Hi Christian - a close friend of mine is a leading Asthma nurse in the UK. She has told us on several occasions that asthma and related problems have risen massively over the last 10-15 years. She also noted that this would be on another level for those who are athletes and general sports people etc simply because how their lungs and pipes need to function under stress. It may seem like a sporting epidemic (I note your possible 'tongue in cheek' meaning within your comment) but is seems to reflect a growing problem within modern society.
For sure it was a 'tongue in cheek' meaning. What if there was an asthma drug with no performance benefit? Would the riders use it to this extent? I doubt it.
I've never liked, believed or trusted Brailsford, and have felt for some time that he is running a science lab that would make Bruyneels look amateur! Here we have an entire team out-climbing the pure climbers on the hardest Cols, pacing their fearless leader as though they were on a Sunday club ride! ...And the next day there they are at the pointy end fully recovered and shielding their boss. It all wreaks...and the Salbutamol is possibly an innocent TUE that masks the most complex and powerful new cocktails we've not yet heard of!
I was criticized for asking the same question. I don't understand how the team performs at the level of a climber such as Quintana for 75% of a climbing stage. then just drags Froome back to his wheel, when he attacks. many times its the same guy. maybe I'm wrong, but the three best climber on any stage seem to be Froome, Thomas and whoever else is on the front at the time. We know that Kwiatkowski is a world champion, but Sky seems to be making quarter horses into thoroughbreds. ijs
Thank you Bob! Love the way you talk about a story/subject keep it up... I dont see this being explained away ... I see a ban and a loss of results coming... too bad too
I just started watching this piece on UA-cam... but before the actual broadcast began, they had to run an ad prior to the viewing. It was for Symbicort, not the same drug that Froome is using... but the same general type. Thanks, UA-cam... great ad placement!
Bob, your analysis is spot on; Squeaky clean CF not so perfect. CF is not a doper but does seem to have taken marginal gains over the literal limit and he should pay for it. He could say; "Yes I did" and then hand his Vuelta trophy over to Vincenzo. What a dramatic moment for cycling THAT would be. BobkeTV--> best pro-cycling analysis anywhere!
The point is that Froome claims not to have broken the rules on inhaler use, but is still outside the limits of concentration in urine. Currently the limits do not take into consideration the levels of dehydration, but this is changing next year.
Look it's called due process. An AAF is a POTENTIAL anti-doping rule violation. He'll be punished IF he can't show that inhalation of salbutomal below the threshold results in a 2000ng/ml output. Very straightforward. These are WADAs rules.
Hi Bob, I think he probably would have. I can't recall the gap to Nibali in 2nd, but it might have been too much for Nibali to surpass. I wish to echo exactly what bullwhip johnson has said below. Whats to say that Froome was clean at Barloworld, but has been on the gas since moving to sky?
I'm not sure we will ever know if this is the first drug test he's failed.. If the UCI didn't make it public, what else are they keeping confidential? I've come to expect that teams and athletes will try to cheat in sports at every level. As we've seen. Even though, I still want to watch them compete. If the sanctioning bodies don't deal openly, ethically and fairly no matter who is found to be at fault, it's just anarchy. Anything goes. Why test anyone at all?
I am fine with the UCI not releasing info during an investigation, as long as that investigation is handled with blind justice. But that's part of the problem, isn't it? We've come to not trust the riders, the teams, the UCI, the organizers, etc.
Well not being that close to the Pro riders and the various testing that goes on you may have a point ... in reality ... testing must continue. I love the sport and will continue to be a fan and supporter.
I agree with you Bobke. I wish that this continued controversy would just stop. I hate to be jaded about this beautiful sport. Big money and for some big fame brings out the worst in many people. You have heard a Lance say that he is ashamed of the way he acted. However, given the situation, he would probably do it again. I have to think that the UCI should turn this job of testing to an impartial 3rd party. What a pain. Great hearing from you as usual.
My guess is that they're all using long acting and undetectable broncho dialators. Everyone puffs up on the bus prior to the start and it'll last around 8 hours. Basically they'll gain deep lung function which in turn gains surface area for respiratory function increase.
Great points Bobke, but I don't think Froome was helped much if at all by the extra salbutamol but it still looks bad. Any Idea when the 2018 Predictions are going to happen? always my favorite video of the year!
Very complex subject. I think that it all gets down to intent. Was it pre-meditated? Was it an inadvertent overdose due to an episode of asthma during the race? Hopefully a plausible explanation is forthcoming. I did so want to believe in Chris Froome!
I would think that Team sky probably has all the biometric data along with inhaler usage time points during the race (?). They could release this information but it may just further muddy the waters?
The key for me in the big PR push w/ the Giro/Tour double. How could he go there without some assurance from SKY, UCI and/or WADA that this was gonna be 'swept under the rug'.
Agree with your sentiments, excellent questions. It seems strange that Chris would fall the one test during the race along with allot of testing from previous races and by so much. Is the timeline to have a final decision reached down to the layers involved or an inefficient process. As much as I want to see Froome ride the Giro against Dumoulin, Nibali and others I think he needs to miss it due to suspension. A rule was broken. He knew the rule, the team knew the rules, if a TUE was needed for an extreme case he & the team failed to get a TUE. Knowing all the rules as he does and what the team went through last year with TUEs and the Jiffy bag he failed the test by double the amount. If it is an honest mistake as Froome says due to extra hits of his medicine combined with his dehyration he needs to step up, say he messed up and take his punishment. I also have a problem with the UCI and/or WADA leaking this info to the two news papers. If the current process is that this is not made public for this type of negative reading until a final decision is reached it seems it was leaked for someone's agenda. Why is there a need for a positive test result with some tests to be kept confidential while others are published when they happen? And why is cycling the whipping boy of sports for athletes using substances for an advantage to recover quicker and/or compete better. Look at the size, speed and how ripped players are in baseball, basketball and football. This is all not down to diet, training and sleep. Football players get a suspension for a few games and then are back being lauded for the next big play they make upon return.
"If Salbutamol is a doping agent, how could Froome have expected NOT to be caught?" VS "If he'd so far been taking it without exceeding UCI limits, what happened differently this time?"
I'm inclined to see this as a 'one off' situation because of what I've seen of Chris Froome and how he's carried himself. But I have to agree, there's that nagging question / suspicion due to the way the information was made public. As you clearly stated, this is definitely NOT what cycling needs right now. I hope Froome and Team Sky will clear this up very soon, cycling doesn't need this dark cloud looming over it with the new season almost upon us.
I have been a life long cycling fan since the 60's. I raced here and in Italy. I raised my kids watching TDF with Paul and Phil. But this is the last straw for me. I've had it. My family quit with cycling after Lance but I hung in there but not anymore. I don't believe any of it now. To me it's like pro wrestling. Now I think, "Maybe some of those guys had motors in their bikes" wouldn't surprise me now. Kidney failure!! Let me tell you, my Father died of kidney failure. He wasn't riding the Vuelta. He could hardly get out of bed. I sooooo sick of the BS excuses. So if they are losing fans like me, who's left? The only thing that will fix this is LIFE TIME BANS. Nothing else. For everyone, riders, Dr's, DS and teams. It is the only way to fix it. Until they do..... PEACE OUT
Why you mentioning CF needing to take twice the permissible amount of albuterol? He had twice the permissible level of salbutamol is his system, that doesn't mean he took twice the permissible level. We don't know the actual amount he took, but we do that CF has said he doubled the amount he had been taking on the recommendation of his doctor, but still within the permissible input limits. We also perhaps know that on stage 18 he did not take any during the race, but had three 100mg puffs immediately after the race.
The Sky zero tolerance policy (publicly sacking staff and older riders with a doggy history) gave/gives their efforts a veneer of moral superiority and unquestionably, not dissimilar to Lance Armstrong’s Livestrong-cancer messiah tropes. Marginal gains, over the top team budgets, too much dominance, I fear the past is prologue.
Its obvious, isn't it? As long as gr. tours require superhuman effort and so much money and fame are riding on winning them, some riders will dope to have a chance to win, and some will even get away with it for sometime. Froome is just the latest.
No doubt asthmatics are a dime a dozen in endurance sports, however controversy continues to surround TEUs for this condition. You can look to the recent USDA investigations into the Nike Oregon project and distance running regarding similar types of allegations. In top tier sporting events, minuscule percentage gains in performance are crucial when you are measuring down to seconds, and one could ague that salbutamol may give a little extra to an athlete if taken in a particular manner. The whole circumstance, at the very least, is dishonest given the timelines. Only time will tell how this unfolds. But, rules are rules and if you can explain your way out, what's the point or having them? You're the man Bobke! Keep the videos coming, really enjoy them.
My cycling friend, says he is surprised that people are surprised ... can someone explain to me how the average speed over a stage in a grand tour like the TDF has increased by up to 10km/h over the past 6 to 7 years...? Bike technology did not change that much, if any, to allow this massive increase in the average speed pro riders clock in grand tours....what has changed?
Is it out of the realm of possibility that the Inhaler that Mr Froome used was not standardized or was too potent? Could the drug company have made a mistake during the manufacturing process and the solution was too high, doubling the concentration in the urine sample?
