Cyclingnews TV   News  Tech   Features   Road   MTB   BMX   Cyclo-cross   Track    Photos    Fitness    Letters   Search   Forum  

Recently on

Dauphiné Libéré
Photo ©: Sirotti

Letters to Cyclingnews - November 2, 2007

Here's your chance to get more involved with Cyclingnews. Comments and criticism on current stories, races, coverage and anything cycling related are welcomed, even pictures if you wish. Letters should be brief (less than 300 words), with the sender clearly identified. They may be edited for space and clarity; please stick to one topic per letter. We will normally include your name and place of residence, but not your email address unless you specify in the message.

Please email your correspondence to

What does this mean?
Le Tour 08
Mayo's B sample
Bike design originality, Trimble
UCI says Mayo case not closed
Drug testing procedures ... and false positives
Kashechkin: controls violate human rights
Drug testing procedures
Mayo, UCI, Kashechkin, et al... Great, now it's coming from both ends
Positive tests
Why even bother with B samples then?
Mayo's positive EPO test
Falling barriers


What does this mean?

Perusing recent headlines about the Iban Mayo, I caught this quote:

"According to Gripper, Mayo's B sample was transferred to a laboratory in Gent, Belgium because the Châtenay-Malabry laboratory in Paris, where the original sample was tested, was closed for the holidays. "To ensure that the rider could have the B sample done more quickly, we transferred the sample, but the Gent laboratory just couldn't get the sample to confirm the Paris result," said Gripper. "In Gent, they use a slightly different technique [than the Paris laboratory]," she added."

What does that mean? I know that we're dealing with sound bites, but Gripper statements suggest a couple of things (to me, anyway). First, the Gent lab "couldn't get the sample to confirm." Try as we might, boys, we just couldn't get it to come out right. While I know that's not what's meant, Gripper's words would unnerve me.

Second, if I were a rider, I'd demand a different lab for my B test. "They use a slightly different technique." What does that mean? A career can be ruined by who gets to test the sample? Techniques, user ability/judgment can affect the outcome? The science sounds more slippery each day.

Cycling is forgetting one key truth: it exists as a sport and business on trust. Once again, another key area in our sport shows that trust hasn't been earned and is far from reality. Which lab would you trust your sample with? Which agency? We're already suspecting the riders, DS's, etc. But if you can't trust those appointed with policing them, you've got chaos. Welcome to cycling.

Harold Veldman
Allendale, MI, USA
Thursday, October 25, 2007

Respond to this letter

Le Tour 08

Cracking Route, more mountains less TT's, has Monsieur Prudhomme been looking at the Giro. It's nice to see L'Alpe d'Huez and the Col du Tourmalet back as well.

Add that to the seemingly good relations between the UCI and ASO, a new doping passport and some positive vibes about the sport for a change; anyone else excited yet???

Donald Young
Aberdeen Scotland
Thursday, October 25, 2007

Respond to this letter

Mayo's B sample

Why is it that because Mayo's B sample was found negative, I mean "inconclusive" or not positive, that it now has to be re-tested at the French lab? It seems to me that if the B sample comes back anything but positive from another lab that the UCI will make sure it comes back positive by sending it back to the French Lab. If the other lab was incompetent or unable to test the sample accurately, then why was it sent there in the first place?

This kind of ad hoc testing on the surface seems suspect and doesn't help garner trust in the UCI's testing procedures or the labs they use. Trust in the testing procedures and the labs in my opinion are critical in the success of eradicating doping in cycling and bringing back the sponsors. Otherwise it sometimes seems like an UCI fishing expedition just to bolster their own record of doping successes.

Chad Billings
Ashburn, Virginia
Thursday, October 25, 2007

Respond to this letter

Bike design originality, Trimble

I still have a picture of one of your first frames. It looks somewhat similar to the Cervélo design that shields the rear wheel so nicely. In fact, I offered to buy one but you responded that you had moved on to a new design (it looked like a giant diamond with room for the spare and pump inside). I am sure there are many riders who want a very fast frame. I don't care if it is illegal. I just love to fly. Just make it.

