Police tracked 536 sales of performance enhancing products [...]]]>

A joint operation between the Mossos, the Civil Guard and police in Andorra has uncovered a doping ring which involves some 60 professional athletes. A new report on Cadena Sur states that 42 of the clients of an internet pharmacy in Encamp are or were professional cyclists.

Police tracked 536 sales of performance enhancing products over the past year, but investigators say the pharmacy was operating for the past six years.

Also listed amongst the clientele were professional multisport athletes, bodybuilders, a motorcycle racer and kayaker.

The report named several professional cyclists as clients: Ángel Gómez Gómez (ex-Saunier Duval/Fuji Servetto), Footon Servetto rider Enrique Mata Cabello, Adolfo Garcia Quesada, a former professional with Kelme who was banned for two years for testing positive for human chorionic gonadotropin in 2006 and Vicente Ballester Martínez, also retired. Also named are under-23 riders Javier Sánchez Cidoncha, Narcís Sallent Sanglas and Kevin Kohlvelter, and ex-pro Isidro Cerrato López,

Current riders include Spanish track cyclists Carlos Herrero Nadal and Alfredo Moreno Cano, Víctor de la Parte González and Guillermo Lana Baquedano of Caja Rural and Frenchman Guillaume Pont (SP Tableware).

Another 30 riders took the drugs to help boost their performances in amateur events such as gran fondos.

via Doping Ring Busted In Andorra | Cyclingnews.com.

Seriously? Doping to ride a fun ride/century … err … gran fondo?

When we consider the problem of doping it’s easy to look at the issue in terms of black and [...]]]> Padraig, over at the Red Kite Prayer, wrote a great post today comparing Pat McQuaid’s proposed rule which will prevent riders caught and banned for doping practices from working in team management in the future.

When we consider the problem of doping it’s easy to look at the issue in terms of black and white. There are the clean riders (white) and the doped riders (black). There are the teams whose management actively work to keep riders clean (white). And there are teams whose management organize and facilitate doping (black).

Such an outlook keeps the problem chopped up in easy to digest chunks. And while it may be easier to organize our thinking and ability to pass judgement on who should be in or out of the sport, such an assessment does little to shed light on the reality of the problem.

Every time we reduce someone to “culprit” or “doper” what we are doing is labeling them “the bad guy.” By reducing them into a two-dimensional role, they become cardboard cutouts, symbols, for what we find offensive. Dressing a guy in a black hat automatically makes him the bad guy. That’s what makes old spaghetti westerns so laughable; you didn’t need to know anything more about the guy than the fact that he had the black hat on.

via The Bad Guy : Red Kite Prayer.

Go read the rest of Padraig’s post. Seriously. Go now.

Now, I generally agree with Padraig, and generally disagree with most of the things that Pat McQuaid and the rest of the UCI has run our sport over the past few years … but this is one situation where I think McQuaid might be right.

Padraig argues that:

It would seem that Pat McQuaid is a big believer in the black hat. McQuaid wants every former rider who ever had a brush with doping to be banned from roles in team management, banned from the sport. If we consider the example of guys like Jonathan Vaughters, a manager who says he faced some difficult decisions while he was a rider, banning him would mean losing a figure who understands the trials riders face better than most. Who else would better understand the agonies of the riders than someone who was confronted with those very choices.

The last I read, McQuaid’s proposal would essentially have a grandfather clause … people who are already working in team management would be able to continue to do so. His proposal is to prevent current riders who have doping issues in the future from becoming part of team management after they retire.

One point McQuaid stressed surrounded retrospective analysis, saying that past doping offences before the new rule comes into place would not be punished. Cycling has numerous team bosses and DSs whom either tested positive – in some cases several times – or who later confessed to doping.

“You can’t make it retrospective. Everyone must know what the playing pitch is like before they go onto it, and you can’t do it in another way. However, once that rule comes into place and all riders are informed of it, they will know what the consequences would be should they get involved in a doping infraction and try to come back in another way.”

“You can only bring in the rule for the future so it will only apply to people that get involved in doping after the rules comes in – so the riders know and they’re informed.”

“All we’re trying to do is break the cycle so that the doping influence is less involved in the sport and that the managers are a group who have the highest ethics as cyclists and continue to have the highest ethics as management. I’m bringing in the rule for the future.

via McQuaid Proposes Rule To Ban Drug Cheats From Team Management | Cyclingnews.com.

