Professional Cycling For the Fans - Oh oh, Cavendish?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jan/06/mark-cavendish-missed-drugs-test

Isolated incident or the beginning of the end?

Isolated incident.

isolated.

Cavendish will be a hobo in 2 days. SHUNNED FROM SOCIETY!

I care, but I don't care.

non-story, you have to remember that once successful in the UK, the press will do what they can to put you down.

Don't they let the athletes miss like 3 or 4 before they actually care?

Don't they let the athletes miss like 3 or 4 before they actually care?

thats what was said in the article

I just found it strange that they specifically said they reason he missed is because of some BBC and Giro business. It's almost like trying too hard to convince us this is an isolated incident because he's Cav and busy with all the glamor stuff so missing a test is "of course" within reason.

I think you reading to far into it. and I think thats why they do things like this, because they know others will also feed into it and create conflicted opinions. He's at the top and everyone knows you can only stay at the top for so long. Everyone below is reaching and grabbing for that spot. Media does everything they can to help rip that person off the top because it will give them more to write about.

he was having dinner with Alberto. Spanish beef.





... also, wonder why this is just coming out now?

I have no idea what the UCI and WADA protocols are, but do they have to make this public if the tolerance is 3-4 missed tests?

moved from Road

Most certainly an isolated incident, I hope.

Daniel Tosh is right: let these athletes juice so we can see the best human beings pound for pound.

Isolated? Whatevs.

You're a pro and have an assistant-manager-yes men-teamates to remind you about this one important thing. It's not like your missing a meal. It's something that the whole cycling world cares about.

Since he's British, he can get away with going the Millar route. Dope; get caught, then talk about the "evils of doping" and everyone will think you're a hero.

You're a pro and have an assistant-manager-yes men-teamates to remind you about this one important thing. It's not like your missing a meal. It's something that the whole cycling world cares about.
Several Pro's have written about the difficulty of using the new ADAMS system and how it doesn't confirm that modifications have been correctly input and schedules updated.

Can you guarantee where you'll be March 5th at 2:20 PM?

Sure! If you pay me over $2m dollars a year (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2004053/Mark-Cavendish-shock-join-Bradley-Wiggins-Team-Sky.html) to ride a bike. ;)

Really, this stuff isn't rocket science. I don't think Cav is doping, but it is a silly and unnecessary mistake, with no excuses. And to his credit, he doesn't seem to be making any.

Really, this stuff isn't rocket science.
You might consider these data. http://www.usada.org/rule-violation-statistics/ 316 whereabouts failures in one year, and that's just for the U.S. With that many, it seems fair to ask if perhaps there's a problem with the system.

Good link, thanks for posting. Tried to check WADA for the same, but they don't seem to publish that data. Pity - would be interesting to see global numbers for comparison.

316 is an exaggeration. Cav missed reporting his whereabouts only, which accounts for 285 of that 316. I am not commenting on the logistics of actually providing a sample.

That said, 'whereabouts failures' are only around 5% of the total for 2010. That appears to be across all sports, not just cycling. Given the downward trendline for the data on missed tests since 2000, I would expect even that relatively low percentage will decrease in coming years too.

In the UK - I presume that is Cav's national governing body - there were only 57 whereabouts failures (http://www.ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rule-violations/facts-and-figures/). Not sure exactly what % of the total that is, but it also seems pretty low considering it is across 40 or 50 different sporting bodies.

So no, I do not think that indicates a systemic failure at all.

Oh, and btw - here is the detailed user guide for ADAMS (http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/ADAMS/Training_User_Guides/ADAMS_User_Guide_Athletes_V3.0_28Nov2011.pdf) (PDF) the system that atheletes must use to report their whereabouts.

For contrast, here is a high-level reference manual for the space shuttle (http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/shutref/index.html) (web).

I maintain that one of these is really not rocket science. :)

316 is an exaggeration. Cav missed reporting his whereabouts only, which accounts for 285 of that 316. I am not commenting on the logistics of actually providing a sample.
There were 316 cases where the athlete did not accurately report their whereabouts. In 61 of those cases, the error resulted in a missed test; in 285, the error did not. Since the discussion was about the difficulty of logging location, and it is safe to presume the athlete can't know beforehand if an error will result in a missed test or not, I think the correct comparison is to 316; the number of times an incorrect location was entered regardless of later outcome.

