# Jonathon Tiernan Locke blood passport iffy? (ToB title for Haas?)



## Strathlubnaig (29 Sep 2013)

Tiernan-Locke....If he was on something, it didnt do too much this season.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/sport/cycling/article1320921.ece
Withdrew at the last minute due to lack of form, aye.


----------



## raindog (29 Sep 2013)

Any chance of cutting and pasting that for us Strath? I can only read the first paragraph.

Hope there's nothing amiss, I really like his style of riding, but his season _has_ been a bit strange since last year's wins. Whatever, I still maintain he should never have joined Sky.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (29 Sep 2013)

Cyclingnews doesn't have a paywall - http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tiernan-locke-called-to-clarify-irregular-blood-values


----------



## raindog (29 Sep 2013)

cheers dm - that CN article wasn't there when I was sniffing round early this morning

doesn't look too good, does it?


----------



## gavintc (29 Sep 2013)

Interesting, it was during this year's ToB that I recalled his performance last year and wondered why he had fallen into obscurity this year.


----------



## MrGrumpy (29 Sep 2013)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/24321502


----------



## raindog (29 Sep 2013)

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/tob-title-for-haas.140608/


----------



## MrGrumpy (29 Sep 2013)

no wonder I didn`t see......


----------



## Crackle (29 Sep 2013)

If true it would explain a lot of things and his performance drop would suddenly make sense.

This will be manna for the Sky haters.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (29 Sep 2013)

Crackle said:


> If true it would explain a lot of things and his performance drop would suddenly make sense.
> 
> This will be manna for the Sky haters.


Though the potential discrepancy predates his time at Sky and he hasn't performed with them. If anything, it enhances Sky's reputation, I reckon.


----------



## Crackle (29 Sep 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Though the potential discrepancy predates his time at Sky and he hasn't performed with them. If anything, it enhances Sky's reputation, I reckon.


 
I agree with that completely but I'd regard us as the right side of reasonable.

It's funny that I never real thought his drop off was due to not doping now but rather Sky training methods not suiting him and people question us being cynical. Maybe I'm not quite cynical enough. I'm sure Locke ended up with a nice contract at Sky.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (29 Sep 2013)

MrGrumpy said:


> no wonder I didn`t see......


i was being cryptic


----------



## jdtate101 (29 Sep 2013)

I do hope he's not done anything silly!!! That would be his career all but done, and a disgraced exit from SKY.


----------



## montage (29 Sep 2013)

Fingers crossed all is fine.... but a strong performance year followed by a slack showing whilst riding for a team with a zero tolerance policy doesn't point in the right direction. Time will tell!


----------



## Crackle (29 Sep 2013)

User said:


> Jonathan Tiernan-Locke is another pro athlete who has had mononucleosis (glandular fever), which seems to be a common ailment of those that have taken drugs or failed drug tests in their career ....which isn't really proof of anything but there does seem to be a connection between the two..


 
His old manager clearly thinks there's an explanation and supports him.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/former-endura-manager-defends-tiernan-locke


----------



## DogTired (29 Sep 2013)

Crackle said:


> I agree with that completely but I'd regard us as the right side of reasonable.
> 
> It's funny that I never real thought his drop off was due to not doping now but rather Sky training methods not suiting him and people question us being cynical. Maybe I'm not quite cynical enough. I'm sure Locke ended up with a nice contract at Sky.



Being cynical with evidence (UCI are investigating) is different to 'well someone's won a competition and a foreigner' (like the Vuelta) so something must be wrong cynical. Sky's different training approach is well documented. The effect on Wiggins' results has been dramatic - he went backwards from 3rd in the TdF in 2009 to 23rd in his first year at Sky so its pretty reasonable to suspect a different regime might hit Locke too.

Until some facts come out about the discrepancies who knows what they are, how significant they are and whether the discrepancies would provide enhanced performances. It could be the one test from 2012 has less suspect figures than this year.

If he has cheated, its surprising none of the well informed experts on this forum detected it. The threshold for slinging mud with little factual evidence is pretty low.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (29 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Being cynical with evidence (UCI are investigating) is different to 'well someone's won a competition and a foreigner' (like the Vuelta) so something must be wrong cynical. Sky's different training approach is well documented. The effect on Wiggins' results has been dramatic - he went backwards from 3rd in the TdF in 2009 to 23rd in his first year at Sky so its pretty reasonable to suspect a different regime might hit Locke too.
> 
> Until some facts come out about the discrepancies who knows what they are, how significant they are and whether the discrepancies would provide enhanced performances. It could be the one test from 2012 has less suspect figures than this year.
> 
> If he has cheated, its surprising none of the well informed experts on this forum detected it. The threshold for slinging mud with little factual evidence is pretty low.



There was discussion at the time, actually...


----------



## DogTired (30 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There was discussion at the time, actually...



Pro-cyclist + win + internet forum = discussion of doping (where doping suspicion is inversely proportional to how much the rider is liked)

Without any facts to go on (such as insider knowledge or a bit of insightful intelligent investigation) where I'm cynical is in suspecting commentards of suggesting doping use purely on successful results so they can say 'see, I told you so'. 

Its getting a broken record now.


----------



## raindog (30 Sep 2013)

from a Grauniad article
_Speaking to the cyclingnews.com website, Smith said that Tiernan-Locke had been tested in 2012 by the Garmin-Sharp team, who were considering taking him on. Garmin are one of the strictest teams where anti-doping is concerned, and test all potential recruits. "[Garmin manager] Jonathan Vaughters got in contact and said there were no abnormalities in Jon's test," said Smith. "I think I even sent the results to [Sky]. They've seen all the data. As far as I'm concerned Jonathan is the real deal. Sky, Garmin and Endura all thought there were no irregularities with Jonathan."_


----------



## Noodley (30 Sep 2013)

JT-L seems intent on doing things his way even since going to Sky and their "numbers" approach; so I'm not sure how much we can read into the Sky approach has adversly affected him. 

As for the abnormalities and the corresponding doping insinuations I suppose it's all part and parcel of cycling, especially given the back story.


----------



## thom (30 Sep 2013)

Noodley said:


> As for the abnormalities and the corresponding doping insinuations I suppose it's all part and parcel of cycling, especially given the back story.


<Snort=deactivate><Guffaw=deactivate> 
wise words @Noodley - its just one hell of a situation to be in and we all have to work to pull it back from the brink goddamit !
<Guffaw=reactivate><Snort=reactivate>


----------



## Shaun (30 Sep 2013)

Just a FYI - I've merged the two threads discussing this (and added both thread titles for clarification).


----------



## Crackle (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Pro-cyclist + win + internet forum = discussion of doping (where doping suspicion is inversely proportional to how much the rider is liked)
> 
> Without any facts to go on (such as insider knowledge or a bit of insightful intelligent investigation) where I'm cynical is in suspecting commentards of suggesting doping use purely on successful results so they can say 'see, I told you so'.
> 
> Its getting a broken record now.



This is largely wrong. Relatively few riders have had the finger of suspicion pointed at them and if you mean Horner, well, USADA have spent a fair bit of time and effort conducting out of competition tests on him, they must be reading the posts on here.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Pro-cyclist + win + internet forum = discussion of doping (where doping suspicion is inversely proportional to how much the rider is liked)
> 
> Without any facts to go on (such as insider knowledge or a bit of insightful intelligent investigation) where I'm cynical is in suspecting commentards of suggesting doping use purely on successful results so they can say 'see, I told you so'.
> 
> Its getting a broken record now.



And you're wrong again. The discussion was sensible, involving his illness, interupted career etc. and as far as I recall, no conclusions either way were reached. 

Ironically you, in contrast, are a perfect example of commenting without any knowledge - as your last two posts demonstrate.


----------



## RecordAceFromNew (30 Sep 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Though the potential discrepancy predates his time at Sky and he hasn't performed with them. *If anything, it enhances Sky's reputation, I reckon.*



On the other hand it would show up the futility of Sky's "never doped" pledge requirement. As some had said the requirement would simply make cheats lie, if the pledge has no real teeth (such as clawback provisions on rewards/salaries from the team).


----------



## DogTired (30 Sep 2013)

Crackle said:


> This is largely wrong. Relatively few riders have had the finger of suspicion pointed at them and if you mean Horner, well, USADA have spent a fair bit of time and effort conducting out of competition tests on him, they must be reading the posts on here.



Err - relatively few riders _*win*_.

But in hindsight I'd change it to anyone who looked like winning.


----------



## DogTired (30 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> And you're wrong again. The discussion was sensible, involving his illness, interupted career etc. and as far as I recall, no conclusions either way were reached.
> 
> Ironically you, in contrast, are a perfect example of commenting without any knowledge - as your last two posts demonstrate.



Right first off - pack in the attacking the man not the ball - its all a bit playground and doesnt add anything.

Was the discussion sensible. Nope. Talking of his illness, lets have some facts shall we?

"It is estimated that one in every 200 people will develop glandular fever in any given year. Most cases affect young adults between the ages of 15 to 24..."

90% of people age 35 have mono anti-bodies - you have a 10% chance of NOT being exposed. Locke was 21 when he suffered from it so a lot higher chance than a person chosen at random from the population.

Oh, and is there any reason why an elite athlete may have a relatively suppressed immune system other than for doping? Could there be Monkey??? Is suppression of the immune system in elite athletes a completely unknown phenomena??? Could it take more than 5 seconds using google to find:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20839496

Is there any link from PEDs to the symptom in this thread? Nope. Some PEDs suppress the immune system, some don't.

In terms of innuendo the stuff I'm talking about is similar to:



> however I had already made the same observation on the TdF thread about Quintana and Rodiguez being the ones who seemed to be in suspicious territory



Well that proved founded!

I also quite liked this informed exchange:



> I presume that's Europcar and Rolland is it.





> I thought Voeckler but it is worth noting that there were some questions regarding Rolland's test results post Dauphine.





> As to who he means in Europcar, surely it's the performances of Rolland _and_ Voeckler two years ago.



Hell, 2 for the price of one - bargain!

But talking of informed:


> But alos consider, there are no "ordinary" riders in that top peloton, every single rider is an exceptional athlete, or they would not be there. Simply filling yourself with chemicals will not turn a donkey into a thoroughbred.



As for me talking without knowledge, you're absolutely right on that score because I have no idea whether Locke has doped. But I have taken the time to research what others say.

So what exactly are your magic qualifications? Actually?


----------



## Crackle (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Err - relatively few riders _*win*_.
> 
> But in hindsight I'd change it to anyone who looked like winning.



I'm not really sure what your point is. Given the sports history it's pretty normal to look at riders with a jaundiced eye. Sayer, Vini Fantini, contador, valverde et al but hardly all. Given this is an internet forum and not CAS, speculation tends to be around what we've seen and read.

With regard to Tiernan Locke, after the initial shock, I'm tending to give him the benefit of the doubt and remain fairly open-minded.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't speculate?


----------



## DogTired (30 Sep 2013)

Crackle said:


> I'm not really sure what your point is. Given the sports history it's pretty normal to look at riders with a jaundiced eye. Sayer, Vini Fantini, contador, valverde et al but hardly all. Given this is an internet forum and not CAS, speculation tends to be around what we've seen and read.
> 
> With regard to Tiernan Locke, after the initial shock, I'm tending to give him the benefit of the doubt and remain fairly open-minded.
> 
> Are you suggesting that we shouldn't speculate?



OK, the point was that theres a lot of typing and polluting the space without at least having a bit of backing. Like you say, speculation tends to be around whats been seen. The speculation is frequently 'Seen someone doing well = doping. Unless we like them'. The previous lazy approach to questioning LA is now a lazy approach to assuming guilt.

Lockes biological passport discrepancies are not public so saying well he's had glandular fever and linking that to PED abuse (a tenuous link) is pretty weak speculation but was phrased strongly. Thats not to say its not an issue but not acknowledging the other side of the argument is fiddle. With less than a minutes worth of effort you can find a reasonable causal link between elite athletics and glandular fever but that takes effort and burning calories from the neck up. 