So what this means, should McQuaid’s proposed rule be finalized and implemented, is that not only would current managers like Jonathan Vaughters be able to keep his position in team management, but once Tyler Hamilton’s current 8-year ban is up in 2017, he would also be able to work as a team manager if he could convince someone to hire him.

However, should Johan Vlaamsewieler become involved in some sort of doping practice in 2012 and get caught … serve his two year ban and then return as a rider in 2014, he would be still be prevented from working in team management after he retires from cycling as a rider in 2019.

It’s one of the few UCI rules (proposed or otherwise) that I think I can get behind; today’s team managers who are outspokenly anti-doping, like Jonathan Vaughters, were active professionals in a time when doping was widely accepted within the peloton. They do understand the choices and the pressures that riders felt, and are best suited to help educate and keep the current crop of riders from falling into the same traps. And hopefully, by the time the current crop of riders is ready to retire and join team management, a new culture of complete intolerance for doping will have taken hold.

I think it’s time to for the sport to say, “Thus far shall you come, and no farther.”

If you prefer Star Trek references to Biblical ones, “Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no farther!”

Tyler Hamilton Interview, part 1:

Tyler Hamilton Interview, part 2:

60 Minutes Overtime Interview with Scott Pelley:

Every person (with the exception of Fernando Escartin) who has finished on the podium at the Tour de France with Lance Armstrong [...]]]> In case anyone actually missed Tyler Hamilton’s interview on 60 Minutes last night:

Tyler Hamilton Interview, part 1:

Tyler Hamilton Interview, part 2:

60 Minutes Overtime Interview with Scott Pelley:

Every person (with the exception of Fernando Escartin) who has finished on the podium at the Tour de France with Lance Armstrong has tested positive for some sort of banned doping substance, or has been implicated in a conspiracy for systematic doping (like Operacion Puerto) … and several of Armstrong’s former teammates, in addition to Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis, have either tested positive for some sort of doping product, or have admitted to having doped during their career.

One-time Armstrong teammates implicated in doping cases:

• Frankie Andreu – Armstrong teammate at Motorola (1993-1996) & US Postal Service (1998-2000). Admitted to using EPO to help Armstrong win 1999 Tour de France.
• Tyler Hamilton – Armstrong teammate at US Postal Service (1998-2001). Tested positive for homologous blood transfusions at 2004 Olympic Games and Vuelta a España. Admitted to doping throughout most of his career. Alleges systematic doping at US Postal Service team.
• Floyd Landis – Armstrong teammate at US Postal Service (2002-2004). Tested positive for testosterone at 2006 Tour de France. Admitted to doping throughout most of his career. Alleges systematic doping at US Postal Service team.
• Stephen Swart – Armstrong teammate at Motorola (1995-1996). Admitted using EPO at Motorola. Implicates Armstrong as strongest proponent of systematic doping program at Motorola.
• Roberto Heras – Armstrong teammate at US Postal Service (2001-2003). Tested positive for EPO at 2005 Vuelta a España.
• Manuel “Triki” Beltrán – Armstrong teammate at US Postal Service (2003-2006). Tested positive for EPO at 2008 Tour de France.
• George Hincapie – Armstrong teammate at Motorola (1994-1996) & US Postal Service/Discovery Channel (1998-2005). Reported to have testified to Federal Grand Jury about doping program at US Postal Service team.

There has been speculation that other former teammates have also testified to the Grand Jury regarding doping practices in professional cycling.

I still don’t understand how anyone can possibly believe that Lance Armstrong did not dope during his career. And for the people who want to whitewash his involvement by saying “But look at what good his foundation has done for cancer” … well, there are a number of other cancer charities out there, charities which have done a lot more to actually try to find a cure than Livestrong’s little yellow rubber bands.

Um well…so I guess I have some good news. Turns out I can race this year due to a string of random events that played out starting last October. Remember when I lamented on [...]]]> Good news is that Tom Zirbel’s sanction has been reduced, as he indicates in this except from his blog earlier today:

Um well…so I guess I have some good news. Turns out I can race this year due to a string of random events that played out starting last October. Remember when I lamented on this blog a few months back about Di Luca because he got a reduction in sanction for providing details of his doping practices? And then I said something to the effect of “if only I had actually doped or had knowledge of dopers, I too could get a reduction”. Well, at some point after that rant I met with a person who had incriminating knowledge of a suspected doper and I eventually helped convince that person to approach USADA with that information. USADA found that information so useful that they decided to reduce my sanction because of it.

via Enjoying the Ride.