However, I feel it could be a waste of money to buy an expensive aero frame. I would bet that the fastest illegal carbon wind slicing frame would be beaten easily by a steel round tube design with an aero windscreen that shields the handlebars and riders chest. Look at some of the IHPVA records. Their somewhat odd designs have easily surpassed the Olympic stars.

Timothy Shame, USA
Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

UCI says Mayo case not closed

It seems that many of your readers did not watch or follow the Landis hearing. Had they done so they would not be at all surprised by the Mayo case. At least they are beginning to see the light.

Simply, unless laboratories are held to the highest standards, then the anti-doping system can not and will not work. I've read so many letters from readers who said that Landis had synthetic testosterone in his body. How can they be so certain when the lab violated almost every lab standard (chain-of-custody, procedural, confidentiality, impartiality)?

Michael Lewin
Atlanta, Georgia

Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

Drug testing procedures ... and false positives

It makes a pleasant change to hear someone speaking some sense on the issue of 'dope testing'. I originally trained as a chemist and I am very dubious about the reliability of testing results. Biological samples are notoriously difficult to work with. I would not be surprised to find that a significant number of cyclists have had their careers messed up as a consequence of poor testing procedures combined with presumed guilt rather than presumed innocence. As you say, we will never know.

John Leaver BSc MA
Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

Kashechkin: controls violate human rights

I've just read the article on Kashechkin and realise that this could start an avalanche of debate regarding human rights but come on. If the guy decided to compete "clean" and not dope then what's the issue. Yes cycling is under the microscope for good reason and more so than other sports but if I was fortunate to compete at their level then I would expect to be turned inside out and if I was found guilty then see ya. Wake up Andrey and get real.

Seb Fisher
Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

Drug testing procedures

A majority of your readers' letters sides against the French lab (the fact that it happens to be French seems to be a bad thing in the first place!) and wish guys like F. Landis and I. Mayo were still riding their bikes at the Tour 2008. The lab is "corrupt", the UCI and WADA and ASO are "witch hunters", and the basic idea is that there shouldn't be any sanctions if 100% of the procedure is not completely perfect and flawless (for example, "who cares if they found synthetic testosterone, they shouldn't even have looked for that to begin with!").

I cannot help but notice that most of the letters come from the USA and I don't think they realize how cycling is in danger. Because people are getting sick and tired of doping scandals, because they don't want to see ever again on the road some riders who are involved in doping scandals. (Yeah, I know, the Virenque thing; I think he "got away with it" cause he was caught at a time when the whole peloton was on it and it was broadly 'tolerated'; if today Moreau tested positive, I'm sure he would be booed as well.)

If all suspected riders are not kicked out, the people will stop watching the Tour, parents will stop sending their kids to cycling clubs, and eventually there won't even be TV coverage anymore just because people will have grown tired of watching a sport where they can never know if they should praise or boo the winner. So your readers will be happy, the "innocent until guilty" rule will be saved (and let's not forget we are not talking about a murder case here), but the only problem is that cycling will not be a popular sport anymore, it will only be followed by a few 'aficionados' on some obscure website (I'm not talking of of course!).

Cheers to my American friends!

R. Leroux
Rennes, France
Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

Mayo, UCI, Kashechkin, et al... Great, now it's coming from both ends

I'm flabbergasted. My heart aches for this sport that we love, these riders who are clean and just want to race.

Gripper: "They just couldn't get it to confirm the Paris lab's result..." That's why they have two labs do tests!!! Or have we forgotten that humans are fallible creatures, some even being motivated by malice rather than justice?

Kashechkin: "Sports officials violate my rights by testing me for cheating." Excuse me, but if you sign your name on the sheet, that's an agreement to compete fairly, and to submit to whatever testing your sport's officials or the event's officials deem necessary. You don't want to submit to a urine test? Don't race these events. How much of a flagrant red herring! You need not worry if you've not taken something that you shouldn't have! Oh, and by the way, trying to run the legal gamut so you don't have to submit samples is really not the same thing as football teams being prohibited from impeding the signing transfer of an athlete. That's like comparing apples and Buicks.

So we have sporting officials who clearly do not have the riders' nor the sport's best interests at heart, but rather the goal of making a point, making a statement, using whomever they can to do it...

