We're going to the ToC tomorrow in Palo Alto, dreading the parking situation, but looking forward to seeing folks and the shows behind the scenes and in front.
TBV is going to be wearing his Phonak jacket, which he expects to be a rare sight. If you spot it, come over and say, "hi!".
Mrs. TBV will be more discreet, but she'll be the stunning blonde next to the dork in the garish jacket.
News
USA Today's Sal Ruibal reports that Rock Racing has backed down from its defiant stance of earlier today and that after reconsidering the prospects of a "fight" the riders AEG found questionable will sit out the ToC:
...after a team meeting Saturday night, all three riders said they would rather sit out the race than disrupt the prologue.
"They'll still be on the team and they'll be out signing posters for the fans," Ball told USA TODAY. "There were some of our riders who said, 'If they can't race, we won't race,' but the three guys wanted to see the team out on the course."
News
The San Jose Mercury News quotes Greg LeMond saying he is glad that cycling is being "brought to its knees" by the recent doping scandals it has had to endure. LeMond, who will speak at Santa Clara University Sunday night, also references the incident involving former Landis manager Will Geoghegan at the USADA hearings last May as "...the meanest, cruelest thing that's ever happened to me in my life". He goes on to further comment on Lance Armstrong with whom he has a continuing feud that is now being contested legally.
The CyclingNews says that despite his team being shunned by the ASO, Andreas Kloden will stick with Astana. The Friday reader mail column is full of responses to the ASO decision this week to exclude Astana from all of its events this year.
And in yet more CyclingNews Alberto Contador says he will NOT leave Astana despite the team's exclusion from all ASO events this year. Also it appears the reopening of OP will not involve further prosecution of cyclists:
One day after the Provincial Court of Madrid announced its decision of re-opening the investigation around Operación Puerto, it would seem as if this only concerned the heads of the affair, Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes and his assistant Merino Batres. As a matter of fact, todociclismo reported that the criminal investigation that will now be conducted will only apply to the conservation of the 200 blood bags thought to be used for doping practices.
Under Spanish criminal law, flaws in the handling of the blood bags can be penalised, but not the doping practices themselves. Therefore, the actions of the cyclists, former team manager Manolo Sáiz, Ignacio Labarta, Vicente Belda and others will reportedly not be the target of the re-visited investigation.
How else to explain why Astana, which bears little resemblance to the brazen band of syringe-brandishing fuckwits who doped their way through the 2007 season, is not invited, but Rabobank, which essentially wallpapered over as serious a crime and remains largely the same in structure, gets a nod. To be sure, Rabobank is not yet in the clear, and Wednesday’s announcement was pointedly not about who is in the Tour, but who is not. But at this point, Astana is the only team on the outside looking in.
We cannot wipe away what happened these last two years," Prudhomme explained. "We don't have the right to have a short memory. In 2006, a team came out of the ashes of Liberty Seguros. Within this team, half of the riders were linked to Operation Puerto and cannot take the start of the Tour. The next year, they explain to us that it's a new team, a new management, that everything about it is new. We trust them and invite them to the Tour. But we made a mistake to take them - and we don't want to make that mistake once again."
Speaking to Dutch AD, Prudhomme added that ASO had also pondered the exclusion of Rabobank, which made headlines last July with overall leader Michael Rasmussen being withdrawn from the race for having lied about his whereabouts and missed doping controls. "We hesitated, but came to the conclusion that it was Rasmussen and his boss [Theo De Rooy - ed.] that harmed the Tour, and not the sponsor," he said. "They made the decision to pull him out of the race a bit late, but they did. The sponsor made that gesture even if there wasn't a positive control. Today, Rasmussen is suing them for having been sacked without a reason."
Novitzky has (also) become the most expert agent in the Department of Justice on steroid investigations. He helped secure a conviction of Marion Jones for lying to federal agents, and his work led to perjury charges against Barry Bonds.
The biggest doping investigation in international cycling – Operación Puerto – was called to be re-opened on Saint Valentine's Day, February 14, in Madrid. A Spanish court ordered that the blood doping investigation, which first hit the headlines in May 2006 and was shelved by Judge Antonio Serrano in March 2007, be re-visited according to Spanish paper El País.
If you disagree with the ASO's decision and you want to let them know, here are a few email addresses to get you started. Tell them how you feel. It's a private organization and they have the power to change any decision they want.
