Garmin-Transitions owner defends the sport against blanket accusations, welcomes retests
He’s since backtracked on his comments, but the chief prosecutor of the Italian anti-doping committee CONI Ettore Torri raised a storm last week when he was quoted as saying that all the riders in the bunch were doping. In all likelihood the words were said out of frustration, or perhaps to be provocative, but his statement echoes a sentiment about the sport that some members of the public believe to be true. Namely, that it is impossible to win, or even compete in major events, without chemistry.
Part of the blame undoubtedly lies with the continuous stream of doping scandals, which puts the sport in a poor light compared to others. That said, part of the reason for the difference is that cycling has implemented a huge number of progressive tests, while the other sports have held back.
Things have moved on since the 90s, when it was believed that huge numbers of the pro peloton were using EPO. Many of them were doing so simply to survive, as the absence of a test for the substance plus a dearth of the monitoring of blood levels made things very difficult for anyone aspiring to race clean. Now, with better testing and the biological passport, there are more and more riders saying that things have changed.
One of those who has stated it is possible to compete without doping – and who has a blemish-free reputation – is the Italian rider Marco Pinotti. He expressed frustration with Torri’s statement that the riders who had admitted using banned substances to him claimed that everyone in the peloton was breaking the same rules. “If you interrogate rider connected with doping, what did you expect them to say?” he asked on his Twitter feed last week. “They prefer to hide behind the belief “everyone is doping” instead admitting they are losers, wanckers (sic), cheaters, liars.”
Another who has been frustrated by the comments is Jonathan Vaughters, CEO of the Garmin-Transitions squad. He set up his team in order to show that it is possible to compete clean, and has been one of the most outspoken people in cycling about that subject. He told VeloNation in recent days that he has been frustrated by the scattergun approach in condemning everyone, and says that there are clear signs that things are much better than before. While some riders might be breaking rules, Vaughters argues that there are large numbers who are doing things in the right way.
Aside from giving his perspective on that matter, he also speaks about the Alberto Contador doping case. Vaughters also states that if the transfusion test science is good, he’d welcome widespread retesting of riders’ samples from this and other Tours.
—
VeloNation: Ettore Torri made a very surprising statement in recent days. He said: “I’m not the only one saying it. Lately, all of the cyclists I’ve interrogated have said that everyone dopes.” For those completing clean in the peloton, how difficult are those blanket statements?
Jonathan Vaughters: That kind of stuff is hard for riders to hear. Cyclists aside, I also think it is also pretty demoralising to the anti-doping community…for those who are toiling in laboratories, for those working on new tests and those who are executing those tests out in the field. In essence, he is saying that their work is not worthwhile.
His perspective is understandable and, you know, those thoughts are probably also the thoughts of a lot of people at this point in time. Torri has only been exposed to prosecuting cases, and to hearing admissions from people. However his exposure to the mathematics of it all, the broad data of it all is very limited.
There are important questions that have to be considered. When you look at the raw data, the mean total of haemoglobin values from 1996 to now, what does that show? What does the trending show? What does the overall haematological values from 1996 until now, or even from 2000 until now? What are the trend-lines in there?
VN: So do you think he is not considering these figures?
JV: The point is, he is not a trained haematologist, I don’t think he has the capability to analyse that data. But if he did, what he would find is a truth that is very, very far from what he is saying. As I said, I would be very hurt if I were someone working in anti-doping, WADA and whatnot, to see my work disparaged like that.
I understand that he has been exposed to a certain side of it, but there is a very factual body of data that is completely contrary to what he has said. For example, there has been a mean decrease of haemoglobin of 11 percent over the last ten years. Also, the total number of tests administered has increased by at least 400 percent…it is an enormous number.
VN: Testing has certainly increased relative to how it was fifteen or twenty years ago…
JV: Yes. Cycling has been the first sport to accept, and be the index point for tests from CERA, homologous transfusions, corticoids, Aranesp, haematocrit, the EPO tests… All of those were indexes in cycling, meaning that cycling was the first sport to accept it.
Fact is, a lot of sports haven’t accepted those tests – even to this day. Cycling has accepted and executed more of those tests – and done so by an order of magnitude – than any other sport.
You have got all of those enforcements in place. You have got the general haematological lines and biological markers trending downwards…I’m sorry, but from a scientific standpoint, from an analytic standpoint, the truth is, very simply, that to compete clean now is better than it has ever been. Period.