But hey, its a public forum - just as people can throw out 'speculation', accusations and 'facts', so other people can question them and try and get the comments justified. Seriously some of the guff posted here (and I dont mean just this thread) is plain rubbish.

But isnt the real back story how Locke's tests came to be released into the public?


----------



## thom (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> But isnt the real back story how Locke's tests came to be released into the public?


Had it happened before the UCI presidential vote it might have appeared like a conspiracy to discredit Cookson.
Now it is an embarrassment but who stands to gain apart from the headline writers ?


----------



## Crackle (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Lockes biological passport discrepancies are not public so saying well he's had glandular fever and linking that to PED abuse (a tenuous link) is pretty weak speculation but was phrased strongly. Thats not to say its not an issue but not acknowledging the other side of the argument is ****. With less than a minutes worth of effort you can find a reasonable causal link between elite athletics and glandular fever but that takes effort and burning calories from the neck up.


 
Sure but that original article is about more sustained low cortisol levels which is not quite the same as the article you've linked to, which talked about lymphocyte cycles over much shorter periods, as you would expect. Clearly the low cortisol levels were on the unexpected scale.

However you're right, it's speculation at this point what the irregularities are and also right that it shouldn't have come out. Personally, the article I linked to gives me more faith in Tiernan-Locke than speculation on the irregularities


----------



## 172traindriver (30 Sep 2013)

Lets just wait and see what comes out before jumping to conclusions.

Lets hope there is a logical explanation and there is a satisfactory outcome and he is allowed to get on with his career.

If he has doped and it is proved, well he deserves to be hung out to dry.


----------



## Noodley (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Right first off - pack in the attacking the man not the ball - its all a bit playground and doesnt add anything.


 
Indeed



DogTired said:


> Could there be Monkey???
> So what exactly are your magic qualifications? Actually?


 
Or maybe not...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (30 Sep 2013)

DogTired said:


> Right first off - pack in the attacking the man not the ... etc etc



Point completely missed. Never mind, it wasn't that important...


----------



## lukesdad (1 Oct 2013)

Crackle said:


> This is largely wrong. Relatively few riders have had the finger of suspicion pointed at them and if you mean Horner, well, USADA have spent a fair bit of time and effort conducting out of competition tests on him, they must be reading the posts on here.


----------



## lukesdad (1 Oct 2013)

DogTired said:


> Being cynical with evidence (UCI are investigating) is different to 'well someone's won a competition and a foreigner' (like the Vuelta) so something must be wrong cynical. Sky's different training approach is well documented. The effect on Wiggins' results has been dramatic - he went backwards from 3rd in the TdF in 2009 to 23rd in his first year at Sky so its pretty reasonable to suspect a different regime might hit Locke too.
> 
> Until some facts come out about the discrepancies who knows what they are, how significant they are and whether the discrepancies would provide enhanced performances. It could be the one test from 2012 has less suspect figures than this year.
> 
> If he has cheated, its surprising none of the well informed experts on this forum detected it. The threshold for slinging mud with little factual evidence is pretty low.


Bollox ! Wiigins 2010 performances had nothing to do with the Sky training approach, he got his arse kicked for slacking.


----------



## smutchin (1 Oct 2013)

DogTired said:


> theres a lot of typing and polluting the space without at least having a bit of backing.



Welcome to the internet!



> Lockes biological passport discrepancies are not public so saying well he's had glandular fever and linking that to PED abuse (a tenuous link) is pretty weak speculation but was phrased strongly.



I thought the glandular fever thing was supposed to be an explanation of his poor performances rather than a hint at doping, but I may be misreading.



> But isnt the real back story how Locke's tests came to be released into the public?



Well, take this with a pinch of salt because it's no more than innuendo, but it seems like quite a coincidence that a negative story about a Brit cyclist should be leaked at the same time as a Brit is elected as the new president of the UCI on a platform of cleaning up the sport.


----------



## smutchin (1 Oct 2013)

172traindriver said:


> Lets just wait and see what comes out before jumping to conclusions.



Quite. At the moment, there isn't even a formal allegation of wrongdoing, just a hint of "something that needs investigating". And so he's being investigated. I bet these anomalies crop up more often than we know about. Investigating them is what the authorities are there to do. It's only when their investigations turn up suspicious results that it gets reported. And we now know that historically, even some of those suspicious findings don't always get reported.


----------



## Booyaa (1 Oct 2013)

So are we allowed to speculate about people doping or do we need to provide screeds of scientific evidence to back it up first?


----------



## Noodley (1 Oct 2013)

Booyaa said:


> So are we allowed to speculate about people doping or do we need to provide screeds of scientific evidence to back it up first?


 
Speculate away Booyaa.


----------



## Booyaa (1 Oct 2013)

Noodley said:


> Speculate away Booyaa.


Thank you Sir, I wanted to be sure not to speculate inappropriately. I used to be told off for suggesting LA was a cheat.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (1 Oct 2013)

smutchin said:


> .....
> but it seems like quite a coincidence that a negative story about a Brit cyclist should be leaked at the same time as a Brit is elected as the new president of the UCI on a platform of cleaning up the sport.


The story about JTL was in the news the night before the UCI meeting and subsequent election, which Cookson could well have lost, that's a red herring theory.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (2 Oct 2013)

Cyclingnews is reporting that Endura Racing say that JTL was assessed physiologically by both Garmin and Sky during the period in question and neither reported any anomolies. He also trained with Sky extensively during this period - which does make it a bit weird that Sky has basically said that this is none of their business (apart from the fact that they are trying to avoid commenting on what should be a confidential process, of course).

The BBC reporting on the same statement emphasizes the claim that JTL asked the UCI if he could be part of the biological passport program (it wasn't compulsory for pro-conti teams) and they refused. 

On another note, the posts on the Cyclingnews site about the JTL case are verging on the insane. Mind you, a lot of it seems to be down to one guy, who seems to be a sock puppet connected to McQuaid (who also just posted under a different story that the reason why 146 riders didn't finish the World's and that teams are going under is... Brian Cookson - lolwut?)


----------



## smutchin (2 Oct 2013)

Strathlubnaig said:


> The story about JTL was in the news the night before the UCI meeting and subsequent election, which Cookson could well have lost, that's a red herring theory.



Au contraire, I'd say that if you want to influence an election, putting a damaging story out the night before it happens would be ideal timing.

(I don't really believe this is the actual explanation for the leak, by the way, I'm just throwing more baseless speculation into the discussion for the fun of it.)


----------



## User169 (2 Oct 2013)

smutchin said:


> Au contraire, I'd say that if you want to influence an election, putting a damaging story out the night before it happens would be ideal timing.
> 
> (I don't really believe this is the actual explanation for the leak, by the way, I'm just throwing more baseless speculation into the discussion for the fun of it.)


 
McQuaid's son is JTL's agent.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (2 Oct 2013)

Delftse Post said:


> McQuaid's son is JTL's agent.



True, but he's also the agent for a lot of other cyclists who aren't the target of investigations.


----------



## User169 (2 Oct 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> True, but he's also the agent for a lot of other cyclists who aren't the target of investigations.


 
Not suggesting McQuaid Jnr is involved in anything intoward. It was more of a response to the idea that the McQuaid Snr camp had released the news to discredit Cookson.


----------



## thom (2 Oct 2013)

Delftse Post said:


> Not suggesting McQuaid Jnr is involved in anything intoward. It was more of a response to the idea that the McQuaid Snr camp had released the news to discredit Cookson.


Hmmm that is odd.

Parts of the twittersphere has chosen to interpret Endura's comments that he was clean while with them as questioning Sky's methods...


----------



## smutchin (2 Oct 2013)

Delftse Post said:


> Not suggesting McQuaid Jnr is involved in anything intoward. It was more of a response to the idea that the McQuaid Snr camp had released the news to discredit Cookson.



It's a fair point.


----------



## albion (2 Oct 2013)

Seems right that Cookson election brought a new agenda.

This certainly looks redressed news. Fact is that JTL only really performed prior to Sky, and that is when the rumours really started.
It does look insane that his performances dropped off but the problem is only of the recent now.


----------



## rich p (2 Oct 2013)

Brian Smith is very supportive of JTL. Mind you, he thought Lance Armstrong was clean up until the USADA document


----------



## uphillstruggler (2 Oct 2013)

Crackle said:


> I agree with that completely but I'd regard us as the right side of reasonable.
> 
> It's funny that I never real thought his drop off was due to not doping now but rather Sky training methods not suiting him and people question us being cynical. Maybe I'm not quite cynical enough. I'm sure Locke ended up with a nice contract at Sky.


 
if he is guilty, will sky sue for damages etc - could break the bloke entirely.

I hope he is innocent but its seems a bit strange


----------



## thom (2 Oct 2013)

uphillstruggler said:


> if he is guilty, will sky sue for damages etc - could break the bloke entirely.
> 
> I hope he is innocent but its seems a bit strange


I imagine there could be some kind of reclaim/bond/clawback possibility in riders contracts at Sky, like at Garmin. The aim being not to get compensation in the event of wrongdoing but to discourage people chancing their arm.


----------



## uphillstruggler (2 Oct 2013)

thom said:


> I imagine there could be some kind of reclaim/bond/clawback possibility in riders contracts at Sky, like at Garmin. The aim being not to get compensation in the event of wrongdoing but to discourage people chancing their arm.


 
I think Sky have indicated that they are 'supporting' him whilst also indicating that the issue was before they signed him.

I was looking forward to seeing him this season after the worlds ride last year. shame its gone to pot whatever the reason.


----------



## dellzeqq (2 Oct 2013)

uphillstruggler said:


> I think Sky have indicated that they are 'supporting' him whilst also indicating that the issue was before they signed him.
> 
> I was looking forward to seeing him this season after the worlds ride last year. shame its gone to *pot* whatever the reason.


I doubt that's the problem


----------



## uphillstruggler (2 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> I doubt that's the problem



He may do now.


----------



## The Couch (3 Oct 2013)

Booyaa said:


> Thank you Sir, I wanted to be sure not to speculate inappropriately. I used to be told off for suggesting LA was a cheat.


Los Angeles is indeed full of cheats ... people cheating on the taxes, on their spouses, ...


----------



## Crackle (3 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> Brian Smith is very supportive of JTL. Mind you, he thought Lance Armstrong was clean up until the USADA document


Another character reference though

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/opinion-why-i-think-jon-tiernan-locke-is-clean


----------



## rich p (3 Oct 2013)

Crackle said:


> Another character reference though
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/opinion-why-i-think-jon-tiernan-locke-is-clean


 Yes, I'd read that. I wasn't really suggesting that Brian Smith was blindly supportive, just being mischievous really. There's not much else happening at the mo!
Although, Smith says that he was tested and was clean or plausible when at Endura which misses the point, non?
The problem was that his blood values were significantly different to flag up a BP issue when the Endura years were compared with the Sky year. That's not enough alone to suggest he was doping but it requires an explanation unless we think he is being targeted and fingered in a Machiavellian conspiracy.


----------



## Crackle (3 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> Yes, I'd read that. I wasn't really suggesting that Brian Smith was blindly supportive, just being mischievous really. There's not much else happening at the mo!
> Although, Smith says that he was tested and was clean or plausible when at Endura which misses the point, non?
> The problem was that his blood values were significantly different to flag up a BP issue when the Endura years were compared with the Sky year. That's not enough alone to suggest he was doping but it requires an explanation unless we think he is being targeted and fingered in a Machiavellian conspiracy.


I know but I had forgotten what Brian Smith had said and I agree, it doesn't matter what people say, it needs an explanation. As the Guiness marketeers say, we wait.....


----------



## Slaav (3 Oct 2013)

I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (3 Oct 2013)

Slaav said:


> I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?