Christian Prudhomme - cprudhomme@aso.fr
Gilbert Ysern - gysern@aso.fr
Patrice Clerc - pclerc@aso.fr
photos: Z Gary/McCormack CampNews
AP/ESPN has the first we've seen that Astana, and defending champ Contador are not invited to the Tour.
Also at CyclingNews and VeloNews. Astana is unique in the snub, as the other teams turned down by the Giro are invited to the ASO events. We might conclude that the ASO (a) does not like Bruyneel; (b) can carry a grudge; (c) the healing has not begun.
The VeloNews also posts Alberto Contador's reaction to the news that the ASO has snubbed Astana along with expanded commentary on the subject:
Should the ASO decision stand up, and should Bruyneel’s Astana team not start this year’s Tour, then not only will defending champ Contador and potential winners Leipheimer and Andreas Klöden be deprived of their chances at further Tour glory, but the Tour itself will lose even more of its credibility.
That point was echoed by (Johan) Bruyneel, who said in a prepared statement: “Unfortunately, the Tour de France will lose now much of its credibility by not letting participate some of the world’s best riders, who were never implicated in doping scandals.”
"AEG will pass the riders' names on to USA Cycling, who then passes the information to USADA (the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency)," Catlin said. "Where's the independence? You want the collectors to be independent ... They should report to someone outside the racing system."
ASO officials so far have remained mum, but there’s speculation that if teams are left out of next month’s Paris-Nice, they won’t be invited for the Tour. Participation in Paris-Nice, however, is no guarantee of a berth in the Tour as ASO still holds the cards when final invitations are issued in the coming weeks.
One sport director told VeloNews this week that the situation is “intolerable for the teams. Riders cannot plan their seasons. Sponsors cannot expect return on their investment. It’s bad for the image of cycling.”
News
The NY Times reports that, amid speculation Andy Pettitte gave a deposition that was damaging to Roger Clemens' credibility, Pettitte, Kirk Radomski, and Chuck Knoblauch will not testify before congress tomorrow:Pettitte’s recusal came amid growing indications that he made statements that linked Clemens with steroids or H.G.H., or both, in his deposition to the committee on Feb. 4. A congressional staff member and several other people familiar with the case said that Pettitte did not want to have to testify publicly, on national television, and perhaps be forced to reiterate statements that would not be in Clemens’s interest. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the case.
The Boulder Report has some wacky predictions for 2008, such as Michael Ball teaming up with Vince McMahon to form the "Rock Racing League" which would replace the UCI. Maybe Tony George is a silent partner.
ESPN says that MLB commissioner Bud Selig knew that pitcher John Rocker had tested positive for steroid use, but looked the other way:Former major league pitcher John Rocker said Monday that baseball commissioner Bud Selig knew he failed a drug test in 2000 and that doctors for the "league" and the "players association" advised him and several Texas Rangers teammates on how to effectively use steroids.
Cycling, the former whipping boy of PED use, looks better every day by comparison.
Blogs
Bernard Dugdale delves into a bit of Tour de France history and reminisces about a moment which made folks take notice of Postal domestique Floyd Landis.
WADA Watch offers draft 3 of its proposed Bill of Rights, a continuing must-read.
News
The CyclingNews says that all doping controls from the controversial late night testing done on Team Lampre have been determined to be negative.
Law.com carries a detailed report on a ruling denying immunity for non-governmental entities that may resonate for USADA and HRO.
ESPN reports some funniness in Tennis, where an investigation has been going on into potential match-fixing. Bill Hue comments below:Here is an intersting quote from the head of the ATP. Perhaps he hasn't gotten the memo that anyone accused of throwing matches or providing "inside" information about their health to professional gamblers must be guilty if 3 people file affidavits attesting to that fact and/or circumstantial evidence exists to establish it:
"For its part, the ATP has had to strike the delicate balance of investigating a highly unusual betting pattern without unfairly indicting one of the sport's premier players.
"We never at any point mentioned Davydenko and went to great lengths, in fact, to stress that nobody should mention any player because their reputations were at stake," ATP executive chairman Etienne de Villiers says.
"[Davydenko] is a player, whether he is guilty or not, who deserves due process," de Villiers adds. "He deserves to live by something we all live by, which is, 'We are innocent until we are proven guilty.'"
Are we, then?
Someone get this over to Floyd Landis ASAP.
Blogs
Peloton Jim writes about the fight between good and evil, this time in the guises of Rock Racing and Slipstream. You can guess which team wears the white hats and which one wears the black. BTW argyle is now cool again.
