Pro-cycling thread

Still, look at the Schlecks, just because one brother is dodgy, it doesn't mean the other one is...

To quote the mighty Slick Rick, and heeeere we go...

http://www.greenedgecycling.com/news/statement-regarding-simon-yates-adverse-analytical-finding

Of course you kind of want it to sort itself out but this is all looking a bit Sharapova at the moment. Long practice of minor PED use and blame it all on a crew member when the shit hits the fan.

Then again, leaks of information always look a bit suspicious to me. Especially if it's a leak of information that would either a) be made public as part of normal procedures or b) of higher prejudicial value if revealed before the completion of those normal procedures. Leaks either happen because someone wants to blow the whistle on a coverup or because they feel they stand to gain if are exercising control over the story. In a situation like this, the latter seems a lot more likely than the former.

We should definitely be keeping close watch on Simon Yates. But we should also ask who stands to gain from pushing the story out early and potentially muddying the waters/influencing the jury.

Gutted about Simon Yates

But we should also ask who stands to gain from pushing the story out early and potentially muddying the waters/influencing the jury.>

Peter Kennaugh

Or bc.

Clear diversionary tactics.

Really sad day for cycling.

But he's just another asthmatic professional cyclist with a bad admin team. No wrong doing here.

If I was an asthmatic cyclist with a TUE, I want a copy showing it had been signed off by the UCI for my personal files.

BC developed him, so clearly they are involved.

My guess is this was known amongst a few journalists, and one of them either told whoever broke the story or told another journalist who broke it as part of the developing cycling in crisis story.

I don't know what protocol OGE use, but to administer a medicine before completing the TUE seems amateurish at best.

I remember reading this when Froome had a TUE at Romandie two years ago. It's worth reading again;

https://spokeydokeyblog.com/2014/12/29/sky-high-on-salbutamol/

I guess I need to read Nicole's book.

And Victoria's as well.

There might be a valid excuse, let's see.

throws first stone

Going back to Cooke's assertion that Womens' races should be the same length as mens' - why would you want that? The biggest strength of womens' cycling is the shorter stages. That translates to more exciting racing, almost always. Coverage for the mens' races is almost always for the second half, and because people don't do elephantine amounts of EPO, amphetamines and blood bags these days the 100km solo winning attack is a thing of the past - so the first half of races is sheer boredom. I'd argue for the mens' races/stages to be 50km shorter on most days. Look at the Queen stage of this year's Giro:

That looks like 5000m of climbing up some brutal roads - Giau is insane, but overall the Dolomite roads are pretty steep anyway - and 210km. It'll look spectacular, but there's just too much work to do that day for any interesting racing to happen.
You want a massive battle that looks good on the telly, then you need shorter stages which allow riders to properly compete.

Terbutaline, doc forgot the TUE. What a crock. Now the poor fucker is tainted for ever.

Then again, why are they using non-standard drugs that require TUE? Normal puffers not good enough?

throws more stones

When has a drug test positive in France ever NOT been leaked?

I sob rode sob my sob bike sob

Is that about right?

Because if they don't ride the same length races why should they get the some money?
They'll never get the same money if they're always riding shorter events.

Olympics: Bring back the Kilo and let the women ride it too and the 4k IP.

Have read a cycling doc clarify that the drug he has been caught out for is of no benefit to anyone who does not suffer with asthma. Said doctor is vehemently anti-doping.

I like long stages and I've never found that the length of a stage influences how exciting the racing is. It depends on so many factors.

You're pretty much arguing for the same thing that Cooke is but from the other side. You may well be right.

However, I think that culturally, men's racing can't be perceived to get easier. It just wouldn't wash with the audience in general. So I think Cooke's assertion is fair that races should be the same length. The point isn't so much about the actual length of races but the UCI regulations about how long they can be.

However, I'm not convinced that this should happen immediately. This is in no way meant to belittle the capabilities of professional women cyclists. However, they are collectively used to racing shorter courses and training for that. A sudden jump in race lengths is the sort of thing that might lead to an increase in racing/training injuries and/or doping. It's something that should happen over maybe the course of 5 years.

He has asthma so that's kind of irrelevant.

If the drug has no benefit why is it on the ban list?

Well that's a slap in the face. OGE look very sloppy if that's the truth of it.

My understanding is that the list of banned substances is being revised as many are on due to historical suspicion of use and their relation to asthma.

Am not falling on either side, just adding some info from someone whose knowledge and experience I respect and has proven to be quite clear in his opposition to doping

Or there's a doctor falling on a sword for one of their riders..