Hi, Bobke. The biggest problem I have with you asking if Nibali should be the rightful 2017 Vuelta winner is... I can never get that image of him holding onto his team car during the Vuelta (2016?) & being towed uphill away from his group. That was absolute, blatant cheating by him & his DS, which got them ejected. But it spoke volumes as to his character & his intent. For me, that forever trumps a few extra squirts of an inhaler needed to breathe! 😔
Same exact scenario with The Vuelta as was the UCI withholding known suspect samples of Armstrong prior in TDF. Just to poke fun I imagine Froome was more than just lucky when he turned the Tour De France into an Ironman event not getting penalized but ran off whatever he was juiced on there. Wiggins goes from track guy to greatest climber ever but Sky is clean and transparent. That to me was more of an indication that Sky is bogus more than this news. Hiring Bruyneel’s lawyer not helping the mental image of all this either. Guess Johnnie Cochran was not available. Oh yeah, he’s dead.
Doping in general is cheating. I see no gray areas. If an athlete needs to use a banned substance above the allowed limits to compete, that athlete doesn’t get to compete. Pretty simple. Exceed the limit and the athlete is cheating. Cheating themselves, the public, their sponsorship and supporters, the sport and their teammates and competitors. Keeping the sport clean starts with the athlete, then the athlete’s management and sanctioning bodies. If any one of those shirks that responsibility the integrity of the sport is harmed. Rules only govern when they are applied and accepted by reasonable people. If a society decide to operate outside those rules, that society are ungoverned. That is anarchy. And that is what we get as enthusiasts of cycling when cycling as a body fails to enforce rules in a timely fashion. You cannot rerun a race. The conditions can never be the same as they were. The athlete’s fitness, health, mental conditions can never be repeated. That is what cheating steals. Vandalism that steals a victory from one and destroys the integrity of the sport at the same time. We have for a very long time not been able to watch racing and truly believe what we are seeing is the result of athletes giving their best only. We can’t even consider racing in the past in that light. For cycling to rise above this it will take brave and selfless people to make a stand. Managers, riders, trainers, mechanics, officials, sponsors and the governing body must stand or this sport is nothing more than entertainment spectacle. I don’t think any of us want to spend any time or money watching that. Froom needs to come clean and be honest and transparent. The true metal of a leader is seen when they have to make the hard choices.
1,600 micrograms of salbutamol can be taken by an athlete via inhaler in a 24-hour period without the need for a therapeutic use exemption (TUE). If he has taken more than the allowed allowed amount then he will be banned. I do not believe for one minute that he tried to cheat when he knew he was going to be tested. He has been using Salbutamol for many years as have so many other athletes in all sports and must know the amount he can take. Accidental excessive use is not an excuse and would still to lead to a ban. What Froome will have to establish is that he did not take more than the specified amount permissable yet produced what is considered an abnormal sample.
Whatever the outcome, it should be quick and clean and let's all look forward to the upcoming season. At least in a perfect world. And this is the off-season, so why isn't Chris stepping up to the microphone and answering questions? And could Chris simply be a gentleman and return his Vuelta crown? Why not, he could say, "I took twice as much as I should have, I messed up, my mistake. Here, Mr. Nibali, congratulations, you won. Now, please let me race this year and let me prepare for the Giro." Or he could say, "Hey, if I win the next Tour, no worries, adios, I am outta here, watch me and Bradley race kayaks and bobsleds in the Olympics." Anything would be better than the silent treatment he is giving the sport right now, and that is bad for business, the big business for the sponsors and promoters and host cities and countries, the livelihoods of all the racers and teams and participants and press, and the fans who attend the races and watch them on the tele and chat about the racing scene in friendly forums such as this on a cold Saturday night in January, not to mention that we buy the sponsors' merchandise and participate in the sport ourselves in so many ways and enjoy the ride in the Broom Wagon with Bobke at the wheel. And he will keep us out of the ditch, for sure.
why would he not say that? Because his case rests on the fact that he says he did not. Im not sure its up to CF to step up to the microphone. There might be all kinds of legal reasons for this.
I know this--it is sickening when you are accused of a crime and your name and reputation are drug through the mud over it. And I simply think it would be clean, it would be positive, for Chris to step up to the mike and make a statement and tell us why he exceeded the allowable dosage. But as is, the Sky Silence, well, not exactly transparent and they have had months to clear up these clouds of doubt. And a new season is already here, so let's go go go and enjoy the show.
So much to comment on. Transparency is a false word any athlete, politician, salesman or catholic priest that talks about complete transparency is lying. In athletics we have learned when you take a team of one day specialists sprinters and track riders (us postal) (sky) and suddenly they are the greatest climbers and time trial riders in the world something strange is afoot I road as a cat 1 track and 2 road in the 80's (actually rode at the same time as bob in the USA and for a short while in Europe. Pure sprinter any up hill i was off the back. Later in life i found myself asthmatic, if i knew what Salbuterol did for my lungs then i would have found a doctor to say i was asthmatic a long time ago. Salbuterol makes your lungs gigantic. A little bit of lung congestion and bam its gone (bronchodilator and stimulant all in 2 short huffs.) How many tour contenders are clean? remove the superman who came out of nowhere. Cadel and Greg are the only 2 clean riders in decades. Ask Petacchi what he thinks should be done with a possitive test for salbuterol. No debate rules are set he cheated.
As long as their is sport, racing and competition there will always be someone or a group of someone’s looking to cheat. We will never be able to rid any sport of cheating unfortunately. I have my own theory about the UCI and the way they have handled certain riders doping violations, or certain teams whose riders fail a test. I believe there are many failed tests that are kept secret. Just like in Froome’s case. I can’t say I’m a big Froome or Sky fan, but I do enjoy watching him ride. After Froome won his second TdF I was hoping he was the clean rider he had claimed to be. However I have always been skeptical. Bob make some great points about why is his lifelong asthma history is just coming out now, and after you get busted for a failed test? If Froome’s asthma was so bad that day that he had to take that much salbutamol just so he would be able to finish the stage then should he have even been racing? Shouldn’t he have abandoned if taking that much was the only way he was able to finish the stage or else finish with or ahead of his rivals. Either way you look at it he cheated plain and simple. I’m pretty sure most riders could get a dr. to sign off stating he needs a TUE for something when in reality he does not. That is this generations way of doping now.
By all accounts I’ve heard, the threshold for Salbutamol is quite generous in favor of riders. To have two times the legal limit is hard to wrap my head around. If Froome was in such bad condition to require that much of the drug, Team Sky’s medical staff appear to be derelict in their duties and should’ve removed him. Given that Froome won La Vuelta, they appear complicit.
Would he have win the Vuelta without salbutamol? Depends on whether he used salbutamol in pill or injected form while he was training before he blood bagged. He got beat up pretty good on Stage 17. A transfusion that afternoon or that night, not knowing that it was dirty really explains his 'comeback'! (Why is Froome the only rider that wears a long sleeve jersey on rest days for that day's group ride?) Anyway, if he believed the blood bag to be clean, and was told it is okay to also take a bit more than the legal dose by the team doctor, say Froome was given the pill form that morning and he took his regular inhaler doses, he would be very much in the red. Taking three extra puffs at the podium area, possibly for masking reasons as he would have to take EPO to keep his body producing red blood cells as his body would stop producing them after an infusion of trillions of new oxygen carrying red blood cells after his blood transfusion. I'd say no, he would not have won, he would have made the podium or just missed the podium but not have won...Froome was already losing time, just taking puffs would not have re-energized him. My opinion is he blood bagged using his salbutamol as a cover. I am curious to see how well he does, depending on the outcome, how well Team SKY will do without one of their own (Brian Cookson) as UCI President. How dominant was Chris Froome if tests like these were being swept under the table for all these years? Team SKY rose to fame under Cookson's presidency, my guess is that they will fall now that he's gone. Disney now owns SKY News now, will they keep shelling out money to another questionable cyclist?
As somebody who's blocked by Chris Froome on Twitter for asking the doping question, this entire thing is just too beautiful. Regardless of the outcome. What a bunch of clowns. Go Team Sky! He was dehydrated for sure...end of story, or is it?
I agree that this is another big cover up by the UCI.. What else are they covering up, Sagan's elbow maybe. Who was the sports commentator that said " he always rides with his elbows out". I only saw his right elbow out, and it took out two great riders, Cav and Degenkolb..
When I saw Froome bury himself to grab Sagan's wheel on that flat TDF stage, I knew this guy was for me. Love the way he rides, even if it is not pretty :-) I really think more of the blame here lays with team Sky. They have an obsession with marginal gains and questionable behavior makes me think they would gladly push the envelope. I would not put it past Sky team doctors to perscribe and ensure Chris that all was kosher with "taking a little extra". Compound the impact of the day - dehydration in 40 degree heat, the stage itself - and there you have it. Chris may very well be just plain dirty. I'm betting on more naive on a dirty team. P.S. Bobke, come back to Oakland and start a Fondo!