That's my understanding too.


----------



## rich p (3 Oct 2013)

If that's the case then maybe he was BPed from post ToB last year but I share your confusion.


----------



## User169 (3 Oct 2013)

Slaav said:


> I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?



It's this year's BP against individual tests from last year.


----------



## tigger (3 Oct 2013)

Yes as Delftse Post has said, my understanding is that his BP effectively started at some point early to mid 2012 when he was tested by Garmin and then later started working with Sky. Now WADA have approx 14 to 18 months worth of data they are questioning his levels from last September.

It may be an interesting case this one, if any of us can following the findings, whatever they may be! Until then it's pure speculation, and will remain that way thereafter no doubt!?


----------



## rich p (4 Oct 2013)

tigger said:


> Yes as Delftse Post has said, my understanding is that his BP effectively started at some point early to mid 2012 when he was tested by Garmin and then later started working with Sky. Now WADA have approx 14 to 18 months worth of data they are questioning his levels from last September.
> 
> It may be an interesting case this one, if any of us can following the findings, whatever they may be! Until then it's pure speculation, and will remain that way thereafter no doubt!?


 I thought that he'd asked to be put on the programme in the summer of 2012, but both the UCI and UK Doping had refused.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (4 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> I thought that he'd asked to be put on the programme in the summer of 2012, but both the UCI and UK Doping had refused.



Yes, that's correct.


----------



## rich p (4 Oct 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Yes, that's correct.


 So the anomalies are from post 2012 ToB when compared to his blood profile in 2013 with Sky.
_The baseline values ascertained after a season of passport measurements during 2013 are what testers are now claiming render his limited 2012 data as suspect - CyclingNews_
If the 2012 data is as limited as it seems this may be a storm in a tea-cup.


----------



## thom (4 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> If the 2012 data is as limited as it seems this may be a storm in a tea-cup.


It is just impossible to know - the fact he is in a process should never have been made public obviously.
This kind of speculation is just far too commonplace in cycling these days - the long term legacy of USPostal et al.


----------



## User169 (4 Oct 2013)

thom said:


> It is just impossible to know - *the fact he is in a process should never have been made public obviously.*
> This kind of speculation is just far too commonplace in cycling these days - the long term legacy of USPostal et al.


 
Can't remember where I saw it, but there was an interesting speculation was that the original source was Brailsford (since Walsh broke the story). The reasoning went that Brailsford couldn't hold it back in view of Walsh' "embedded" status and that Walsh had to then publish for the same reason. Sounds a bit far-fetched, but does highlight some of the potential conflicts of interest with Walsh so close to Sky.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (4 Oct 2013)

Delftse Post said:


> Can't remember where I saw it, but there was an interesting speculation was that the original source was Brailsford (since Walsh broke the story). The reasoning went that Brailsford couldn't hold it back in view of Walsh' "embedded" status and that Walsh had to then publish for the same reason. Sounds a bit far-fetched, but does highlight some of the potential conflicts of interest with Walsh so close to Sky.


The speculation is mentioned here - http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...t-case-should-have-remained-confidential.html


----------



## User169 (4 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> The speculation is mentioned here - http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...t-case-should-have-remained-confidential.html


 
Thanks! That's the one. Pretty good article actually.


----------



## rich p (4 Oct 2013)

Delftse Post said:


> Thanks! That's the one. Pretty good article actually.


 It is reasonably persuasive apart from not explaining why Walsh would have been pressing Brailford about JTL's withdrawal. Lack of form would have seemed credible enough given the rubbish year he's had.
Having said that, it's as plausible as any other explanation as to who leaked it.


----------



## thom (4 Oct 2013)

I can't see Brailsford breaking the confidentialities of that situation to Walsh.
He is a clever guy, well capable of giving a plausible reason if Walsh had asked the question. 

Just sounds completely speculative in a way the cycling world is very apt at.


----------



## rich p (4 Oct 2013)

thom said:


> I can't see Brailsford breaking the confidentialities of that situation to Walsh.
> He is a clever guy, well capable of giving a plausible reason if Walsh had asked the question.
> 
> Just sounds completely speculative in a way the cycling world is very apt at.


 True but as the speculative article says, if he tells white lies and then the true story comes out, it looks pretty bad for the Walsh/Sky/Brailsford embedding.
Plausible at least, I'd say!


----------



## Noodley (4 Oct 2013)

Sounds to me as if Brailsford is trying too hard to get his message over to Walsh and may have sacrificed JTL.


----------



## dellzeqq (4 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> True but as the speculative article says, if he tells white lies and then the true story comes out, it looks pretty bad for the Walsh/Sky/Brailsford embedding.
> Plausible at least, I'd say!


I'd say it was Cycling Weakly's editor being an arse.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (5 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> I'd say it was Cycling Weakly's editor being an arse.


The article frames it in a way that suggests how rumour enterprise works without saying it was the product itself (because rumour enterprise doesn't actually need one).

Meanwhile, the timing of the leak and that fact that McQuaid's son is JTL's agent still intrigues me.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (5 Oct 2013)

Interesting article that.

Is it possible that Walsh has contacts who informed him there was a rider (rider 634BX) with a bio passport problem. They won't have revealed names but maybe he decided that it was too close a coincidence when JTL pulled out of the Worlds. Walsh then has a hunch and puts pressure on Brailsford to let the cat out the bag.

If DB covers it up he could then become part of the story and suspicions would be cast on Sky, should JTL be found guilty.

Unless Walsh knows more than has been reported, then his breaking of the story was premature and unethical. JTL deserves the anonymity the situation, at this point, requires.


----------



## psmiffy (5 Oct 2013)

> The UCI then informs the rider - and only the rider - that he has 30 days to gather data and explain himself.
> Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...emained-confidential.html#Vy0Jv8Gvm1fqBjIL.99



Just out of a matter of interest how do you gather "data" - particularly from a period where it sounds like the official record is somewhat sketchy - and explain it.


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

This is a reasonable explanation of how the BP works from inrng
http://inrng.com/2013/10/uci-bio-passport-tiernan-locke/


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> I'd say it was Cycling Weakly's editor being an arse.


 He is an arse - that's beyond debate but the story was leaked by someone.
The data gatherers and analysts do their work without knowing the athlete's identity. The story must have been leaked by someone from the UCI, WADA,SKY,JTL or maybe some other acronym I've forgotten!


----------



## psmiffy (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> This is a reasonable explanation of how the BP works from inrng
> http://inrng.com/2013/10/uci-bio-passport-tiernan-locke/


So basically -he says she says - having been flagged and the experts deciding to raise the question - on the balance of probabilities he will get a ban - not necessarily because he is guilty but because his BP is unexplained.


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

psmiffy said:


> So basically -he says she says - having been flagged and the experts deciding to raise the question - on the balance of probabilities he will get a ban - not necessarily because he is guilty but because his BP is unexplained.


 I don't read it like that!
If the anomalies are large enough for 3 experts to agree independently that a doping violation is likely then the athlete is asked to provide another explanation. If he can't then he is liable to be banned. The BP is to catch athletes clever enough to avoid getting a positive test by micro-manipulation. IMHO, that's a good thing as long as you accept that the process is rigorous and reliable.


----------



## User169 (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> This is a reasonable explanation of how the BP works from inrng
> http://inrng.com/2013/10/uci-bio-passport-tiernan-locke/



Interesting comment re the Colombia es Pasion team. Like Endura, they're outside the BP, but they paid for it to be done anyway. Quintana and Henao could show a good lot of data to European teams interested in taking them on.


----------



## User169 (5 Oct 2013)

psmiffy said:


> So basically -he says she says - having been flagged and the experts deciding to raise the question - on the balance of probabilities he will get a ban - not necessarily because he is guilty but because his BP is unexplained.



No. He says we don't know how likely it is that a "prosecution" will follow since we don't know how many riders get flagged and whay happens when they do.


----------



## psmiffy (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> I don't read it like that!
> If the anomalies are large enough for 3 experts to agree independently that a doping violation is likely then the athlete is asked to provide another explanation. If he can't then he is liable to be banned. The BP is to catch athletes clever enough to avoid getting a positive test by micro-manipulation. IMHO, that's a good thing as long as you accept that the process is rigorous and reliable.



I actually think we are in agreement  - the unusual thing here is tho he has not gone from ordinary to superhuman - but from good to an also ran (Im assuming that is the gist of the anomaly) - the cause of the fall could be attributed to illness - or the illness could be attributed to the problem - still leaves an element of doubt - does he get the benefit of it - and should he get a ban and on his return to racing his form returns presumably with a return to the blood values he had when he was going well does he get flagged again.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (5 Oct 2013)

psmiffy said:


> - and should he get a ban and on his return to racing his form returns presumably with a return to the blood values he had when he was going well does he get flagged again.


 A ban for taking what, exactly ?


----------



## psmiffy (5 Oct 2013)

Strathlubnaig said:


> A ban for taking what, exactly ?



That was the question that was on my mind - I seem to remember not so long ago that two or three riders were "suspended" because of BP anomalies


----------



## amaferanga (5 Oct 2013)

psmiffy said:


> I actually think we are in agreement  - the unusual thing here is tho he has not gone from ordinary to superhuman - but from good to an also ran (Im assuming that is the gist of the anomaly) - the cause of the fall could be attributed to illness - or the illness could be attributed to the problem - still leaves an element of doubt - does he get the benefit of it - and should he get a ban and on his return to racing his form returns presumably with a return to the blood values he had when he was going well does he get flagged again.



I don't think the gist of the anomaly is as simple as a dip in form. There's clearly something very suspicious with his blood values - if that is down to illness then it should be possible for JTL to demonstrate that in his reply. If he tries to use illness as an explanation and the doping experts aren't convinced then he will likely get a ban because they would deem that it's highly improbable that the anomalies aren't doping related. 

Why should he get the benefit of the doubt when 3 experts in the field of doping agree that the only explanation for his blood values is that he's been doping? Would you say the same of it was Vinokourov or Contador? Amongst others Pellizotti served a 2 year ban for suspicious blood values without actually testing positive.

This may all come to nothing and it could all be down to his illness, but if he gets a ban then I certainly won't have any sympathy for him.


----------



## thom (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> This is a reasonable explanation of how the BP works from inrng
> http://inrng.com/2013/10/uci-bio-passport-tiernan-locke/


As a person with a probability PhD, I can say that the DNA example in that article is a clever illustration of the problem of trying to conclude anything about JTL's blood values, not only for us as distant observers but also for the experts reading the blood tests. A good article as always.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (5 Oct 2013)

thom said:


> As a person with a probability PhD



What's the likelihood of getting one of those?


----------



## thom (5 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> What's the likelihood of getting one of those?


depends on how hard you work and how much of a masochist you are

Edit, btw, your avatar - is it either a close up picture of a peculiar colored cauliflower or an image of a fractal surface ?


----------



## ColinJ (5 Oct 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> What's the likelihood of getting one of those?


Chances are, you'd fail!


----------



## thom (5 Oct 2013)

ColinJ said:


> Chances are, you'd fail!


About as likely as finding an unattached heterosexual woman in Hebden Bridge then...


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

Okay, Thom, you smart arse, what's the probability of us keeping this thread going with pure speculation till we actually find out anything new?


----------



## thom (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> Okay, Thom, you smart arse, what's the probability of us keeping this thread going with pure speculation till we actually find out anything new?


quite high !
On the one hand, JTL's process now is very likely to go back to being confidential so we'll hear no genuine information about developments.
On the other, the season is coming to a close so nothing is likely to take our attention away in terms of racing and McQuaid is not around to confound us with random behaviour any more. 
We need a new story to divert our attention.
Like Horner getting sprung - anyone know how quickly the doping tests conclude after grand tours ? 
I wonder whether Cookson will start fleshing out the mechanism for reviewing the past UCI culture soon.


