UCI names first five biological passport violators
Comments
-
Wasn't De Bonis the rider that mysteriously disappeared from Gerolsteiner mid-way through last season?
Also, interestingly enough this would mean that Caucchioli would have been 'suspicious' (in terms of his bio-passport results) while riding for Credit Agricole last season.0 -
How come? Couldn't the 'suspicious' values be more recent, and be only suspect in the first place when measured against baseline data that was gathered last season?GroupOfOne MkII wrote:interestingly enough this would mean that Caucchioli would have been 'suspicious' (in terms of his bio-passport results) while riding for Credit Agricole last season.0 -
GroupOfOne MkII wrote:Wasn't De Bonis the rider that mysteriously disappeared from Gerolsteiner mid-way through last season?
Yeah he did an amazing solo ride through the mountains in the Tour de Romandie, won the stage, then vanished into thin air.
Astarloa is already without a team after Amica Chips went bust. He may as well call it a day. Worst World Champion ever.0 -
aurelio wrote:
How come? Couldn't the 'suspicious' values be more recent, and be only suspect in the first place when measured against baseline data that was gathered last season?GroupOfOne MkII wrote:interestingly enough this would mean that Caucchioli would have been 'suspicious' (in terms of his bio-passport results) while riding for Credit Agricole last season.
Yes true, I hadn't considered that. As you say could be a radical change over the winter that's alerted them, or it might not be. Would be interesting if they released an overview of the data afterwards, on completion of a successful prosecution.
Would possibly help explain why it was considered suspicious. The problem being I guess some of the information could help other riders 'control' some of the parameters involved.0 -
So why the drip drip effect?
Considering the passport only applies to the top riders, these are fairly low down the food chain. Smallest first?
Maybe the UCI think it's like Big Brother.
Further evictions to follow, or maybe we get to vote."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
aurelio wrote:
How come? Couldn't the 'suspicious' values be more recent, and be only suspect in the first place when measured against baseline data that was gathered last season?GroupOfOne MkII wrote:interestingly enough this would mean that Caucchioli would have been 'suspicious' (in terms of his bio-passport results) while riding for Credit Agricole last season.
This is the way it works round these parts - rider leaves US Postal/Discovery and gets busted - he must have been doping at US Postal. Rider leaves Credit Agricole and gets busted - oh no, doesn't mean he was doping at Credit Agricole.
It's all very amusing.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Or maybe this is just a bit of damage limitation, sacrificing a few relative unknowns, and the UCI hope that the 'big boys' will take it as a warning. After all, keeping the issue of doping 'in the family' for the 'good of the sport' and doing nothing more than giving doped riders an informal 'red card' was an approach that was openly supported by Hein Verbruggen...Blazing Saddles wrote:So why the drip drip effect?
Considering the passport only applies to the top riders, these are fairly low down the food chain. Smallest first?
Maybe the UCI think it's like Big Brother.
Further evictions to follow, or maybe we get to vote.
Verbruggen said that the efforts made by the UCI over recent years to combat doping were now paying dividends. And he added that blood transfusion tests, which he claims are not fully legal, are being used by the UCI to warn riders' of potential misdemeanors."We know that most riders that are winning races are clean. The blood transfusion method is not validated yet, but we do the tests for our own use.
"Say we do 30 auto-transfusion tests - maybe two will not be clean. We have the information, but legally we can’t publicize it."Instead, Verbruggen said, teams and riders were contacted by the UCI."It's very effective - it’s almost a red card."
http://velonews.com/article/77530 -
Not quite so. The thing with USP / Disco and doped riders is that there is a very definite pattern there. At times it seems that there are more ex-USP / Disco riders who have been busted for doping than there are those who haven't!DaveyL wrote:This is the way it works round these parts - rider leaves US Postal/Discovery and gets busted - he must have been doping at US Postal. Rider leaves Credit Agricole and gets busted - oh no, doesn't mean he was doping at Credit Agricole.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:So why the drip drip effect?
Perhaps it's being done by nationality? All of those five were either Spanish or Italian. Didn't the UCI say this week they were informing all the various federations (or was that of the riders that they're going to be monitoring/keeping an extra special eye on), so perhaps they've only got round to those two?0 -
To quote the UCI: “Each rider mentioned above shall be accorded the right to the presumption of innocence until a final decision has been made on this matter.”
Yeah, right. By making the names public, the right to be presumed innocent has been revoked. We can all talk about our favorite conspiracy theories or even blatantly condemn an athlete with no evidence. That's our choice and the only real harm is somebody's feelings might get hurt. However, when the governing body of a sport publicly announces that the following people are under suspicion, there's no longer any possibility of innocence.
