Late last week came word that a “top rider” may have been nabbed for doping by the UCI’s new biological passport program. To both Pat McQuaid’s and Anne Gripper’s credit, neither divulged the name of the rider who might be facing anti-doping charges. Nor did they identify the supposed four other riders from “other disciplines” in cycling who may also face charges stemming from results related to the new program.
This week, we have the puzzling case of Patxi Vila (it’s the second story on the page), who appears to have tested “non-negative” on a testosterone screening done as part of an out-of-competition test at Vila’s home on March 3rd. Much like the early days after Floyd Landis’ results were leaked to the press, there appears to be a dearth of information as to what, exactly, Vila’s results are. According to CyclingNews.com:
“They announced to me that the detected quantity was small, but that there has been an irregularity,” said Vila. “It’s a positive test, but until the counter-analysis has been carried out nothing can be said officially. An attorney and endocrinologist, who saw the specimen, said that the quantity is very little.”
On the face of this, it is an odd statement, especially given all of the information known about testosterone testing these days. What’s missing in the story is any reference to a T/E ratio and what the result was, or whether this data comes from CIR/IRMS analysis. Or, for that matter, whether the test that implicates Vila is actually the urine-based test that was used in the Landis case and many others. Pointing in the direction of at T/E result, but only vaguely is this:
“We heard that there had been this control with results that are slightly above what is allowed,” added [Lampre Press Officer Andrea ] Appiani. “We know that he has asked for a counter-analysis and we will wait for the counter-analysis results before we take any decision.”
Slightly above what is allowed could mean that the T/E ratio came in slightly over 4:1. Or it could mean that the CIR studies done on the A sample were slightly above the cutoff to declare a positive result. Exactly how far above would be interesting to find out. Within the lab’s margin of error for the test (which means no adverse finding should be declared), or above the lab’s margin of error. How many metabolites were measured? How many were elevated?
At this point, there are many more questions than answers. And, there’s yet another possibility. That Vila is, in fact, the “top rider” that the UCI’s biological passport program has put into the hot seat. Because we don’t know for certain what test was used, or the results from that test, it is possible that Vila is caught in this situation due to results of a blood test, instead.
For the moment, Vila’s team is sticking by him.
“He is an exemplary rider and we have faith in him,” Lampre Press Officer Andrea Appiani told Cyclingnews. “We got the news yesterday [from the UCI via fax] after we returned from the long weekend holiday.
And Vila has learned something from the scandals of the last two years in terms of handling questions from the media.
Vila, whose legal representative is the same one as Italian sprinter Alessandro Petacchi, did not offer any explanation for this incident. “I could give you any excuse, but I won’t do it,” he said. “I have a quiet conscience. I already gave an explanation to my team. They have known me for years; I have spent a lot of time with them. I know that I am putting my career on the line, but the only thing I can do is to wait.”
Time will tell whether Vila is caught up in a case based on the urine-based testing protocols, or whether he’s caught up in a newer kind of case. One thing is certain, these kinds of cases are tricky to decipher. As CyclingNews.com summed things up:
Testosterone analyses is always problematic, because the parameters for its measurement are difficult to handle, as seen in the cases of Spain’s Iban Mayo and American Floyd Landis.
Truer words.
Irony, Thy Name Is Basso?
Trust But Verify found a little tidbit on Yahoo! Sports that suggests Ivan Basso may become an anti-doping ambassador, of sorts, for the UCI. Seems that a certain Pat McQuaid is taking the eminently reasonable position that once he’s done his time, all is forgiven.
UCI president Pat McQuaid backed the news that Basso will come on board in the fight against drug cheats.
“He has made a mistake,” McQuaid said. “He has paid. I believe he will interpret this role to the best of his ability, for us and for the Italian cycling federation.”
One has to wonder, is Basso getting a break because he’s admitted his mistake and served his time gracefully? Or would McQuaid cut a similar break to someone who served his time, but didn’t kowtow to the powers that be? Inquiring minds want to know.