----------



## Noodley (5 Oct 2013)

rich p said:


> Okay, Thom, you smart arse, what's the probability of us keeping this thread going with pure speculation till we actually find out anything new?


 
Rich, would your degree in supposition not be of more help here?


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

Where's the witchfinder general when you need him Noods?


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

I did wonder if there would any UCI action over the source of the leak from Cookson.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (5 Oct 2013)

thom said:


> Edit, btw, your avatar - is it either a close up picture of a peculiar colored cauliflower or an image of a fractal surface ?


It's a photo of one of these - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanesco_broccoli They are approximate fractals


> The head of Romanesco broccoli is a visually striking example of an approximate fractal in nature. The pattern is only an approximate fractal since the pattern eventually terminates when the feature size becomes sufficiently small. The number of spirals on the head of Romanesco broccoli is a Fibonacci number.[1] In computer graphics, its pattern has been modeled as a recursive helical arrangement of cones.


Some people eat them - I just look at them.


----------



## Crackle (5 Oct 2013)

Probably a dodgy steak, quite common apparently


----------



## rich p (5 Oct 2013)

The thread is being diverted into a menu cul-de-sac...
...broccoli, cauliflower, steak and leaks


----------



## rich p (17 Dec 2013)

Oh dear - JTL has a case to answer.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci...case-against-team-skys-jonathan-tiernan-locke


----------



## smutchin (17 Dec 2013)

Is JTL turning out to be the Tesco Value Cunego?


----------



## rich p (17 Dec 2013)

Sky statement
http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17546_9077438,00.html


----------



## rich p (17 Dec 2013)

smutchin said:


> Is JTL turning out to be the Tesco Value Cunego?


Just Took Loads?


----------



## raindog (17 Dec 2013)

that's so depressing, I really thought he was the real deal


----------



## Crackle (17 Dec 2013)

raindog said:


> that's so depressing, I really thought he was the real deal


Case to answer doesn't yet mean he's guilty but it isn't looking good.


----------



## raindog (17 Dec 2013)

What I don't get is, this is about his performances in 2012, how come questions were only asked last september? Does anyone know?


----------



## rich p (17 Dec 2013)

He was tested at the ToB when it was known that he was going to sign for Sky.
The tests taken then, while at Endura, were shown to be anomalous when later compared with a full BP programme at Sky in 2013.


----------



## smutchin (17 Dec 2013)

Crackle said:


> Case to answer doesn't yet mean he's guilty but it isn't looking good.



Hence the Cunego comparison - both the blood anomalies and the dip in performance _could_ be explained by illness, but...

Does anyone really believe that story?


----------



## raindog (17 Dec 2013)

I know, but why did it take a whole year to show up?


----------



## Crackle (17 Dec 2013)

smutchin said:


> Hence the Cunego comparison - both the blood anomalies and the dip in performance _could_ be explained by illness, but...
> 
> Does anyone really believe that story?



Looking at the character references, looking at his past history, the decision to dope doesn't quite add up, stranger things have happened though and unless he can produce a credible explanation, he's cooked and even if he can, I can't see much future at Sky for him.


----------



## VamP (17 Dec 2013)

raindog said:


> I know, but why did it take a whole year to show up?


 
Because they didn't have a baseline to compare against until after this season. Says so right there in the cyclingnews article.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (17 Dec 2013)

raindog said:


> I know, but why did it take a whole year to show up?


I may have got this wrong but it seems like the anomaly only showed up as an anomaly once the two sets of pre- and post-Sky figures could be compared.


----------



## smutchin (17 Dec 2013)

Crackle said:


> Looking at the character references, looking at his past history, the decision to dope doesn't quite add up, stranger things have happened though and unless he can produce a credible explanation, he's cooked and even if he can, I can't see much future at Sky for him.



This comment could apply equally to any number of past convicted dopers.

Much as I'd like to believe he's a good boy who wouldn't do that kind of thing, I can't convince myself of it. Colour me a jaded old cynic.


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> Because they didn't have a baseline to compare against until after this season. Says so right there in the cyclingnews article.


Yes - the strange thing is I think JTL/Endura actually requested testing for him on that successful season but resources did not permit.


----------



## Crackle (17 Dec 2013)

smutchin said:


> This comment could apply equally to any number of past convicted dopers.
> 
> Much as I'd like to believe he's a good boy who wouldn't do that kind of thing, I can't convince myself of it. Colour me a jaded old cynic.


Yeah but he's a Brit. not some jonny foreigner, chin up!

No, I agree Smutch, I said as much early on in the thread, that in fact, I wasn't cynical enough.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (17 Dec 2013)

Didn't the first news from the UCI about JTL only break immediately after Cookson's election? There was something really odd about the timing. I would have thought P McQ would have been more than happy to have had it announced before the election itself - and he would have known about it. Wouldn't he have wanted to appear strong on controls, with a Brit in the firing line to boot?


----------



## Doc333 (17 Dec 2013)

I really hope this is nothing other than a glitch of analaysis and data, however I fear the worst and I would imagine that Sir Dave will be fuming and embarrased after the stance taken earlier. Sky were going to prove to be the cleanest team and a team who wins clean. fingers crossed


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Didn't the first news from the UCI about JTL only break immediately after Cookson's election? There was something really odd about the timing. I would have thought P McQ would have been more than happy to have had it announced before the election itself - and he would have known about it. Wouldn't he have wanted to appear strong on controls, with a Brit in the firing line to boot?


I think the story did come out in the run up to the election, round about the time the GB team was being clarified.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (17 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> I think the story did come out in the run up to the election, round about the time the GB team was being clarified.


Cheers, thom, it's probably my memory playing tricks. I only 'remember' the announcement that JTL wouldn't be racing from shortly before the election but nothing from the UCI.

EDIT: JTL's last twitter was on 26 Sept - _Was sorry I had to withdraw from the worlds line up, just don't have the form to help the lads there. Good luck to team GB though!_
Election on 27 Sept.


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Cheers, thom, it's probably my memory playing tricks. I only 'remember' the announcement that JTL wouldn't be racing from shortly before the election but nothing from the UCI.
> 
> EDIT: JTL's last twitter was on 26 Sept - _Was sorry I had to withdraw from the worlds line up, just don't have the form to help the lads there. Good luck to team GB though!_
> Election on 27 Sept.


Ah yes - you're probably right, the UCI didn't say anything themselves but I think there was an inkling of the story through the press.


----------



## beastie (17 Dec 2013)

The UCI must be pretty sure there is a case to answer, they only bring BP cases when they expect a result.


----------



## VamP (17 Dec 2013)

Doc333 said:


> I really hope this is nothing other than a glitch of analaysis and data, however I fear the worst and I would imagine that Sir Dave will be fuming and embarrased after the stance taken earlier. Sky were going to prove to be the cleanest team and a team who wins clean. fingers crossed


 
Two points. The alleged infractions took place while JTL was riding for Endura, and JTL has now entered a stage in the process that no-one has as yet escaped from without a ban.


----------



## oldroadman (17 Dec 2013)

VamP said:


> Two points. The alleged infractions took place while JTL was riding for Endura, and JTL has now entered a stage in the process that no-one has as yet escaped from without a ban.


 Correct, the questioned values go back to Endura days, which must be a considerable embarassment to the boss of Endura who put his faith in the team and team management to do things the right way. I hope that the values can be explained and it's all sorted out. Unfortunately there will be some who see the dip in form from 2012 to 2013 as meaning something, and start the mud slinging before any verdict is made public. I believe that the process is UCI tell BC, who tell UK anti-doping, who actually run the investigation. If this is correct then I have complete trust in UKAD, as they have no axe to grind except to find what really happened and deal with it. The sad part is that if found guilty it might be a case where the 4 year ban would apply. End of career for someone close to 30?


----------



## Doc333 (17 Dec 2013)

I heard JTL's old team manager at Endura on radio 5 live earlier. he stated that no way was JTL a doper (His words) he says the guy is pure class and couldn't or wouldn't do it. I really hope this is the facts, because if not it shines a huge light on Endura


----------



## lyn1 (17 Dec 2013)

Doc333 said:


> I heard JTL's old team manager at Endura on radio 5 live earlier. he stated that no way was JTL a doper (His words) he says the guy is pure class and couldn't or wouldn't do it. I really hope this is the facts, because if not it shines *a huge light on Endura*



On the brand maybe, but not other riders. None of them:
showed very dramatic improvement between 2011 & 12 as JTL did
won races well above the level they had won previously
saw a dramatic decline in their 2013 performances compared to 2011 or 2012

If there is some naughtiness it is difficult to establish when it may have begun. My recollection of 2011 is that he had a decent start to the season with Rapha Condor Sharp (RCS), won an odd Premier but nothing consistently outstanding compared to many other riders in those races. Stepped up performance levels noticably in Aug/Sept with stage win and second overall at Leon and 5th overall and mountains jersey at Tour of Britain. Winter training then took place while still contracted to Rapha CS. Arrived at first Endura camp in January and blew the whole squad away on the climbs...which is why he went into Tour Med and Haut Var in Feb as team leader. Much stronger than guys he was not riding away from the previous Spring/Summer. Although these improvements were noted with some skepticism at the time, I believe it was attributed to things like greater commitment and training over winter, significant weight loss, longer /different types of climbs and an intention to peak for early races.

Although the rogue test may have been in Sept 2012 his significant physiological improvement came at least 9 months earlier.


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

oldroadman said:


> The sad part is that if found guilty it might be a case where the 4 year ban would apply. End of career for someone close to 30?


Well I'd say the sad part if found guilty was that the chances are he was guilty and as such is/was a cheat.
I'm not sure I'd care too much at that point but until we know more, he has to be allowed to make his case and establish facts.


----------



## Buddfox (17 Dec 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Didn't the first news from the UCI about JTL only break immediately after Cookson's election? There was something really odd about the timing. I would have thought P McQ would have been more than happy to have had it announced before the election itself - and he would have known about it. Wouldn't he have wanted to appear strong on controls, with a Brit in the firing line to boot?



I'm not sure this reflects too well on Pat, Pat's son (Andrew Macquaid) is JTL's agent... oops!


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (17 Dec 2013)

Buddfox said:


> I'm not sure this reflects too well on Pat, Pat's son (Andrew Macquaid) is JTL's agent... oops!


No, exactly. It really stinks. But I'm not sure that the UCI's action was buried for very long, just long enough to stop P McQ getting flak for conflict of interest.


----------



## jdtate101 (17 Dec 2013)

Not much to add to what's already been said, except that I hope he's not been a silly billy, but if he has doped then I hope they throw the book at him!


----------



## Dusty Bin (17 Dec 2013)

Doc333 said:


> I heard JTL's old team manager at Endura on radio 5 live earlier. he stated that no way was JTL a doper (His words) he says the guy is pure class and couldn't or wouldn't do it. I really hope this is the facts, because if not it shines a huge light on Endura



I think Endura's anti-doping policy went something like this:

Team manager - "We have a 'no doping' policy, is that clear to everyone?"
Riders - "Er, yeah, sure.."

I'm sure they were not all charged-up, but believing someone to be clean is clearly a bit different to proving them to be clean.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (17 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> Well I'd say the sad part if found guilty was that the chances are he was guilty and as such is/was a cheat.
> I'm not sure I'd care too much at that point but until we know more, *he has to be allowed to make his case and establish facts*.


I've always agreed with the bit in bold but i recall when Horner won the Vuelta the majority of regulars, who hang out in the pro lobby, had him hung out to dry. There is far more reason now to believe JTL has doped. Is it because he is British that we refuse to pass judgment without facts? 

Someone in the Vuelta forum cleverly summed it up with "if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck....................". Well in JTL's case it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and they have taken DNA and it turns out it is 99% certain it is a duck. 

What excuse, reason or evidence could he possibly produce to disprove and dispel all doubt?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (17 Dec 2013)

Buddfox said:


> I'm not sure this reflects too well on Pat, Pat's son (Andrew Macquaid) is JTL's agent... oops!