Bob had a platform to say something about drug use in cycling for years when it was obvious to all of us. He stayed silent and sucked up to Lance and others ....as did Phil and Paul. i never hear reference to Valverde's bans when he is racing - questioning why he is even in the sport....but he picks this one to speak out on.
Question: If Froome passed every other doping test during La Vuelta, what were his readings for Salbutamol in those tests?... Was he close to the limit or way below the limit?... I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere.
Bill Reilly - That also came to my mind. What levels are these guys on ‘normally’. In this era of data; hr, cadence, wattage ... I’d love to see testosterone level, red blood cell count, Salbutamol etc etc.
This is one area where Froome has boxed himself in...there are 20 stages worth of tests and he had already stated that he didn't take over the legal dose. He will have to go into a lab and get tested before to get a baseline and will only be allowed to take the legal dose and his result will more than likely be nowhere near the level he tested after Stage 18.
I sometimes take a big bunch of ventolin hits before a ride even if my asthma is fine, because it actually helps a lot. I cope much better with intense efforts. Just my opinion.
It is confusing why SKY will not bring a swift conclusion and total transparency to all this for the sake of the sport they claim to love. It will be a shame for this to cloud the Grand tours this summer.
The UCI has once again been proven an organization that is not willing to take the necessary actions required to permanently clean up this great sport. The fact there was a delay in disclosure is proof enough of the ineffectiveness of the UCI. Shame on the UCI and shame on Froome and SKY for not disclosing. My prediction is Murdoch and Sky will not be in this sport long term and overall the sport suffers sponsorship crisis...the 21st century Logo will have to come off the kit for certain with Disney’s acquisition. No way Disney will gave association with this.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I like Froome, but he should have been banned from racing, it seems the powers that be decide that the watching public have to pay a price and not the guilty rider, so very disheartening. The TDF will be a boo fest if Froome is there.
Talk about a cover up! Seems like the UCI and Tram Sky are obviously not been honest with the public. So much for been transparent. If the UCI and Team Sky are serious about cleaning up the sport Froome should be suspended and his Vuelta win taken away. As a fan this is what I need to see so I can take the UCI seriously when they talk about cleaning up the sport. I’m a huge cycling fan and have been for over 30 years but I am at the point the I question every win and wonder if the win was “clean.”
exercise-induced asthma is a real thing, but it's not solved by oral tablet / intravenous salbutamol. it should not be possible to get double the urine quantity limit with only inhaler use. if froome can somehow show that his system is different and replicate the high result in lab setting with only an inhaler, he might prove his innocence. low level use of salbutamol via inhaler has been proven to not give a performance benefit but high level use such as by tablet has been shown to give a performance benefit.
Nibali Also has asma maybe he should take drogs, and when he had the problema with the car at the vuelta what happend to him? What happend to Ulisses and others?
Bob, Team Sky still hasn't come out from under the cloud of their last scandal with Brailsford and the packages. Brailsford shouldn't even be on the team any more. Transparency? Please, that's a marketing word at best. Sky never had it and never will. A large portion of the pro peloton is on some sort of inhaler because most people have some sort of exercise induced Bronchospasm. We rarely see them taking it because tv coverage starts in the last two hours and they've usually had their fill by then. If you recall Froome did poorly the stage before 18 and they probably over reacted on 18 so he could get good again. No I do not think he would of won without the inhaler, but that's shouldn't be the question. It should be could he of won had he taken the legal doses of the inhaler, and I think that might be yes.
Hi Mr. Bobke. Here is the deal with any physical enhancement for pro riders. To me, it doesn't really matter what an athlete's physical limitations are. If the athlete is pro then there should be a total ban and zero tolerance policy for any substance not in a normal diet. For example. Should an athlete be blessed with an exceptional VO2 max from birth. An exceptional heart as well and also very low weight because he has no legs, be allowed to compete if he has the unfortunate circumstance of being born with no legs. Should this athlete be allowed to compete, with manufactured super legs that are very lightweight, that require only batteries to operate? This man, with these legs, could sweep all the pro podiums. Should this be allowed? I think not. What about the guy with bad lungs? What sports needs is a league just for artificially enhanced athletics and one for all natural athletics. Then let the markets decide what the market wants.
Bob, I see the UCI President is complaining about Froome choosing to still race and Sky not suspending him. Isn't the UCI in charge of adjudicating Froome's violation? Am I wrong about this? Why doesn't the UCI President get the reveiw process going? He acts like he has no control over the situation. He's also admitted in a recent interview to not talking to Sky or Froome. This seems like the craziest thing I've heard yet. Your biggest rider on your biggests team get caught doping and months later the UCI President hasn't talked to them? What am I missing here about UCI's role in reoslving this?
Team Sky were at my ball club Nottingham Forest a few years ago, they didnt last long, thier methods were not approved of, even silly things like drinking coffee all day and night. When you look at athletes like Mo Farah too, actually in this case, his trainer has pretty much been found to have been using people as guinea pigs to measure how much of these banned substances can be consumed in various methods and in conjunction with other drugs ´without´triggering a positive. So yeah that sounds like what happens all the time to me, occasionally tho our natural body chemistry does have a way of speaking up for itself and whispering clues. I dont even trust much of British althletics anymore, the cyclists, the swimmers... I cynically suspect we are the best at all the science whilst Russia keeps getting ketched. On the moral side, I see why initially some think, they are all on drugs so let em just play on. But in reality thats brutal. Id love to idolise Froome and yet I cannot because of this drug shadow. That is just so wrong on so many levels, cos he might be deserving of it, or not, what a dilemma. Plus of course, if we just had a free for all, it would soon be a hundred dead cyclists a month over training
Here's one report that I can link:- link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02425500 The abstract gives the potted conclusion that twice normal therapeutic levels has no performance enhancement effects in healthy individuals. I have heard of other reports that conclude that it takes vastly greater concentrations to have any beneficial effect on non-asthmatic individuals. If Froome's inhaler use was within the permitted limits, the question remains about how such a concentration was in his system. This article covers what Froome has to do to prove his innocence:- www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/42417297 About the silence the UCI and Sky. Yes, it would have been nice if they had come clean about it as soon as they knew, but let's face reality. As soon as the story broke it turned into a media circus: not conducive to concentrating on the World Championship. If it was Sky's intension to come clean once Froome's season was over, we'll never know now. I'm sure that there are plenty more riders who have successfully defended themselves in private, and I agree with that since the reputational damage can't be undone, not with the cynical "no smoke without fire" chattering classes.
David Lloyd basically true. Tough to get enough in you thru inhaler gain more than 100% lung function. Thru injection or pill it becomes easier to get perf gains but they come from increased heart or other function not the lungs, but both those are not legal. My question, can the test he failed tell the difference from inhaled versus pills or injection?
As long as exceptions are made for medical conditions there will be excuses and violations. If an athlete needs to take a drug to compete, they should not participate. It's a tough break for the athletes involved but that's needs to happen. Asthma, cancer survivor that needs to take stuff, no legs, etc., sorry, find another way to make a living. Failure to do so literally sets up an unfair competition arena and creates a potentially unfair situation disadvantaging healthy athletes. It also fosters a litany of medical conditions. It sends out the wrong message! I love Chris Froome, but he should find something else to do. Otherwise re-instate Lance Armstrong and everyone else removed from the record books for doping, and let's celebrate them as winners. They won on the track and won at doping. It will be impossible to stop it if not banned 100%.
This should be over and done with already. There has already been a precedent set. Other athletes have been charged with 1300 and 1900 ng of asthma medication in their urine. Froome had 2000ng. It is clearly a violation. Accidental or not. He needs to be charged and banned from riding for a period of time. It should have been decided already really.
Petacchi and Ulisse were not sanctioned by the UCI/WADA following an AAF, only after the investigation. That's the process and thats the process CF and Team Sky are following
Very true Chris. But this AAF was hidden and dates back to the Vuelta. It should have been investigated and decided already. Well before the start of the 2018 season.
Right there are a few things here. Are you saying that because this AAF was not revealed to the public either by the UCI or Team Sky, then it means something was being hidden? Using the word, 'hidden' might imply that something was not correct about the way the information was not being made public, when in fact an AAF in this context does not need to be made public. Do you have any thoughts on that? The rules are if a rider has an AAF and is then cleared, nobody needs to know anything about it. If a rider - following the investigation that follows an AAF - is found to be 'guilty' then the UCI is required to release a statement, up until that time they don't need to. They write the rules. The UCI released a statement on CF's AAF because of the leak, not because they needed to under their own rules or were obliged to. CF is not being given any special treatment by the UCI that might indicate any of the rules are being broken. The UCI could have, if they wished to, have issued a provisional suspension at any time after the AAF, but they don't have to and they can still do this, if they wish to and they may do, but it seems unlikely they will d. It should have been investigated and decided already? Well, I think everyone would agree on this, however in the real world of pro-cycling, hundreds of lawyers, courts, sponsors, big big money and reputations there is not any great need to move this case quickly. It's also possibly not fair to blame Team Sky on the speed of the case, but it would be interesting to hear the views of someone who has a much better understanding of how the wheels of justice move.