No, that is not correct. They are specifically different.

A missed test is a "failure by the Athlete to be available for Testing at the location and time specified in the 60-minute time slot identified in his/her Whereabouts Filing for the day in question"

A filing failure is a "failure by the Athlete ... to make an accurate and complete Whereabouts Filing"

[source (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=international%20standard%20for%20testing&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wada-ama.org%2Frtecontent%2Fdocument%2Fist_en_2009.pdf&ei=duMIT6bHF8_UiAKFnoWsCQ&usg=AFQjCNH-fSpBopAZT5MUjUOoj8wndOtLTg&cad=rja)].

Although I don't think the 1% difference between the two numbers is material. My point is the same.

I just found it strange that they specifically said they reason he missed is because of some BBC and Giro business. It's almost like trying too hard to convince us this is an isolated incident because he's Cav and busy with all the glamor stuff so missing a test is "of course" within reason.

I got the same impression.

"Of course I totally understand the importance of testing in sport. I was tested by the UCI [cycling (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/cycling)'s world governing body] a couple of weeks before that and twice in the fortnight after and had around 60 tests in all last year.

Were any of them positive? Says it all really. Having built him up, the press would just love to knock Cav back down. Isn't that what they do all the time?

Since he's British, he can get away with going the Millar route. Dope; get caught, then talk about the "evils of doping" and everyone will think you're a hero.

Well said!

I'm reading Cav's new book , "Boy Racer", and he seems to have a pretty dim view and little sympathy for riders who doped during there careers. After reading his views on some of the dopers, I would find it hard to believe that he would dope himself.

But then again, many riders have lied about there drug use, so who knows? I just would like to believe he is telling us the truth, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt...

More importantly, how do you guys think he is going to do this season without his lead out train, and with Griepel seemingly having made more improvements?

My guess is that he is not going to be nearly as dominant a sprinter as he was in the past without Renshaw's head clearing space for him. People underestimate the value of the HTC train. He'll still win quite a few based on speed and smarts, but it won't be as lopsided as it used to be in the past.

More importantly, how do you guys think he is going to do this season without his lead out train, and with Griepel seemingly having made more improvements?

My guess is that he is not going to be nearly as dominant a sprinter as he was in the past without Renshaw's head clearing space for him. People underestimate the value of the HTC train. He'll still win quite a few based on speed and smarts, but it won't be as lopsided as it used to be in the past.

Any idea which team can put together the best train?

This was definitely an isolated incident. He was tested shortly before and shortly after the missed test.



My guess is that he is not going to be nearly as dominant a sprinter as he was in the past without Renshaw's head clearing space for him....
My guess is it won't make a big difference. Maybe 1 or 2 less sprint wins later on in a grand tour.

If he wasn't such a good sprinter, I don't think HTC would have been motivated to basically build a team around him. ;)

Since he's British, he can get away with going the Millar route. Dope; get caught, then talk about the "evils of doping" and everyone will think you're a hero.http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/8/27/teehee128643165721235724.jpg

More importantly, how do you guys think he is going to do this season without his lead out train, and with Griepel seemingly having made more improvements?

My guess is that he is not going to be nearly as dominant a sprinter as he was in the past without Renshaw's head clearing space for him. People underestimate the value of the HTC train. He'll still win quite a few based on speed and smarts, but it won't be as lopsided as it used to be in the past.

He had a great "carry" to his World Championship Jersey, but didn't have a great lead out in the chaos of the finishing hurlyburly. I seem to remember he still won tho', didn't he?

Oh, and two stage wins out of 6 in the Tour of Quatar in spite of sickness on the flight over and for a day or three afterwards and a crash on the finishing straight on the final stage.

As for a Millar-alike story (or should that be Millarlite), at 60 tests in a year, together with the biological passport, it would be pretty damn difficult to avoid detection.

Lead out train or not, cav is the best sprinter in the game right now. I don't think the switch to Sky is going to cost him a lot of victories. Greipel looks like he has been juicin. Should be good to see them go head to head.