Chris at Podium Cafe thinks the games the UCI and ASO are playing is an altered version of "Spy vs Spy", and he wonders why anyone would pick sides. And where is a PR firm when you need one:Another reason not to pick sides: why bother? Neither spy gave readers a reason to even think of liking them. Sound familiar? Seriously, the "organization" of Cycling seems to suffer from the same disease that afflicted the Red Sox management for my entire childhood: a belief that I was lucky to have them. Has Cycling ever hired a communications team? A PR firm? Has anyone ever been tasked with telling people in a calm and reasoned way what the hell is going on with the sport? Ah, nope. Instead, we're supposed to be satisfied by dueling, unintelligible hot air blasts. And if that's not good enough for us, well, I mean, why would a sport need a fan base?
News
The VeloNews interviews Alberto Contador who says he has no "plan B" , he insists that he must be included in the field for the Tour de France:
Q: Can you accept the idea that you might not go to the Tour?
AC: No – at the moment I cannot imagine not going to the Tour. The (Astana) team is completely new – new staff, new directors, new riders – the only thing that has stayed the same is the sponsor. It was bad that we were left out of the Giro because a lot of riders (on Astana) were preparing to make the race. The Giro is very important for the team.
News
The CyclingNews reports the UCI wants Michael Rasmussen punished for not being honest about his whereabouts while "training" last spring. And WADA is chomping at the bit as it hopes for a reopening of the Operation Puerto investigation. Oliver Niggli, legal director of WADA, feels the UCI and WADA will take over as lead investigatory agencies should the case be re instituted.
The VeloNews Mailbag has one note in sympathy with Dick Pound's lobbying efforts to head the CAS, and another from a Canadian who is embarrassed to be the same nationality as Mr. Pound. This writer wants to start a campaign to keep Pound from the CAS post. The majority of the remaining letters express heartfelt sympathy at the loss of cycling wrench guru Sheldon Brown, who was one of Mr.Strbuk's personal heroes.
The NY Times dryly notes that as Roger Clemens continued his "meet and greet" with Congress yesterday, Brian MacNamee was alleging that Roger was not the only member of the Clemens family MacNamee was injecting.
The Washington Post expresses concerns that this summer's Olympic games in China may be virtually impossible to adequately police for doping violations.
Santa Clara University gives us all another chance to catch Greg LeMond speaking on the topic of "ethics, doping, and the future of cycling"
US News and World Reports says that 80 year old former Senate page Floyd Landis has found a treasure trove of old visitors passes. This has nothing to do with anything here, but hey, it came up in a search.
CBS Sports.com posts a snarky little piece about "Generation A", athletes who make sports writers long for the good old days when jocks, or coaches, were merely drunken fools. Floyd Landis inevitably makes "the list" of arseheads:
Upon learning that Floyd Landis had beaten his foes by something like 89 minutes during one of the 2006 Tour De France's most punishing stages, I burst into a "U-S-A!" cheer and talked trash about the inferiority of other countries' cheeseburgers and romantic comedies. Not for a second did it dawn on me that such a surge could only have been fueled by a pre-race testosterone smoothie.
The cheating -- affirmed by numerous arbitration panels and such -- doesn't land him on this list, though. No, it's his revolving barrage of explanations for his elevated testosterone level, which have ranged from the medical to intimations of an anti-Floyd conspiracy to the c'mon-dude-seriously? claim that a massive hangover spurred it. Even worse was the revelation that Landis' business manager called up Greg LeMond and mocked him about a private conversation between the two cyclists regarding LeMond's childhood sexual abuse. What a cur.
News
The VeloNews reports this morning that a hearing in Spain today will determine whether the Operation Puerto investigation will be reopened, or closed for good. If reopened the case would still not fall under the newer Spanish anti-doping statutes which are far more stringent than the old laws which prevented OP from having more "teeth" at the time it was initiated:
The Puerto case has remained in limbo since March (2007) when Spanish judge Antonio Serrano ordered the investigation closed. The UCI, the Spanish cycling federation and the Spanish prosecutors office appealed that decision.
If the appeals court decides to reopen the case, Serrano will be required to reactivate the investigation but without the power to retroactively apply Spain’s new tough anti-doping law that was introduced six months after the original Puerto raids in May 2006.
Even if the case is reopened, it’s unlikely that Serrano will be able to force DNA testing on some 200 bags of blood and plasma found in police raids.
