Jonathon Tiernan Locke blood passport iffy? (ToB title for Haas?)

[Slaav]

I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?

That's my understanding too.

 

[rich p]

If that's the case then maybe he was BPed from post ToB last year but I share your confusion.

 

[User169]

I thought there was not an accurate BP for JTL from Endura days? As in using the exact same methodology as UCI? Didn't UCI refuse his own request to go into the programme to get an accurate baseline etc?

It's this year's BP against individual tests from last year.

 

[tigger]

Yes as Delftse Post has said, my understanding is that his BP effectively started at some point early to mid 2012 when he was tested by Garmin and then later started working with Sky. Now WADA have approx 14 to 18 months worth of data they are questioning his levels from last September.

It may be an interesting case this one, if any of us can following the findings, whatever they may be! Until then it's pure speculation, and will remain that way thereafter no doubt!?

 

[rich p]

Yes as Delftse Post has said, my understanding is that his BP effectively started at some point early to mid 2012 when he was tested by Garmin and then later started working with Sky. Now WADA have approx 14 to 18 months worth of data they are questioning his levels from last September.

It may be an interesting case this one, if any of us can following the findings, whatever they may be! Until then it's pure speculation, and will remain that way thereafter no doubt!?

I thought that he'd asked to be put on the programme in the summer of 2012, but both the UCI and UK Doping had refused.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I thought that he'd asked to be put on the programme in the summer of 2012, but both the UCI and UK Doping had refused.

Yes, that's correct.

 

[rich p]

Yes, that's correct.

So the anomalies are from post 2012 ToB when compared to his blood profile in 2013 with Sky.
The baseline values ascertained after a season of passport measurements during 2013 are what testers are now claiming render his limited 2012 data as suspect - CyclingNews
If the 2012 data is as limited as it seems this may be a storm in a tea-cup.

 

[thom]

If the 2012 data is as limited as it seems this may be a storm in a tea-cup.

It is just impossible to know - the fact he is in a process should never have been made public obviously.
This kind of speculation is just far too commonplace in cycling these days - the long term legacy of USPostal et al.

 

[User169]

It is just impossible to know - the fact he is in a process should never have been made public obviously.
This kind of speculation is just far too commonplace in cycling these days - the long term legacy of USPostal et al.

Can't remember where I saw it, but there was an interesting speculation was that the original source was Brailsford (since Walsh broke the story). The reasoning went that Brailsford couldn't hold it back in view of Walsh' "embedded" status and that Walsh had to then publish for the same reason. Sounds a bit far-fetched, but does highlight some of the potential conflicts of interest with Walsh so close to Sky.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Can't remember where I saw it, but there was an interesting speculation was that the original source was Brailsford (since Walsh broke the story). The reasoning went that Brailsford couldn't hold it back in view of Walsh' "embedded" status and that Walsh had to then publish for the same reason. Sounds a bit far-fetched, but does highlight some of the potential conflicts of interest with Walsh so close to Sky.

The speculation is mentioned here - http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...t-case-should-have-remained-confidential.html

 

[User169]

The speculation is mentioned here - http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...t-case-should-have-remained-confidential.html

Thanks! That's the one. Pretty good article actually.

 

[rich p]

Thanks! That's the one. Pretty good article actually.

It is reasonably persuasive apart from not explaining why Walsh would have been pressing Brailford about JTL's withdrawal. Lack of form would have seemed credible enough given the rubbish year he's had.
Having said that, it's as plausible as any other explanation as to who leaked it.

 

[thom]

I can't see Brailsford breaking the confidentialities of that situation to Walsh.
He is a clever guy, well capable of giving a plausible reason if Walsh had asked the question.

Just sounds completely speculative in a way the cycling world is very apt at.

 

[rich p]

I can't see Brailsford breaking the confidentialities of that situation to Walsh.
He is a clever guy, well capable of giving a plausible reason if Walsh had asked the question.

Just sounds completely speculative in a way the cycling world is very apt at.

True but as the speculative article says, if he tells white lies and then the true story comes out, it looks pretty bad for the Walsh/Sky/Brailsford embedding.
Plausible at least, I'd say!