Time for the annual update on the wealthiest people in cycling.
If you thought this meant Alberto Contador, Mark Cavendish or Philippe Gilbert time to think again. They are mere millionaires riding in the service of billionaire team owners. And, new for 2013, the list is no longer exclusively male.
Thanks to Ride Cycling Review for sponsoring the Inner Ring for January. All sponsors get a public thank-you once a month and the Australian magazine is here for January.
Only you don’t need to ride the Tour Down Under to pick up a copy as the magazine is available to read on your computer or tablet via Zinio, the electronic magazine distribution site.
And if you want to find out more about the magazine there’s an article to download for free below.
Le Monde made some serious allegations against the UCI yesterday. The French newspaper accuses cycling’s governing body of “covering for Lance Armstrong” and even alleges that they accepted a “falsified document” to help Armstrong escape a doping ban in 1999.
Some these tales have been doing the rounds before but paper published the documents relating to the controls in July 1999. Now a backdated and falsified document is a very serious charge. But I can reveal another document from 1999 that should have seen Armstrong ejected from the Tour de France: the UCI rulebook.
We’ve only had one exhibition criterium in Adelaide but already some sharp eyes have seen that some riders are using more narrow handlebars, a trend that’s probably coming to a ride near you.
As the fourth part in a series exploring the famous roads of cycling, here is the Col de la Madone in France. The idea of the series is to discover the road and its place in the world, whether its part in cycling’s folklore or to explore what it is like on a normal day without a race.
This road lacks the myth and history of the others in the series as no race has used it. Yet it has given its name to Trek’s top road bike and was the first clue that Lance Armstrong was going to “win” the 1999 Tour de France.
Since then it’s been a key test of fitness, an outdoor gymnasium, a laboratory even. As such it is almost a workplace for the pro cyclist but think of an office with stunning views and fine weather and one that climbs from sea level to almost a kilometre in the sky in no time.
There’s a race on. It’s becoming a cliché to say we should talk about the sport instead of scandal, races instead of revelations. So here it is, a proper World Tour race packed with big names, Australian sunshine and it’s all just a few days away.
Here’s a stage-by-stage preview, a look at the contenders, the jerseys as well as what time you can expect to watch the finish on TV.
Everyone seems to have a verdict on the Oprah show. Reviewing last night’s TV would be a novelty for this blog so if you want a good take see Bonnie Ford on ESPN for a strong piece that goes from body language to the big picture.
Given we already knew Armstrong was doping, there were not many answers to long standing questions during the show. In fact we got some revelations that only bring more questions. Here are questions for Armstrong, for the sport, its officials, the media and even the riders.
This week a leaked expert report suggest that Frank Schleck’s positive test in the Tour de France probably didn’t result from doping. Luxembourg newspaper Tageblatt got a copy of the work done by Dr. Hans Geyer, deputy director of the WADA-approved laboratory in Cologne.
The report seems fine – although I’ll add one point to it below – but the rules don’t care for hypotheses. no matter how expert. If the molecule is there a two year ban awaits unless the athlete can demonstrate it was an accident, for example proof he was poisoned. Without this, Frank Schleck will be banned until July 2014.
This is the principle of strict liability, a cornerstone of the anti-doping rules. It’s all reminiscent the Contador case when the Spaniard too tested positive during the 2010 Tour de France. Similarly, it might take time, there might be speculation, it could go to appeal but all the signs point to a two year ban.
Mark Cavendish got frustrated at the Omega Pharma-Quickstep team presentation when journalists repeatedly pressed him over the Lance Armstrong story. Presumably Cavendish wanted to talk about his the ambitions for 2013. But there’s only one show in town: Lance Armstrong.
The story stretches from primetime sofa to the US Department of Justice via the Tour de France and features an international celebrity in the midst of a downfall more public than Felix Baumgartner’s leap.
Given this even a big name like Mark Cavendish is going to be pressed relentlessly for a quote on Lance Armstrong and others will face tricky questions on other topics this year. What should a rider say? What can they say?
Too many acronyms? Yes but no matter which way you arrange the letters this spells trouble for the UCI.
In the past 24 hours two anti-doping agencies, USADA and WADA, have gone public with criticism of cycling’s governing body. Now they’ve been joined by the Independent Commission created by the UCI which has itself turned against the governing body to create a power struggle over its remit and capabilities.
There’s even talk cycling could be thrown out of the Olympics but don’t believe the hype. But this is a battle for the truth and the UCI is going to lose.