Nine teams (Quick Step, Lampre, Duval Salt maker, Liquigas, Milram, Rabobank, High Road, Astana and CSC) demanded on Thursday for an immediate meeting with the organizers of the three large turns cyclists (Italy, France, Spain) following the not-selection of several of them for Giro.
This request is shaded with threats of boycott, which come implicitly from a common official statement:
"We understand obviously the will of the organizers to avoid the presence of teams which could harm the image of the sport, but we do not want to lead to a situation where we would be obliged to pressure [them] by asking [that] all [teams] be invited in block, or if not no team would take part".(With AFP)
++++++
Patrice Leclerc: enjoy the bed you made, mon pauvre... you're next!
ZENchill
Before finishing Volume 2 I had to wait until the arbitration panel had ruled on Floyd Landis' appeal. While Landis is going to the Court for Arbitration of Sport for a final appeal, I think it unlikely that Landis' positive for exegenous testosterone will be overturned.
It is about the 2007 winner of the San Antonio Livestock Exposition whose winning ewe tested positive for ractopamine, a supplement used in pig feed but not sheep feed. She was stripped of her title and banned from competition for four years and is now suing.
The pigs and sheep were housed together and the young lady was unable to muzzle her animal due to the ewe's size so one could imagine the possibility of contamination of the ewe's food source. But strict liability trumps all. Possible failure on the part of the show to protect the animals is irrelevant. This would be like testing athlete's samples in a lab known for contaminating samples. Oh wait a sec....
News
The VeloNews says President George W. Bush has asked the U.S. Senate to ratify an international treaty that would add further muscle to the anti-doping effort in sport:“The United States supported the development of the International Convention Against Doping in Sport as a means to ensure equitable and effective application and promotion of anti-doping controls in international competition,” Bush wrote. “The Convention will help to advance international cooperation on and promotion of international doping control efforts, and will help to protect the integrity and spirit of sport by supporting efforts to ensure a fair and doping-free environment for athletes.”
Work on the Convention began in 2003 after the second World Conference on Doping in Sport in Copenhagen, Denmark. At the time, analysts determined that the World Anti-Doping Code required the additional legal authority of an international treaty since a majority of governments around the world – including the United States - could not be bound by agreements drafted by non-governmental organizations, such as the International Olympic Committee and the World Anti-Doping Agency.
The NY Times reports today that former trainer Brian MacNamee has turned over to authorities physical evidence which he says proves that Roger Clemens was injected with steroids and HGH, an accusation which Clemens has vigorously denied:But McNamee, a former police officer, decided to save the evidence rather than discard it, the lawyer said. “He was always concerned that if he ever got caught, he would be the most vulnerable and people would throw him under the bus,” the lawyer said.
[...]
The anonymous lawyer said McNamee kept quiet about the physical evidence out of lingering loyalty to Clemens, the winner of seven Cy Young awards, even though McNamee, by then, had created tremendous problems for Clemens. He had done so by telling federal authorities and Mitchell’s investigators that he repeatedly injected Clemens with steroids and H.G.H. from 1998 to 2001.
MSNBC posts an opinion piece on "cognitive dissonance", or in this case the arrogant protestations of denial in the face of reality professed by many athletes caught doping. The article was written largely in reaction to the revelatory claim this morning that Roger Clemen's trainer, Brian MacNamee, has physical evidence that Clemens was injected with steroids and HGH, even though Clemens still denies he ever did anything wrong.
The CyclingNews reports on a proposed meeting between the owners of the three Grand Tours and IPCT,the International Professional Cycling Teams, to discuss recent issues concerning the exclusion of a number of pro tour teams from the Giro. And RCS Events Director Angelo Zomegnan thinks Pat McQuaid may need a history lesson. In an update CN notes the sorry state of German cycing in the wake of many recent doping scandals.
Blogs
Racejukie tackles a number of subjects this morning ranging from "UCI gadfly" Pat McQuaid's muddying of the waters with his opinion that the best pro teams should be in the Giro, to the lesson cyclists should learn from Roger Clemens' present dilemma:
Never share your cheating with someone who'll later rat on you.
RJ phrases it more colorfully.
Rant feels the specters of sins past should be exorcised, at least in the case of Astana, and that Pat McQuaid may just be right for once.
