UCI names names in biological passport program

It had to happen. It's almost Le Tour time:

Lampre's Pietro Caucchioli and Fuji-Servetto's Ricardo Serrano have been suspended their teams after being named by the UCI as riders who showed abnormal values in the year-old system. Both teams stated that the riders showed the abnormal results during the 2008 season while riding for other teams.

Note that these are 'abnormal values' alone - no-one has been "caught" with a specific needle in their arm, or whatever.

But wait, there's more:

Also named were former world champion Igor Astarloa, former Saunier Duval rider Ruben Lobato Elvira, who is without a team for this season, and Italian Francesco De Bonis (Serramenti PVC Diquigiovanni - Androni Giocattoli).

As I say, there may be a smoking gun, but nothing is "proven" beyond the fact that the blood values that are monitored were shown to vary over time in a substantial and unusual way that is usually indicative of doping. The ball is in the riders court to defend themselves, rightly or wrongly.

Bazayev does a Chicken and forgets where he is...or should be

Astana enforce the 'make sure you tell us where you are' rule:

PARIS, June 15 - Astana have suspended their Kazakh rider Assan Bazayev for two weeks because he did not provide thorough information on his whereabouts for the purposes of drug testing. Kazakh road champion Bazayev, 28, was supposed to take part in the Tour of Switzerland last Saturday but he did not start the nine-day stage race.

After what happed to 'Chicken' Rasmussen, you'd think they'd have all learnt.

Doper Kohl says what they all say - it's not just me! It's everybody!

Of course you'd be thinking that - how else do you come to terms with the unethical practice of cheating? Especially so at a very public, very high-profile race like Le Tour? Whilst there's some merit in the argument that if I can only come 3rd, and everyone else in the Top 10 was keeping up pretty well, and I am taking CERA, then they must all be taking CERA too, it's flawed thinking. Who's to say that the rest of the Top 10 weren't clean but simply substantially better prepared, better supported or - quite likely - had bigger "engines" than yourself?

“At first, I once again tried to reassure myself: ‘OK, I was dead—but we were all dead,”’ Kohl said. “Many other riders had taken (banned substances).

Which isn't to say that some other riders weren't also taking advantage of some "help", either. Just that we can't actually know it.

Katusha's Colom caught out by blood passport, A-sample suggests EPO

Not-so-funny coincidences: first Pfannberger gets caught out, then the Katusha 5X salary penalty contract is proposed, now Colom is pinged for an A-sample.

Team Katusha's Antonio Colom has been provisionally suspended by the UCI following a positive test for recombinant EPO. The sport's governing body announced Tuesday that Colom returned the positive test following an out-of-competition control on April 2, 209. He was targeted for additional controls using information from his blood profile and his race schedule, the UCI said.

Awaiting the B-sample, par for the course. Apparently another blood-profiling success story, if the UCI is to be believed. The team expresses "surprise". How about you - are you surprised?

Is 5x annual salary a fair penalty? Transparency and equity in discouraging doping "cheats"

Oh the tangled web we weave - not that anyone is necessarily being deceitful, but how much "discouragement" do bike riders - or any athletes - need?

Following the positive doping test of its Austrian rider Christian Pfannberger in early May prior to the start of the Giro d'Italia, the Russian team Katusha said it would implement stronger anti-doping regulations in its contractual relationship with its employees, the racers. The policies take the form of an additional chapter to the cyclists' work contracts including a clause which states that riders will have to pay a fine of five times their annual salary in the event of a sanction given for doping offenses.

Firstly, does a clearly defined financial penalty work? The current 1 year UCI-sanctioned penalty doesn't seem to work, although we can't be sure exactly how many riders were "dissuaded" by the thought of losing a year's pay. It may have discouraged none. It didn't discourage the likes of Kohl. Indeed, once you are caught and the legal battle ensues, it can be years before the fine is paid. Perhaps never, if you just quit the sport.

So will multiplying the fine by 5 make a difference? A rider already loses his contract - which is his livelihood - and even when he or she returns their contract value is severely impacted. History shows us that riders generally come back to lesser teams on lower wages, if they come back at all. It is doubtful that Landis or even Basso are on the sort of deal that they would have been on had things just continued as they were. Indeed, the financial loss from personal sponsorships alone must be massive. So why add further financial discouragement? Won't that just lead to court battles and possible personal bankrupties, or worse?

If the existing financial penalties don't work, and the public humiliation doesn't dissuade, what are we seeking to achieve? How is this more "transparent" than what we have? And what if a rider is actually innocent but is nevertheless found guilty? It's easy to say that that the tests and procedures are flawless, but are they? Whilst guilty "cheats" do bring dowm teams and cause widespread distress, perhaps it is possible to also go too far in protecting the team, its image, and its funding. Teams are after all made up of people, and last time I checked bikes don't ride themselves.