Do you believe the French lab that conducts the blood testing for the UCI is just plain incompetent?

Question

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I don't want to think that I'm totally naive, but the latest news on Vino just adds fuel to the argument that the lab is a bungling mess. Either they screw up a lot or there is some effort to get rid of most of the non-French riders in an attempt to return the French teams to their pre-Festina debacle dominance. (No offense to the French people - the Tour organizers, L'Equipe editors, etc. are a class of their own). Again, I may have my head in the sand but I still believe in Tyler and Floyd.

Some very well thought out answers so far and gives me a lot to "chew" on. For the one who thinks I should have more cycling knowledge - I'm a former mtb racer, vintage racing road bike collector and enthusiast, worked for organizers in several American pro races, and have travelled to Europe to follow several races including the Tour. Probably know more cycling history than you give me credit for.

Wow- things continue to become even worse with Razzy dropping out. Will Kid Contador become a marked man now? Will this TdF winner simply be the last man left on a bike come Sunday?

Thanks again for the great answers. Maybe I'll ease up a little on all the organizations but I think they are their own worst enemy. Somebody needs to learn a few PR skills (like timing of important announcements, etc)

Answer 1

The labs doing the testing are accredited by the World Andi-Doping Agency (WADA) rather than the UCI, so they handle tests for every sport that's in the Olympics. Unfortunately WADA's chairman, Dick Pound, has been very vocal about his beliefs that all athletes are dirty, and that he's going to catch them. This has bred an organizational culture where positive test results are a measure of success, and created at least the appearance that the labs are being pressured to find positives. In the Landis case (not to say that he was in fact clean) this meant testing and re-testing a sample that had already shown signs of contamination until the result looked positive.
I don't think it has anything to do with French vs. non-French riders. The labs aren't supposed to know who's samples they have. It probably just looks bad because most of the tests are being performed on the top 50 ranked riders and stage/race winners. French cycling may have made more of an effort than other countries to clean up after '98, and thus don't have that many riders performing well enough to be tested often.

Answer 2

Let's be honest though. The lab may be French, but the French gain nothing by declaring Vino a doper. No French riders were helped by the Astana withdrawal. Sylvain Chavanel is the highest placed French rider on GC and he is in 32 place. So now he may be 27th or 28th. Big deal. French cycling's real problem is not with other countries doping, it's with the development of young riders. They have not had success in this area in years. The Festina scandal in the 1990's didn't help.

But in reality, this doping scandal hurts France more than it helps because it hurts the integrity of the race and ultimately the sport which they love so much. Imagine what would happen if we in America learned that half of the NASCAR teams out there were using enhanced gas. Or the Indianapolis Colts had an organized steroid program. The French need a strong national event to match the pride that they have in it. It is a beautiful thing and this nonsense only undermines it.

Answer 3

Wow LS. It amazes me that someone that obviously knows nothing about cycling can have such a strong conviction about it. Learn about the sport, and then comment. As to the question, I too agree with you to an extent. I beleive that the blood testing is incompetent, but I don't think that they are trying to help the French riders or hurt the foreign riders. This doesn't do anyrhing but hurt the sport. As is eveident from LS response above, people who don't know much about cycling think that everyone is doping. The ones who are caught doping need to be kicked out of le Tour forever. And if someone is "suspected" of doping, the officials need to keep there mouths shut until the actually get a positve test result (Lance)...

Answer 4

Because the answerer (if they have the knowlege of cycling to be called that) knows nothing about cycling heres Lance's pre cancer record.

1993-Champion of the United States.
World Champion (You gotta be good to be that)
Stage Win in the Tour
95- Classica San Sebastian (Climbers Classic)
96- Fleche Wallon (Another Hilly Classic)
Cancer
98- Tour of Luxemburg and 4th in the Tour of Spain
99-Tour win

World Champion, only the greatest cyclists have that destiction. You aren't a nobody if you are the World Champion.

Sorry about that rant, but Lance was great before his cancer fight. On to your question. I somewhat agree with you. I think that there needs to be more than one facility to conduct tests. (But it cant be in the riders nation, for obvious reasons) I think the UCI should have their own test site in Swiss, where they are located, so nothing fishy happens in the french lab.

Answer 5

I agree that there should be redundant testing facilities, within reason. Using only one facility allows for possible problems like favoritism and corruption.

As for having faith in your favorite riders, keep it up. There's a lot of problems in cycling and the evidence seems to keep stacking up that every rider at one time or another has doped (my opinion). Testing should be well organized, consistent, and thorough to deter further doping.

Answer 6

I think people cheat that's what i think. I think lance dopestrong cheated I think floyd cheated. I think these new guys cheated. MANY old PAST WINNERS have come out and admitted they doped at some point during their careers. I'll go with that info than blame a FRENCH lab.

here's a fact that many seem to forget about lance dopestrong and riders like floyd

THEY WEREN'T EVEN THE BEST RIDERS ON THEIR TEAMS BEFORE THEY WENT ON THE TOUR.
heck I believe lance was asked to leave his pervious team before he won all them titles in the tour....BECAUSE HE WAS NO GOOD.

but then he gets cancer,recovers..and wins 7 in a row of the harderst bike race in the world?

come on now.

and thats no disrespect to your question.