His dad had taught him well:
In a statement released immediately after the UCI announcement confirming the biological passport violation, Tiernan-Locke’s agent Andrew McQuaid said that his client would contest the charges that had been brought against him.

“Mr Tiernan-Locke vehemently denies the charges brought against him and has informed the UCI that he fully intends to contest them. Mr Tiernan-Locke will not ride for Team Sky, attend training camps or undertake any team duties until a decision is made in these proceedings. Mr Tiernan-Locke is looking forward to a speedy and just resolution of these unfortunate charges. Until a decision has been reached, Mr Tiernan-Locke will make no further comment on the matter."

I'm surprised he managed to get all those words out, what with his head buried deep in the sand and all.


----------



## smutchin (17 Dec 2013)

Dusty Bin said:


> I think Endura's anti-doping policy went something like this:
> 
> Team manager - "We have a 'no doping' policy, is that clear to everyone?"
> Riders - "Er, yeah, sure.."



Much like Vini Fantini's "anti-doping policy" then.


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I've always agreed with the bit in bold but i recall when Horner won the Vuelta the majority of regulars, who hang out in the pro lobby, had him hung out to dry. There is far more reason now to believe JTL has doped. Is it because he is British that we refuse to pass judgment without facts?
> 
> Someone in the Vuelta forum cleverly summed it up with "if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck....................". Well in JTL's case it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and they have taken DNA and it turns out it is 99% certain it is a duck.
> 
> What excuse, reason or evidence could he possibly produce to disprove and dispel all doubt?



I think I argued to hold off condemning Horner at the time as it happens. 

Point is, I have no knowledge of the DNA - do you ? I think this process is and should be completely confidential, so the only thing in terms of DNA that any of us have is the success rate of the accusatory body in terms of their conviction rate. I myself know no specific details of the case - do you ?


----------



## smutchin (17 Dec 2013)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I've always agreed with the bit in bold but i recall when Horner won the Vuelta the majority of regulars, who hang out in the pro lobby, had him hung out to dry. There is far more reason now to believe JTL has doped. Is it because he is British that we refuse to pass judgment without facts?



There are different kinds of facts. In Horner's case, his performance in the Vuelta was, to use the duck analogy, positively quackers. JTL has never produced anything so visibly conclusive (and certainly not as high profile), although as has been noted, the variability in his performances over the past couple of years has caused a few raised eyebrows.

Crackle's earlier mention of his nationality was ironic.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (17 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> I think I argued to hold off condemning Horner at the time as it happens.
> 
> Point is, I have no knowledge of the DNA - do you ? I think this process is and should be completely confidential, so the only thing in terms of DNA that any of us have is the success rate of the accusatory body in terms of their conviction rate. I myself know no specific details of the case - do you ?





smutchin said:


> There are different kinds of facts. In Horner's case, his performance in the Vuelta was, to use the duck analogy, positively quackers. JTL has never produced anything so visibly conclusive (and certainly not as high profile), although as has been noted, the variability in his performances over the past couple of years has caused a few raised eyebrows.
> 
> Crackle's earlier mention of his nationality was ironic.


I don't know the specifics Thom but i do know that it is an official case being made against JTL. There was no such case against Horner, only speculation. Whilst it is easier to condemn a rider you care less for, a doped rider is still a doped rider - if JTL is found to be just that.

I think if it was Johnny Foreigner who was in JTL's position then it might have been mentioned by now that he is a tremendous bawbag worthy of a stoning. I mean he's no rookie, his decisions are his own and, if found guilty, he has spat directly in the face of British cycling and what it stands for.

Smutchin it has more than raised eyebrows. His performances were not consistent before or after the 2012 or TOB. It is to team Sky's credit that he has become average as it would indicate that he is completely clean, now.


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I think if it was Johnny Foreigner who was in JTL's position then it might have been mentioned by now that he is a tremendous bawbag worthy of a stoning. I mean he's no rookie, his decisions are his own and, if found guilty, he has spat directly in the face of British cycling and what it stands for.


Sorry - I think you might re-read the rest of my post to see an expression of no sympathy towards someone who has been proved a cheat.
I find your posts a little bizarre at the moment ...


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (17 Dec 2013)

smutchin said:


> There are different kinds of facts. In Horner's case, his performance in the Vuelta was, to use the duck analogy, positively quackers. .



Not necessarily. Some predicted that Horner was a contender who could win the Vuelta. One director sportif was quoted saying Horner was his favourite to win, before stage 1.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (17 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> Sorry - I think you might re-read the rest of my post to see an expression of no sympathy towards someone who has been proved a cheat.
> I find your posts a little bizarre at the moment ...


Oh, i thought you were essentially saying that we don't know for sure until the verdict is read out?


----------



## thom (17 Dec 2013)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Oh, i thought you were essentially saying that we don't know for sure until the verdict is read out?


I was saying that instead of feeling sorry for a guy at 30 with a lost career who would have been proved to have cheated, he would be a cheat not worthy of any sympathy - I was specifically stating that at that point he ought to be condemned. Other people have pointed out that this process is pretty consistent in convicting anyone accused so it does not look good for him but fundamentally I think it is pretty foolish to totally condemn him now when there is a rigorous process going with the express purpose, opaque to us, of giving fair hearing to facts.

We'll find out in due course, so chill out, its is not about you or me - I don't feel the need to dance on his grave just yet.


----------



## Crackle (17 Dec 2013)

Can we leave Horner in the corner, while we're sending JTL to 'ell.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (17 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> I was saying that instead of feeling sorry for a guy at 30 with a lost career who would have been proved to have cheated, he would be a cheat not worthy of any sympathy - I was specifically stating that at that point he ought to be condemned. Other people have pointed out that this process is pretty consistent in convicting anyone accused so it does not look good for him but fundamentally I think it is pretty foolish to totally condemn him now when there is a rigorous process going with the express purpose, opaque to us, of giving fair hearing to facts.
> 
> We'll find out in due course, so chill out, its is not about you or me - I don't feel the need to dance on his grave just yet.


Cool agreed. Was merely pointing out that others have been found guilty before trial. I also noticed they weren't British. 

As i said though, i am very much in agreement with you RE wait till the results are in. I argued this case with Horner, who is from now on in the corner, and most weren't too interested in facts or results, just speculation. 

It's all good though, i am chilled. Just typing whilst thinking. 

Hmmm, leaving myself open to some wit on that last comment.................


----------



## oldroadman (17 Dec 2013)

Quote Horner if you wish, but also consider Cobo in the Vuelta, hardly a stellar career then thumps everyone on a massive climbing stage to win the GC.
Notice a parallel? No, neither do I.
Horner was consistently around the top level and a quality domestique for ages, then off the leash and gets a win. Cobo has delivered diddly squat worth mentioning since the Vuelta win.
With J T-L I still hope there is a good explanation for the form, and that different training methods which may have been a problem along with (according to reports) the requirement to get super thin may have affected performance. Eventually all will become clear.


----------



## tigger (17 Dec 2013)

I expect there's no smoke without a fire, but I'm not convinced the biological passport system is anywhere near advanced enough to take account for what something like the Epstein Barr virus can do to an elite athlete. It's a virus which can cause glandular fever in some but reoccur and even manifest as cancer in others. And no one knows what causes it or why it manifests so differently in individuals...


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (17 Dec 2013)

tigger said:


> I expect there's no smoke without a fire, but I'm not convinced the biological passport system is anywhere near advanced enough to take account for what something like the Epstein Barr virus can do to an elite athlete. It's a virus which can cause glandular fever in some but reoccur and even manifest as cancer in others. And no one knows what causes it or why it manifests so differently in individuals...


The real danger there is the exploitation of little-understood illnesses as a masking alibi.


----------



## User169 (17 Dec 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> No, exactly. It really stinks. But I'm not sure that the UCI's action was buried for very long, just long enough to stop P McQ getting flak for conflict of interest.



Not sure that's the case: the fact that UCI was asking JTL for an explanation shouldn't have been made public. Where a rider's passport is red-flagged, it's only supposed to be made public if the rider can't convince those screening the passports that there is an innocent explanation. JTL evidently couldn't convince them, so now it goes to a full doping enquiry - it's only now though that this should all have been made public.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Speculation concerning Horner et al is fine as far as I'm concerned. Never having failed a test isn't enough to convince many of us that a rider is clean - as we all know from the last silly season's big story.
Cobo, Santambrogio, di Luca, Ricco, Piepoli, Grabovski, Sayer, Voigt have all caused eyebrows to be raised, to name but a few.
Likewise, Froome, Wiggins, JTL and even Cavendish have been queried with varying degrees of conviction over the years.
Most of the Brits on here hope rather than expect JTL to get cleared for reasons of nationality and I see nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Dusty Bin (18 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> Most of the Brits on here hope rather than expect JTL to get cleared for reasons of nationality and I see nothing wrong with that.



I don't care where he is from. If he has doped his way up, then he needs to fry. And if he does fry, then there are a load of talented clean young Brits out there waiting to take his place...


----------



## VamP (18 Dec 2013)

I think rich misphrased that, as I absolutely DO NOT hope to see JTL cleared for reasons of nationality. IMHO he will not get cleared. The steps taken now are not taken lightly, the stage of the process that he is now at has NEVER seen a rider cleared yet. 

I suspect that his cycling career is now over.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Dusty Bin said:


> I don't care where he is from. If he has doped his way up, then he needs to fry. And if he does fry, then there are a load of talented clean young Brits out there waiting to take his place...





VamP said:


> I think rich misphrased that, as I absolutely DO NOT hope to see JTL cleared for reasons of nationality. IMHO he will not get cleared. The steps taken now are not taken lightly, the stage of the process that he is now at has NEVER seen a rider cleared yet.
> 
> I suspect that his cycling career is now over.


Yeah, on reflection I did!
There's a comma or two missing.
Just to clarify, I hope he gets cleared as it will taint British cycling
I don't think he will get cleared
If he's guilty, (and I think he is) he should get banned and vilified


----------



## Dusty Bin (18 Dec 2013)

I have no thoughts on whether he is guilty or not. But I don't see how British cycling will be 'tainted', any more than any other countries are tainted when another rider gets caught.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Dusty Bin said:


> I have no thoughts on whether he is guilty or not. But I don't see how British cycling will be 'tainted', any more than any other countries are tainted when another rider gets caught.


It won't be any more, but I'd rather that British cycling, and Sky in particular, remained largely dope-free and zero-tolerance.
Spain, Italy and some others are already tainted.


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> It won't be any more, but I'd rather that British cycling, and Sky in particular, remained largely dope-free and zero-tolerance.
> Spain, Italy and some others are already tainted.


Exactly - it can be said as an example, had Horner (I'm in the not proven camp) not been associated with the world of Lance Armstrong then the scepticism over his results would certainly be a notch lower. I understand that might make it to 10 on the scale as opposed to 11… but still, the point to make is not about Horner per se, but about the clouds of uncertainty that surround cliques/groups of pro-cyclists. Michael Rogers is a reasonable example of this in my opinion.


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

ffs : please note the timings of my post above and the publication of the article here :
*Former Sky rider Michael Rogers suspended after failed dope test*
I had no prior knowledge of this Rogers thing when I posted above - the dodgy association will primarily be towards Contador & Riis but questions will get asked to some extent of his time at SKY as well.


----------



## smutchin (18 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> ffs : please note the timings of my post above and the publication of the article here



I was just about to ask if that was a coincidence. 

lolz!


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Dodgy steak defence?


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

smutchin said:


> I was just about to ask if that was a coincidence.
> 
> lolz!