Bad news at that the haters are coming out to play as well, if the chatter on Twitter is indicative of general feelings. For example:

• http://twitter.com/#!/TdFLanterne/status/52857647564730368
• http://twitter.com/#!/nyvelocity/status/52786766847025152
• http://twitter.com/#!/matt_conn/status/52803649755295744
• http://twitter.com/#!/mindtron/status/52806111753027584
• http://twitter.com/#!/jbowes72/status/52789788033548288

Okay … I get that some people will doubt his initial story … but now to call someone who is actually trying to do something to keep his sport clean a snitch? And then people wonder why more people with info on doping in the peloton don’t come forward.

Keep in mind that that when he was sanctioned, he accepted the ban instead of fighting it all the way up to the CAS, and moved on. Thankfully, there are also guys like Adam Myerson to put a little perspective on things:

My thoughts are that he’s a victim of the system, not a doper, and I’m glad he got his ban reduced.

I think the way his ban was reduced is part of why he’s a victim of the system, and his own thoughts echo that. It’s not the way he wanted his ban reduced. But he also isn’t in charge of the rules of the game, he’s just stuck having to play it. You can’t expect him not to accept the reduction in his sentence even if he himself thinks it’s a strange way for it to have gotten reduced. Part of me thinks USADA is looking at Contador, knows Zirbel got a bad deal, and found a way to, in the end, give him the 1-year ban he should probably have received in the first place.

Zirbel seems to me to be a righteous dude, and he walks the walk, in my opinion. I may be a sucker, but I buy it, because it doesn’t ever seem to have been for his own profit. He’s not shilling his good deeds and heroism as a marketing ploy, a la LA. He’s just quietly doing good work in his personal life, before, after, and unrelated to his ban.

via On Zirbel | Cycle-Smart.

I’m with you, Adam … welcome back, Tom … I hope that you get a contract and continue to show the cycling world your talent the way you did before all this happened.

We’re assuming, of course, that the powers that be in the UCI and elsewhere really want to clean the sport [...]]]> There’s been a lot of chatter on various sites about Riccardo Ricco’s current “situation” … but the upshot of a lot of it is that the sport will be better off (and cleaner) without him.

We’re assuming, of course, that the powers that be in the UCI and elsewhere really want to clean the sport up …

As long as it keeps making them money, they’ll continue to look the other way when riders get caught, unless somehow it’s leaked to the public first, or as in this case, it’s such a completely over-the-top boneheaded move, all the interested parties have no choice but to throw the book at the offender.

And all parties involved will continue to deny, deny, deny … is it any surprise that Contadoper is using the same language as Lance Dopestrong? “I’m the first, second and third most test athlete!”, “I’ve never tested positive (until now)!”, “It doesn’t matter that many of my teammates (past & present) have been busted in organized doping programs!”, “It’s a witch hunt!”

I love this sport. I always have, I always will … but enough with the wishy-washy approach to doping. Either clean the sport up for real … and I’m beginning to think the only way to do this is to offer a general amnesty to any riders involved who cooperate with authorities, and really go after the suppliers who are pushing riders to dope to stay competitive … or eliminate doping regulations completely and let racers kill themselves by pushing their bodies to and beyond their limits.

Riccardo Ricco will be out of the sport … but what of all the rest? Why is it that only Jeff Novitzky is taking any of Floyd Landis’s allegations seriously and investigating? Ah, because if his allegations are true, it makes the entire system look as dirty as it is.

At least the newer generation seem to be more solidly anti-doping … hopefully their efforts will truly be able to help effect a change in the mindset and culture of the pro peloton.

I’m not holding my breath.

In the first announcement of the day:

Neal [...]]]> At least, that’s the most reasonable assumption, since neither rider tested positive for any performance enhancing drugs, and were banned based on other evidence … and it is pretty well known that Joe Papp provided USADA with a list of his customers during his own doping investigation.

In the first announcement of the day:

Neal Schubel, a 45-year-old masters racer from Saginaw, Michigan, has accepted a two-year suspension from competition after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency found that he had purchased and used synthetic erythropoietin EPO.

According to a USADA announcement issued Wednesday, Schubel’s suspension began on November 18, 2010, the day he accepted the sanction, but his results have been negated all the way back to August of 2006. Schubel readily admitted the violation when confronted with evidence in the agency’s possession.

Under UCI and USADA rules, Schubel is also required to return any prizes earned over that four-year period, but a review of his results posted at USA Cycling’s website suggests that he needn’t worry about that aspect of the Doping Code.

via Michigan masters racer suspended for EPO use – VeloNews.

