Cobo DQ Vuelta 2011? - may contain rumours

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

So since it’s bio passport it’s not a new test for some EPO right?

Just a few more riders being pinged recently so I assumed they have.

The last paragraph of Marca's article (Google translate):

Now, eight years later, a laboratory has achieved a new method to find the dopant substance that in the past did not detect. That is why the new analysis has been conducted where they have found the banned substance, which is almost certainly EPO . The biological passport, therefore, has served as an indication to request the reanalysis used to sanction the Cantabrian. It is time to wait if, in the next dates, more cases are announced such as the 'Bison', hunted 8 years later.

Full article: https://www.marca.com/ciclismo/2019/06/ ... b4587.html

m.r.m.

larkim wrote:

7.5 years is a long time to be waiting for a podium ceremony though...

Talk about a hot seat...!



*I'll let myself out*

blazing_saddles

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So since it’s bio passport it’s not a new test for some EPO right?

Just a few more riders being pinged recently so I assumed they have.

The last paragraph of Marca's article (Google translate):

Now, eight years later, a laboratory has achieved a new method to find the dopant substance that in the past did not detect. That is why the new analysis has been conducted where they have found the banned substance, which is almost certainly EPO . The biological passport, therefore, has served as an indication to request the reanalysis used to sanction the Cantabrian. It is time to wait if, in the next dates, more cases are announced such as the 'Bison', hunted 8 years later.

Full article: https://www.marca.com/ciclismo/2019/06/ ... b4587.html

The Bison?
Would that be the Buffalo: José Enrique Gutiérrez? If so that's going back a lot further than 8 years.

iainf72

The Bison was Cobo's nickname

blazing_saddles

iainf72 wrote:

The Bison was Cobo's nickname

Ah, OK. I read that completely wrong.... :oops:

kingstongraham

Two years to wait for the 2013 news then?

tailwindhome

There's no statute of limitations here?

iainf72

KingstonGraham wrote:

Two years to wait for the 2013 news then?

Sounds more like they knew something wasn't right because of his OFF-scores, started proceedings in 2015 but have just managed to prove it.

My feeling is anyone who expects a whole raft of new positives will be somewhat disappointed.

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Two years to wait for the 2013 news then?

Sounds more like they knew something wasn't right because of his OFF-scores, started proceedings in 2015 but have just managed to prove it.

My feeling is anyone who expects a whole raft of new positives will be somewhat disappointed.

Horner is the only other one that stands out like Cobo did as far as I can remember. They may look at Kreuziger and Henao again, but doubt they'll find anything.

bobmcstuff

TailWindHome wrote:

There's no statute of limitations here?

Apparently not - and with doping I don't think there should be either?

Because surely the idea that your currently undetectable doping regime might be caught in the future when your samples will be retested using better and currently unknown tests is a massive deterrent.

darkhairedlord

So froome wakes up.. frak, where am I?
Congratulations, you just won the vuelta.

bobmcstuff

darkhairedlord wrote:

So froome wakes up.. frak, where am I?
Congratulations, you just won the vuelta.

And it's 2011.

The last 8 years was a coma dream...

larkim

Presumably if they have been on the fence about an ABP anomaly and then a new or more sensitive test comes along for, the advantage of the ABP is that it gives them justifiable reason for retesting old samples.

I doubt they were suddenly persuaded of the positive by a different analysis of the statistics that underly the ABP measures.

The best detection rates will always be in the "intelligence led" investigations, and it would be reassuring to know that 50/50 calls on ABP provide a basis for focussed re-opening direct sample testing of historic samples if something new comes along. i.e. a new test comes out, but only test samples from riders where the ABP raises question marks, even if the ABP score on its own would not be sufficient to give a doping outcome.

sherer

it's a shame it's another EPO positive. Seems the peloton is still hooked on this drug.

I still think the peloton is cleaner than it was and clean riders can win

r0bh

sherer wrote:

it's a shame it's another EPO positive. Seems the peloton is still hooked on this drug.

I still think the peloton is cleaner than it was and clean riders can win

Not sure you can derive much about the current state of the peloton from samples taken almost 8 years ago

gweeds

Apparently the new test targets micro-dosing and is going to be used retrospectively.

This could get interesting.

RichN95.

If Froome gets the win then these are the Sky riders who participated the most in their nine GT wins

9 Froome
5 Stannard, Thomas, Poels
4 Knees, Rowe, Kiryienka
3 Porte, Henao, Nieve
2 Wiggins, Boasson Hagen, Sivtsov, Kennaugh, Lopez, Landa, Kwiatkowski, Puccio, Moscon
1 Sixteen riders

iainf72

Good question from Bruyneel

https://www.instagram.com/p/BytSTo5IqKW ... 05mwhga1hs

And if he's right, it puts to bed any kind of "new magic test" theory

No_Ta_Doctor

iainf72 wrote:

Good question from Bruyneel

https://www.instagram.com/p/BytSTo5IqKW ... 05mwhga1hs

And if he's right, it puts to bed any kind of "new magic test" theory

Page not found. What did he say?

bompington

No tA Doctor wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Good question from Bruyneel

https://www.instagram.com/p/BytSTo5IqKW ... 05mwhga1hs

And if he's right, it puts to bed any kind of "new magic test" theory

Page not found. What did he say?