If cycling is going to thrive, the governance of cycling needs to take privacy into account. Publicly releasing names and openly casting doubt about riders and teams serves no one. Not the riders, not the teams, and least of all the sport itself.
That was about 3 cents worth, don't you think?
0 -
GroupOfOne MkII wrote:Perhaps it's being done by nationality? All of those five were either Spanish or Italian. Didn't the UCI say this week they were informing all the various federations (or was that of the riders that they're going to be monitoring/keeping an extra special eye on), so perhaps they've only got round to those two?
I'd be surprised if only 5 out of 50 were from Italy and Spain.
That would mean most of the rest come from English speaking nations. :roll:
No. As I now understand it, these 5 are the only 5. The 50 rider list doesn't exsist in this context. That is a group for targetted testing at the Tour. Riders who's results are not as suspicious as the named 5.
Looks a lot like the UCI sacrificial lambs.
A has been, some never weres, the already sacked and jobless.
Latest: Lampre's Pietro Caucchioli has been suspended by his team after being named by the UCI as one of five riders who showed abnormal values in the year-old system."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:GroupOfOne MkII wrote:Perhaps it's being done by nationality? All of those five were either Spanish or Italian. Didn't the UCI say this week they were informing all the various federations (or was that of the riders that they're going to be monitoring/keeping an extra special eye on), so perhaps they've only got round to those two?
I'd be surprised if only 5 out of 50 were from Italy and Spain.
That would mean most of the rest come from English speaking nations. :roll:
No. As I now understand it, these 5 are the only 5. The 50 rider list doesn't exsist in this context. That is a group for targetted testing at the Tour. Riders who's results are not as suspicious as the named 5.
Or they could be French? Portugese? Russian? German? Austrian? Most wouldn't have to be English speakers.
Anyway I think you're right with your second point, the UCI never said how many were being announced, they just said that there were 50 riders who they would be keeping their eye on in the near future.0 -
The UCI has clarified the 50 riders thing here:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid ... ted-riders
"A group of around 50 were selected by UCI, ASO and AFLD comprising the race favourites, leading riders in each team and some targeted riders; they will get extra testing on top of the others."0 -
What a load of backside.
Handy the riders are all from those dodgy Southern European countries where people misbehave. You don't get that kind of thing happening in Germany or Austria, for example.
If this is it, I'd like to see the UCI put their money where their mouths are and publish a list of riders who's values are normal. If any of them test + for something we'll be able to call how effective it was then, eh?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I wonder if these five riders knew they were going to get the bullet? With the riders being able to see all their passport results. Or is it like Kohl says with regard the peleton, with the have's and the have not's when it comes to medical assistants.
Its not suprising that Gripper can make statements like this...“I’m an optimist by nature but when I look at the 840 riders in the passport programme the vast majority of the peloton have very normal blood values,” Gripper told Cyclingnews.
When the riders are given the results of all their tests.0 -
-
stagehopper wrote:Where does it say the riders can see all their passport results?
Kohl makes refrence to it here.........The International Cycling Union 's (UCI) biological passport failed to prevent Kohl from practicing blood doping on a regular basis during his career, he said. "The top riders are so professional in their doping that they know very well they have to keep their blood values stable not to be detected. The UCI sent us the values resulting from the controls: we thus referred to those to mark the next ones. In a way, the passport almost helped us."
Full article here -
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-te ... t-doping-10 -
iainf72 wrote:What a load of backside.
Handy the riders are all from those dodgy Southern European countries where people misbehave. You don't get that kind of thing happening in Germany or Austria, for example.
Some of you guys positively foam at the mouth when it comes to possible drug cheats being exposed. Sometimes i wonder if its the cycling you like or the just the PEDs side of it.Gasping - but somehow still alive !0 -
the forum's been debased a bit IMO by PED debates that seem to dominate...the number of threads should reflect the number of races with no + tests...this fourm makes it look like every day is drug scandal with + tests , infact very few + tests this year.. must be hundreds of tested races that came back negative...bikeradar pro race doesn't reflect that at all0
-
Dave_1 wrote:the forum's been debased a bit IMO by PED debates that seem to dominate...the number of threads should reflect the number of races with no + tests...this fourm makes it look like every day is drug scandal with + tests , infact very few + tests this year.. must be hundreds of tested races that came back negative...bikeradar pro race doesn't reflect that at all
Fine...but what about all the chatter generated by dopers serving bans ans then coming back? Plus soap operas like Kohl slowly unfurling. Add a liberal dash of Puerto and the farce of Valverde / Valv Piti and you can see how the column inches ramp up.
