The Cycliste Moderne, November 28, 2005

This week I had intended to write about some of our recent bike experiences in the Netherlands and in Belgium, however, with the announcement this week that Roberto Heras’ B sample from the Vuelta a Espana was positive for EPO, Cyclingnews.com’s detailed report on Tyler Hamilton’s doping case, and the fact that I finally watched the recent episode of Fox’s series “House” which dealt with a doping cyclist who was clearly modeled on Lance Armstrong, I think it is necessary to discuss some of these recent doping developments.

Heras Test Confirmed

The results of the test of Spaniard Roberto Heras’ urine from the second to last stage of the Vuelta a Espana was confirmed this week with the result of the test on his B sample. Unfortunately, rather than confirm the prior tests, the actions of the testing lab and cycling officials in dealing with the B sample test create greater confusion and concern. Originally, it was reported that extra safeguards were being put into place to ensure no problems with the second test. Spanish officials announced that the results would be due out on Wednesday.

However, when Wednesday came and went and no results were released, Heras and his attorneys attacked the testing procedures in a press conference. Testing officials responded by indicating that the test needed more time to be completed, because the initial results were inconclusive. Finally, on Friday Spanish cycling officials announced that the B sample was positive. Heras and his attorneys have announced that they intend to pursue any and all remedies legally available to them.

The problem in this case is that even if Heras did dope, the process does not instill confidence in the ability of cycling officials to manage a testing system that is fair and objective. Heras’ attorneys have alleged that the urine specimen taken from Heras following the Vuelta’s final time trial, which occurred on a Saturday, was not delivered to the testing lab until Monday. Additionally, the claim by officials that testing would be completed by a specific date and then their inability to adhere to that timeline causes concern, especially where they then claim that the test was not yet conclusive. Moreover, it does not appear that some races are as actively testing as they claim. In addition to random tests that occur during a stage race, typically stage winners and the overall leader will be tested daily. However, Velonews.com has reported that Vuelta officials did not conduct EPO tests for each stage of the race due to the fact that the EPO test costs more than 400 euros. Finally, there have been several successful challenges in Spain to the urine test for EPO by triathletes.

For any testing regime to be effective, it has to be legitimate in the eyes of those being tested as well as the public as a whole. The current system does neither. The current testing system does not instill confidence in the public due to the litigious nature of testing. You now expect positive tests to be litigated like death penalty cases. There have been several successful attacks on the EPO test this year including L’Equipe’s report regarding EPO usage during the 1999 Tour de France, which appears to show that Lance Armstrong used EPO as evidenced by five tests but ignores the fact that twelve other tests showed no EPO usage. With results like this, some are likely just to throw up their hands and discount the extent of doping in the peleton.

Race organizers that do not actually test for certain drugs due to cost do not evidence a real commitment to cleaning up the sport. This is especially true where race organizers insist on stages in their races which go beyond what can be reasonably expected. A prime example of that is the insistence of the RCS, the promoters of the Giro d’Italia, to have a split stage on the final day of next Spring’s Giro, requiring the racers to complete a difficult stage on Saturday, only to get up early Sunday to ride an uphill time trial and then after lunch finish with a circuit race around Milan. Moreover, the use of “rest days” during the Giro to make long transfers by air first from Belgium to Italy and then from Southern Italy to Northern Italy do not evidence any consideration by race promoters for the health and well-being of the peleton.

Hamilton Update

Cyclingnews.com published a detailed two-part account of what has transpired in Tyler Hamilton’s doping proceeding. Here are links to Part 1 and to Part 2.

Hamilton’s lawyers have criticized the UCI’s contributions to those stories as violating the agreement that none of the parties would comment on the proceeding until the Court of Arbitration for Sport finally rules. Currently, the next hearing in the Hamilton appeal is set for January.

Again there are no winners in this matter. The conduct of the UCI and WADA in the Hamilton matter has been suspect throughout due to apparent procedural lapses. Moreover, the willingness of UCI and WADA officials to comment on a pending case is deeply troubling to those that expect a certain level of due process from disciplinary proceedings. If Hamilton is found to have doped it raises questions as to why he would engage in such a risk to his health when he was already held in high esteem and was earning as much as any other rider in the peleton save Lance Armstrong and Jan Ulrich.

House Recap

For those of you that missed it, Fox’s series House had an episode a couple of weeks ago involving the diagnosis of a professional cyclist who admitted to using everything except EPO, because “that stuff can kill you.” The episode was as ham handed as you would expect from the network that brings you “The OC” and really failed to have a point other than the fact that cyclists and their managers are deceptive. In the end, the show fell back on the view that everyone lies and deceives and the cyclist, it turns out, had a health condition masked by his doping activities. I really expected more from what is an occasionally a very good series.