Bruyneel wrote:

Before I want to go into the details about the following topic, I want to stress that I’m not trying to defend the rider in question, my only purpose is to try to understand some questionable facts which seem to have occurred in the Juan Jose Cobo biological passport case.

I would like to address the following words to the @UCI_cycling and it’s President @dlappartient and also to his predecessor @brian.cookson (he was in charge of the UCI at the moment the case was opened): Dear UCI,
Dear Mr. Lappartient,
Dear Mr. Cookson

I understand that the case of anomalies in the bio pass of Cobo was opened in 2014... and that there have been several proposals from UCI to Cobo about a ban + fine, 1 in 2015, which he refused and a 2nd one in 2017, which he also refused. I understand that in the 2nd case there was a proposal for a reduced money fine. Now finally in mid 2019, 5 years after the decision to sanction the rider and 8 years after his Vuelta win, you announce your final decision, after having tried to negotiate with the rider.
I think everybody is entitled to a full and frank explanation from the UCI of what happened during this lengthy process, why did you negotiate the amount of the fine, and especially also why it has taken so long, particularly since there hasn’t been any retro-active testing of old samples with new detection methods. So I think it’s fair to ask: what changed between 2014 (opening of the case) and June 2019?
If it’s a clear cut case, and there is no doubt that the cyclist has doped, how can you explain a delay of 5 years before announcing your decision?

In the extremely unlikely case that you might reply, please do not hide behind answers like “the anti doping commission is independent from the UCI and we have no control over their agenda and decisions” (We all know that this is not true). Looking forward to your reply.
Johan Bruyneel.

EDIT: fair questions, but then, Bruyneel wouldn't have any vested interest in muddying the waters, would he?

DeadCalm

RichN95 wrote:

If Froome gets the win then these are the Sky riders who participated the most in their nine GT wins

9 Froome
5 Stannard, Thomas, Poels
4 Knees, Rowe, Kiryienka
3 Porte, Henao, Nieve
2 Wiggins, Boasson Hagen, Sivtsov, Kennaugh, Lopez, Landa, Kwiatkowski, Puccio, Moscon
1 Sixteen riders

So, if Thomas or Bernal are to win, it will be the first Sky / Ineos GT victory with no Froome in the team?

sherer

interesting comments from JB, and I hope the UCI isnt making deals with riders. Id like to know where he got that info from and if he can back up those claims

salsiccia1

I'd be interested in how does a persona non grata like Bruyneel gets info like that. Good to know the UCI has learned it's lesson after the Froome leak...

Alejandrosdog

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I'd be interested in how does a persona non grata like Bruyneel gets info like that. Good to know the UCI has learned it's lesson after the Froome leak...

Lol froome was innocent because he couldn’t be found guilty. Pfft everyone knows that

salsiccia1

Alejandrosdog wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I'd be interested in how does a persona non grata like Bruyneel gets info like that. Good to know the UCI has learned it's lesson after the Froome leak...

Lol froome was innocent because he couldn’t be found guilty. Pfft everyone knows that

What's that got to do with UCI leaking like a sieve?

Pross

Alejandrosdog wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I'd be interested in how does a persona non grata like Bruyneel gets info like that. Good to know the UCI has learned it's lesson after the Froome leak...

Lol froome was innocent because he couldn’t be found guilty. Pfft everyone knows that

Well yes, that's basically how these things work!

rick_chasey

bompington wrote:

EDIT: fair questions, but then, Bruyneel wouldn't have any vested interest in muddying the waters, would he?

He definitely has an horse in the argument that the UCI do not apply the rules evenly or fairly.

Doesn't mean it's not true, however.

amrushton

Salsiccia1 wrote:

I'd be interested in how does a persona non grata like Bruyneel gets info like that. Good to know the UCI has learned it's lesson after the Froome leak...

he has a lot of friends in the sport. Listen to him on the podcast The Move. he was tipping Carapaz v.early on as a result of info he had and was able to say who/why, when moves would go etc. He has spent a lifetime in the sport

rick_chasey

Haha, feels odd defending the guy.

His bit is knowing the f*ck out of everyone and he was able to secure a monopoly (with Lance's help) over the best doping dr around.

Good DS he may have been, but I always felt his edge was his ability to add value in the murky bits.

Of that generation, I always rated Riis as the better tactician but Mr 60% lacked the real value add in the murky bits.

blazing_saddles

Done deal it seems. Froome gets the magnificent 7.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/raci ... ing-427599