Tour 2010 doping allegations

cogidubnus

mroli wrote:

P_Tucker wrote:

Dgh wrote:

Would be nice to know on what it was based. As a Brit, I don;t like it that Wiggins and Thomas are thought surprisingly suspicious.

Excellent. Can I interest you in membership of the BNP?

I read this as "being British, I am concerned and worried about the fact that two of our cycling "stars" are so high up the list. I am surprised by this fact and hope that there is a good reason for it, so more detail would be welcomed".

NOT

"That list is a load of old tosh - it has a couple of Brit riders on it and that can't be right".

likewise

nikle

Andyp,,well Iam new to chat forums and as admitted no expert on doping, thought it was all about opinion after all.

What did I post that was so off beam?

I am to old and ugly to be fan of any particular rider, and don't own a pair of union flag shorts either.

nikle

Andyp,,well Iam new to chat forums and as admitted no expert on doping, thought it was all about opinion after all.

What did I post that was so off beam?

I am to old and ugly to be fan of any particular rider, and don't own a pair of union flag shorts either.

iainf72

Let's keep in mind that in 09 an anti-doping guy said that looking at Wigans blood results looked suspicious.

So if this is output from the passport programme, it's possible it would flag him with a higher score.

I doubt the UCI or WADA would want to explain how it's scored - If it's pure algorthymic, then that might explain some stuff. But if it's a combo of blood / urine data AND other stuff that would be more interesting.

andyp

Why is everyone getting their union jack knickers in a twist about Wiggins and Thomas yet not making any noise whatsoever about Jeremy Hunt being rated at 7?

inkyfingers

andyp wrote:

Why is everyone getting their union jack knickers in a twist about Wiggins and Thomas yet not making any noise whatsoever about Jeremy Hunt being rated at 7?

I don't see anyone getting their knickers in a twist, just stating that it's interesting that two british riders with pretty good reputations doping wise appear relatively high on the list.

No disrespect but if Jez Hunt tested positive it would hardly be a major story in the UK but if an Olympic "hero" like Wiggins or Thomas did then it would make it into the mainstream press.

iainf72

inkyfingers wrote:

No disrespect but if Jez Hunt tested positive it would hardly be a major story in the UK but if an Olympic "hero" like Wiggins or Thomas did then it would make it into the mainstream press.

That's true.

Sky managed to recruit 3 riders over the winter who appear high on the list. You would've thought evaluating the passport data would have eliminated them?

nikle

iain72

did shenk(sic) or some bod from U.CI state recently that the wiggins 09 tour passport spike was ok.

Bfore anybody chews my head off, I am in no way saying its not possible that he didn't or doesn't dope, But logic would say he doesn't.

58585

Here we go, some more alleged details of the scoring system:
Examples of increased suspicion include:

sudden drop in hemoglobin one month before the summer of 2010 which could point to an important loss of blood possibly destined to be re-injected during the Tour
suspicion of EPO use during the 2009 Giro hematocrit, hemoglobin or stimulation index superior to 2010 values, which could have led to a start ban before the UCI rules were changed
low parameters off-race

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ucis-su ... -de-france

iainf72

nikle wrote:

iain72

did shenk(sic) or some bod from U.CI state recently that the wiggins 09 tour passport spike was ok.

Bfore anybody chews my head off, I am in no way saying its not possible that he didn't or doesn't dope, But logic would say he doesn't.

That was my point. Some people said it was fine, some didn't. So if this is the result of software, it would probably flag as suspicious.

What would your logic be that he didn't? Imagine you had a huge contract and people expected you to deliver but you weren't convinced you could. That's the kind of thing that turns people to the needle. Again, not suggesting Wiggins did, but there would be motivation.

FJS

nikle wrote:

iain72

did shenk(sic) or some bod from U.CI state recently that the wiggins 09 tour passport spike was ok.

Bfore anybody chews my head off, I am in no way saying its not possible that he didn't or doesn't dope, But logic would say he doesn't.

logic?

Gingerflash

"Robbie Hunter's tweet was a bit stupid."

They usually are.

nikle

By logic i mean't he was crap in '10, all year really.

rickyrider

iainf72 wrote:

What would your logic be that he didn't? Imagine you had a huge contract and people expected you to deliver but you weren't convinced you could. That's the kind of thing that turns people to the needle. Again, not suggesting Wiggins did, but there would be motivation.

This would be true if the rider in question cared enough - Wiggo seems to give every impression that it's all a right old ball ache and he'd much rather be doing something else! (which I personally find pretty sh*tty for a pro athlete on a massive wedge)

FJS

nikle wrote:

By logic i mean't he was crap in '10, all year really.

Popovych has been crap for the best part of a decade

inkyfingers

iainf72 wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

No disrespect but if Jez Hunt tested positive it would hardly be a major story in the UK but if an Olympic "hero" like Wiggins or Thomas did then it would make it into the mainstream press.

That's true.

Sky managed to recruit 3 riders over the winter who appear high on the list. You would've thought evaluating the passport data would have eliminated them?

The latter is an interesting point, and one I missed. Particularly after Brailsfords comments at the Tour about not signing riders with dodgy passports. Maybe this hints that this list is not solely worked out using passport data, either that or Brailsfords so desperate for a decent stage racer that he's prepared to overlook it....

Just to add some more pure speculation...wonder if his position on this list is part of the reason for Matthew Lloyds recent problems?