All good points Chris. But Froome will be under a cloud at each race he participates in this year. Hi excuses don't add up. Better he serve a fine and protect the sport.
mjv1967 well indeed something doesn't add up. But we can't judge before we have more facts. It's not helpful.we can't say if he was cheating or not cheating. If it's found he was ingesting salbutomal, then this would be with the agreement of Team Sky. This will be like an atomic bomb. This will be the end of Team Sky and CF will never race again. There is not a good ending to this. We can't say he has to take a ban, till untill we see the results of the tests. We have to know what was going on. This also will not be sorted out before the Giro. Impossible. Team Sky won't want to withdraw him but I don't see how he will be able to race. The environment will simply be too hostile. This is an unresolvable situation of a magnitude never seen before in sporting history. Much bigger than LA or Team Postal. And this case will move very slowly unfortunately.
Bobke for UCI Pres.! I am a competitive cyclist. I was born with asthma, low Testosterone, low Growth Hormone and low red blood cell count. I have TUE's for all these things and have never failed a drug test because I make sure my ratios never go above the legal limits. If anyone has a problem with this they can kiss my badonkadonk!
With the exception of Bobke for UCI Pres. I was being sarcastic. I am an amateur cyclist. I love cycling because it is a different spectacle. I can't stand watching multi-multi-millionaires in the NHL, NBA, Golf, etc. play their game. I am however, frustrated with all the legalized doping in cycling. I forgot to add that I am a minor diabetic and use occasional dialysis for which I sneak in an extra bag of blood. Did I mention my twin that disappeared on several occasions?
You’re giving too many concessions. And I understand why... who’s a nicer friggin’ lad than Froomey? Who’s more gracious and tactful? Few within the peloton could claim the title.. Despite all that, it’s plain to see, he got cold busted. Period. And for some reason (he’s a cash cow and along with Peter Sagan the face of Pro cycling atm) the UCI gave him a whole month and a half and a chance to compete in the World’s before they made it known he pinged a hot one at the Vuelta. For some reason he hasn’t been stripped of his win in La Vuelta yet, nor has he been handed a lengthy suspension as was pretty much par for the course for this kind of positive test prior; so long as you had an Italian or Spanish surname anyhow. The UCI has found new and inventive ways to make themselves look bad in a situation where they should’ve gone by the book, And Froome can no longer hide underneath his starched Britishness and overt good manners. He’s a doper. Just say it, because it’s true.
I am sure Chris mentioned his Asthma issue long long ago - also its know that its a 'genuine' condition he has, he has dealt with it and succeeded, why should 'he' go on about it in his book? There could be a plausible explanation for the high levels at the Vuelta Stage 18, I personally doubt Chris would have intentionally over dosed on that Asthma drug, knowing he would be drug tested, either biologically / psychologically
Kosmonooit what if the team was doping him, in his bottle and made a mistake for the first time in over hundred races. He had lost time the day before and may have taken an extra boost
I refuse to believe that one of the best cyclists we've ever seen has become so with asthma. For all we know, all his negatives just meant that he came in just below the legal limit.
Didnt Lance pay off some negative results from Tour of Switzerland? SKY with all that money might being slipping some bucks to the UCI to keep those results quiet but someone ratted them out. I hope Im wrong...but when theres some big $$$ involved it seems to get shady real quick. Baseball turned a blind eye to roids back in the late 90s because chicks "dig the long ball" and rating were at their highest when Bonds, Sosa, and McGuire were launching them out at a ridiculous rate. Its all about that dollar...or Euro
I read that Vincenzo Nibali also suffers from athsma and also read that due to the Vuelta not being as dry and hot as he said that he was not feeling symptoms due to the weather so then why does Froome need more? Froome is not trustworthy anymore. His career is over in my opinion.
Bill Dean Actually, Bill, salbuterol doesn't require a TUE. Usage just requires that the athlete's blood samples do not show more than the allowed amount. That's the problem here. Froome had twice the allowable amount in his samples.
Stevie Nellor I'm talking of TUEs for other things which aren't revealed. Remember the one we did hear about? Prednisone for a Chest infection. cyclingtips.com/2014/06/uci-reacts-to-tue-criticism-in-froome-case-promises-changes/
Bill Dean I tried to view the video on that link but get a message "Sorry, this video cannot be played".(might be country restricted) But Prednisone is a valid med for chest infection. I spent all last winter & spring on it for same thing. Not sure how quickly a doc can get the TUE exemption when time is of the essence to treat a chest infection. Do you have any info on that?
Prednisone while used in circumstances of asthmatics with a chest infection, does not actually kill the bugs that cause the infection in the first place. It is used to primarily reduce the resultant inflammation of the lung tissues. To be frank, if his infection was that serious and required the use of prednisone, he should not have been riding. This is just another way of getting around the SPORTING rules. Marginal gains...
Daniel Martinez Hi, Daniel. I agree with you completely. It is used as an antii-nflamatory. However, I think there should be more focus on the team doctors. They are supposed to know what to use, when to use it, what is banned & how a body metabolizes it...especially when no TUE is required for a specific med. I'm so torn. A person with compromised health is punished throughout life, so I don't think he /she should have to be punished even more, when they have a God-given talent, by not being able to compete or make a living doing what they love. Don't get me wrong, I'm anti-doping. I just think there needs to be more clarification between all parties involved.
I have no idea about the interaction between asthma meds and hard core cardio. I think Chris Froome would of won and again I am most definitely not a fan or a detractor of him.
Breaking news...everyone is doing something and the UCI knows about it all....$$$$$$$$$....hey I love cycling....I just understand what it is...entertainment based upon sport
Stop testing and everything will be fine. Seriously. Name an American sport where the athletes are all natural? I dare say that most people would not care if they weren't confronted with the morality of it all. Even then, many will lie to say they care when really they don't. Froome, Lance et el make it interesting to watch.
He didn't need to use that amount of medication imo but perhaps he thought it would possibly give that "marginal gain" which has been the slogan.of some teams and the cash cow that is the product industry. A lot of it is in the head. We all know lance was the best rider at the time.and would have won without dope....but wasn't group against others doping?
Bob, I agree with you this whole issue is so upsetting and depressing. Hard to understand why Froome, after not testing positive in hundreds of tests, exceeds the limit on one test. Either he inhaled too much (accidently or otherwise), or due to dehydration, the drug was concentrated in his urine. Sadly he will have to pay a price. I hope the investigation will find mitigating circumstances so his suspension is short - cycling needs Chris Froome. Do I think he would have won the Vuelta if the drug was within limits on stage 18? Yes, but no way to prove it. He and his team dominated and if the drug was at 1000 NG level rather than 2000 NG, I think he would have been good enough to continue to lead. Thanks Bob.
Oh give it a rest Bobke, don't tell me that we are circling back around to where we just came from in cycling! I will agree that this is very disheartening and team sky owes us some detailed answers, but Froome was simply using asthma meds. The question most of us are asking is can salbutamol enhance performance to any significant degree. I personally have seen no studies or evidence to prove that it can. I mean we all knew that the whole pro peleton was not squeaky clean... but it's not like these guys are out there slamming gallons of EPO and HGH and then washing it down with testosterone and cortisone as they did in the dark era of cycling (90s and early 00s) So please lay off the sensationalism a bit...
The Asthma epidemic in cycling is remarkable.
Christian Holmstedt it's even worse in swimming..
Hi Christian - a close friend of mine is a leading Asthma nurse in the UK. She has told us on several occasions that asthma and related problems have risen massively over the last 10-15 years. She also noted that this would be on another level for those who are athletes and general sports people etc simply because how their lungs and pipes need to function under stress. It may seem like a sporting epidemic (I note your possible 'tongue in cheek' meaning within your comment) but is seems to reflect a growing problem within modern society.
For sure it was a 'tongue in cheek' meaning.
What if there was an asthma drug with no performance benefit? Would the riders use it to this extent? I doubt it.
This is the most intelligent commentary I've heard on the subject so far! :-)
I've never liked, believed or trusted Brailsford, and have felt for some time that he is running a science lab that would make Bruyneels look amateur! Here we have an entire team out-climbing the pure climbers on the hardest Cols, pacing their fearless leader as though they were on a Sunday club ride! ...And the next day there they are at the pointy end fully recovered and shielding their boss. It all wreaks...and the Salbutamol is possibly an innocent TUE that masks the most complex and powerful new cocktails we've not yet heard of!
you hitt the spot there
very good point re 'masking'...
Just a matter of time until this becomes clear.
I was criticized for asking the same question. I don't understand how the team performs at the level of a climber such as Quintana for 75% of a climbing stage. then just drags Froome back to his wheel, when he attacks. many times its the same guy. maybe I'm wrong, but the three best climber on any stage seem to be Froome, Thomas and whoever else is on the front at the time. We know that Kwiatkowski is a world champion, but Sky seems to be making quarter horses into thoroughbreds. ijs
Yep. TUE is where it ALL starts going off the rails.
Hey bobke! Greetings from Maine.Huge fan keep up the Good work
On point and honest questions that deserve answers.
Great questions. I look forward to the answers. I hope they come a lot sooner than later.