And we have riders who cheat, deny it when they're caught, and try to circumvent the whole affair by throwing up a huge legal debacle smoke screen.

Our sport has been around for more than one hundred years. Not a great many sports can claim that. How then have we managed to put it into this state of being in so short a time? How dare they try to take it from us?

Thank God they will never truly succeed in doing so.

David Millar. Bjarne Riis and CSC. Lance Armstrong. Greg LeMond. (However much they despise each other.) Jonathan Vaughters. T-Mobile.

In the end I'm thankful for the potential for our sport that will never fade, and the undeniability of a man, on a bike, trying to get there first. Like they always say- once you've hit a certain point, there is nowhere else to go but up. I'm just afraid that we've not yet actually hit the bottom...

Toby Deemer
Cleveland, OH, USA
Friday, October 26, 2007

Respond to this letter

Positive tests

I've read and read about Mayo's test now being negative. How a lot of people are saying that the lab was incompetent. How Landis should be cleared. But the same question keeps popping in my head. How can an "incompetent" lab produce something that is not there? I can see how they can screw up and miss the illegal substance. A lot of people also say that they should legalize drugs to have a level playing field. I could see the bike and component makers lobby to not have that happen. After all, why would anybody spend $2,000 on a pair of wheels when they can take a $35 dose and ride faster?

I'm sure glad that I didn't get into cycling today. I just hope that this all goes away when my son starts racing as a junior. "Oh, how I dream of the days of LeMond, Hinault and Roche".

Steve Demertzis
San Jose, CA
Saturday, October 27, 2007

Respond to this letter

Why even bother with B samples then?

First let me open this letter by saying I was never a fan of Iban Mayo, and was neither surprised, nor disappointed when a non-negative A test was announced.

WADA and the UCI have VERY specific rules governing drug testing. Among those rules are the requirements of an A and B sample. Also among the rules (on the UCI's side) are the ability for the authorities (not the athlete interestingly enough) to have the B sample tested in another lab and, if they feel the need, to have 2 different labs perform this test. The advantage goes further to the UCI in that only one of 2 labs (if the dual lab option is chosen) has to come up with a "non-negative" for the B sample to institute a ban. Now WADA determines what labs can do what tests and all of the labs authorized have to meet the SAME standard, which means Gent, and the lab in Oz, have to have the same facilities and trained technicians as LNDD. Both of these labs tested the B sample and came to the same conclusion, that the B sample is negative for EPO.

Rather than saying "this proves that the system works to not only catch dopers but to protest the athlete" the UCI instead comes forth and says Gent "could not produce the same result" and they conveniently forget the Oz lab. Their answer is that Gent uses a "slightly different procedure". Well what difference could they have since all labs authorized to do EPO testing had to use WADA approved procedures? This standardization was one of the main purposes for the creation of WADA. Instead the UCI wants what in essence will be a "C" test. The result of which is irrelevant because A) "C" tests are clearly outside the rules B) regardless of the results of the test either the UCI will lose on appeal to CAS for doing this (in the result of a miraculous LNDD positive) and the reliability of LNDD will come further into question as some how they get positives when no one else can C) most importantly, regardless of the results of a possible LNDD "C" test, the UCI will be seen as being more interested in a McCarthyism style Witch Hunt than finding the true "Enemies of the State".

This situation raises a number of disturbing questions. If the UCI will not accept the results of a WADA approved lab, then why even bother with multiple labs or even B tests? Why bother with the testing protocols at all? If they "think" an athlete's performance was enhanced by dope, just ban him. Also what does instances like this do on the PR front? You have many fans of Vino, Landis and many others who will look to this as proof that "their athlete was a victim of similar misconduct. This instance can also be used as fodder for the next dopers "the system is the problem" defence. Perhaps most importantly, if the authorities will not follow the rules they themselves wrote, why should the next generation of athletes bother to follow them. If a young athlete believes he or she risks being branded a doper and banned with no corroborating evidence, why not take the risk and actually dope? They may well feel "well if you are going to accuse and possibly ban me for doping, I may as well actually dope and get the pay off with a win and some prize money."