FJS

Oh my, look with which sodom and gomorra Britain is equalled with:

1. France 1.23 (based on the average of 35 riders)
2. Netherlands 1.25 (8
3. Switzerland 1.60 (5)
4. Portugal 2.0 (3)
5. Slovenia 2.25 (4)
6. USA 2.37 (8
7. Belgium 2.69 (13)
8. Denmark 2.80 (5)
9. Austria 3.0 (3)
10. Germany 3.27 (15)
Australia 3.27 (11)
12. Spain 3.27 (32)
Great Britain 3.27 (8
14. Italy 3.70 (17)
15. Belarus 4.0 (3)
16. Russia 4.33 (6)
17. Kazakhstan 5.33 (3)
Ukraine 5.33 (3)

Disclaimer: I think these team and nation lists are particularly pointless and self-serving for L'Equipe, as they're based on a very incomplete selection of riders.

LangerDan

inkyfingers wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

No disrespect but if Jez Hunt tested positive it would hardly be a major story in the UK but if an Olympic "hero" like Wiggins or Thomas did then it would make it into the mainstream press.

That's true.

Sky managed to recruit 3 riders over the winter who appear high on the list. You would've thought evaluating the passport data would have eliminated them?

The latter is an interesting point, and one I missed. Particularly after Brailsfords comments at the Tour about not signing riders with dodgy passports. Maybe this hints that this list is not solely worked out using passport data, either that or Brailsfords so desperate for a decent stage racer that he's prepared to overlook it....

Just to add some more pure speculation...wonder if his position on this list is part of the reason for Matthew Lloyds recent problems?

Mind you, Michael Barry, who has been called out by Landis and as a result created a certain amount of internal kerfuffle at Sky, has a big, squeaky-clean zero to his name.

Cumulonimbus

LangerDan wrote:

Mind you, Michael Barry, who has been called out by Landis and as a result created a certain amount of internal kerfuffle at Sky, has a big, squeaky-clean zero to his name.

The passport only started in 2008 and i am pretty sure that Landis's allegations refer to when he was at Discovery. He left there in 2006 so if i am correct then the Landis allegations would not come into it.

Kléber

Face it, we all have our own "suspect lists" and that's before any of us analyse blood data. For many fans just wearing a [insert team name] jersey is often enough to raise eyebrows, no?

rick_chasey

I'd imagine their suspicions are liklier to be correct than this very forum's list.

skavanagh.bikeradar

If 6 and above is so suspicious as to be an acknoledgement of likely doping, why is that the passport hasn't resulted in bans for these riders? Especially those with a suspicion rating of 10 i.e. the UCI is convinced they are doping?

It'd be interesting to see the same list with all riders in the pro peleton not just those starting the 2010 Tour.

rick_chasey

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

If 6 and above is so suspicious as to be an acknoledgement of likely doping, why is that the passport hasn't resulted in bans for these riders? Especially those with a suspicion rating of 10 i.e. the UCI is convinced they are doping?

It'd be interesting to see the same list with all riders in the pro peloton not just those starting the 2010 Tour.

Indeed. I wanna know where Boonen would be!

iainf72

Rick Chasey wrote:

Indeed. I wanna know where Boonen would be!

Leaning out of the window of his Lambo chatting up some schoolgirls?

Cumulonimbus

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

If 6 and above is so suspicious as to be an acknoledgement of likely doping, why is that the passport hasn't resulted in bans for these riders? Especially those with a suspicion rating of 10 i.e. the UCI is convinced they are doping?

It'd be interesting to see the same list with all riders in the pro peloton not just those starting the 2010 Tour.

The problem is producing a case which the UCI can win in court. At the present moment experts can look at parameters and say something is doping in their opinion but does that make it enforceable in a court of law? The UCI is not made of money and if people get off then they could be stumping up a lot in damages.

The recent Pellizotti and Valjavec cases will have delayed any potential proceedings IMO. The UCI will have wanted to see if they were able to successfully ban them in court and learn what will stand up in court. With those guys being successfully prosecuted maybe we can expect the next round of proceedings in the next month or two.

I agree that it would be interesting to see what the rest of the pro peloton comes out as too.

rick_chasey

iainf72 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Indeed. I wanna know where Boonen would be!

Leaning out of the window of his Lambo chatting up some schoolgirls?

Hehehee....

He was supposed to be dropping an hour set of his favourite chunes on radio the other day.

FJS

Kléber wrote:

Face it, we all have our own "suspect lists" and that's before any of us analyse blood data. For many fans just wearing a [insert team name] jersey is often enough to raise eyebrows, no?

I guess it's the riders that haven't really appeared in the usual suspect lists that are interesting - some higher scores of prominent riders I hadn't really seen anything about (Oss, Seeldrayers, Van den Broeck, Tony Martin), and on the other hand some 0 or 1 score prominent GC riders (Valls, Fuglsang, Gesink, Hesjedal, Roche, Taaramae). But then I don't always follow this kind of news overly closely.

blazing_saddles

Mmmmm, Mr Harmon certainly toeing the rider party line.
"Confidential. L'Equipe big mistake. Who gains?
However, "this document is one of thousands", stands out, since it certainly appears to be the one that WADA referred to, in it's TDF observational assessment.

Bakunin

Lance is only a 4?

Could it be that the fanboys are right?

How can Klodi only be a 7?


While the list is fun, how does the UCI continue to exist? And if the breakaway boys weren't so vile themselves, I'd say do it.

Woolfie

Just regarding G Thomas (havn't read the whole thread so don't know if anyone has mentioned this before) he had a bad crash a few years back which meant removing something (spleen / pancreas??) which means he has an elevated haemocrit value which I think means he has to have a dispensation to ride above the 50% level - the UCI might view this as putting him as high risk?