Spot on Bob! Keep up the good work. Cheers
Thank you Bob! Love the way you talk about a story/subject keep it up... I dont see this being explained away ... I see a ban and a loss of results coming... too bad too
We don’t know if he has other positive tests, the UCI does not disclose positive Sulbutemol tests unless teams fail to justify them.
I just started watching this piece on UA-cam... but before the actual broadcast began, they had to run an ad prior to the viewing. It was for Symbicort, not the same drug that Froome is using... but the same general type. Thanks, UA-cam... great ad placement!
Bob, your analysis is spot on; Squeaky clean CF not so perfect. CF is not a doper but does seem to have taken marginal gains over the literal limit and he should pay for it. He could say; "Yes I did" and then hand his Vuelta trophy over to Vincenzo. What a dramatic moment for cycling THAT would be. BobkeTV--> best pro-cycling analysis anywhere!
Thanks Bob, well done, well said.
thanks Frank!
Bobke if he has broken the rules, he should be punished, were some of Lemond's comments about this case, I agree.
The point is that Froome claims not to have broken the rules on inhaler use, but is still outside the limits of concentration in urine. Currently the limits do not take into consideration the levels of dehydration, but this is changing next year.
Look it's called due process. An AAF is a POTENTIAL anti-doping rule violation. He'll be punished IF he can't show that inhalation of salbutomal below the threshold results in a 2000ng/ml output. Very straightforward. These are WADAs rules.
Well said Bobke.
Hi Bob, I think he probably would have. I can't recall the gap to Nibali in 2nd, but it might have been too much for Nibali to surpass. I wish to echo exactly what bullwhip johnson has said below. Whats to say that Froome was clean at Barloworld, but has been on the gas since moving to sky?
Hi Bob, looking forward to your 2018 predictions.
I'm not sure we will ever know if this is the first drug test he's failed.. If the UCI didn't make it public, what else are they keeping confidential?
I've come to expect that teams and athletes will try to cheat in sports at every level. As we've seen. Even though, I still want to watch them compete. If the sanctioning bodies don't deal openly, ethically and fairly no matter who is found to be at fault, it's just anarchy. Anything goes. Why test anyone at all?
bullwhip johnson i
The UCI don't need to make public any AAFs if the following investigation clear the rider. Those are the rules as decided by UCI.
I am fine with the UCI not releasing info during an investigation, as long as that investigation is handled with blind justice. But that's part of the problem, isn't it? We've come to not trust the riders, the teams, the UCI, the organizers, etc.
Phil Anderson agreed. Total breakdown in trust. This mess is unresolvable. Doesn't matter he CF is cleared or banned.
Well not being that close to the Pro riders and the various testing that goes on you may have a point ... in reality ... testing must continue. I love the sport and will continue to be a fan and supporter.
I agree with you Bobke. I wish that this continued controversy would just stop. I hate to be jaded about this beautiful sport. Big money and for some big fame brings out the worst in many people. You have heard a Lance say that he is ashamed of the way he acted. However, given the situation, he would probably do it again. I have to think that the UCI should turn this job of testing to an impartial 3rd party. What a pain. Great hearing from you as usual.
My guess is that they're all using long acting and undetectable broncho dialators. Everyone puffs up on the bus prior to the start and it'll last around 8 hours. Basically they'll gain deep lung function which in turn gains surface area for respiratory function increase.
Great points Bobke, but I don't think Froome was helped much if at all by the extra salbutamol but it still looks bad.
Any Idea when the 2018 Predictions are going to happen? always my favorite video of the year!
It was just a matter of Time... people stop being naive
MONTRÉAL cycling for ever thank you. Froome is toast He’s getting some sort of ban
Very complex subject. I think that it all gets down to intent. Was it pre-meditated? Was it an inadvertent overdose due to an episode of asthma during the race? Hopefully a plausible explanation is forthcoming. I did so want to believe in Chris Froome!
The level he tested for was equal to 20 puffs off an inhaler! That will give you a hell of a boost
I would think that Team sky probably has all the biometric data along with inhaler usage time points during the race (?). They could release this information but it may just further muddy the waters?
Exactly Bob, why was it never mentioned in the past, it stinks of lies and deceit, what was it masking?
David Walsh seems didn't do any investigative reporting when he wrote the book. That's kind of funny.
The key for me in the big PR push w/ the Giro/Tour double. How could he go there without some assurance from SKY, UCI and/or WADA that this was gonna be 'swept under the rug'.
Yeah 100% authentic. Right. Just look at the times.
Agree with your sentiments, excellent questions. It seems strange that Chris would fall the one test during the race along with allot of testing from previous races and by so much. Is the timeline to have a final decision reached down to the layers involved or an inefficient process. As much as I want to see Froome ride the Giro against Dumoulin, Nibali and others I think he needs to miss it due to suspension. A rule was broken. He knew the rule, the team knew the rules, if a TUE was needed for an extreme case he & the team failed to get a TUE. Knowing all the rules as he does and what the team went through last year with TUEs and the Jiffy bag he failed the test by double the amount. If it is an honest mistake as Froome says due to extra hits of his medicine combined with his dehyration he needs to step up, say he messed up and take his punishment.
I also have a problem with the UCI and/or WADA leaking this info to the two news papers. If the current process is that this is not made public for this type of negative reading until a final decision is reached it seems it was leaked for someone's agenda. Why is there a need for a positive test result with some tests to be kept confidential while others are published when they happen? And why is cycling the whipping boy of sports for athletes using substances for an advantage to recover quicker and/or compete better. Look at the size, speed and how ripped players are in baseball, basketball and football. This is all not down to diet, training and sleep. Football players get a suspension for a few games and then are back being lauded for the next big play they make upon return.
"If Salbutamol is a doping agent, how could Froome have expected NOT to be caught?" VS "If he'd so far been taking it without exceeding UCI limits, what happened differently this time?"
I'm inclined to see this as a 'one off' situation because of what I've seen of Chris Froome and how he's carried himself. But I have to agree, there's that nagging question / suspicion due to the way the information was made public. As you clearly stated, this is definitely NOT what cycling needs right now. I hope Froome and Team Sky will clear this up very soon, cycling doesn't need this dark cloud looming over it with the new season almost upon us.
Good evening Sir...what was the outcome and final decision from the UCI?
I have been a life long cycling fan since the 60's. I raced here and in Italy. I raised my kids watching TDF with Paul and Phil. But this is the last straw for me. I've had it. My family quit with cycling after Lance but I hung in there but not anymore. I don't believe any of it now. To me it's like pro wrestling. Now I think, "Maybe some of those guys had motors in their bikes" wouldn't surprise me now.
Kidney failure!! Let me tell you, my Father died of kidney failure. He wasn't riding the Vuelta. He could hardly get out of bed. I sooooo sick of the BS excuses. So if they are losing fans like me, who's left?
The only thing that will fix this is LIFE TIME BANS. Nothing else. For everyone, riders, Dr's, DS and teams. It is the only way to fix it. Until they do..... PEACE OUT
Why you mentioning CF needing to take twice the permissible amount of albuterol? He had twice the permissible level of salbutamol is his system, that doesn't mean he took twice the permissible level. We don't know the actual amount he took, but we do that CF has said he doubled the amount he had been taking on the recommendation of his doctor, but still within the permissible input limits.
We also perhaps know that on stage 18 he did not take any during the race, but had three 100mg puffs immediately after the race.
The Sky zero tolerance policy (publicly sacking staff and older riders with a doggy history) gave/gives their efforts a veneer of moral superiority and unquestionably, not dissimilar to Lance Armstrong’s Livestrong-cancer messiah tropes. Marginal gains, over the top team budgets, too much dominance, I fear the past is prologue.
Its obvious, isn't it? As long as gr. tours require superhuman effort and so much money and fame are riding on winning them, some riders will dope to have a chance to win, and some will even get away with it for sometime. Froome is just the latest.
Well done robert
Hey Bobke! UCI wants a French champion at the tour at all cost! The Badger was their last champion.
If they wanted that, they could have disqualified him when he walked up the mountain. They didn't. Who won: Froome, second: A frenchman.
Erwin not when Cookson was the president.
No doubt asthmatics are a dime a dozen in endurance sports, however controversy continues to surround TEUs for this condition. You can look to the recent USDA investigations into the Nike Oregon project and distance running regarding similar types of allegations. In top tier sporting events, minuscule percentage gains in performance are crucial when you are measuring down to seconds, and one could ague that salbutamol may give a little extra to an athlete if taken in a particular manner. The whole circumstance, at the very least, is dishonest given the timelines. Only time will tell how this unfolds. But, rules are rules and if you can explain your way out, what's the point or having them?
You're the man Bobke! Keep the videos coming, really enjoy them.
My cycling friend, says he is surprised that people are surprised ... can someone explain to me how the average speed over a stage in a grand tour like the TDF has increased by up to 10km/h over the past 6 to 7 years...? Bike technology did not change that much, if any, to allow this massive increase in the average speed pro riders clock in grand tours....what has changed?