Publisher's Marketplace is shopping a manuscript:
Code of Injustice | | ||||
 | |||||
| | Dr. Erik Seedhouse and Doina Nugent | ||||
| |||||
| | Non-fiction: Sports | ||||
| |||||
| | Code of Injustice is a powerful indictment of all that is wrong with Dick Pound's WADA. Based on comprehensive and meticulous research, it attacks, blow by blow, the inner workings of a morally corrupt agency that implements antiquated science, utilizes flawed protocols and applies a draconian legislative process. The book examines the most conspicuous examples of incompetence such as writing incorrect sample numbers on laboratory documents, mislabeling samples, allowing samples to be contaminated and WADA's continued reliance on testing equipment and software that has long been rendered obsolete. Code of Injustice also investigates documented cases of incompetence such as lab technicians who operated highly complex testing machines without considering it necessary to look at the user's manual! But Code of Injustice is more than just an indictment of WADA. This book also explores the impact upon the lives of high-profile athletes who have had their reputations and careers destroyed by false accusations of positive drug tests. Code of Injustice also scrutinizes the role of the mass media in their role as character assassins and the illegality of collusion that exists between the media and WADA. Finally, the book provides, through the eyes of an experienced international lawyer, recommendations for remedying the process by which athletes are tested, and lays out a legal roadmap for the future of drug testing. | ||||
News
The Boulder Report wonders if Rock Racing just "bought" itself a guarantee (with a fat $500,000.00 check to AEG) of who it may want to race at the Tour of California. Good question:So what's this all mean? Did Rock effectively just purchase the right to keep its original roster submission intact? (Four of the six riders who team owner Michael Ball says have "guaranteed" start spots appeared to clash at least aesthetically with AEG's strict new "no doping investigations" mandate.) USA Cycling is reportedly still reviewing roster submissions, so we don't yet know the final makeup of any team competing at the Tour of California...
The VeloNews says that 2007 Tour de France champ Alberto Contador, who faces exclusion by the ASO from this year's Tour due to Astana's past doping sins, has a "plan B". It's a good thing someone does.
The CyclingNews notes that the upcoming Paris-Nice team roster announcement next week may be an indication of Astana's chances for a Tour de France invite. In other cyclingnews Bjorn Leukemans hearing date has been announced. Leukemans feels he will be vindicated and will ride again soon in the peloton, still his eyes have been opened:
..."I lost my naivety and a lot more," he said. He has no contact with his former team, Silence-Lotto, or his former colleagues. "The team management ignores me. I asked [sport director] Marc Sergeant if I could return if I am cleared. He never answered me."
He continued, "I don't hear any more from the riders, not from Nick Nuyens or anyone else. I have no friends left in the group, only colleagues."
I do not understand" said McQuaid to the AFP. "The organizer of Giro (RCS) knows the event is one of the greatest tests, but he does not include the best teams. The 18 ProTour teams are the top 18 teams in the world. Ok, the organizers have the right to invite whom they please, but everyone knows there is a hierarchy of races and also of teams."
McQuaid termed the team choices arbitrary, citing economic and national reasons and contrasted the selections with the UCI's work to look out for the whole sport.
"In my opinion, it will be necessary to return to rules about participation. The organizer must have responsibilities for the organization for his race, not for the participation"
The puritanical righteousness is even more pronounced with regard to steroids than with other drugs because of the underlying eroticism associated with the steroid-enhanced muscularity that our society moral guardians find morally disturbing.
News
The NY Times wonders how a WADA official from New Zealand can compare the "national pastime" to a niche sport like cycling. (as the world waits for Roger Clemens' testimony before Congress) David Howman says that baseball is in turmoil, and WADA can come to its "rescue" as it did with cycling. Trouble is, baseball, and its fans here in America, seem to feel realtively little of the angst WADA wants them to:(David) Howman, however, would be hard-pressed to demonstrate how American society or even some segment of society disagrees with what baseball is doing. The problem with these gentlemen is they operate in a self-deluding vacuum and don’t understand the reality of American sports.
The CyclingNews posts Astana's disappointed reaction to its exclusion from the Giro start list, noting that all hope may not be lost.In a PM update the CN reports that Ivan Basso hasn't decided on a team yet, and that he "hangs his head low" and accepts his punishment foregoing any suggestion of a reduction in his suspension. Meanwhile Alessandro Ballan has requested a hearing with CONI over the recent Lampre doping control controversy.
The VeloNews Mailbag is full of incredulity about Dick Pound's desire to become CAS president
Moving on, in a demonstration of cost-effective priorities, Velonews reports USADA has secured a life ban against 40 year-old Steve Alfred. The sprinter was one year into an 8 year ban, and refused an out-of-competition test in November 2007. There was evidently no-one more relevant to test at the time, and USADA was horrified by the prospect of a 46 year old sprinter turning up at events when his existing ban ended. Think of the kids!
