Mario signs with Liquigas!

Say it ain't so. Super Mario will not be riding a Specialized next season. According to this article on ProCycling, Mario has left Domino to go to Liquigas.

2005 Tour route unveiled

Procycling reports on the 2005 Tour de France route being unveiled. First looks makes it look like Lance could go for number 7. No matter what the course, I think he and Johann will have a game plan.

Sorry we haven't posted in a while. Interbike came and went, full time jobs have gotten in the way, and we've actually been trying to get some riding in - which hasn't been easy. Curses this colder weather already!!!

Congrats to Heras on Vuelta win!

Congrats to Roberto Heras on his third Vuelta win. Despite his problems at the Tour, Roberto came back to form to outpace the field at the Vuelta. During one stage he dropped everyone off his wheel during a difficult climb. Coming in second was Santiago Perez from Phonak. Could Perez be the next leader of the team despite Tyler's legal troubles? Third was Mancebo, who actually had a very good Tour if our minds remember correctly. Very good job to all the riders. The climbs were tough and the heat was tougher. Here's looking to next year!!!

Miscommunications and Mistakes . . . a trail of footprints?

Here's even more evidence that the testing lab, IOC and WADO are not as organized as one might assume for organizations with the fate of athletes careers in the balance.

Conflicting statements from the director of the lab and the IOC medical chairman. They disagree as to whether freezing the blood was agreed protocol or procedural error. Both are quoted by the AP with conflicting statements.

Steven Wilson's AP article


So which is it guys? Sounds like a lot of miscommunication going on here? Are we sure we are doing the other steps in the tests right too if we can't even get the story straight or agree on the storage proceedures? Did we train the testers for the Vuelta the same way?
We're just days into this and already WADA is acknowledging changes to the testing proceedures need to be made for storage . . . perhaps we should have thought this through ahead of time?! Are there other parts of the test that also need revision?

Will we find other mistakes in the testing proceedure under more detailed and open examination?

My personal life experiences have shown that usually where you find one foot print in the mud, other's aren't far away.

Holding all to the same standard: Sanction the Test LAB too!

Here's a novel thought . . .

If testing lab can make

1) that big a mistake with a critical sample
2) at arguable the biggest race of the year
3) on one of the most touted riders in the race (there were a handful of top riders likely/predicted to have a shot at the win which means these top riders samples are known entities “to handle with extra special care")

and they have the "careers" of the riders in the palm of there hands when they perform these critical tests and make monumental decisions based on them,

THEN . .

perhaps the LAB & research team that did testing should be given a 2 year BAN from participating in any sports or cycling sports testing by the UCI and IOC (or 8 yrs so the are banned for two consecutive olympics) for this confirmed guilt regarding testing!!!

There are certainly other testing labs out there that could be given the chance to "try harder" and "be more professional" with the handling of critical samples.

What kind of credibility do we give a lab following this sort of screw up? What reassurances or confidence do we have that they aren't making "OTHER" mistakes that we don't yet or may never know about?

Let's hold the "blood police" to the same high “one strike” standard we are holding our riders to. Seems only fair to me and it would certainly send a message to all that testers out there that the testing should be done "accurately", "professionally" and with "great care".

I don't want to hear lame excuses from the IOC like "the lab was heavily overworked" or "this was an easy mistake to make because other samples are suppose to be stored a certain way". That's the whole reason you have "PROFESSIONALS" that are "WELL TRAINED" and know what they are doing.

How many millions of dollars and years of timing does the IOC have to spend preparing for the games? Perhaps you spend a few less dollars on fancy road signs and hire an extra dozen lab researchers for three weeks and make sure they are well trained" so critical testing isn't a rush job or with poorly trained workers . . . Then would we have an overload problem? Try the same excuse for the rider and see if it works . . I was overworked the last 3 months with the TDF and all so I made a little mistake . . . or it was an easy mistake to make to get my blood levels messed up . . . it doesn't hold water for the rider so why let the judge and jury get away with this lack of professionalism.

I'd do the same thing when a bikeshop works on my bike and they screw it up or a mechanic mess up my car. I don't take my business there again . . . it's a fairly simple and time proven management concept.

Add your name to this blog petition via the comment link below to voice your support for sanctioning the LAB and holding them to the same high standard we hold riders to!

Tyler will keep his Olympic Gold.

Due to human error in storing the B blood sample, the sample can not be used to run the same test. Therefore, without two positive tests, Tyler will keep his Olympic Gold as reported here.

Hamilton's Olympic tests reveal conflicting results; test accuracy battle begins

Tyler Hamilton's Olympic "B" samples and Vuelta "B" sample testing was revealed today and low and behold, the Olympic sample shows conflictiong results. The Vuelta "B" sample is negative however.

What does this mean?

Well for starters it casts some real shadows on the testing reliability. 4 tests in a short time period on the same athlete and only 3 are the same. Which one's are right and which ones are off? Now it is also interesting to pose the question whether or not this same testing took place at the TDF (where Tyler also showed great Time Trialing)? I've yet to see this question addressed on any of the media sources or press releases. If this testing was done on Tyler at the Tour de France (speculating here), it could mean 3 positives and 3 negatives in a very short period of time. This would take the odds from 75/25 down to 50/50. Certainly not the kind of accuracy I'd want to try and hang my hat on and defend at this point for inquisiton proceedings. UCI and the IOC will definately have some more explaining to do, though the ball is squarely in their court regarding Tyler's racing fate.

It's also a very new test and neither the actual test data for the samples or the testing proceedures have been released. What is know is that top tier athletes do sometimes show actual physical differences and chemical differences from regular individuals due to the intense training and stress they put their bodies under. This test has never before been used in athletics for this purpose. Is it possible the accuracy is off due to athlete's training and chemical differences? Is it possible the testing proceedures weren't properly followed? Is it possible the data is subject to medical interpretation and different doctors would look at the same data and interpret a positive as a negative? What's the historical accuracy of the test in other studies and are their other factors that can influence false positives?

These are all unanswered questions at this point. The good news is Tyler does now have a "leg" to stand on. Be it "one leg", but his deck of cards isn't leaning quite as far over now that the negative test at the Olympics has been revealed.

And he may be getting a "second leg of support" . . . Phonak has announced that they will be setting up an independent board of experts to review the testing proceedures and data to make their own determination on Tyler's innocence or guilt. This is good news as it appears to be a very professional way for Phonak to support Tyler, while still keeping their distance so this incident doesn't risk bringing the whole team under sanction.

One thing's for sure . . . this one is far from over. As always, check out www.VeloNews.com for great coverage on the details.

Jittery Joe's to start sponsoring juniors!!!

Being the superfans that we are, we love this announcement. Jittery Joe's, you know that coffee house team from the Tour of Georgia, has been a major supporter of american cycling for years now. They have just announced that they are interested helping develop the youth of today become better amateur and pro cyclists. They are going to sponsor 3 to 5 teams next year. This is awesome. We always enjoy watching the JJ guys ride at events like Downer's Grove. Soon maybe the next Lance Armstrong will be riding for them and they'll help discover him. If you have a team with 5 members, shoot them an email and get some funds.