Certainly, someone who’s been there and done that makes for a very credible spokesman. Sort of like David Millar…
We Don’t Make The Rules, We Just Enforce `Em
And then, of course, there’s the case of one Alessandro Petacchi, he of the extra puff at last year’s Giro d’Italia. The CAS ruled a few days ago in Petacchi’s case, and the ruling didn’t go the Italian rider’s way — despite the fact that the CAS panel found that Petacchi “wasn’t a cheat.” And that he apparently made a mistake in how many puffs he took from his asthma inhaler last May. Or, to put it in the words of the panel:
The Panel is satisfied that Mr. Petacchi is not a cheat, and that the adverse analytical finding in this case is the result of Mr. Petacchi simply, and, possibly, accidentally, taking too much Salbutamol on the day of the test, but that the overdose was not taken with the intention of enhancing his performance. Indeed, it would be an unsusual way of attempting to enhance performance to take the prohibited substance after the particular event had concluded.
But there is the small matter of strict liability, after all. And Petacchi’s test results for salbutamol exceeded the UCI and WADA’s limit by a fair amount. (Petacchi’s test result showed a concentration of 1352 nanograms (ng)/milliliter (ml), more than 300 ng/ml above the official threshold concentration of 1000 ng/ml.) Since the panel had some discretion, they didn’t impose a full two-year ban on the Italian.
The panel, in their ruling, goes on to find that while Petacchi may have been negligent in taking too many doses from his inhaler, he bears “no significant fault or negligence.” This, in turn, allows the panel to reduce the term of Petacchi’s suspension. And here’s where things get interesting. The Panel’s ruling notes:
In light of the specific circumstances of the case the Panel has concluded that it would be just and proportionate to reduce the period of ineligibility to one year. In doing so the Panel has taken into account that the amended WADC, which the International Federations will have to implement by 1 January 2009, would qualify Salbutamol as a “specified substance” and would allow for the sanction to be reduced down to a reprimand (with no period of ineligibility). Even though the new WADC is not yet in force the Panel takes the view that it is both equitable and fair, and in compliance with Article 255 of the ADR, to take these matters into consideration when exercising the discretion given to it by Art. 275 of the ADR.
OK, discretion is allowed. And in 7 month’s time, Petacchi would qualify for a slap on the wrist, rather than a ban. So what’s a panel to do? They gave him a year, taking the two months he didn’t compete earlier in 2007 and adding that to the time he’s been sitting out of competition since November 1st, so that his ban will be over and he can start racing again at the beginning of September.
What puzzles me is this: If the panel can see fit to exercise discretion, and they acknowledge that not too long from now this offense wouldn’t merit a suspension, couldn’t they have exercised a little more discretion? Like time already served? One year for taking one puff too many on the old inhaler seems like a pretty steep bit of punishment. Disqualifying his Giro results seems a pretty strong, sitting out for somewhere around nine months seems pretty serious, too (though some of those months included cycling’s “off season”). Making him sit out an entire year seems over the top, especially when the panel, themselves, said that they didn’t think Petacchi’s intention was to cheat.
Astana Gets A Shot At Redemption, Sort of…
And finally, the team that was once persona non grata at the Giro, Astana, is now actually in the race. Just one week before the race was due to begin, RCS announced that the Kazakhstan-based Astana would be allowed to race. It’s going to be interesting to see how well Andreas Kloden, Levi Leipheimer, Alberto Contador and company will fare, especially given that they haven’t been focusing on the training for the first of the three Grand Tours. Does this mean that a change of heart over at the ASO might be in the offing? As a great sage once said, “Not bloody likely.”
Alas, Poor Oscar …
Right, just one more. Really. I just can’t resist. Oscar Pereiro is at it again:
“This year has started totally different for me compared to last year, which was very complicated, difficult and caused me to lose a lot of the motivation I had to train and race and to live for cycling,” Pereiro told journalists in a press conference last week. “This year, I’ve recovered the (motivation) to train and race and do things well.”
