzoli, I think a fax and a phone call solves the problem.

Exactly the point. Under the normal circumstances I don't think he would have got the TUE. Considering what is required. The part Cookosn is not being open about and why Cound should keep quiet is I don't believe he provided the required documentation for TUE exemption.

The UCI did approve it so they have to wear it. Hence why they put up the defences and said nothing since.

 

[frenchfry]

I know about marginal gains, why do you think I put pillows in the comment?

Sorry, I didn't pick up on the irony.