AFLD follow 500 sportspeople

takethehighroad

I read in l'Equipe yesterday that the AFLD are forcing the ADAMS on lots of different sports in France, and making 500 sportsmen and women join the whereabouts program. I couldn't find the link on the l'Equipe website, and the article was in French, but I understood that the captains from each Ligue 1& Ligue 2 team, and each 'Top 14' rugby team would be included.

Just a little note of what everybody's favourite anti-doping agency are up to...

leguape

And the UCI's pool covers who? Am I right in thinking that's all Pro Tour and Pro Continental registered riders? Across how many geographical locations?

micron

Difference is the AFLD might actually catch some of the dopers, unlike the UCI :roll:

leguape

micron wrote:

Difference is the AFLD might actually catch some of the dopers, unlike the UCI :roll:

What about

Iban Mayo
Andrey Kascheckin
Alexandre Vinokourov
Emmanuelle Sella
Patrick Sinkewitz
Christophe Moreni

As I keep saying, just because AFLD got lucky on one race in one season, doesn't make them any more capable.

mwo

leguape wrote:

As I keep saying, just because AFLD got lucky on one race in one season, doesn't make them any more capable.

It might have been luck that the CERA test was available, and not known about, in time for the tour, but it wasn't luck that made AFLD decide to use it, and it wasn't luck that made the UCI decide not to use it to retest the Giro samples.

Sometimes the UCI just don't seem to be doing everything possible to catch people. On the little evidence we have I don't think the same can be said about AFLD

moray_gub

leguape wrote:

micron wrote:

Difference is the AFLD might actually catch some of the dopers, unlike the UCI :roll:

What about

Iban Mayo
Andrey Kascheckin
Alexandre Vinokourov
Emmanuelle Sella
Patrick Sinkewitz
Christophe Moreni

As I keep saying, just because AFLD got lucky on one race in one season, doesn't make them any more capable.

Hey what do you think you are doing, you should know by now not to let the facts get in the way.

MG

stagehopper

mwo wrote:

leguape wrote:

As I keep saying, just because AFLD got lucky on one race in one season, doesn't make them any more capable.

It might have been luck that the CERA test was available, and not known about, in time for the tour, but it wasn't luck that made AFLD decide to use it, and it wasn't luck that made the UCI decide not to use it to retest the Giro samples.

Sometimes the UCI just don't seem to be doing everything possible to catch people. On the little evidence we have I don't think the same can be said about AFLD

Wasn't part of the success of the AFLD's targetting that the UCI passed on the Giro's suspicions over certain riders which led to those riders being targetted in and out of competition? Hence Ricco being caught by AFLD and Sella being chased down out of competition?

panachedujour

stagehopper wrote:

mwo wrote:

leguape wrote:

As I keep saying, just because AFLD got lucky on one race in one season, doesn't make them any more capable.

It might have been luck that the CERA test was available, and not known about, in time for the tour, but it wasn't luck that made AFLD decide to use it, and it wasn't luck that made the UCI decide not to use it to retest the Giro samples.

Sometimes the UCI just don't seem to be doing everything possible to catch people. On the little evidence we have I don't think the same can be said about AFLD

Wasn't part of the success of the AFLD's targetting that the UCI passed on the Giro's suspicions over certain riders which led to those riders being targetted in and out of competition? Hence Ricco being caught by AFLD and Sella being chased down out of competition?

BINGO!

iainf72

stagehopper wrote:

Wasn't part of the success of the AFLD's targetting that the UCI passed on the Giro's suspicions over certain riders which led to those riders being targetted in and out of competition? Hence Ricco being caught by AFLD and Sella being chased down out of competition?

I don't think so. The UCI wouldn't let the AFLD have access to their data AFAIK. That changed post tour but before they definately weren't playing nice.

mwo

iainf72 wrote:

I don't think so. The UCI wouldn't let the AFLD have access to their data AFAIK. That changed post tour but before they definately weren't playing nice.

That's my recollection as well, it's also what Pierre Bordry has said happened:

The agency conducted 80 random pre-race tests during the weeks prior to the Tour, and one blood test of each of the 180 starters two days prior to the July 5 start in Brest.

The pre-race tests allowed the agency to target certain riders with suspicious blood values

In the same article he said that the UCI did not provide access to riders' biological passport data:

But, he said, the targeted testing could have been more effective had the UCI shared its data from the biological passport program.

"I would have preferred that the UCI collaborated a bit more with us in the fight against doping," said Bordry. "We played the game with the UCI, but they have refused to give us any information whatsoever."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/jul08/jul27news

I think the UCI was perfectly within in its rights not to share its data with a race that wasn't being run under its auspices, but it makes the UCI look more interested in playing politics than actually catching cheats. This is what causes people to become frustrated and angry with the UCI, and it's part of the reason AFLD are some people's "favourite anti-doping agency".