VN: Yet the headlines are still bad in the sport, with several high profile cases occurring…
JV: Well, when you have high-profile positives going on, what is that indicative of? I think that is indicative of the system working. Of the tests becoming more refined. Of the tests being able to detect smaller quantities. Of new tests, such as this plasticizer test coming out. What I don’t understand is why are people upset….why are people denigrating the anti-doping system in cycling, when this news of the test for plasticizers is actually probably the best news that we could have had in the sport? That should be the headline.
If you want a headline that concerns riders nowadays…one that concerns young riders, one that concerns riders who have worked very hard to be clean, and one that concerns the people who have done the research and the hard work to get these tests off the ground…the headline here is that there is a potential test for transfusions. Okay, it hasn’t been ratified yet…I am aware of that – but there is the possibility of a test that can detect autologous blood transfusions. That is a headline! For me, that is a very good news headline…that is excellent news.
And that, quite frankly, for me personally outweighs any sort of scandalous blow-up, high profile athlete, or any other thing. At the end of the day, if I am looking for a race to be competed in a clean way, I want to see the most rigorous testing possible. If occasionally you get a positive test out of that, well then that’s the point!
VN: The plasticizer test is reportedly being used on Alberto Contador’s samples in order to prove or disprove the theory that he might have had transfusions. Would you welcome it to be run over samples from other riders who competed in this year’s Tour?
JV: Sure. If it is an accurate test – I am not familiar with the science behind this test, I didn’t even know it existed until this whole thing happened – but if it is a scientifically proven and ratified test and it meets WADA criteria, then I am totally in support of it. WADA has got eight years from the point from which the test is verified scientifically to look at retroactive samples, and I don’t see any problem with that whatsoever.
If the test is good, is accurate and if it respects athlete’s rights – meaning that we are not going to have false positives – then I am in support of it being run as widely as possible. And I think the broad, broad majority of professional riders are in support of a test like that being run.
As long as they are assured as this is an accurate test and that their rights are being held intact in this administration of this test, I have got to say that the athletes I work with plus the majority of the athletes I encounter would be fully in support of this being used on a much broader basis. But that’s all under the assumption that the science is good.
VN: We recently spoke to the anti-doping scientist Michael Ashenden and he said that there are several possibilities for tests in this area. It’s not just the plasticizer test, but there are also other ones that are being worked on and which might be introduced in future.
JV: It’s all very interesting, and could make a big difference. At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself: where is this test going to be introduced? The answer is: in professional cycling, along with every single other of these groundbreaking tests. It is always introduced in professional cycling. So if you are expecting to introducing ground-breaking tests like that and not catch a few people, I think that is unrealistic, considering we are the point of enforcement.
VN: Alberto Contador recently revealed that he tested positive for Clenbuterol in this year’s Tour. He is currently being investigated by the UCI. Is there much talk about his situation amongst the riders in the peloton?
JV: I don’t really have any idea. That case is sort of separate from what I am talking about here. I don’t know the specifics of it. I only read what you guys [the media] are writing, seeing that there is talk of this plasticizer element. Like I have said from the beginning on this one, I just want for science to take its course.
Whatever the end result of that is, as long as that is a fair ruling, then that is what happens. If he is innocent, he is innocent. If it is a contaminated supplement or piece of beef or whatever else, then he should be fully exonerated and his reputation should be fully restored. If, conversely it is a blood transfusion, then he has to face the full consequence of that. I just think we need to let the process take its course and make our determinations based on the final result, not on the scuttlebutt in-between.
VN: Overall, it seems that hearing these accusations that the entire peloton is breaking the rules has been a frustrating one…
JV: Yes, it is frustrating, because this stuff just throws young guys like Dan [Martin] into a bucket that they have nothing to do with. It really upsets me….I can squawk and scream and yell at the press all I want about this stuff, and I certainly will, but at the end of the day I am not going to change the minds of the general public. They see me as having a biased perspective, although what I am saying is true. I hope people can see it.
I have to say, I feel horrible for a guy like Marco Pinotti. He has got to live in the same country [as Torri] and has to deal with the media there. He is a guy who has been a clean rider, so it’s very frustrating…
—–
In part II, Vaughters talks about becoming the big winner of the transfer market, one year after the Wiggins saga, and discusses the 2011 lineup and goals of the team.