Is it out of the realm of possibility that the Inhaler that Mr Froome used was not standardized or was too potent? Could the drug company have made a mistake during the manufacturing process and the solution was too high, doubling the concentration in the urine sample?
cool
Bob, BTW...your T-shirt link isn't working:(
Hi, Bobke. The biggest problem I have with you asking if Nibali should be the rightful 2017 Vuelta winner is... I can never get that image of him holding onto his team car during the Vuelta (2016?) & being towed uphill away from his group. That was absolute, blatant cheating by him & his DS, which got them ejected. But it spoke volumes as to his character & his intent. For me, that forever trumps a few extra squirts of an inhaler needed to breathe! 😔
At their level, if you don't dope you won't cope...period.
Same exact scenario with The Vuelta as was the UCI withholding known suspect samples of Armstrong prior in TDF. Just to poke fun I imagine Froome was more than just lucky when he turned the Tour De France into an Ironman event not getting penalized but ran off whatever he was juiced on there. Wiggins goes from track guy to greatest climber ever but Sky is clean and transparent. That to me was more of an indication that Sky is bogus more than this news. Hiring Bruyneel’s lawyer not helping the mental image of all this either. Guess Johnnie Cochran was not available. Oh yeah, he’s dead.
Doping in general is cheating. I see no gray areas. If an athlete needs to use a banned substance above the allowed limits to compete, that athlete doesn’t get to compete. Pretty simple. Exceed the limit and the athlete is cheating. Cheating themselves, the public, their sponsorship and supporters, the sport and their teammates and competitors.
Keeping the sport clean starts with the athlete, then the athlete’s management and sanctioning bodies. If any one of those shirks that responsibility the integrity of the sport is harmed.
Rules only govern when they are applied and accepted by reasonable people. If a society decide to operate outside those rules, that society are ungoverned. That is anarchy. And that is what we get as enthusiasts of cycling when cycling as a body fails to enforce rules in a timely fashion. You cannot rerun a race. The conditions can never be the same as they were. The athlete’s fitness, health, mental conditions can never be repeated. That is what cheating steals. Vandalism that steals a victory from one and destroys the integrity of the sport at the same time. We have for a very long time not been able to watch racing and truly believe what we are seeing is the result of athletes giving their best only. We can’t even consider racing in the past in that light. For cycling to rise above this it will take brave and selfless people to make a stand. Managers, riders, trainers, mechanics, officials, sponsors and the governing body must stand or this sport is nothing more than entertainment spectacle.
I don’t think any of us want to spend any time or money watching that. Froom needs to come clean and be honest and transparent. The true metal of a leader is seen when they have to make the hard choices.
You're talking crap Salbutamol is not a banned substance and that is the problem.
If it is not banned, why the fail?
1,600 micrograms of salbutamol can be taken by an athlete via inhaler in a 24-hour period without the need for a therapeutic use exemption (TUE). If he has taken more than the allowed
allowed amount then he will be banned. I do not believe for one minute that he tried to cheat when he knew he was going to be tested. He has been using Salbutamol for many years as have so many other athletes in all sports and must know the amount he can take. Accidental excessive use is not an excuse and would still to lead to a ban. What Froome will have to establish is that he did not take more than the specified amount permissable yet produced what is considered an abnormal sample.
Whatever the outcome, it should be quick and clean and let's all look forward to the upcoming season. At least in a perfect world. And this is the off-season, so why isn't Chris stepping up to the microphone and answering questions? And could Chris simply be a gentleman and return his Vuelta crown? Why not, he could say, "I took twice as much as I should have, I messed up, my mistake. Here, Mr. Nibali, congratulations, you won. Now, please let me race this year and let me prepare for the Giro." Or he could say, "Hey, if I win the next Tour, no worries, adios, I am outta here, watch me and Bradley race kayaks and bobsleds in the Olympics." Anything would be better than the silent treatment he is giving the sport right now, and that is bad for business, the big business for the sponsors and promoters and host cities and countries, the livelihoods of all the racers and teams and participants and press, and the fans who attend the races and watch them on the tele and chat about the racing scene in friendly forums such as this on a cold Saturday night in January, not to mention that we buy the sponsors' merchandise and participate in the sport ourselves in so many ways and enjoy the ride in the Broom Wagon with Bobke at the wheel. And he will keep us out of the ditch, for sure.
why would he not say that? Because his case rests on the fact that he says he did not. Im not sure its up to CF to step up to the microphone. There might be all kinds of legal reasons for this.
I know this--it is sickening when you are accused of a crime and your name and reputation are drug through the mud over it. And I simply think it would be clean, it would be positive, for Chris to step up to the mike and make a statement and tell us why he exceeded the allowable dosage. But as is, the Sky Silence, well, not exactly transparent and they have had months to clear up these clouds of doubt. And a new season is already here, so let's go go go and enjoy the show.
Not saying anything, is saying something
So much to comment on. Transparency is a false word any athlete, politician, salesman or catholic priest that talks about complete transparency is lying. In athletics we have learned when you take a team of one day specialists sprinters and track riders (us postal) (sky) and suddenly they are the greatest climbers and time trial riders in the world something strange is afoot I road as a cat 1 track and 2 road in the 80's (actually rode at the same time as bob in the USA and for a short while in Europe. Pure sprinter any up hill i was off the back. Later in life i found myself asthmatic, if i knew what Salbuterol did for my lungs then i would have found a doctor to say i was asthmatic a long time ago. Salbuterol makes your lungs gigantic. A little bit of lung congestion and bam its gone (bronchodilator and stimulant all in 2 short huffs.) How many tour contenders are clean? remove the superman who came out of nowhere. Cadel and Greg are the only 2 clean riders in decades. Ask Petacchi what he thinks should be done with a possitive test for salbuterol. No debate rules are set he cheated.
As long as their is sport, racing and competition there will always be someone or a group of someone’s looking to cheat. We will never be able to rid any sport of cheating unfortunately. I have my own theory about the UCI and the way they have handled certain riders doping violations, or certain teams whose riders fail a test. I believe there are many failed tests that are kept secret. Just like in Froome’s case. I can’t say I’m a big Froome or Sky fan, but I do enjoy watching him ride. After Froome won his second TdF I was hoping he was the clean rider he had claimed to be. However I have always been skeptical. Bob make some great points about why is his lifelong asthma history is just coming out now, and after you get busted for a failed test? If Froome’s asthma was so bad that day that he had to take that much salbutamol just so he would be able to finish the stage then should he have even been racing? Shouldn’t he have abandoned if taking that much was the only way he was able to finish the stage or else finish with or ahead of his rivals. Either way you look at it he cheated plain and simple. I’m pretty sure most riders could get a dr. to sign off stating he needs a TUE for something when in reality he does not. That is this generations way of doping now.
"I could have taken all the EPO in the world, and I still would not have won that race" - Bryan Fogel. You can't replace genetics.
By all accounts I’ve heard, the threshold for Salbutamol is quite generous in favor of riders. To have two times the legal limit is hard to wrap my head around. If Froome was in such bad condition to require that much of the drug, Team Sky’s medical staff appear to be derelict in their duties and should’ve removed him. Given that Froome won La Vuelta, they appear complicit.
Double the legal amount? Im curious how that can be done.
I love cycling and hate when this shit happens ... Regardless Chris is a fucken beast...
Would he have win the Vuelta without salbutamol? Depends on whether he used salbutamol in pill or injected form while he was training before he blood bagged. He got beat up pretty good on Stage 17. A transfusion that afternoon or that night, not knowing that it was dirty really explains his 'comeback'! (Why is Froome the only rider that wears a long sleeve jersey on rest days for that day's group ride?) Anyway, if he believed the blood bag to be clean, and was told it is okay to also take a bit more than the legal dose by the team doctor, say Froome was given the pill form that morning and he took his regular inhaler doses, he would be very much in the red. Taking three extra puffs at the podium area, possibly for masking reasons as he would have to take EPO to keep his body producing red blood cells as his body would stop producing them after an infusion of trillions of new oxygen carrying red blood cells after his blood transfusion. I'd say no, he would not have won, he would have made the podium or just missed the podium but not have won...Froome was already losing time, just taking puffs would not have re-energized him. My opinion is he blood bagged using his salbutamol as a cover.
I am curious to see how well he does, depending on the outcome, how well Team SKY will do without one of their own (Brian Cookson) as UCI President. How dominant was Chris Froome if tests like these were being swept under the table for all these years? Team SKY rose to fame under Cookson's presidency, my guess is that they will fall now that he's gone. Disney now owns SKY News now, will they keep shelling out money to another questionable cyclist?
As somebody who's blocked by Chris Froome on Twitter for asking the doping question, this entire thing is just too beautiful. Regardless of the outcome. What a bunch of clowns. Go Team Sky! He was dehydrated for sure...end of story, or is it?
I agree that this is another big cover up by the UCI.. What else are they covering up, Sagan's elbow maybe. Who was the sports commentator that said " he always rides with his elbows out". I only saw his right elbow out, and it took out two great riders, Cav and Degenkolb..
Ugh not again. I hope there's an explanation.