Though nagged by bronchitis that forced him to leave early from Paris-Nice and to bypass the Vuelta a Castilla y León in March, Pereiro at least has his head in the right place.
He says he’s enjoying racing again and has rediscovered the necessary motivation and drive to focus on training and preparation rather than being distracted by fiestas and questions revolving around the 2006 Tour.
“I want to be one of the protagonists again at the front of the Tour,” he said. “I’m not going to say a number where I hope to finish, but just that I want to recover my position in the Tour bunch. Since 2004, the Tour has been an obsession for me and I want to return to the level where I can shine on the stage once again.”
Umm. Let’s see. A certain someone “won” the tour based on two things. First, an incredible gift by a (former?) friend, whose team allowed Pereiro to recover darn-near 30 minutes and be vaulted into the lead of the 2006 Tour de France. And second, due to a certain ruling that’s currently being appealed. Were I a competitor at that level, this is not how I’d want to “win” cycling’s biggest event. And, were I thrust into such a situation, I’d certainly remember that my win has an asterisk by it. As in, except for a half-hour gimme and a certain doping case, a certain someone would have finished way the heck out of contention.
Racejunkie has a pretty good take on it:
Quote o’ the Week (and lacking stenographic skills or perfect memory, I paraphrase): from we love Phil Liggett during Sunday’s Tour of Romandie coverage, discussing Oscar Pereiro’s performance: “Of course, he’s going to have to do a lot better than that, if he hopes to win another Tour de France, if indeed he won one in the first place.” Right on Phil, and forza Floyd!
For all his whinging, perhaps Pereiro needs an attitude adjustment. So here it is: Oscar, you’re a professional cyclist. You’re paid to ride your bike. Paid to compete. And paid to produce results. The folks signing your paycheck don’t want to hear excuses like the tripe you’re peddling about last year. You owed it to your team and your sponsors to put out your best effort. If you didn’t, then you failed them. Perhaps you’d like to refund them some of last year’s salary?
Being a professional means overcoming whatever frustrations and annoyances are thrown your way. Remember, you have a friend in California who’s been spending the better part of everything he has to clear his name, and who hasn’t been able to work as a pro cyclist for nigh on two years now. Get over yourself. Your “victory” in 2006 amounts to a great deal of good luck. Be thankful for the luck, and be respectful of the people who helped you get there — one of whom has the name Floyd.
Or, to put it another way, there’s an old story in Hollywood that goes something like this. One day an actress spoke to her director about a scene in the movie they were working on. “What’s my motivation?” she asked the director. “To get paid,” was his response.
`Nuff said. Capiche, Mr. Pereiro?
Basso is forgiven but Hamilton is still getting pounded? What crap!
BSMB,
That’s the Cliff Notes version. 😉
Pretty much seems like if you sing the tune certain people want you to sing, all is forgiven. If not, well, that risks becoming persona non grata in various quarters.
I’m so glad to hear that Levi will ride, at least in the Giro, and Alberto too.
Oscar has really become someone I love to boo and hiss at during the races. Is he going to pout if no one gives him any time in this year’s tour?!
Basso fighting doping seems more a gag… but to compare him with Hamilton is irrelevant.
Hamilton is not welcomed in Pro-Cycling because he is seen by a lot of people as a cheater who has stolen money to his fans too. Because that is pro event, no one organiser or team want to have his goods put in jeopardize by that kind of people.
To race as pro is not a right, if he wants he has the possibility to race as amateur, that is the difference between amateur and pro.
Hey Rant,
“¦Do we get paid for this? Augh”¦that’s right, we’re not professionals!