Yeah it was - wouldn't the Japan race in Oct be another one of those post-tour money making fake races where all the jerseys act like they're making a race out of it ? 
Why would he risk Clenbuterol in a race like that ? 
OK the story does not say if the B sample has also tested +ve but you have to ask whether this would be part of something wider in the team or just a guy at the end of his career trying to get improved results to secure his future next year.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> Yeah it was - wouldn't the Japan race in Oct be another one of those post-tour money making fake races where all the jerseys act like they're making a race out of it ?
> Why would he risk Clenbuterol in a race like that ?
> OK the story does not say if the B sample has also tested +ve but you have to ask whether this would be part of something wider in the team or just a guy at the end of his career trying to get improved results to secure his future next year.


Prescient tho' Thom. Spooky almost!
he was at the Tour of Beijing too I think


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> Dodgy steak defence?





rich p said:


> Prescient tho' Thom. Spooky almost!
> he was at the Tour of Beijing too I think


He rode the Tour of Beijing before the Japan Cup race and could have eaten contaminated meat while in China.

rotflol - our collective musings are just a little too accurate today 

ok, someone else make something up and let's see if it transpires in reality too


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (18 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> Dodgy steak defence?



Dodgy rider is the far more likely reason


----------



## DooDah (18 Dec 2013)

> ok, someone else make something up and let's see if it transpires in reality too



Sex change op?


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Marmion said:


> Dodgy rider is the far more likely reason


Indeed but not a credible mitigating defence, Marmy


----------



## Crackle (18 Dec 2013)

It has a certain weary inevitability about it this but as Thom says, a race in Japan, end of season?


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

From the road.cc report :

It’s worth noting that in the week prior to the Japan Cup, Rogers had been competing in the Tour of Beijing in China, where clenbuterol is regularly – and illegally – used to build muscle mass in livestock and poultry, provoking regular food safety scandals.

Ahead of the London 2012 Olympic Games, China even banned its athletes from eating meat due to fears that they could inadvertently ingest clenbuterol from contaminated food. China’s 2009 judo world champion Tong Wen was given a two-year ban in 2010 and stripped of her title when clenbuterol was found in her bloodstream.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

Crackle said:


> It has a certain weary inevitability about it this but as Thom says, a race in Japan, end of season?


If he is using the ToBeijing, clen-filled Chinese meat defence, then he must hope that some of the others at the race test +ve too. 
The fact that everyone should know that their meat is dodgy and best avoided won't help him, nor will strict liability


----------



## tigger (18 Dec 2013)

In Rodgers defence, if I understand it correctly, cyclists tend to use clenbuterol early season / in race preparation to shift weight and build muscle. During a competition at the end of th season is an odd time to test positive for it. So this could well be another contamination case, but is it from stored blood or dodgy meat?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (18 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> ..some of the others at the race test +ve too



You'd think that there would be others - I recall a couple of years ago at some football tournament in Mexico that over a hundred junior players tested positive for Clenbuterol due it being commonly used with livestock.


----------



## thom (18 Dec 2013)

Pro riders should know by now not to rehash old excuses with steaks this high.


----------



## rich p (18 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> Pro riders should know by now not to rehash old excuses with steaks this high.


Shuddit Thom


----------



## Crackle (19 Dec 2013)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/jonathan-breyne-provisionally-suspended-over-clenbuterol

Jonathan Breyne with traces of Clenbuterol.

So two riders so far who've competed in China but as far as I'm aware, Clenbuterol doesn't stay in the system long, I thought I read 48hrs. So for Breyne, contaminated food is plausible, for Rodgers less so. Breyne is another rider who was looking to make an impression and move up. Blood bags to China and Japan though, does it add up?


----------



## raindog (19 Dec 2013)

Brian Smith still insisting JTL is straight
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...spite-UCIs-anti-doping-violation-process.aspx
"I don’t know. Jon could have had blood tests done, but it looks as if the irregularity in the blood test was after the Tour of Britain. I don’t know when, whether it was the week after, whether it was two months after. Sky are saying the test in question was before he became part of the team. If so, it has to be either in October, November or December that a blood test was taken with irregular values.
Consider if that blood test is showing irregular values. He already had his contract with Sky. He knew they are against doping. Why would he do something late on in the year? He already knew he had a contract.
This makes no sense. Looking at it with common sense, it doesn’t add up. That just confirms things for me."


----------



## Crackle (19 Dec 2013)

raindog said:


> Brian Smith still insisting JTL is straight
> http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...spite-UCIs-anti-doping-violation-process.aspx
> "I don’t know. Jon could have had blood tests done, but it looks as if the irregularity in the blood test was after the Tour of Britain. I don’t know when, whether it was the week after, whether it was two months after. Sky are saying the test in question was before he became part of the team. If so, it has to be either in October, November or December that a blood test was taken with irregular values.
> Consider if that blood test is showing irregular values. He already had his contract with Sky. He knew they are against doping. Why would he do something late on in the year? He already knew he had a contract.
> This makes no sense. Looking at it with common sense, it doesn’t add up. That just confirms things for me."



He rode the Worlds in September, was he tested then. If he was doping, I'd imagine the worlds would be a target and a big step up for him. Not sure how much stock you can put in Brian Smith either.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (19 Dec 2013)

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands


----------



## thom (19 Dec 2013)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands


If it's Chinese duck then I'd test it for Clenbutarol before coming to such a crisp conclusion.


----------



## andrew_s (19 Dec 2013)

Crackle said:


> ...as far as I'm aware, Clenbuterol doesn't stay in the system long, I thought I read 48hrs...


It was 48 hrs for Contador (positive in the two tests after the rest day), but he only had a tiny amount present. Dodgy steak can give you a high enough dose to go to hospital with Clenbuterol poisoning (which is why there's fairly thorough slaughterhouse testing in Europe, which scuppered Contador's dodgy steak excuse).
It could well have been dodgy steak, but as everyone was warned beforehand, I don't see that getting him off.


----------



## thom (20 Dec 2013)

Michael Rogers says it is Chinese Tour of Beijing stuff : https://twitter.com/mickrogers/status/413972783744712704/photo/1


----------



## Crackle (20 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> Michael Rogers says it is Chinese Tour of Beijing stuff : https://twitter.com/mickrogers/status/413972783744712704/photo/1


So he would have finished that race on the 15th and five days later he's in Japan. Clenbuterol is out the system in 48 hours, though I guess detection methods have improved so it might be detectable longer. His explanation is plausible but he should be able to produce some evidence of having eaten contaminated meat and even if he does, it's still his liability, especially considering the warnings given over Chinese meat. 

Contador is the only person who's managed to set a precedent with the meat defence and I doubt Rodgers has the same weight, so a definite ban which will finish his career, is on the cards.


----------



## smutchin (20 Dec 2013)

Weasel words.


----------



## rich p (20 Dec 2013)

If WADA warned everyone about the meat/clen issue, then why the feck is he eating it? Sky ate tuna, AFAIK and clenb. isn't present in chicken - again AFAIK.
Nor vegeatbles, or snake, or rat or dog or birds nests, and anything else that moves, that the Chinese eat.


----------



## thom (20 Dec 2013)

rich p said:


> If WADA warned everyone about the meat/clen issue, then why the feck is he eating it? Sky ate tuna, AFAIK and clenb. isn't present in chicken - again AFAIK.
> Nor vegeatbles, or snake, or rat or dog or birds nests, and anything else that moves, that the Chinese eat.





smutchin said:


> Weasel words.


Sweet and sour weasel ?


----------



## smutchin (20 Dec 2013)

Bombay Duck - quacks like a duck, smells a bit fishy...


----------



## thom (20 Dec 2013)

Crackle said:


> Clenbuterol is out the system in 48 hours, though I guess detection methods have improved so it might be detectable longer..


People are suggesting he didn't leave China immediately - if he hanged around for a few days he may just have got unlucky.
Anyway, easy with hindsight to say he should have risked Japan's radio-active food instead.


----------



## rich p (20 Dec 2013)

thom said:


> People are suggesting he didn't leave China immediately - if he hanged around for a few days he may just have got unlucky.
> Anyway, easy with hindsight to say he should have risked Japan's radio-active food instead.


It cooks itself in its own new clear (sic) bag- what's not to like?


----------



## Strathlubnaig (2 Jan 2014)

They could have just told him face to face eh ?
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tiernan-locke-removed-from-sky-website


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (2 Jan 2014)

Hmmm, unless they know something the public doesn't then this is in very poor taste IMO. If JTL is punished and proven guilty then SKY should act accordingly. Acting in any way before judgment is only going to cast more doubt on JTL. It would be very easy for SKY to remain publicly silent until the jury reach their verdict.


----------



## smutchin (3 Jan 2014)

What jury? You mean the panel of experts, surely? He's not facing a criminal trial, he's facing a professional disciplinary procedure.

In any case, even in the unlikely event that the hearing clears him, I don't see that it will be possible for him to continue as a member of Team Sky.


----------



## raindog (3 Jan 2014)

"Tiernan-Locke removed from Sky website"
shades of North Korea?


----------



## jdtate101 (3 Jan 2014)

Unless something miraculous happens at the hearing (and no rider has been acquitted when it's got this far) it's career ended for JTL I fear. Can't imagine anyone touching him after a 2yr ban, especially by then he will be quite old (in pro racing terms) and still having only really raced successfully at the lower levels of the sport. I don't see how he can come back from this.....


----------



## Strathlubnaig (3 Jan 2014)

For Tiernan-Locke it is a Wilfrid Laurier moment...."c'est finis"....


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (3 Jan 2014)

smutchin said:


> What jury? You mean the panel of experts, surely? He's not facing a criminal trial, he's facing a professional disciplinary procedure.
> 
> In any case, even in the unlikely event that the hearing clears him, I don't see that it will be possible for him to continue as a member of Team Sky.


Ha, i don't mean an actual jury Smutchin. I mean the metaphorical kind........... "The jury is still out on this one"


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Hmmm, unless they know something the public doesn't then this is in very poor taste IMO. If JTL is punished and proven guilty then SKY should act accordingly. Acting in any way before judgment is only going to cast more doubt on JTL. It would be very easy for SKY to remain publicly silent until the jury reach their verdict.



It's up to them what they do, and as the article say they have taken the decision to distance themselves from him during the investigation, whether you think that's poor taste or not. 

It surely can't be news to you that a) Sky have a "zero tolerance" approach <despite them hiring dopers in the past> and b) Sky don't care about people they care about the brand.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Jan 2014)

As an aside, I used to quite like Sky when they started, but that has changed.


----------



## smutchin (3 Jan 2014)

Marmion said:


> It's up to them what they do



Up to a point. There are employment contracts and related laws to consider, which is perhaps the only reason they've suspended rather than sacked him up to this point.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Jan 2014)

smutchin said:


> Up to a point. There are employment contracts and related laws to consider, which is perhaps the only reason they've suspended rather than sacked him up to this point.


Indeed


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (3 Jan 2014)

Marmion said:


> It's up to them what they do, and as the article say they have taken the decision to distance themselves from him during the investigation, whether you think that's poor taste or not.
> 
> It surely can't be news to you that a) Sky have a "zero tolerance" approach <despite them hiring dopers in the past> and b) Sky don't care about people they care about the brand.


The "IMO" part is just that, my opinion.

The fact that they are making decisions, and distancing themselves from JTL, before any conclusions have come from the doping inquiry shows a ruthlessness that i class as poor taste.

Should they have stood by their rider until proven guilty then, IMO, not only would they have been doing the right thing by JTL they would have looked a lot classier than they do now.


----------



## thom (3 Jan 2014)

I don't know what the fuss is about - of all the problems JTL has at the moment, I very much doubt this is something JTL is worried about - might even be his choice. Who knows ?


----------



## smutchin (3 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Should they have stood by their rider until proven guilty then, IMO, not only would they have been doing the right thing by JTL they would have looked a lot classier than they do now.



As jdtate pointed out earlier, no rider has ever been acquitted when the procedure has reached this stage. Sky did stand by him for a long time, but now it's past the point where their public support can help him. We don't know what is going on in private.