John Schmalbach
Philadelphia PA
Monday, October 29, 2007

Respond to this letter

Mayo's positive EPO test

Unfortunately, it has become the norm for those seeking to defend suspected and proven dopers to engage in misleading spin and the spread of misinformation and the Mayo EPO case appears to be no exception. Regardless of what the Spanish Cycling Federation might have claimed, Mayo has not been proven to be innocent of doping and crucially his 'B' sample test was not 'negative'. Rather the result was reported as being 'illegible' or 'unreadable'. Given this it is only right that the UCI should seek further tests to give a definitive result one way or the other. Surely this is exactly what Mayo would also want - if he were innocent that is - otherwise people would be free to argue that he did dope but only got away with it due to a botched or 'unreadable' 'B' sample test result.

Secondly, his positive 'A' sample test for EPO which was conducted by the Châtenay-Malabry lab has certainly not, at this stage at least, been shown to be a 'false positive'. As to the claim that a separate test conducted in Australia gave a 'negative' result no evidence has so far come to light showing that such a test was ever done. An Australian lab may have confirmed that the Belgian lab's test data gave an inconclusive result, but this is a long way from a further test being conducted, let alone one which gave a definitively 'negative' result.

Such facts are likely to be ignored by those intent on claiming Mayo did not dope, ably supported by all those who selectively focus on anything, no matter how inaccurate or misleading, which they feel undermines the credibility of dope testing in general and the Châtenay-Malabry lab in particular. This, of course, then reduces the amount of 'doublethink' and selective blindness they need to apply in order to maintain the fantasy that other riders conclusively shown to have doped (such as Landis) are 'innocent'...

Howard Peel
East Yorkshire, UK
Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Respond to this letter

Falling barriers

I just read the article about the falling barriers on Cyclingnews by Edita Pucinskaite. The barriers that took down a big group of female riders were not the only ones affected by the wind. If you watch the TV coverage closely you will see that at one point on the right side of the road the barriers are also coming down. This could have been avoided by simply putting sand bags on the foot stands - like is done at the Dutch National Championships with barrier carrying advertisements. So it's simple: the organisation is to blame for the incident since with this simple measure it would have been avoided.

Paul van der Veer
Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Respond to this letter