When I saw Froome bury himself to grab Sagan's wheel on that flat TDF stage, I knew this guy was for me. Love the way he rides, even if it is not pretty :-) I really think more of the blame here lays with team Sky. They have an obsession with marginal gains and questionable behavior makes me think they would gladly push the envelope. I would not put it past Sky team doctors to perscribe and ensure Chris that all was kosher with "taking a little extra". Compound the impact of the day - dehydration in 40 degree heat, the stage itself - and there you have it. Chris may very well be just plain dirty. I'm betting on more naive on a dirty team.
P.S. Bobke, come back to Oakland and start a Fondo!
Sky is a team with big money and influence to cover this up and watch it go away.. Nothing will happen
Bob had a platform to say something about drug use in cycling for years when it was obvious to all of us. He stayed silent and sucked up to Lance and others ....as did Phil and Paul. i never hear reference to Valverde's bans when he is racing - questioning why he is even in the sport....but he picks this one to speak out on.
Of Course all of Team Sky were Asthmatics. Lol
Question: If Froome passed every other doping test during La Vuelta, what were his readings for Salbutamol in those tests?... Was he close to the limit or way below the limit?... I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere.
Bill Reilly - That also came to my mind. What levels are these guys on ‘normally’. In this era of data; hr, cadence, wattage ... I’d love to see testosterone level, red blood cell count, Salbutamol etc etc.
This is one area where Froome has boxed himself in...there are 20 stages worth of tests and he had already stated that he didn't take over the legal dose. He will have to go into a lab and get tested before to get a baseline and will only be allowed to take the legal dose and his result will more than likely be nowhere near the level he tested after Stage 18.
I sometimes take a big bunch of ventolin hits before a ride even if my asthma is fine, because it actually helps a lot. I cope much better with intense efforts. Just my opinion.
Andy C Do you think it could be psychological?
glenny oc definitely could be partly to mostly in my head but it definitely does do something. I’m just a c grade hack anyway so no real comparison.
Do you think your brain is separate to your body?
Justin Keane good point it’s definitely cheating
I believe Armstrong and groomed are treated totally different.
It is confusing why SKY will not bring a swift conclusion and total transparency to all this for the sake of the sport they claim to love. It will be a shame for this to cloud the Grand tours this summer.
This dude is to be suspended and striped all his tours ... He IS A DOPER!
6/19..... still hanging...... woof.
The UCI has once again been proven an organization that is not willing to take the necessary actions required to permanently clean up this great sport. The fact there was a delay in disclosure is proof enough of the ineffectiveness of the UCI. Shame on the UCI and shame on Froome and SKY for not disclosing. My prediction is Murdoch and Sky will not be in this sport long term and overall the sport suffers sponsorship crisis...the 21st century Logo will have to come off the kit for certain with Disney’s acquisition. No way Disney will gave association with this.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I like Froome, but he should have been banned from racing, it seems the powers that be decide that the watching public have to pay a price and not the guilty rider, so very disheartening. The TDF will be a boo fest if Froome is there.
Trust bro. There's also aliens
Talk about a cover up! Seems like the UCI and Tram Sky are obviously not been honest with the public. So much for been transparent. If the UCI and Team Sky are serious about cleaning up the sport Froome should be suspended and his Vuelta win taken away. As a fan this is what I need to see so I can take the UCI seriously when they talk about cleaning up the sport. I’m a huge cycling fan and have been for over 30 years but I am at the point the I question every win and wonder if the win was “clean.”
exercise-induced asthma is a real thing, but it's not solved by oral tablet / intravenous salbutamol. it should not be possible to get double the urine quantity limit with only inhaler use. if froome can somehow show that his system is different and replicate the high result in lab setting with only an inhaler, he might prove his innocence. low level use of salbutamol via inhaler has been proven to not give a performance benefit but high level use such as by tablet has been shown to give a performance benefit.
Why is it? Money Money Money...
Nibali Also has asma maybe he should take drogs, and when he had the problema with the car at the vuelta what happend to him? What happend to Ulisses and others?
Bob, Team Sky still hasn't come out from under the cloud of their last scandal with Brailsford and the packages. Brailsford shouldn't even be on the team any more. Transparency? Please, that's a marketing word at best. Sky never had it and never will. A large portion of the pro peloton is on some sort of inhaler because most people have some sort of exercise induced Bronchospasm. We rarely see them taking it because tv coverage starts in the last two hours and they've usually had their fill by then. If you recall Froome did poorly the stage before 18 and they probably over reacted on 18 so he could get good again. No I do not think he would of won without the inhaler, but that's shouldn't be the question. It should be could he of won had he taken the legal doses of the inhaler, and I think that might be yes.
Hi Mr. Bobke. Here is the deal with any physical enhancement for pro riders. To me, it doesn't really matter what an athlete's physical limitations are. If the athlete is pro then there should be a total ban and zero tolerance policy for any substance not in a normal diet. For example. Should an athlete be blessed with an exceptional VO2 max from birth. An exceptional heart as well and also very low weight because he has no legs, be allowed to compete if he has the unfortunate circumstance of being born with no legs. Should this athlete be allowed to compete, with manufactured super legs that are very lightweight, that require only batteries to operate? This man, with these legs, could sweep all the pro podiums. Should this be allowed? I think not. What about the guy with bad lungs? What sports needs is a league just for artificially enhanced athletics and one for all natural athletics. Then let the markets decide what the market wants.
Bob,
I see the UCI President is complaining about Froome choosing to still race and Sky not suspending him. Isn't the UCI in charge of adjudicating Froome's violation? Am I wrong about this? Why doesn't the UCI President get the reveiw process going? He acts like he has no control over the situation. He's also admitted in a recent interview to not talking to Sky or Froome. This seems like the craziest thing I've heard yet. Your biggest rider on your biggests team get caught doping and months later the UCI President hasn't talked to them? What am I missing here about UCI's role in reoslving this?
Team Sky were at my ball club Nottingham Forest a few years ago, they didnt last long, thier methods were not approved of, even silly things like drinking coffee all day and night.
When you look at athletes like Mo Farah too, actually in this case, his trainer has pretty much been found to have been using people as guinea pigs to measure how much of these banned substances can be consumed in various methods and in conjunction with other drugs ´without´triggering a positive.
So yeah that sounds like what happens all the time to me, occasionally tho our natural body chemistry does have a way of speaking up for itself and whispering clues.
I dont even trust much of British althletics anymore, the cyclists, the swimmers... I cynically suspect we are the best at all the science whilst Russia keeps getting ketched.
On the moral side, I see why initially some think, they are all on drugs so let em just play on. But in reality thats brutal. Id love to idolise Froome and yet I cannot because of this drug shadow. That is just so wrong on so many levels, cos he might be deserving of it, or not, what a dilemma.
Plus of course, if we just had a free for all, it would soon be a hundred dead cyclists a month over training
Here's one report that I can link:- link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02425500 The abstract gives the potted conclusion that twice normal therapeutic levels has no performance enhancement effects in healthy individuals. I have heard of other reports that conclude that it takes vastly greater concentrations to have any beneficial effect on non-asthmatic individuals.
If Froome's inhaler use was within the permitted limits, the question remains about how such a concentration was in his system. This article covers what Froome has to do to prove his innocence:- www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/42417297
About the silence the UCI and Sky. Yes, it would have been nice if they had come clean about it as soon as they knew, but let's face reality. As soon as the story broke it turned into a media circus: not conducive to concentrating on the World Championship. If it was Sky's intension to come clean once Froome's season was over, we'll never know now. I'm sure that there are plenty more riders who have successfully defended themselves in private, and I agree with that since the reputational damage can't be undone, not with the cynical "no smoke without fire" chattering classes.
David Lloyd basically true. Tough to get enough in you thru inhaler gain more than 100% lung function. Thru injection or pill it becomes easier to get perf gains but they come from increased heart or other function not the lungs, but both those are not legal. My question, can the test he failed tell the difference from inhaled versus pills or injection?
Double amount was not in his system. It was in his urine. Difference.
Love having you back - your comments are always well thought out and fair to all sides
David Walsh covered up
As long as exceptions are made for medical conditions there will be excuses and violations. If an athlete needs to take a drug to compete, they should not participate. It's a tough break for the athletes involved but that's needs to happen. Asthma, cancer survivor that needs to take stuff, no legs, etc., sorry, find another way to make a living. Failure to do so literally sets up an unfair competition arena and creates a potentially unfair situation disadvantaging healthy athletes. It also fosters a litany of medical conditions. It sends out the wrong message! I love Chris Froome, but he should find something else to do.
Otherwise re-instate Lance Armstrong and everyone else removed from the record books for doping, and let's celebrate them as winners. They won on the track and won at doping. It will be impossible to stop it if not banned 100%.
This should be over and done with already. There has already been a precedent set. Other athletes have been charged with 1300 and 1900 ng of asthma medication in their urine. Froome had 2000ng. It is clearly a violation. Accidental or not. He needs to be charged and banned from riding for a period of time. It should have been decided already really.
Petacchi and Ulisse were not sanctioned by the UCI/WADA following an AAF, only after the investigation. That's the process and thats the process CF and Team Sky are following
Very true Chris. But this AAF was hidden and dates back to the Vuelta. It should have been investigated and decided already. Well before the start of the 2018 season.