It's a no-win situation for Sky, really. If they did continue to back him, they'd be getting a lot of stick for being seen as soft on doping.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Should they have stood by their rider until proven guilty then, IMO, not only would they have been doing the right thing by JTL they would have looked a lot classier than they do now.



see part b) of my earlier post - if you still think Sky give a crap about people then you ain't been watching them for the past few years.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (3 Jan 2014)

thom said:


> I don't know what the fuss is about - of all the problems JTL has at the moment, I very much doubt this is something JTL is worried about - might even be his choice. Who knows ?


You're probably right Thom, it might just be media spin but the media would also report team Sky publicly backing their rider. How much damage could be done to Skys rep should they have come out and said "our number one priority just now is to stand by our rider. We will continue to do so until the appropriate authorities make their decision". 

It appears though that JTL has been nominated the sacrificial lamb before there is any call for slaughter.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (3 Jan 2014)

Marmion said:


> see part b) of my earlier post - if you still think Sky give a crap about people then you ain't been watching them for the past few years.


I don't presume to know wether team Sky give a crap about people. I personally think it might be misguided to tar the entire team and staff with that brush, which seems to be implied?


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (3 Jan 2014)

smutchin said:


> As jdtate pointed out earlier, no rider has ever been acquitted when the procedure has reached this stage. Sky did stand by him for a long time, but now it's past the point where their public support can help him. We don't know what is going on in private.
> 
> It's a no-win situation for Sky, really. If they did continue to back him, they'd be getting a lot of stick for being seen as soft on doping.


Yeh i think you are right that it's the fear of how the media can spin it. The shame is at this point is that someone has to lose here and Sky have decided that it won't be them.


----------



## smutchin (3 Jan 2014)

It was never going to be!


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Jan 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> I don't presume to know wether team Sky give a crap about people.



You can't have been paying attention then.


----------



## oldroadman (3 Jan 2014)

Of course, when yu have no financial interests in a project, moralising is easy. Sky have made zero tolerance a public policy, and are a very powerful and rich brand. One of their riders looks as if he may have done something silly. Empathise with the Sky bosses (those well beyond the actual team, the real power players - money men/women). If there is the slightest possibilty of the brand being damaged by association then the source of that potential damage will be sidelined, removed from public association, and if the matter is proved to be true, fired. This is called business. Business does not take prisoners. Professional sport is a business, however much some might want it to be all lovely and amateur and caring. It's tough on JTL if he is innocent, but from a sporting point of view he simply has not delivered anyway since going to Sky, so even if this is the case (innnocent) he may well be in a more comfortable place moving down a division or two where he might be more competitive. It's a tough game and casualties are inevitable.


----------



## Crackle (20 Mar 2014)

Doping hearing now coming up

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/doping-hearing-for-jonathan-tiernan-locke-by-end-of-month


----------



## lay (22 Mar 2014)

When he done that world champs he was flying at the end...1 can only wonder...i hope for him...cest la vie


----------



## User169 (22 May 2014)

Thought this had all gone a bit quiet. Seems that JTL has requested that the hearing be postponed, so it may not take place until the summer. I wonder what is going on.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...han-tiernan-locke-anti-doping-hearing-cycling


----------



## Roscoe (22 May 2014)

New evidence form JTL?


----------



## User169 (22 May 2014)

Roscoe said:


> New evidence form JTL?


 
I suppose that's most likely. I just hope it's something sensible and not some crackpot theory a la phantom twin.


----------



## rich p (22 May 2014)

Rumour has it that it is something to do with legal representation!!!!
This from the previousy unheralded Torquay Herald!
_The Herald Express understands that the latest postponement is not related to any problems over evidence that ‘JTL’, as he is known, may be ready to present, but more to the availability of legal representatives_
http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co....lues-hearing/story-21127353-detail/story.html


----------



## User169 (22 May 2014)

Not enough cash to pay lawyers? Landis and Hamilton pretty much bankrupted themselves and I'd imagine both were sigificantly wealthier than JTL.


----------



## rich p (22 May 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> Not enough cash to pay lawyers? Landis and Hamilton pretty much bankrupted themselves and I'd imagine both were sigificantly wealthier than JTL.


I'm not sure who normally pays for the defence of riders who are still in a team? It may depend if you're of the stature of Contador or, say, JTL.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (23 May 2014)

rich p said:


> I'm not sure who normally pays for the defence of riders who are still in a team? It may depend if you're of the stature of Contador or, say, JTL.



You can be pretty sure that Sky is not backing him on this. They've pretty much washed their hands of him. Even if he's cleared, I'm not sure he'll be able to go back to them now.


----------



## rich p (23 May 2014)

Flying_Monkey said:


> You can be pretty sure that Sky is not backing him on this. They've pretty much washed their hands of him. Even if he's cleared, I'm not sure he'll be able to go back to them now.


Oh, I agree with that.
I was speculating who would have paid for the defence of somebody like Pellizotti or Rebellin to name but two.


----------



## rich p (23 May 2014)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tiernan-locke-denies-requesting-hearing-delay
So it seems as if it's a legal representation issue but not of JTL's making.


----------



## mattobrien (17 Jul 2014)

Sky terminate JTL's contract today here following the confirmation of his UCI anti-doping violation


----------



## rliu (17 Jul 2014)

It seems incredibly stupid for him to have joined Sky as I believe at the Continental level he was racing under with Endura there was no requirement to submit biological passport values, so if he was doping he essentially presented himself to the lions' den. That and also his immediately declining performances since joining Sky made this one of the most blatant cases of doping in the last few years.


----------



## oldroadman (17 Jul 2014)

Which suggests (allegedly) that something was not quite right while he raced with his previous team. If he did do something stupid without the knowledge of the team to get noticed, and then ended up recruited to one of the world's top teams without working out testing and scrutiny would follow, big mistake. The question now is, regrettably, what was happening at the ToB with his spectacular ride? He must have been tested several times at that race. It's not good for the old team and their management who one would hope are entirely blameless. And of course a two year ban at JTL's age is close to career ending. All very sad.


----------



## User169 (17 Jul 2014)

Another one announced by a super-transparent one-liner hidden-away in a pdf somewhere on the UCI website.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (17 Jul 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> Another one announced by a super-transparent one-liner hidden-away in a pdf somewhere on the UCI website.



We know where to find them now tho.

So it's much better.

On a list on a pdf that is not obvious on the UCI webpage somewhere...I've tried finding it and can't.

And from the Menchov pdf which was linked on cyclingnews it looks as if the pdf is alphabetical and not by date so you'll have to look through it from start to finish to spot any updates.

Well done Mr. Cookson. You rock transparency.


----------



## phil_hg_uk (17 Jul 2014)

I am glad the windows in my house are not made by the UCI otherwise it would be farking dark in here


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (17 Jul 2014)

User said:


> although he deserves everything he gets for doping, I really liked JTL and his second chance story, his TOB was brillant, I really thought if he took that form to SKY, he would be an inspirational rider to many but alas it wasn't to be, a real shame...



Yep, it seemed a great story and I hoped it was true - but yet again it was a lie.
It all started to smell a bit off very soon after it looked like roses tho, so he had a limited opportunity to deceive.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (17 Jul 2014)

A great disappointment.


----------



## rich p (17 Jul 2014)

If he'd been a foreign we'd have been flagging him up even earlier.
Bleedin' idiot.


----------



## rich p (18 Jul 2014)

oldroadman said:


> Which suggests (allegedly) that something was not quite right while he raced with his previous team. If he did do something stupid without the knowledge of the team to get noticed, and then ended up recruited to one of the world's top teams without working out testing and scrutiny would follow, big mistake. *The question now is, regrettably, what was happening at the ToB with his spectacular ride? He must have been tested several times at that race*. It's not good for the old team and their management who one would hope are entirely blameless. And of course a two year ban at JTL's age is close to career ending. All very sad.


It was a blood passport violation showing anomalies over an extended period - not a failed test.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (18 Jul 2014)

I am sure some people are already pointing out that his story is not unlike Chris Froome's - promising career affected by chronic illness which was then cured leading to success. I can't help remembering Brailsford's graphs...

One does have to wonder whether JTL was either a victim of his own unusual post-recovery chemistry (can the biological passport really account for this?) or whether illness provided what was felt to be a convenient cover for rather stronger 'treatment' than is strictly necessary in this and other cases. In the case of Froome, he seems so far to be the genuine article and the similarities to JTL's story just skin-deep. In JTL's case however, it seems clear that his story of illness and recovery was used to spin a yarn of almost tragedy leading to deserved success which had a lot of us hoping it was a story that would have a happy ending... unfortunately, it wasn't a fairy tale, it was just another sorry tale of fraud, lies and deception.


----------



## rliu (18 Aug 2014)

His explanation for the abnormal values ranks right up there with the worst of the poor excuses that have been proffered in the history of doping in professional sports

_A doctor presenting evidence on behalf of Tiernan-Locke claimed at a hearing in July that the 2012 Tour of Britain winner had consumed more than 33 units of alcohol in six hours on the evening of 20 September. 


The rider said he had drunk the majority of two bottles of wine over dinner with his girlfriend in Bristol and estimated that he had a further "six or seven" double measures of gin before moving on to vodka. 


Tiernan-Locke said he had been hungover when he woke the following morning so took aspirin and paracetamol and spent much of the day in bed before travelling with the rest of the Great Britain team to the Road World Championships in Maastricht that evening. 


He suggested that, when his irregular sample was taken the following morning, he was dehydrated because a fear of making himself vomit had caused him not to drink any water. _


----------



## mattobrien (18 Aug 2014)

I am sure the majority of professional sportspeople get utterly hammered prior to an event and it has not impact on their performance at all.

Glad that's all cleared up. Does someone want to give Dave a call so he can be reinstated?


----------



## rliu (18 Aug 2014)

Pretty risky way to try and beat a doping ban, even if what he said was scientifically plausible (it isn't), I doubt many teams would want to employ someone with a binge drinking problem. (And yes I would consider that kind of alcohol consumption in one go problematic, even if the frequency is occasional)


----------



## Hont (18 Aug 2014)

rliu said:


> Pretty risky way to try and beat a doping ban.



Indeed. Especially since it was literally days before the World Championships. He was basically saying, "It's OK I'm not a drug cheat, just an incredibly unprofessional idiot."


----------



## rich p (18 Aug 2014)

Jonathon Twatface Liar.


----------



## Crackle (18 Aug 2014)

No doubt of his guilt and stupidity now. Up there with the best.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (18 Aug 2014)

Holy crap, I'm going to have to up my alcohol intake! One day I'll be a contender! Hic.


----------



## resal (18 Aug 2014)

That excuse is an insult to all the fans.

Given that he was working with Sky throughout the year, why the heck did they hire him and once again it sadly points that the "in competition testing" - in this case at the TOB - is still useless, only catching people who are even more stupid that JTL.


----------



## 400bhp (18 Aug 2014)

what a bellend.


----------



## Origamist (18 Aug 2014)

rliu said:


> His explanation for the abnormal values ranks right up there with the worst of the poor excuses that have been proffered in the history of doping in professional sports
> 
> _A doctor presenting evidence on behalf of Tiernan-Locke claimed at a hearing in July that the 2012 Tour of Britain winner had consumed more than 33 units of alcohol in six hours on the evening of 20 September.
> 
> ...



That sounds perfectly plausible to me - JTL is a Janner after all. The story would be watertight if he had also come clean about his trip to Cap' n Jaspers for half a yard dog, followed by a Sky tattoo at Dr Price's, and the brawl with 42 Commando in The Two Trees all on the same evening. This pre-race approach worked for me back in Devon...


----------



## rich p (18 Aug 2014)

resal said:


> That excuse is an insult to all the fans.
> 
> Given that he was working with Sky throughout the year, why the heck did they hire him and once again it sadly points that the "in competition testing" - in this case at the TOB - is still useless, only catching people who are even more stupid that JTL.