Recent letters pages

Letters 2007

  • October 26: Rider passports & Cadel Evans, Drug testing procedures ... and false positives, Iban Mayo's false positive, Iban Mayo and Landis, Armstrong on Landis, Mayo's B sample, UCI turns Mayo's case into a debaucle, they hand pick the results, No justice for Mayo, UCI says Mayo case not closed, Bike design originality, 2006 Tour de France, A bad week for cycling, A fitting end to the season
  • October 19: 2006 Grand Tour trifecta!, 2006 Tour de France, A fitting end to the season, Armstrong on Landis, Bike design originality, doping in cycling, Doping numbers, Paris-Tours testing mishap, UCI and the lack of testing!, Vino's other Tour stage win, The absolute best?
  • October 12: Armstrong on Landis, Bike design originality, Cycling drama, Doping is unfair; but so is discrimination, It’s not doping that's..., Landis case - everyone's a loser, Length and cost of the Landis case, R & R, The Landis decision, Tour of America
  • October 5: Cycle drama, It's not doping that's "killing" the sport, Why is VAM a benchmark, Tour of America, The Landis decision, DYNEPO, Worlds, Rock & Republic's CEO Michael Ball, Please explain, Giuseppe Guerini, FICP
  • September 28: Tour of America, World champion zany-ness, The Landis decision, ASO v UCI, McQuaid vs ASO vs the riders, Please explain, Why is VAM a benchmark, Giuseppe Guerini, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, ProTour and Le Tour, Where is the due process
  • September 21: Astana's future and Bruyneel, Bruyneel's afterlife, Floyd Landis decision, Why is VAM a benchmark, Lifetime bans, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, Ungrateful Levi, Spanish cycling, Where is the due process
  • September 14: Astana & Bruyneel, Cycling vs. soccer, Cycling will survive, Floyd Landis decision, LeMond's comments, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, Ungrateful Levi, Why is VAM a benchmark?
  • September 7: Cycling vs. soccer, Floyd Landis decision, UCI, ASO, LeMond, et al who cares? Riders, Lawyers in the Landis case, LeMond's comments, Riders taking the fall?, US Postal/Discovery R.I.P.
  • August 31: LeMond’s comments, Farewell De Peet, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Vino & human rights?, Cadel was robbed, Floyd Landis decision, Market beliefs, Sinkewitz Positive.
  • August 23: Biting the hand that feeds you, Cadel was robbed, Congratulations to grand tour organizers, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Discovery folding, Drugs and cycling, Fewer ProTour teams, Floyd Landis decision, Petacchi’s asthma, Science of doping, Sinkewitz positive, Tailwind withdrawal, The good news...., Unibet, what a shame, World’s exclusion, Vino: "a clear violation of human rights"?,
  • August 17: Dying from within..., Cadel was robbed, Biting the hand that feeds you, Discovery folding, Astana-Tour cover-up?, Christian Moreni, UCI may lose it all, Drugs & cycling, Aussie proTour team, Valverde and the worlds, Klöden: are things getting out of control?, Congratulations to grand tours organizers
  • August 10: Smarter Drug Testing, Cassani and Rasmussen, Bruyneel: take doping seriously, The dubious Disco boys, Spanish ethics, Who's to blame for doping?, Untrustworthy authorities, Insurance for pro riders, Science of doping, It's working?, State of cycling, Less mountain stages, Positively false, Sinkewitz positive, Team suspensions, Tour ethics, Vino response, Editorials call for ending Tour, Revoking le Tours jerseys, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, WADA vigilantes
  • August 3, Part 1: What about team suspensions?, WADA vigilantes, Vino response, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Unanswered questions, Tour de France doping "scandals", State of cycling, Spanish ethics and the A.C. joke, Sinkewitz positive, Secondary testing?, Editorials calling for ending Tour, Rasmussen's location, Quality control and anti doping, Positively False, McQuaid: not the Godfather of cycling, Less mountain stages
  • August 3, Part 2: LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Le Tour, L'affaire Vino, It’s the culture, IOC questioning cycling in Olympics, Greg LeMond is not surprised, Greg LeMond, German TV, Due process, Evans v Contador - the real margin of victory, Doping, the media and the MPCC, Doping, Evans, Dope tests and the tour, Different perspective on doping, David Millar, Cycling revolution, Cadel was robbed, Bruyneel a 'man in black'?, Another drug test result leaked, Andy Hampsten
  • July 27 Part 1: 80's style back in fashion?, A great few days for cycling, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Another drug test result leaked, ASO discretion in administering Tour justice, Astana in stage 5, Astana’s tactics, Bad day for Australia, Bloody dopes, Cadel Evans, Catching Vino is good news, Conspiracy?, David "what a joke" Millar, Doping, Doping controls, Tour ethics, German TV, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, How many big bastards in the peloton?
  • July 27 Part 2: How will cycling survive, Kazahkstan Pie, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, Landis testing, Le maillot jaune is gone, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, The'Vino' scene, Losing time and bouncing back, Losing my religion, Moreau, No, not Vino, Out of season testing and baseline tests, PED's, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Petacchi out
  • July 20: What about team suspensions?, Tyler Hamilton, Stuttgart Worlds, Sinkewitz positive, Petacchi out!, Bad day for Australia, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal problems, Greg LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Fair doping tests, Drug testing and sequence of recorded results, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Advice for Stapleton and Sinkewitz, Astana in stage 5, Crashes, bike changes & team cars