ESPN reports that the UK Athletics has backed down and has decided that Dwain Chambers can participate in the UK's national indoor track championship despite his recent lack of doping controls.
Blogs
WADAWatch continues to be baffled by the AFLD decision in its Landis case, and the problems of wording in various WADA documents that seem to be precursors to trouble.
The CaliRado Cyclist watched the Superbowl and puts a cycling "spin" on his commentary.
Racejunkie paraphrases a line from "It's a Wonderful Life" and thinks maybe tearful confession is the way to go. And what IS up with TdF director Christian Purdhomme, is Astana in or out?
CFA posts upcoming CAS hearing dates, looks like a full docket:
Februrary 7th, UCI v. Michele Scarponi & FCI
March 1st, UCI v. Iban Mayo & RF
March 12th, UPA-CONI v. Alessandro Petacchi & FCI/WADA v. Alessandro Petacchi & FCI
March 19th, Floyd Landis
News
The CyclingNews writes about burgeoning speculation that RCS Sport left Astana and High Road, among others, off the Giro start list for merely political reasons.
The VeloNews' Andrew Hood interviews Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme and asks about the growing assumption that Astana may be left out of the Tour this year. This would obviously eliminate any chance for defending champ Alberto Contador to participate despite Astana's efforts to start with a clean slate. Prudhomme sounds less than positive about Astans's chances, but intimates that Slipstream/Chipotle may get an invite, even though reformed/confessed doper David Millar is a member of that squad.
The Denver Post's Mark Kiszla feels that "justice" prevailed as the "cheaters" lost in the Superbowl yesterday, just like Floyd Landis "lost" his TdF championship.
Blogs
Pommi watched the Superbowl pretty much to see the commercials, and on a completely unrelated subject he guesses that yes maybe Dick Pound IS suited to be head honcho at the CAS.
Rant talks about two "deciders". Firstly, who gets to decide who participates in the Grand Tours? He thinks that IF Astana and High Road are both shunned from the TdF and the Vuelta, as they have been from the Giro, they may not be able to survive. Decider number two is old friend Dick Pound who lusts after the presidency of the CAS.
In comments there, Morgan Hunter connects more dots, and meaningfully suggests a lot of the struggle is The Olympics strategically competing with event promoters -- like the grand tours.
WT Odom has been places, LOTS of them. Along the winding road he says he met Floyd Landis, before Floyd was "officially guilty", and almost broke his Tour de France trophy.
News
The CyclingNews continues its interview with Johan Bruyneel who contends that he can still salvage Astana's reputation. And Laurent Jalabert thinks that though cycling faces an uphill battle against doping scandals and bad press it will not die.
The VeloNews writes about Dick Pound's desire to be a "neutral decider" despite his controversial reign at WADA:“That’s my job, to cause things to happen," he said. "If my job becomes to be a neutral decider, then that will be my job and I can do that. Most good judges were very successful lawyers before they became judges … to be a good lawyer you need to be a good advocate. The role of judge is different, but having been an advocate helps you as a judge.”
ESPN reports that British sprinter Dwain Chambers has seemingly become another victim of the system as he tries to continue his career in track and field after serving a two year doping suspension:
UK Athletics said he cannot compete in its championships or trials because he has not been drug-tested since his ban ended two years ago, and he must be tested for a full 12-month period.
Chambers' lawyers said they will take legal action against UK Athletics if he is excluded from the trials.
"I never took myself off the drugs register at all," Chambers said. "It was their [UKA] decision and unfortunately because of that, it has left both of us in a sticky situation."
Question: Why isn’t Frankie Andreu the director of Rock Racing anymore?
Answer: This separation stemmed from an honest disagreement between Frankie and Mr. Ball. On one hand, Frankie thought the directeur sportif of Rock Racing would be in charge of both strategic and tactical operations for the team, from the hiring of the racers to the race-day plans.
On the other hand, Michael Ball thought main job of the directeur sportif of Rock Racing was to run odd errands, chauffeur the team Escalade, and give Mr. Ball soothing neckrubs when he is feeling stressed out.
The truth is, though, Michael Ball fired Andreu because he discovered that Andreu had used — and then kept secret for many years — EPO as a professional cyclist, and that kind of unethical behavior is simply not to be tolerated on this team.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAH! Sorry
The new president will control the appointment of arbitrators who rule on disputes. That could be bad news for those trying to get off doping violations. Pound's reputation there is that he aggressively tries to clean up sport and doesn't buy excuses.