Here we go folks — Patxi Vila — the champion who believes in the “blood passport” is “nabbed” for going over the line! Hells bells — it’s an attack on ol’ Patxi “¦right, err”¦but maybe not? More likely it is an attack on the blood passport. Maybe it is just too damned “unclear” — at least to the tifosi — what in tarnation it actually involves. Never mind that the hand picked “international” panel of individuals by WADA? UCI? Has past judgment and ol’ Patxi is “over the line!” So lets toss out there that it is miniscule, just to show how “proper and fair” everything is being handled”¦I think it is time for me to make an emergency call to my doctor who makes my life better through chemistry — legally! (tic)
And being that I’m on this “wink, wink — nod, nod” kind of mood, I have a small question. How many actually believe that Mr Basso, was merely “hedging” his chances by squirreling away some extra blood for that “bad rainy day?”
Right — “wink, wink — nod, nod” — Isn’t this very much like that old famous line – “Hey, the check is in the mail! I dropped it in the mailbox, myself yesterday. ”
Hey — maybe I’m just getting way too old and crotchety but there is a sense of incredulity that rears its head when I hear that Pattie McQuickie is now turning Mr Basso into a “poster boy” — I’m wondering, will there be a “before and after” visual included?
Now just incase you assume that I have a particular ax to grind with Mr Basso — let me reassure you that I actually don’t — I have learned from direct experience that “spitting in to the wind” does not work. Mr Basso simply has some heavy hitter backers, why should I hold this against him? Besides — I have no intention of waking up one morning and finding a horse’s head on the pillow next to me. No thank you — I know my limitations!
As to the “bellyaching” going on whether Floyd or Hamilton are lacking the “right” connections — I’m giving it time — we’re a “new nation” sometimes we are not the first — but it seems to me, history bears me out — when we get mowing — we can build our own “connections.” I can just see it now: “So Floyd — why have you not come to me sooner, before all your troubles?” (tic)
You know what CAS needs — they need a good Joe Friday! — “Book’em Danno!” — or has the threat of Dickie P “hovering” in the wings — ready to swoop to power has mad CAS weak kneed with anticipatory pleasure? I for one — loved the verbal gymnastics! The WADA rules are in “change” again — and too bad Mr P — but you can’t benefit — Shhh- reminds me of another arbitration of interpretation — “Okay Mr Landis — we give you that the lab has done real sloppy work, but sorry, we cannot do anything about it”¦we promise to take it more seriously the next time, we promise!” (tic)
Can you see that “Meeting of the Board” at the UCI? “Okay people — we gotto give the impression of fair play — we miscalculated slightly — Astana has a bigger Tifosi backing then we anticipated! We need to make a “call” to Mr Z — he’s happy to get some of the heat off of him if he lets Astana race — we look good, he looks good — everybody wins! So — how about we vote? “˜And by the way — there is a buffet and wet bar, after the voting!” (tic)
And finally — “poor Oscar” — leave him alone! — When a man is a legend in his own mind — it is not “nice” to bust his bubble! ASO can’t be held responsible for poor Oscars’ condition — Somebody HAD to be given the prize money that rightfully should have gone to Floyd Landis — even if you could only use a bad “Photoshop” job on the handing over the money — somebody had to get it! — Can you blame poor Oscar for wanting to “believe?” (tic) So lets be “fair” — it’s not all poor Oscar’s fault.
Hey Vito! – What’s keeping that beer?
Jean,
I see your point. But having served his suspension, shouldn’t Hamilton be allowed to race again, regardless of whether or not he’s publicly repentant? It seems as though serving the suspension isn’t enough, that there is more ad-hoc punishment heaped on, keeping him and teams that employ him from racing in various events.
That said, I realize that human nature is that people want to see him admit to what he was convicted of, apologize, and then maybe they will forgive him. But what if he really was innocent, like he claimed? Should he have to admit to something he didn’t do, in order to return to the top of the pro ranks (assuming he still has the fitness to do so)? Granted, I suspect most people don’t think he’s innocent, but the only ones among us who really know the truth are Hamilton and those he confides in. The rest of us have to rely on the anti-doping adjudication system — which we hope gets things right, but we have to acknowledge may occasionally get things wrong.
Pereiro is an interesting cyclist. He was reported to have failed a doping test in the 2006 Tour when traces of the anti-asthma drug salbutamol were found in his urine sample. Like Pettachi, he had a TUE. Unlike Petacchi, he had the sense not to “overuse” the drug AFTER the stage was finished and was not prosecuted for a PED violation.