  • July 13: Fair doping tests, Tyler Hamilton, Tour downright exciting!, Stuttgart(?) Worlds, Rocketing Robbie v tormented Tommy, Armstrong's comment to ASO, Petacchi out, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal Problems, Incentive for doping, Imagine, UCI agreement, Does the UCI test for blood transfusions?, The real heroes, Bicycle options,
  • July 5: Tour de France boring!, The real heroes, The flying Scotsman, Signing the contract, No Zabriskie?, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Incentive for Doping, Bicycle Options, Anti-doping charter, Sale of the century
  • June 29: "The Flying Scotsman",Cancellara,The real heroes, Categorised Climbs, Tour for Devolder and Zabriskie?, Tour de France, boring!,Nationalistic pride, Anti Doping Charter, Bicycle Options, Doping, Doping Coverage - Enough already..., Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 22: Anti Doping Charter, The real heroes, Basso's "suspension", Categorized climbs, Bicycle options, Greg LeMond and record ITT's, It is about us!, Finding the clean winner of the TdF?, Tour de France, BORING!, Prudhomme and the 1996 Tour farce, Riis, the '96 Tour and Prudhomme, Amnesty for doping..., Cycling, doping....???, Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 15: Bicycle options, New Trek Madone, A week of confessions, Cycling - not yet a real professional sport, Di Luca's finest win..., Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Giro fever, Amnesty for doping offenses, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Is drafting a known doper cheating?, Let's sort this mess out, Doping hypocrisy, Cycling, doping....?, Prudhomme and the1996 Tour farce, Simoni goes 1850 meters / hour
  • June 8: Di Luca's finest win, Simoni goes 1850 metres / hour, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Andy the Dandy, Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Percentage of pros with asthma, Amnesty for doping offenses, ling - not yet a real professional sport, Doping and cycling, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Meaningless defense, We are out of denial - Let's look forward
  • June 1, part 1: A thought for cycling's true heroes..., A cunning plan, A great opportunity for the UCI, Admissions of guilt, Let's have some real confessions, Amnesty is the way forward, Suggestions for an amnesty, Amnesty, Amnesty or punishment?, ASO's double standard, Tour Clowns, Bjarne Riis, Bjarne Riis confession, Riis must go, Riis, Basso, Zabel, et al..., Repairing the Magenta Express, Tip of the iceberg, Riis and winning the tour on EPO
  • June 1, part 2: Confessions?, Honour - Seemingly rare in cycling, How deep do you go?, Who do we give it to?, A week of confessions, Peer pressure, Mind boggling hypocrisy, Pro cycling - Sometimes you make it hard to love you, Meaningless defence, Riding with Lance, Lucky Lance, Cheating by proxy, LeMond trying to tear down US riders , So, if Floyd is right..., Thank you Floyd, Floyd Landis hearing, Mr. Young's closing arguments, Something more important..., What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Percentage of pros with asthma:
  • May 23: Landis case live coverage, LeMond a true champion, Questioning LeMond's motives, LeMond trying to tear down US riders, Saint LeMond, Landis and his character, Landis has made cycling a joke, Landis had his drink spiked?, Landis in a corner, Landis polygraph?, Landis' disclosure of information, The quality of Landis' character, Landis' behaviour, Joe Papp
  • May 18: Armstrong can defend himself, Di Brat, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Hoy in sixty seconds, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Italian Reactions to Basso, Who's telling the truth?, Basso + Ullrich = Armstrong?, Basso still a legend, Simoni vs Basso, Basso, Landis etc The new mafia?, Landis to ask UCI to boot Pound, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF?, Percentage of pros with asthma, Unibet at Dunkerque
  • May 11: An attempt at doping?, Almost as bad as Ullrich, Basso admission, Hats off Basso, Basso still a legend, Basso's attempted plea bargain, Basso and Discovery, Discovery's PR, Basso vs Simoni , Truth and Reconciliation Commission, A means to an end, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF? , New Puerto plan, Where is the Puerto money?, Time to start re-stating race results, The morals and math of cycling, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Unibet at Dunkerque, Davide Rebellin
  • May 4: Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Pose with Landis, at a price, Danielson should leave Discovery, Davide Rebellin, The year of the clean Classics?, Basso and Discovery, Basso this, Landis that, Ullrich the other..., Basso, DNA and whatever else, Basso's DNA, Say it ain't so, Johan, Let's cut them some slack!, Armstrong, head and shoulders above?, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, It's not all about the Tour!, Puerto Affair
  • April 27: The year of the clean Classics?, David Rebellin, Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Danielson should leave Discovery, Inspirational O'Grady and those cobbles, L'Equipe does it again!, Tour de France speaks out, The morals and math of cycling, Basso and Puerto, Puerto, part deux, Gilberto, you were right!, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, Pose with Landis, at a price?, Taking blood, Gent-Wevelgem and the Kemmelberg, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles
  • April 20: Stuey wins Roubaix, O'Grady Rocks!, An Aussie in Arenberg, Deep-dish carbon versus the cobbles, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Racing in America, Retesting Floyd's B-samples, Taking blood
  • April 13: Thoughts on Flanders, Crashes at Gent-Wevelgem, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, What about that loose water bottle?, T-Mobile one-two, Popo for the Classics, Racing in America, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, French hypocrites?, Bjarne Riis, Floyd Landis 'B' sample fiasco, Taking blood, Ullrich DNA match