The last sentence in the above article is simply classic, and you really have to love the pop-up text when you hover over the link (which I dutifully copied from VeloNews). It’s definitely illustrative of how ridiculous it is for a masters racer to take performance enhancing drugs …

And in later news, which seems to be quite a shock to many based on various reactions in the Twitterverse:

Boulder-area racer Charles “Chuck” Coyle has accepted a two-year suspension after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency found that he had purchased and used synthetic erythropoietin (EPO) and insulin growth factor (IGF-1).

The 38-year-old Coyle was a part owner of the Boulder-based Hüdz-Vista Subaru cyclocross team and has been an active road, track and `cross racer for 20 years. Following the announcement of Coyle’s suspension, he relinquished his share in the team.

Team owner and director Lance Johnson said that Coyle has now been fired from Hüdz-Vista Subaru and pointed out that the suspension relates to events that can be traced back to Coyle’s involvement in another team and should not reflect on the character or policies of Hüdz-Vista Subaru.

Coyle’s two-year suspension began on Wednesday, when he accepted the penalty after investigators presented evidence of purchases of illicit performance-enhancing drugs dating back to June 13, 2007. Under UCI and USADA rules, Coyle will be required to return any prizes earned since that date.

As was the case with another suspension announced Wednesday, Coyle’s case did not involve an analytical positive test, but was based on evidence of purchases of illicit performance-enhancing drugs supplied in other investigations.

via USADA announces another cycling suspension – VeloNews.

I can understand (but not condone) the temptation for an up-and-coming pro to start doping … I can understand (but not condone) a pro rider who is trying to stay at the top of his game to dope. I cannot understand what drives a 35-45 year old never-was to dope his way to mid-pack (or worse) finishes … it’s a waste of money, and riders like that are a waste of space.

“The [...]]]> Okay … I’m not a Contador fan, and it’s doubtful I ever will be … so when I first heard the news about his positive test yesterday, part of me was overjoyed. But now more details are available; specifically the UCI release regarding the positive test, and the levels of Clenbuterol which were detected.

“The UCI confirmed today that Spanish rider Alberto Contador returned an adverse analytical finding for clenbuterol following the analysis of urine sample taken during an in competition test on 21st July 2010 on the second rest day of the Tour de France. This result was reported by the WADA accredited laboratory in Cologne to UCI and WADA simultaneously.

“The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 time less than what the antidoping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect.”

“In view of this very small concentration and in consultation with WADA, the UCI immediately had the proper results management proceedings conducted including the analysis of B sample that confirmed the first result. The rider, who had already put an end to his cycling season before the result was known, was nevertheless formally and provisionally suspended as is prescribed by the World Anti-Doping Code.

“This case required further scientific investigation before any conclusion could be drawn. The UCI continues working with the scientific support of WADA to analyse all the elements that are relevant to the case. This further investigation may take some more time.

“In order to protect the integrity of the proceedings and in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code, the UCI will refrain from making any further comments until the management of this adverse analytical finding has been completed.”

via Alberto Contador Suspended Over Traces Of Clenbuterol From Tour De France Test | Cyclingnews.com.

So in order to be accredited, the lab must be able to detect 20 nanograms per milliliter, already an amazingly small amount, and in this case the amount detected was 400 times less than that. An amount that small, on the rest day, with no detection either the day before or the day after the positive test?

This definitely leads me to think that a case of accidental ingestion due to contamination is possible, and certainly that there was no benefit to performance gained.

As much as it pains me to admit it, I’m inclined to let it slide in this case …

Contador, a three-time winner of the French national tour, apparently tested positive for the drug in tests conducted on the final day of this year’s race and was notified of [...]]]>

Tour de France champion Alberto Contador has scheduled a news conference for Thursday to address reports of an apparent positive test for the bronchodilator clenbuterol.

Contador, a three-time winner of the French national tour, apparently tested positive for the drug in tests conducted on the final day of this year’s race and was notified of the result on August 24.

According to a release issued by his publicist, Contador is scheduled to hold a press conference at noon Thursday at the Hotel Las Artes in his hometown of Pinto, Spain. Contador has assembled a group of experts who will contend that the positive test is the result of “food contamination.”

“The experts consulted so far have agreed also that this is a food contamination case, especially considering the number of tests passed by Alberto Contador during the Tour de France,” the release asserted.

Contador said that a review of data supplied by the UCI makes it “possible to define precisely both the time of the emergence of the substance as well as the tiny amount detected, ruling out any other source or intentionality.”