This started before he was at Sky and only showed up as an anomaly when he joined the Sky team and joined the BP programme. If you had read the UKAD report it would show you that he was suspected as having been clean at the ToB.

_The reasoning went onto say that, “There was no dispute that the abnormalities in the sample were consistent with the use of an erythropoietic stimulant which had been discontinued approximately 10 to 14 days before the sample was taken _
...it was taken on September 22nd at the ToB, so the glow time was long over.

The blood passport programme is designed to test for anomalous readings over an extended period of testing and not for one-off doping.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (18 Aug 2014)

Is he allowed to race EPO-crits?


----------



## SWSteve (18 Aug 2014)

I'm sorry, he went out, got trashed, took loads of stuff to try and cope with a hangover, and as a result was dehydrated.

Okay then


----------



## themosquitoking (18 Aug 2014)

Have you ever been out in Plymouth? Sounds entirely plausible to me.


----------



## smutchin (18 Aug 2014)

resal said:


> once again it sadly points that the "in competition testing" - in this case at the TOB - is still useless



Er, surely what it shows is that the out-of-competition testing is *not* useless.


----------



## resal (19 Aug 2014)

rich p said:


> This started before he was at Sky and only showed up as an anomaly when he joined the Sky team and joined the BP programme. If you had read the UKAD report it would show you that he was suspected as having been clean at the ToB.
> 
> _The reasoning went onto say that, “There was no dispute that the abnormalities in the sample were consistent with the use of an erythropoietic stimulant which had been discontinued approximately 10 to 14 days before the sample was taken _
> ...it was taken on September 22nd at the ToB, so the glow time was long over.
> ...



JTL was working with Sky for a significant proportion of the year before his signing. He attended training camps with them.

JTL was at the World Championships when the sample was taken on the 22nd, the men's road race was the 23rd.

My post presumes that most observers could work out, without the benefit of thousands of pounds of expensive lab equipment, that JTL was well-fueled at the TOB and that is why he was able to beat all the Sky riders - please see Brian Smith's crowings about this as evidence of the unique and unusual nature of JTL's performance.

Sky profess to be experts in rider analysis. They should ask the secret pro if they are in doubt; he knew.

We all know what the BP is supposed to do. Dr Ashenden, not me, doubts that as currently specified, it is effective - suggesting only a cretin will be caught by the current parameters - these are professional cyclists so those that dope will be professional about doping.



smutchin said:


> Er, surely what it shows is that the out-of-competition testing is *not* useless.


The IN competition testing at the TOB, where he would have been repeatedly testing showed that he was not positive. Which is why I stated that the IN competition testing was useless. 

Dr Ashenden's opinion on the BP is out there for us all to read. I would suggest that it would be rash to consider that catching JTL at the time of the 2012 Wold Champs means the rest of the peloton who passed the BP there, are clean, but of course, maybe I am too cynical.


----------



## smutchin (19 Aug 2014)

resal said:


> The IN competition testing at the TOB, where he would have been repeatedly testing showed that he was not positive. Which is why I stated that the IN competition testing was useless.



You're making assumptions about the state of his blood during the ToB. Understandable but... As you say, the pros are professional about doping, so as per rich p's earlier comment, surely they'd make sure there was nothing actually in their blood when they turned up at a major race?



> I would suggest that it would be rash to consider that catching JTL at the time of the 2012 Wold Champs means the rest of the peloton who passed the BP there, are clean.



On this, I agree entirely.


----------



## rich p (19 Aug 2014)

resal said:


> JTL was working with Sky for a significant proportion of the year before his signing. He attended training camps with them.
> 
> JTL was at the World Championships when the sample was taken on the 22nd, the men's road race was the 23rd.
> 
> ...


Basing your analysis of doping on 'he looked a bit dodgy cos he was riding well', and an anonymous blog written with the benefit of a year's hindsight is stretching a point even for one as cynical as you.


----------



## smutchin (19 Aug 2014)

resal said:


> Dr Ashenden's opinion on the BP is out there for us all to read.



I need help. I've googled but can't find where Ashenden says what you're attributing to him. Do you have a link? Genuine question. I'm always interested in what Ashenden has to say on these matters. If he really does think the BP is useless, that's significant.


----------



## Crackle (19 Aug 2014)

Sky handled JTL completely differently to Henao. JTL was suspended immediately, whereas Henao was given full support for his anomalous readings. That says to me that they knew a lot more about JTL than they were letting on. Personally if I'd found out what his defence was going to be, I'd have flung him out there and then and said why.

Ashenden, if I recall, was not comfortable with a confidentiality clause and resigned from the Independent expert panel. He had some criticism for the passport around testing frequency. He subsequently resigned from the Change Cycling Now Group and was also seen criticising cycling Australia but it's a while since we've heard anything from him.

The Secret Pro is a good read but that's all.


----------



## smutchin (19 Aug 2014)

Crackle said:


> Ashenden, if I recall, was not comfortable with a confidentiality clause and resigned from the Independent expert panel. He had some criticism for the passport around testing frequency. He subsequently resigned from the Change Cycling Now Group and was also seen criticising cycling Australia but it's a while since we've heard anything from him.



AIUI, he's no longer part of the UCI expert panel, because of the confidentiality clause thing, but he's still involved with bio passport testing via WADA, isn't he? And his disagreement with CCN was over them talking to Lance.


----------



## Crackle (19 Aug 2014)

smutchin said:


> AIUI, he's no longer part of the UCI expert panel, because of the confidentiality clause thing, but he's still involved with bio passport testing via WADA, isn't he? And his disagreement with CCN was over them talking to Lance.


I'm not sure how it works. If the UCI passes it to WADA might he still review it? Honestly don't know.


----------



## smutchin (19 Aug 2014)

I think this makes it a bit clearer:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ashenden-speaks-out-on-leaving-biological-passport-panel


----------



## resal (20 Aug 2014)

smutchin said:


> I think this makes it a bit clearer:
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ashenden-speaks-out-on-leaving-biological-passport-panel



Yes - you did your own research (sorry to take so long to get back to you). Passport introduced 2008. Lance waltzes through it . Ashenden leaves over confidentiality. Ashenden states that Lance's data showed that he had been doping whilst Lance is given a a green light. How many others have been given green lights when they showed similar abnormalities to Lance ? None of us have a clue. 
Here are some other good articles, particularly the first one.
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden
http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/02/15/uci-ashenden-clash-over-lance-armstrong/
http://inrng.com/2012/04/whats-up-with-the-bio-passport/


----------



## Hont (16 Sep 2014)

An article by Shane Stokes that implies Sky were not as diligent as they should have been (and not as diligent as Garmin would have been either)...

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/09/b...-can-teams-learn-from-the-tiernan-locke-case/


----------



## smutchin (16 Sep 2014)

Great piece that. Makes Sky look a bit daft.


----------



## tigger (16 Sep 2014)

smutchin said:


> Great piece that. Makes Sky look a bit daft.



Indeed, this is odd, from the Sky spokesman (whoever that was?). Surely the off score is the main basis of the biological passport. If you are testing the credibility of a prospective new rider it's what you'd be looking for at first instance?

“On signing him, the team carried out its own medical with blood tests – normal procedure for us – for health screening. Those tests are not used for any doping controls but there was nothing that raised any concerns for us at that time and over the following months there was nothing in his performance, behaviour or the official testing that raised any doubts,” he said.

He accepted that the OFF-score reading [which, again, is a relationship between mature and immature red blood cells] was not calculated. He said that this reading only came to light when it was worked out by the experts working on the rider’s case. Had Sky done its own longitudinal testing prior to signing the rider, or indeed looked closely at the blood levels from the September 24 test, it is likely that the contract would never have gone ahead."


----------



## User169 (20 Oct 2014)

JTL rode the Exmoor Beast yesterday!


----------



## rich p (20 Oct 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> JTL rode the Exmoor Beast yesterday!


http://road.cc/content/news/133382-jonathan-tiernan-locke-sees-future-cycling-still
The comments are pretty much spot on


----------



## Crackle (20 Oct 2014)

He's exactly the kind of person you want out of the sport.


----------



## DannyCFC (20 Oct 2014)

Much as I support rehabilitation this lad's got to make a start by admitting what exactly he was up to. 

I love a good drink but I'll struggle to get close to the units he claims to have had, and I will be rotten tonight as it's my day off tomorrow. 

So then we come to drugs. Do the right thing, and confess and tell what you know. Show your love for the sport and the people in it by coming clean.

You know what? He won't do either. And regardless of what the truth is, that's what he'll regret in years to come.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Oct 2014)

The bloke is either a plank or a twat... probably a bit of both!


----------



## User169 (21 Oct 2014)

Interview with JTL on cyclingnews today if anyone's interested (can't link from my phone). Gruesome reading.


----------



## ColinJ (21 Oct 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> Interview with JTL on cyclingnews today if anyone's interested (can't link from my phone). Gruesome reading.


LINK

He is either in _serious_ denial mode. or there is something seriously wrong with the way the biological passport works!


----------



## 400bhp (21 Oct 2014)

Given the time on his hands now, partly shown by his sojourn into Sportive riding, I bet he has ventured into this thread.


----------



## SWSteve (27 Oct 2014)

Has JTL ever said 'I am innocent' ot has he just said 'I don't believe I am guilty' 

I've seen lots of him talking about how he isn't happy with decisions, and how he feels a scapegoat/unfairly treated, but has he said he is innocent (in those words)?

I'm just confused as to how he is still trotting out this story and keeping his coaching business in the press...


----------



## ColinJ (27 Oct 2014)

ItsSteveLovell said:


> Has JTL ever said 'I am innocent' ot has he just said 'I don't believe I am guilty'
> 
> I've seen lots of him talking about how he isn't happy with decisions, and how he feels a scapegoat/unfairly treated, but has he said he is innocent (in those words)?
> 
> I'm just confused as to how he is still trotting out this story and keeping his coaching business in the press...


I watched one of the Armstrong documentaries again the other night and was struck by how quickly his former teammates started blabbing once they were brought in front of a Grand Jury with the threat of imprisonment hanging over them if they lied under oath. 

How about offering every pro athlete a bonus if they swear under oath in a court that they have never doped and never will? If they refused to take the bonus, that would look mighty suspicious. If they swore in court that they were not dopers and were then found to be lying, they would be in line for a far more scary punishment than a 2 year ban ...

(Ok, it probably can't be done for one reason or another, but it's a nice thought! )


----------



## User169 (28 Oct 2014)

ItsSteveLovell said:


> I'm just confused as to how he is still trotting out this story and keeping his coaching business in the press...


 
I'd have thought that coaching would breach the terms of his ban.


----------



## rich p (28 Oct 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> I'd have thought that coaching would breach the terms of his ban.


So does Cookson


----------



## SWSteve (28 Oct 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> I'd have thought that coaching would breach the terms of his ban.



That's why I said it. If I was banned from any activity, and this included coaching - I would keep my coaching business on the down low, not talking it up in the press


----------



## oldroadman (28 Oct 2014)

ItsSteveLovell said:


> That's why I said it. If I was banned from any activity, and this included coaching - I would keep my coaching business on the down low, not talking it up in the press


In my competitive a ban was a ban - from everything. Just go away until it was served, then see who might give you a job. Which is how it should be. Sorry if I sound merciless, but when you've been a clean rider, why should people who mess with blood and chemicals get anything other than a total ban?


----------



## SWSteve (28 Oct 2014)

oldroadman said:


> In my competitive a ban was a ban - from everything. Just go away until it was served, then see who might give you a job. Which is how it should be. Sorry if I sound merciless, but when you've been a clean rider, why should people who mess with blood and chemicals get anything other than a total ban?



I agree wholeheartedly, he was given a band, and as a result shouldn't be involved. However, if I was trying to circumvent my ban by continuing to offer coaching services, I wouldn't be shouting about it in the press.


----------