  • April 6: April Fools, Ullrich DNA match, Taking blood, T-Mobile and Puerto, The song remains the same, Ullrich and Hamilton, Tyler Hamilton and flu, Unibet and access into France, Bjarne Riis, Popovych, The death of irony, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons
  • March 30: Basso wind tunnel testing, Bjarne Riis, Riis' response, Drugs in other sports, Dominquez at Redlands, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons, Popovych - the new Armstrong?, ASO wildcard selections, ASO-UCI split, Boys atop the sport, Cycling at two speeds, Puerto shelved, Tyler Hamilton.
  • March 23: Popovych - the new Armstrong?, A few years ago, Tyler Hamilton, Operación Puerto not complete, Puerto shelved, ASO-UCI split, Drugs in other sports, Basso wind tunnel testing, Water bottle and cage sponsorship, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, The current state of cycling
  • March 16: Don Lefévère, Lefévère tries to reinforce omerta, Spring fever, Ullrich's retirement, UCI has no power, Puerto shelved, Who's been taking what?, ProTour a flawed competition?, UCI-Grand Tour organizer dual!, ASO-UCI split, ASO needs to see benefits in ProTour, Sponsorship, drug use and dinosaurs, The current state of cycling, New Pro Cyclist Union, Congratulations to Unibet, Unibet situation, marketing, Tour of California mistake
  • March 9: ASO - UCI split, UCI has no power, UCI vs. ASO, UCI vs. the world, ProTour and contracts, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, Unibet and French law, Unibet situation, Pete Bassinger's Iditarod Trail record ride, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, Tour of California expenses, Discovery's profile in Europe, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Floyd's big ride
  • March 2: Ullrich's retirement, Altitude tents and EPO, Home-made altitude tents, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, The agony of Unibet?, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Upside down Disco solved, Tour of California mistake, Graeme Brown, Hats off to Dick Pound?, Grand Tours, who really cares?, ProTour and contracts, ProTour vs wildcards, RCS' decision, UCI vs. the world, Floyd's big ride, Asthma everywhere
  • February 23: Altitude tents and EPO, Tour of California mistake, Chavanel's training regime, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, Grand Tours, who really cares?, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, A solution to the Unibet situation, UCI and the ASO, UCI vs. the world, Will the fight never end?, Paris Nice and others, Pro Tour and contracts, RCS decision, Hats off to Dick Pound, Armstrong owes Dick Pound nothing, Graeme Brown, Asthma everywhere, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 16: T-Mobile, Adam Hanson and doping, Unibet's new jersey, Double standards for Unibet?, RCS decision, A letter to ASO, Hamilton and Tinkov, Discovery Channel, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the cross worlds, Best moment?, Crowd control at the cross worlds, Doping reconciliation, Get into 'cross racing, Pound still wants answers from Armstrong, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 9: Unibet show they won't be put down, Double standards for Unibet?, Unibet's new jersey, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the Cross Worlds, Crowd control at the Cross Worlds, Jonathan Page's mechanic beaten, Cheers to Bradley Wiggins, Bradley Wiggins' comments, Jaksche lashes out, Get into 'cross racing, Le Tour was created to sell newspapers, The stakes are too high, Doping reconciliation, Best moment of 2006?, Ivan Basso interview, Ullrich's DNA sample, Ullrich to Relax-GAM?, Ullrich partners with sports-clothing company, Still love to ride, My perfect state of mountain biking, A terrible model for cycling
  • February 2: The sanctimonious need to be taken out back, Confidentiality of test results, Oscar Pereiro cleared, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Riders' nicknames, Doping reconciliation, Help for Floyd Landis, Museeuw's insults, Sven Nys, The Floyd Fairness Fund, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • January 26: Drug testing methodologies, Museeuw the PR man, Museeuw's insults, Johan Museeuw and Tyler Hamilton, Sven Nys, Conduct in the pro peloton, McQuaid unhappy with Pereiro, Put doping in the correct context, Moreau wins 2006 TDF, Who wins the 2006 Tour now?, Drapac Porsche's exclusion from the TDU, Bike sponsorship, Compact geometry, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 19: Drapac-Porsche and the TDU, Bettini to win the Ronde?, Frame geometry, Phil Liggett's recently stated views, Prudhomme's zealotry, 3 cheers for Christian Prudhomme, Deutschland Tour, 3 cheers for Saunier Duval, Dick Pound, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Do the maths, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 12: Dick Pound, Just 'Pound' him, Pound casts doubt on Landis, Pound comments, The Dick and Pat Show, McQuaid starts cultural polemic, Why the Pro Tour model will never work, The Floyd Fairness Fund, Riders' union, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Danny Clark - an inspiration, Allan Peiper, Do the maths, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Justice and America, Lance in Leadville, Tubeless road tires
  • January 5: Danny Clark - an inspiration, Legal standards and cycling, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Lance a no show for Leadville, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Do the math, A fair trial, Tubeless road tires, Manzano's polygraph test, Blind trust in implicated riders, A terrible state of affairs, Armstrong's credibility - the conspiracy theories, Best ride ever