You can't expect people not to talk about this stuff. It reflects the sports chronic inability to deal with itself. If the UCI and uncle Pat were prepared to offer some leadership and moral backbone half of the stuff up for discussion would be killed stone dead and the rest would die a slow ignominious death.\'You Come At the King,You Best Not Miss\'0 -
Dave, you know as well as I do that when you see a race there's always the chance that the rider comes back positive months later. This doubt casts a shadow on each race we watch, we might follow a race and enjoy it but do this a few times and soon you realise the result is cooked. Enjoyed Paris-Nice? Colom was busted. Fleche Wallonne was tarnished by Rebellin's disgrace.Dave_1 wrote:the forum's been debased a bit IMO by PED debates that seem to dominate...the number of threads should reflect the number of races with no + tests...this fourm makes it look like every day is drug scandal with + tests , infact very few + tests this year.. must be hundreds of tested races that came back negative...bikeradar pro race doesn't reflect that at all
Above that, we're still waiting for news on Valverde, Kohl and the Humanplasma clinic, the 2008 Giro retests and more. It's the biggest issue in the sport, bigger than race radios, Astana's cash problems, McQuaid's bumblings etc.
Feel free to start new non-doping threads though.0 -
afx237vi wrote:Astarloa is already without a team after Amica Chips went bust. He may as well call it a day. Worst World Champion ever.
Oh I don't know, Camenzind runs him close.0 -
The same Oscar Camenzind who won both the Tour of Lombardy and Liege-Bastogne-Liege? Add in a Tour de Suisse and I reckon that's not a bad palmares, certainly far superior to Astarloa's.jimmythecuckoo wrote:afx237vi wrote:Astarloa is already without a team after Amica Chips went bust. He may as well call it a day. Worst World Champion ever.
Oh I don't know, Camenzind runs him close.0 -
Kléber wrote:
Dave, you know as well as I do that when you see a race there's always the chance that the rider comes back positive months later. This doubt casts a shadow on each race we watch, we might follow a race and enjoy it but do this a few times and soon you realise the result is cooked. Enjoyed Paris-Nice? Colom was busted. Fleche Wallonne was tarnished by Rebellin's disgrace.Dave_1 wrote:the forum's been debased a bit IMO by PED debates that seem to dominate...the number of threads should reflect the number of races with no + tests...this fourm makes it look like every day is drug scandal with + tests , infact very few + tests this year.. must be hundreds of tested races that came back negative...bikeradar pro race doesn't reflect that at all
Above that, we're still waiting for news on Valverde, Kohl and the Humanplasma clinic, the 2008 Giro retests and more. It's the biggest issue in the sport, bigger than race radios, Astana's cash problems, McQuaid's bumblings etc.
Feel free to start new non-doping threads though.
true...I don't really trust the results much either...and there are never ending things like Op puerto...am also posting often on doping stories as that's most of what there is to write about... but what would we have written about in 1984? would have been a quiet forum , no? 0 -
Dave_1 wrote:
true...I don't really trust the results much either...and there are never ending things like Op puerto...am also posting often on doping stories as that's most of what there is to write about... but what would we have written about in 1984? would have been a quiet forum , no?
We would've probably been writing about Fignon vs Hinault vs Lemond. And what the fellow who won the polka dots
I do enjoy a good doping story, I will admit it. I'm a terrible gossip at the best of times (even have a subscription to Popb!tch's mail out) so I like a bit of scandal. Of course I post other news too etc but this year the media reporting of the sport has been on
a) doping
b) whether Lance had a skid mark in his shorts after a training ride
c) why the biological farceport will save us all
d) Cav wins again
The racing ain't been terribly inspiring either.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
There's something immoral about the UCI playing the 'just a few bad apples' card yet again. It's time for them to be chopping the heads off the hydra not fannying about destroying the careers of a few also rans. Pursuing riders like the BP5 would be ok if the rules were evenly applied but Kohl's testimony shows quite clearly there's one rule for the peloton fodder and another for the cash cows. Either clean up the sport or let it be a free for all, but the routine scapegoating of riders like these to protect the golden ones is a disgrace.0
-
Are you suggesting that the UCI has indictable blood passport evidence on "bigger" riders but that they are sitting on it?Le Blaireau (1)0
-
The UCI? Well, what do you think?0
-
From what I've heard they've warned several riders but can't nab them.
Face it, doping is prevalent across a lot of riders. How many have been screened under this passport scheme? Do you believe only 5 amongst all the pros were doping? The riders named weren't even winning races, they souped up their performance but still rode into anonymity.
I regret the way the UCI is spinning this as a big deal. It's like trying to catch the Bernie Madoffs of the world and then boasting when you land five bus fare dodgers.0 -
Interview with Robin Parisotto which is an interesting read.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
