It's such an odd list you can use it to confirm almost any belief or prejudice you already have: French riders are clean, RadioShack is dirty, Wiggins and Thomas are too good to be true, so is Cav. Millar is a cheat, Millar is clean. Contador deserves the benefit of the doubt, and so on.
Or to confirm that the UCI haven't a clue what they are doing. Or are spot on. That the biological passport is a mess or a useful weapon.
I think they have said that part of their assessment is results - Menchov in the Giro, for example, who can believe that performance? - and part of it is ambition, which sounds odd but would have been a reliable suspicion had it been applied to Armstrong in 99, for example.
Personally I say Go Gadret! Or maybe not.
It's such an odd list you can use it to confirm almost any belief or prejudice you already have: French riders are clean, RadioShack is dirty, Wiggins and Thomas are too good to be true, so is Cav. Millar is a cheat, Millar is clean. Contador deserves the benefit of the doubt, and so on.
Or to confirm that the UCI haven't a clue what they are doing. Or are spot on. That the biological passport is a mess or a useful weapon.
I think they have said that part of their assessment is results - Menchov in the Giro, for example, who can believe that performance? - and part of it is ambition, which sounds odd but would have been a reliable suspicion had it been applied to Armstrong in 99, for example.
Personally I say Go Gadret! Or maybe not.