A commenter on Rant's article about Steve Johnson's statements yesterday sent them to Mr. Johnson,
and got this reply:
Thank you for your note.Full Post with Comments...
The special consideration in this situation is that, as a condition of entry into the Amgen Tour of California (an invitational, non-protected event under UCI regulations), the organizer has required all teams to abide by a “Terms of Entry Agreement” under which the teams agree (among other things) not to start riders with open doping investigations as determined by the relevant anti-doping agencies.
The key point here is that we are talking about professional riders who are paid to perform under the terms of an employment contract. Because of the contractual nature of the relationship between a professional rider and his or her team, it has long been an accepted UCI practice to notify the director of a UCI registered team once a doping investigation has started against a rider registered to that team. The only difference in this case is an additional “certification” (as agreed to by the teams) to the AToC organizer that the team rosters do not include any riders currently participating in an active doping investigation. Obviously, this program is predicated on the “Terms of Entry Agreement” and will only affect those teams that have agreed to abide by its terms.
All the best,
Steve Johnson
Up to the Introduction; back to part 14; to the Table of Contents.
Up to the Introduction; back to part 13; on to the Epilogue.
Are there rules in the ISL and in ISO 17025 that are addressed to determining the validity of a test result? Yes. There is at least one more concept under the ISL and ISO 17025 that we need to discuss: the concept of quality control. WADA labs are required to employ properly validated methods, but they are also required to use these methods correctly.
The concept of quality control is at least as complicated as the concept of method validation. It will require me to add a Part II to this article. It will probably take me longer to write that Part than it took me to write this one. Your friendly patience would be appreciated while your faithful (if somewhat overwhelmed and overmatched) author gears up for the effort to write Part II.
That's the end of this walk through method validation. We hope we've illuminated the important rules and regulations that ought to control the acceptance of the reliability of tests in the WADA system.
Up to the Introduction; back to part 13; on to the Epilogue.
News
The CyclingNews contains in depth interviews with Johan Bruyneel, who will discuss Astana and doping in Part II, and Bob Stapleton of Team High Road. Stapleton discusses T-Mobiles dubious history of doping infractions, the implementation of ACE program, and the new UCI "bio passports".
The CyclingNews Letters column overflows this week with topics ranging from the UCI vs well, everyone, to Floyd Landis' participation in the NUE series. Landis gets two nice letters of support for his intention to ride in the MTB endurance events this year.
Blogs
Rant read what Steve Johnson, CEO of USAC. had to say about eliminating "undesirable" cyclists from this year's Tour of California. Rant also posts the rules that govern what information about any rider can be shared and how it is to be disseminated. Rant has a message for Mr. Johnson:Since you’ve stated that unless someone tells you it’s against the rules, you’ll be informing AEG about the status of any ongoing investigations regarding proposed riders for the upcoming Tour of California, I’m here to tell you: It’s against the rules. You can’t share that information.
Followup above. He thinks rider contracts let him do what he wants.
Inside Bureaucracy's Calvini works a Landis reference into an article about rural power needs.
SteroidReport, new to us (we think), finds some interesting articles. Among them is one suggesting that HgH may help aid recovery from the concussions common in football. Our current moralistic position seems to be that it's OK for players to beat their brains out, but unfair for them to try to heal them.
And we get a link, so thanks!
Up to the Introduction; back to part 12; on to part 14.
Can the criteria for method validation be taken outside of the context of method validation, and used to judge the validity of a test result? The answer to this question seems to be a qualified “yes”. For example, in the FL case, FL argued that the LNDD violated ISL Rule 5.4.4.2.1 by failing to properly generate chromatograms that avoided matrix interference. During the arbitration hearing, both sides called expert witnesses to testify to the quality and reliability of these chromatograms. Predictably, the witnesses for USADA stated that these chromatograms were reliable, and the witnesses for FL disagreed. The majority of arbitrators ruled that these chromatograms “perhaps could have been better”, but ultimately found that the chromatograms were “fit for the purpose” and that the chromatography “unquestionably indicates the presence of exogenous testosterone in [FL’s] “A” and “B” samples.” In reaching this ruling, the majority arbitrators made the following statement, a statement that (in my opinion) completely misconstrues the nature, purpose and intent of the ISL:
In applying the language of the ISL what is required is that the “method should avoid interference.” The language is not mandatory. Had the drafters intended that matrix interference be avoided it would require wording such as “shall” or “must”. For this Panel to accept the submissions of the Respondent that matrix interference must be avoided would be a misconstruction of ISL 5.4.4.2.1. Dr. Ayotte confirms this statement in noting that a laboratory does not violate Article 5.4.4.2.1 of the ISL just because it produces a chromatogram that contains matrix interference. Therefore, even where matrix interference has occurred in the Stage 17 chromatograms it would not amount to a violation of the ISL. (FL decision paragraph 240.)