German reporters tried without much success to demonstrate that Pereiro was “Urko” on the infamous OP list. While he denied the insinuation, he was also adamant about not subjecting himself to DNA testing to clear himself in that affair, last year. He said:
“It’s unfair that cyclists have to prove our innocence. I am ready to do anything, but if I have to use DNA to demonstrate my innocence, I will leave cycling, because it’s obvious that cycling like that isn’t worth it.”
Any indication why the Giro changed its mind about Astana?
There’s more here than meets the eye.
Larry,
I agree that there’s more to the sudden reversal than meets the eye. Haven’t seen or heard what that might be, however.
Rant,
Millar is not particularly credible as an anti-doping spokesperson. Indeed he’s told so many lies it’s not easy to believe he’s telling any truth now. Basso is even less so. But really what else is to be expected…we all know who Pat McQuaid is and whose interests he works for.
Honor and integrity have to come first if you want credibility.
Regardless of your opinion of an athlete they shouldn’t be stuck wearing a scarlet letter until they pay a tithing to the church of the alphabet soup. If they’re given a sentence of two years and they serve it then they should be able to race. It shouldn’t matter whether they’ve admitted guilt, took money from your grandmother, or stole candy from a baby. If it is felt that their actions make them deserving of a longer or shorter sentence, than you give them a longer or shorter sentence. Blacklisting those who don’t pay the tithing to the alphabet soup, and fawning all over those who do isn’t going to help.
From what I saw, the public reason for the Astana invite was one of the continental level teams previously invited had to back out for some reason – can’t remember if a reason was given in the article I saw or whether I just forgot it. Anyway, they now had an opening.
However . . . that’s only the public reason. I suspect that there are a number of other continental level teams who would give their right arms for a chance to get their butts kicked by the big boys. So what is the real reason.
A couple of possibilities:
1. The Giro folks figured the continental teams available would be too weak and dilute the race. Go with a team that has demonstrated form this year.
2. The powers that be figured the heat from ASO’s banning of Astana was bad publicity, they put pressure on the Giro to give them a chance.
3. ASO apparently is trying to get into the Giro, maybe the Giro is doing this to rebuff them.
All this of course is pure speculation. I kind of guess some combo of 1 and 2, but who knows.
I agree with Ludwig on this point, although I think the sentiment applies to all currently involved with cycling.
There is precious little honor and integrity anywhere to be found. Everyone is so entrenched that there is no longer any common ground available, there is no trust because no one is seen as trustworthy. Perception being reality and all, they both suck at the moment.
Like our current political climate isn’t bad enough, does it have to mirrored in cycling?
As for the Giro – I imagine they saw how ASO’s decision to ban Astana was viewed (by and large either with indifference or scorn for the seeming hypocrisy of it, what with Rabo, High Road and pretty much every other team that’s been tainted) and saw an opportunity to one up the Grand Boucle. Honestly, which race is more compelling from a competitive standpoint now? So I vote for a mix of 2 and 3 from wschart.
William, I think that something is missing from your guess as to what might have happened with Astana and the Giro.
Remember that Team High Road was ALSO initially excluded from the Giro, but that Stapleton was able to talk to the Giro organizers and get the decision reversed. As far as I know, no one knows exactly what High Road had to do to get into the Giro. Did Stapleton promise to race his “A” team? Were a few Euros involved?
My suspicion is that Astana must have done something similar to what High Road did. I just don’t know what either team ACTUALLY did.
I can’t go with your reason 1. First off, I’ve seen no indication that the Swiss NGC team (the team whose Giro slot is being taken by Astana) had voluntarily dropped out of the Giro before the Giro extended an invitation to Astana. The reports indicate instead that the Swiss team NGC was “told that their initial invite had come prematurely”. William, it is obviously not standard operating procedure at the Giro to invite any team “prematurely”, and of course teams are not given provisional invitations to Grand Tours that are subject to cancellation at the whim of the race organizers a week before the race is to be run.