Clenbuterol is a synthetic bronchodilator often prescribed to asthma sufferers. It is also regarded as a stimulant and has recently been used in off-label prescriptions as a weight-loss drug akin to ephedrine. The drug is on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s banned substances list and is specifically banned under Article 21 of the UCI’s anti-doping rules.

via Contador tests positive for clenbuterol – VeloNews.

There seems to be some discrepancy as to when the positive test occurred … the VeloNews article quoted above says it was on the last day of the race, but the article on Cyclingnews.com indicates the test was on the second rest day (July 21) … and the only indication of how much was detected is from Contador’s own release:

“The experts consulted so far have agreed also that this is a food contamination case, especially considering the number of tests passed by Alberto Contador during the Tour de France, making it possible to define precisely both the time the emergence of the substance as the tiny amount detected, ruling out any other source or intentionality.”

Regardless of intentionality, even if this does turn out to be a food contamination issue, the rules indicate that riders are responsible for all substances that enter their bodies, intentional or otherwise, and riders who have been able to prove an extreme high likelihood that their positive tests were due to contamination were still subject to bans and loss of results (cf. Scott Moninger).

This is not going to be a story that goes away anytime soon. Count on this to be ongoing for months until a final appeal to the CAS by either Contador or WADA depending on the outcome of initial findings. Contador’s only hope is that the B-sample comes up negative … but that occurs so rarely that you can pretty much count on it being positive as well.

Kind of sucks that Andy Schleck’s first Tour de France win comes like this …

Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping, has filed a federal whistle-blower lawsuit against his former team — the United States Postal Service squad that included the seven-time Tour winner Lance Armstrong — claiming that the team defrauded the government, two people briefed [...]]]> From the New York Times:

Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping, has filed a federal whistle-blower lawsuit against his former team — the United States Postal Service squad that included the seven-time Tour winner Lance Armstrong — claiming that the team defrauded the government, two people briefed on the matter said on Friday.

Landis is claiming that team management was aware of the team’s widespread doping when the contract with the Postal Service clearly stated that any doping would constitute default of their agreement, the people said. They did not want their names published because the suit is still under seal. The case was first reported by The Wall Street Journal in its online edition.

In May, Landis publicly claimed that Armstrong and other Postal Service teammates were involved in systematic doping in the early-to-mid 2000s. Armstrong has vehemently denied allegations that he has doped. He has said Landis lacks credibility after lying about his doping practices.

Armstrong and his former Postal team are already under federal criminal investigation for charges that may include fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, drug distribution and breaches of employment law. A grand jury has been convened and has already begun to hear testimony and examine documents. This week, Armstrong’s lawyers met with prosecutors at the United States Attorney’s office in Los Angeles, the office that is in charge of the case.

Read the full article at Landis Is Said to File Whistle-Blower Lawsuit Against U.S. Postal Service Team – NYTimes.com.

And from the Wall Street Journal article mentioned in the Times article:

The U.S. Justice Department is weighing whether to intervene in a federal whistle-blower lawsuit filed earlier this year by one of Lance Armstrong’s former cycling teammates, Floyd Landis, people familiar with the matter say.

Mr. Landis’s lawsuit was filed under the federal False Claims Act, these people say. The act allows citizens to sue on behalf of the government alleging the government has been defrauded.

The U.S. Postal Service, an independent federal agency, sponsored the team led by Mr. Armstrong for several years during which Mr. Landis has said some of its riders, including himself and Mr. Armstrong, cheated by using performance-enhancing drugs and practices.

Because such lawsuits initially are kept under seal, the exact nature of Mr. Landis’s accusations could not be determined. Such a lawsuit is likely to claim a fraud was committed against the Postal Service in relation to the alleged doping.

via U.S. Mulls Joining Cycling Lawsuit – WSJ.com.

And you really have to wonder when the only mention I can find in the cycling press (on VeloNews.com) is a wire article from Agence France Presse (AFP), who cite the article in the Wall Street Journal as their source. What does it mean that mainstream media is breaking these stories faster than the cycling press?

One thing is for sure … the 30% of any fund recovered that Landis would be able to collect would certainly be an incentive for this lawsuit and perceived vendetta against Lance Armstrong, and the Armstrong defense has already put that out there as Landis’ motivation. But I think without the lawsuit, the allegations this time are big enough that they have to be investigated no matter what … and I wouldn’t be surprised if the was the discussions of the legal issues on VeloNews and in other news outlets that prompted the actual filing, if it didn’t pre-date the original public allegations.

This continues to be an interesting story to watch, and will only get bigger before it disappears.