The majority’s reasoning here illustrates the danger inherent in reading rules out of context. The majority managed to interpret ISL Rule 5.4.4.2.1 to exclude any requirement to consider matrix interference – a reading that is possible only by failing to read the entire rule! (As we’ve seen, this rule includes a requirement that lab methods must achieve specificity, and the concept of “specificity” includes within it the need to avoid matrix interference.) But the majority’s reasoning is faulty on a more fundamental level, as the majority never considered ISL Rule 5.4.4.2.1 as applying to the lab’s method validation effort. In the context of method validation, a statement that a method “should avoid” matrix interference takes on a different meaning than the one found by the majority arbitrators. In the context of method validation, this statement would be read in light of the overall goal of method validation: to make a reasonable effort (within the constraints imposed by the cost and time required for the effort) to determine that a method is “fit for purpose”. In this context, the “should avoid interference” language in ISL Rule 5.4.4.2.1 might be interpreted to mean “do the best you can to avoid interference” or “make a reasonable effort to avoid interference”, consistent with the overall principle that a method cannot possibly be “fit for purpose” if it cannot provide us with a reasonable assurance that the method is measuring what we want it to measure.
So, let’s return to the question posed at the beginning of this bullet point: can the criteria for method validation be taken outside of the context of method validation, and used to judge the validity of a test result? The answer is “yes”, at least with respect to some of these criteria, but we need to be careful in how we do this. To be certain, if we want to assess the validity of a particular test result, we would want to consider criteria such as accuracy, uncertainty, specificity and interference. But we should avoid applying the specific language of ISL method validation rules embodying these criteria to our assessment of a particular test result. Instead, we should look to other rules within the ISL and ISO 17025 – rules that were written for the purpose of assessing a method result rather than the method itself – to provide us with the necessary guidelines for determining the validity of a particular method result.
Up to the Introduction; back to part 11 on to part 13.
Can we use method validation criteria as criteria for the evaluation of the validity of a particular test result? For example, can we look at the difference between the original results of the FL stage 17 testing and the results from the subsequent EDF reprocessing, and say that this difference indicates a problem of repeatability or intermediate precision? This is a tricky question to answer. From our discussion above, we understand that criteria such as repeatability and intermediate precision are method validation criteria. Simply because a method produces a bad result does not mean that the method is invalid or should be reevaluated. However, we also understand that method validation is an ongoing process, and that a lab’s quality control efforts may indicate the need to revalidate a method. So it is important (perhaps even required under the ISL and ISO 17025) for a lab to review its test method results against the various method validation criteria, to see if revalidation of the method is necessary or advisable.
However, the failure of a particular lab result to comply with one or more method validation criteria does not necessarily mean that the result is invalid and should be thrown out. There is a difference between the criteria for evaluating test methods and the criteria for evaluating test results. To see this difference, all we need to do is to consider some of the method validation criteria discussed above. For example, the criterion of traceability addresses the test method only – either the method is tied to a known standard or it is not. The criterion of intermediate precision can be used to judge a test result only if the test is repeated at a different time or with different equipment or a different lab technician, but repeated testing of the same sample is not the norm.
Can the criteria for method validation be used by an athlete to prove an ISL departure? Absolutely. This was the basis for the argument made by Tyler Hamilton (discussed above) in his anti-doping case. It is an ISL departure if an AAF is based on a method that was not properly validated. However, we should recognize that it is a difficult proposition for an athlete to prove that a test method was not properly validated. Any such proof requires the athlete to challenge the science surrounding the test method, a tall order under the best of circumstances. This task is made even more difficult by the fact that the WADA rules presume the validity of all WADA lab methods, and that the documentation of the lab’s method validation will not be included in the lab document package provided to the athlete. This difficulty may be the reason why the FL team seemed to avoid many of the criteria discussed above (in particular, specificity) in the case it made before the arbitrators last year.