Right there are a few things here. Are you saying that because this AAF was not revealed to the public either by the UCI or Team Sky, then it means something was being hidden? Using the word, 'hidden' might imply that something was not correct about the way the information was not being made public, when in fact an AAF in this context does not need to be made public. Do you have any thoughts on that?
The rules are if a rider has an AAF and is then cleared, nobody needs to know anything about it.
If a rider - following the investigation that follows an AAF - is found to be 'guilty' then the UCI is required to release a statement, up until that time they don't need to. They write the rules.
The UCI released a statement on CF's AAF because of the leak, not because they needed to under their own rules or were obliged to.
CF is not being given any special treatment by the UCI that might indicate any of the rules are being broken.
The UCI could have, if they wished to, have issued a provisional suspension at any time after the AAF, but they don't have to and they can still do this, if they wish to and they may do, but it seems unlikely they will d.
It should have been investigated and decided already? Well, I think everyone would agree on this, however in the real world of pro-cycling, hundreds of lawyers, courts, sponsors, big big money and reputations there is not any great need to move this case quickly. It's also possibly not fair to blame Team Sky on the speed of the case, but it would be interesting to hear the views of someone who has a much better understanding of how the wheels of justice move.
All good points Chris. But Froome will be under a cloud at each race he participates in this year. Hi excuses don't add up. Better he serve a fine and protect the sport.
mjv1967 well indeed something doesn't add up. But we can't judge before we have more facts. It's not helpful.we can't say if he was cheating or not cheating. If it's found he was ingesting salbutomal, then this would be with the agreement of Team Sky.
This will be like an atomic bomb. This will be the end of Team Sky and CF will never race again.
There is not a good ending to this.
We can't say he has to take a ban, till untill we see the results of the tests. We have to know what was going on. This also will not be sorted out before the Giro. Impossible. Team Sky won't want to withdraw him but I don't see how he will be able to race. The environment will simply be too hostile. This is an unresolvable situation of a magnitude never seen before in sporting history. Much bigger than LA or Team Postal.
And this case will move very slowly unfortunately.
Bobke for UCI Pres.! I am a competitive cyclist. I was born with asthma, low Testosterone, low Growth Hormone and low red blood cell count. I have TUE's for all these things and have never failed a drug test because I make sure my ratios never go above the legal limits. If anyone has a problem with this they can kiss my badonkadonk!
mee chee - then, can I get a TUE for my age? I was born in 1973 and my performance has declined of late. A simple head start would help.
You're saying you've been given a TUE for testosterone? That I don't believe.
With the exception of Bobke for UCI Pres. I was being sarcastic. I am an amateur cyclist. I love cycling because it is a different spectacle. I can't stand watching multi-multi-millionaires in the NHL, NBA, Golf, etc. play their game. I am however, frustrated with all the legalized doping in cycling. I forgot to add that I am a minor diabetic and use occasional dialysis for which I sneak in an extra bag of blood. Did I mention my twin that disappeared on several occasions?
You’re giving too many concessions. And I understand why... who’s a nicer friggin’ lad than Froomey? Who’s more gracious and tactful? Few within the peloton could claim the title.. Despite all that, it’s plain to see, he got cold busted. Period. And for some reason (he’s a cash cow and along with Peter Sagan the face of Pro cycling atm) the UCI gave him a whole month and a half and a chance to compete in the World’s before they made it known he pinged a hot one at the Vuelta. For some reason he hasn’t been stripped of his win in La Vuelta yet, nor has he been handed a lengthy suspension as was pretty much par for the course for this kind of positive test prior; so long as you had an Italian or Spanish surname anyhow. The UCI has found new and inventive ways to make themselves look bad in a situation where they should’ve gone by the book, And Froome can no longer hide underneath his starched Britishness and overt good manners. He’s a doper. Just say it, because it’s true.
I am sure Chris mentioned his Asthma issue long long ago - also its know that its a 'genuine' condition he has, he has dealt with it and succeeded, why should 'he' go on about it in his book?
There could be a plausible explanation for the high levels at the Vuelta Stage 18, I personally doubt Chris would have intentionally over dosed on that Asthma drug, knowing he would be drug tested, either biologically / psychologically
Kosmonooit what if the team was doping him, in his bottle and made a mistake for the first time in over hundred races. He had lost time the day before and may have taken an extra boost
I refuse to believe that one of the best cyclists we've ever seen has become so with asthma. For all we know, all his negatives just meant that he came in just below the legal limit.
and do you refuse to believe that 70% of the British Olympic Swimming team have some form of asthma?
Who the hell cares about British Swimming?!
DarkHalmut not sure that was the point of my comment.
I honestly dont see a point in your comment at all. Froome/Sky is clearly a cheat at this point.
Didnt Lance pay off some negative results from Tour of Switzerland? SKY with all that money might being slipping some bucks to the UCI to keep those results quiet but someone ratted them out. I hope Im wrong...but when theres some big $$$ involved it seems to get shady real quick. Baseball turned a blind eye to roids back in the late 90s because chicks "dig the long ball" and rating were at their highest when Bonds, Sosa, and McGuire were launching them out at a ridiculous rate. Its all about that dollar...or Euro
I read that Vincenzo Nibali also suffers from athsma and also read that due to the Vuelta not being as dry and hot as he said that he was not feeling symptoms due to the weather so then why does Froome need more? Froome is not trustworthy anymore. His career is over in my opinion.
Just how many TUE's for different substances does he have? I'm guessing we'll never know.
Bill Dean
Actually, Bill, salbuterol doesn't require a TUE. Usage just requires that the athlete's blood samples do not show more than the allowed amount. That's the problem here. Froome had twice the allowable amount in his samples.
Stevie Nellor
I'm talking of TUEs for other things which aren't revealed. Remember the one we did hear about? Prednisone for a Chest infection.
cyclingtips.com/2014/06/uci-reacts-to-tue-criticism-in-froome-case-promises-changes/
Bill Dean I tried to view the video on that link but get a message "Sorry, this video cannot be played".(might be country restricted) But Prednisone is a valid med for chest infection. I spent all last winter & spring on it for same thing. Not sure how quickly a doc can get the TUE exemption when time is of the essence to treat a chest infection. Do you have any info on that?
Prednisone while used in circumstances of asthmatics with a chest infection, does not actually kill the bugs that cause the infection in the first place. It is used to primarily reduce the resultant inflammation of the lung tissues. To be frank, if his infection was that serious and required the use of prednisone, he should not have been riding. This is just another way of getting around the SPORTING rules. Marginal gains...
Daniel Martinez
Hi, Daniel. I agree with you completely. It is used as an antii-nflamatory. However, I think there should be more focus on the team doctors. They are supposed to know what to use, when to use it, what is banned & how a body metabolizes it...especially when no TUE is required for a specific med. I'm so torn. A person with compromised health is punished throughout life, so I don't think he /she should have to be punished even more, when they have a God-given talent, by not being able to compete or make a living doing what they love. Don't get me wrong, I'm anti-doping. I just think there needs to be more clarification between all parties involved.
I have no idea about the interaction between asthma meds and hard core cardio. I think Chris Froome would of won and again I am most definitely not a fan or a detractor of him.
Breaking news...everyone is doing something and the UCI knows about it all....$$$$$$$$$....hey I love cycling....I just understand what it is...entertainment based upon sport
Stop testing and everything will be fine. Seriously. Name an American sport where the athletes are all natural? I dare say that most people would not care if they weren't confronted with the morality of it all. Even then, many will lie to say they care when really they don't. Froome, Lance et el make it interesting to watch.
He didn't need to use that amount of medication imo but perhaps he thought it would possibly give that "marginal gain" which has been the slogan.of some teams and the cash cow that is the product industry. A lot of it is in the head. We all know lance was the best rider at the time.and would have won without dope....but wasn't group against others doping?
Bob, I agree with you this whole issue is so upsetting and depressing. Hard to understand why Froome, after not testing positive in hundreds of tests, exceeds the limit on one test. Either he inhaled too much (accidently or otherwise), or due to dehydration, the drug was concentrated in his urine. Sadly he will have to pay a price. I hope the investigation will find mitigating circumstances so his suspension is short - cycling needs Chris Froome. Do I think he would have won the Vuelta if the drug was within limits on stage 18? Yes, but no way to prove it. He and his team dominated and if the drug was at 1000 NG level rather than 2000 NG, I think he would have been good enough to continue to lead. Thanks Bob.
Chris is tainted for life.
Oh give it a rest Bobke, don't tell me that we are circling back around to where we just came from in cycling! I will agree that this is very disheartening and team sky owes us some detailed answers, but Froome was simply using asthma meds. The question most of us are asking is can salbutamol enhance performance to any significant degree. I personally have seen no studies or evidence to prove that it can. I mean we all knew that the whole pro peleton was not squeaky clean... but it's not like these guys are out there slamming gallons of EPO and HGH and then washing it down with testosterone and cortisone as they did in the dark era of cycling (90s and early 00s) So please lay off the sensationalism a bit...