Letters 2006

  • December 29: Lance in Leadville, Leadville Trail 100, Manzano's polygraph test, British Cycling and the Tour de France, Tell me, what's the problem?, "Disco" team?, Presumption of innocence, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, American culture, Armstrong's credibility, Back room politics and the IPCT
  • December 22: Scott Peoples, Hypocrite?, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, Rumours and innuendo, Bjarne Riis interview, Enough already, Back room politics and the IPCT, Armstrong's credibility, American culture, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 15: A totally predictable situation?, Armstrong's credibility, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Back room politics and the IPCT, Holczer and others, Holczer and the Discovery exclusion, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Can't we all just get along?, DNA safety, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Genevieve Jeanson, Mark McGwire, Operación Puerto bungled...deliberately?, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 8: Genevieve Jeanson, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Deutschland Tour, Bjarne's ignorance factor, USADA does it again, Labs and testing, Astana denied ProTour license, Isaac Gálvez, McQuaid, Question about DNA testing, Le Tour de Langkawi 2007
  • December 1: Hamilton, Isaac Gálvez, USADA does it again, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Shorten the Vuelta?, Vuelta short, shorter, shortest, Labs and testing, Ullrich to CSC, Clean up cycling's own house first, Fed up with doping, Strange sponsorships, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, What's going on behind the scenes?, Graeme Obree
  • November 24: Graeme Obree, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, Richard Virenque, UCI are the problem, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 17: Saiz and Tinkoff, Countdown to the 2007 Tour, Improving the reliability of testing, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, Forgetting Tom Simpson, Operación Puerto and national federations, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?. Reverse blood doping, Richard Virenque, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 10: Forgetting Tom Simpson, Tour Route, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, What is DNA testing?, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Jan Ullrich, Operación Puerto and national federations, Reverse blood doping, What's going on behind the scenes?, Comments on McQuaid
  • November 3: Tour Route, Return of a real good guy, Cameron Jennings, Future Australian ProTour team, Neil Stephens, 2007 Tour Intro Video Snub, Richard Virenque, Reverse blood doping, Comments on McQuaid, Marc Madiot, Who's more damaging?, What's going on behind the scenes?, Wada & Cycling's Governing Body, UCI and Doping, The Pope of Cycling and the Spanish Inquisition, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Put up or shut up!, DNA, its so ‘easy', DNA Testing In Cycling

The complete Cyclingnews letters archive