Your possible reason 2 seems more plausible to me, but then, what “powers that be” were involved? The “powers” in cycling are diverse and don’t see eye-to-eye about anything. So we have to look at each individual “power” to see who had an interest in Astana’s racing in the Giro. WADA and the other ADAs would not seem to have a reason to pressure the Giro in favor of Astana. The UCI might have been involved, but the Giro successfully resisted all UCI pressure up until now. It might be the case that the Kazakh government pressured the Italian government and that the Giro organizers were pressured by their own government to let Astana into the race. This is pretty much a wild guess, but if I’m looking for a possible “power” behind this decision, I’d probably look at the Kazakh connection first.
I don’t buy your point 3. If ASO wants to take over the Giro, they’ll do so regardless of whether Astana races there in 2008. This might provide ADDITIONAL impetus for an ASO takeover, as the takeover now appears to be the only way for ASO to bar teams from all 3 Grand Tours.
I’ll add a reason 4 to your list, though it’s just as speculative as reasons 1-3: I think that Astana and the Giro organizers struck a private deal for Astana’s participation in the Giro.
Good points, Larry. Whatever, I bet there was a lot of behind the scenes politicking going on, and perhaps some Euros did change hands.
You’re undoubtedly right that WADA is not involved in this, although they might be involved in ASO’s bans and the ToCal bans, at least indirectly.
But why this all should surprise us, I don’t know. I’d bet that politicking, and francs or liras changing hands was going on for quite a while. And our sports over here have it too. Look at all the extortion pro teams are using to get cities to build them stadiums. Are expansion franchises chosen based purely on the merits? I doubt it. How about awarding contracts for TV coverage?
Sports are big business and business is full of tricks.
William, understood that sport is big business and that it can get ugly. But this Giro business looks VERY ugly to me.
We may be happy to see Astana racing, but not at the expense of the Swiss NGC team, who probably built their whole season around the Giro. Throwing them out of the Giro at the last minute was not a nice thing to do. And if Astana’s appearance in the Giro can be chalked up to politicking and money changing hands, then it’s also fair to say that NGC LOST its Giro slot because of politicking and secret under-the-table payments.
I’m not so naive to believe that teams are selected to race in Grand Tours solely on the basis of grand principles. After all, Pro Tour teams have to pay for their Pro Tour licenses. Part of ASO’s beef with UCI is that ASO would like teams to RIDE and not BUY their way into the Tour de France. Or so they say.
But until this particular incident, I’d never suspected that anyone could politick or purchase the exclusion from a Grand Tour of a team already selected by the Tour to race … a team that had done nothing wrong that I’ve heard about … a team whose only crime was taking up a race slot that the race organizers decided at the last minute they’d rather give to someone else. Worse, that such a thing could be done a week before the start of the race.
I’d guess that the Giro paid something to team NGC to make this up to them, because we did not hear any screams of protest out of Switzerland … but even if the team was made whole, their riders got, er … well, you know what they got.
Maybe there’s a more innocent explanation for what’s taken place. Again, we see that the race organizers do not have to explain their decisions, and that we are all the worse for this.
I agree, Larry. I never meant to imply that politicking and crossing palms with silver were acceptable practices. It would be nice if entry into big races were according to some sort of point system: so many points for top placing in races, etc. You could have a computer do it all; pretty hard to bribe or politick a computer.
About Hamilton
I suppose if Hamilton didn’t lie that his blood could show his chimer twin even today.
His case, if it was the truth would have been very intersting for science, but it seems that no scientist didn’t follow the case .
Why? Probably because they have seen the truth!
And if Hamilton don’t lie he could provide similar fresh blood to clear his name.
If I am working in a bank, if I comdemned to have stolen money, even if I am saying that is not true, I am sure that no bank will give me a job, especially if I am seeing as a thief and a liar. Hamilton is not kept out of racing because of his doping past but more for his behaviour around his case.
Larry,
Good to read you again – boy, am I glad I did not leave myself open to “itemization” – sheeesh – talk about a “tough” crowd! – but seriously – I believe that there are truths in both of your observations – but then I’m am old…or
1 – I am at that certain age?
2 – My testosterone levels are in flux.
3 – I believe in a better life through chemistry.
4 – Fantasy is better then any reality.
5 – payola works.
6 – In order to have a winner, you have to have a loser.
7 – All variables are possible.
8 – Dirty tricks are a given.
9 – in a game of rules, underhandedness is a given
10 – in reality – I am jaded.
All said with (tic)
Good to read you again Larry
Jean,
I see your point. Whether or not Hamilton told the truth, it’s how others perceive him and his behaviour that affects his employment possibilities today. But it’s a bit of a Catch-22 situation. Having served his time, how would he now go about regaining the trust and reputation to continue as a pro? Someone would have to hire him, and someone would need to let him race. USA Cycling gives him a license to race as a pro, but what’s that worth if he can’t actually use it?
So, in the end, what it appears to say is that regardless of the actual truth, if you’re convicted of a doping offense, the best thing to do is to cop to it, beg forgiveness and hope that through good works and a concerted effort to rehab your name that you’d be able to race again when the suspension ends.
That seems to be the only strategy to stay in the sport. For someone who’s truly wrongfully convicted (I’m not drawing a conclusion on Hamilton here), that’s a bitter pill to swallow.
But, as the saying goes, life isn’t fair.
Ludwig and Cabazon,
Integrity and honor are certainly important. When one (or a group) is perceived as lacking those, credibility is in short supply. Pro cycling certainly needs a shot of something to restore a sense of credibility to the racing.
Now, about David Millar as a spokesperson for the anti-doping efforts. I was trying to be a bit ironic there. Guess it didn’t work. Personally, I don’t think he’d have been repentant if he hadn’t been caught red-handed. I suspect that he would have kept right on until he did get caught — or until the doping killed him — or he retired from the sport, whichever came first.
But, people like Millar and Basso and Joe Papp are capable of telling their stories about doping, and the consequences of doping. There are some powerful lessons to be learned from those experiences. Of the three, I’d have to say Joe Papp appears to me to have the most sincere change of heart. He’s not racing anymore, and he came pretty close to dying because of his doping. So he’s seen the horrific consequences up close and personal, and perhaps is in a better position to understand the full cost of doping. Basso and Millar, it was a means to an end, and being anti-doping now may also be a means to an end.
I wasn’t thrilled about Joe Papp’s participation in the Landis hearings last May, but Joe has a story worth telling, if only so that others won’t be tempted to make the same mistakes he did. But, unfortunately, he’s not the big name like a Millar or Basso. If the UCI signed Joe Papp on, many folks would say, “Who?” But with Basso and Millar, those are recognizable names.
Frankly, though, in both Basso’s and Millar’s cases, I have to wonder whether their new-found “anti-doping ambassadorships” have more to do with resurrecting their careers than with any real strong feelings about the subject.
Larry and William,
Good discussion going there.
William, understood that you were not defending shoddy business practices in sport, and that you were pointing out that they exist in cycling and elsewhere, which is true. I personally think this particular incident may be considerably more shoddy than average (we don’t know all the facts, so we can’t say for certain), and I personally do not want to excuse what the Giro has done here as being “business as usual”.
Your comment on a “points system” is a very good one, and got me thinking. The Grand Tours could institute a system for selecting teams like the one used by the NCAA for college basketball: there would be a certain number of teams that would be “automatic selections”, and a certain number of teams selected “at large”. Better, the Grand Tours could televise the selection process, the way the NCAA televises “Selection Sunday” for their college basketball tournament. You could have TV crews at various sites where the “bubble teams” had assembled to watch the selection show, and show their jubilation (or heartbreak) at being selected (or not selected). Great drama, great ratings, great business!
Morgan, that’s one funny list!