I have no understanding of the science behind drugs testing, so my question could be completely stupid, but…

Why don’t they just say before every race that all three people on the podium are automatically tested for doping? Wouldn’t that stop all doping in its tracks? Indeed, if they did that for all major sporting events of a similar nature (athletics; swimming; etc.) wouldn’t that make an end of doping?

I mean, if you do it to win, and you knew that all winners are automatically tested, you would not do it. Isn’t that just logical?

I believe that the problem is in the efficacy of the tests, which don’t “find” all the current drugs.

IANADT

I mean, if you do it to win, and you knew that all winners are automatically tested, you would not do it. Isn’t that just logical?

Most of the guys doing well in the TdF will not be on the podium for most of the race.

That and the methods of doping mean there are windows etc. where testing works and it doesn’t

I believe that the problem is in the efficacy of the tests, which don’t “find” all the current drugs.

Perhaps, but that would apply to any drug testing system, random or otherwise. I’m asking why they don’t just do away with the random system and replace it with a test for all placers. As to whether or not a doper can stay ahead of the specific test is sort of a separate question.

EDIT: Or else mix the systems, so that those in the peleton get tested at random, but those on the podium definitely do.

It’s just that I would think such a system would save people like Froome and Quintana from any accusations of doping. But especially Froome, as a multiple winner.

I believe every stage winner is tested and several randoms from the pack. Lance Armstrong proved you can work around this though. Have your team doped to the eyeballs and let them do the work for you. Puts some of his stage ‘gifts’ into perspective too. I think a couple of tours have been won without the winner taking a stage also.

I’ve all but gave up on pro cycling (and pro sports pretty much) funnily enough I could mostly turn a blind eye to doping, a bit of pot belge was as much a part of cycling as chamois cream. The large scale systematic doping was another matter though and mechanical doping has extinguished any interest I had. I’ll probably still watch a classic or two but with a distinct pessimism.

Most of the more recent known doping methods wouldn’t be used during competition as it’s too easy to spot. Hence all the biopassport and random testing.

as above, after each TdF stage the overall leader, the stage winner, and two riders at random are tested

a quick browse through various jersey-winning rider’s histories would suggest this does nothing to stop doping in its tracks

I have no understanding of the science behind drugs testing, so my question could be completely stupid, but…

Yes it is complicated so perhaps worth doing some research. Maybe reading one of the many books buy a doper. From those I’d say that people expected be tested during the race so either they cheated by doping out of the race or doping during the race in a way that they believed wouldn’t be detected.

Removing the random element would be a mistake IMHO. If you were doping and knew that keeping out of the top 3 meant no testing then that is a loop hole to exploit. Lots of crucial Tour stages a GC rider can move up the places but not place in the top 3 in a stage.

But I’d say the key is out of competition testing. Making sure that people get tested at the time and day of the authorities choosing.

My speculation would be could we increase the “the duty of care” on teams to make sure their riders are clean. In the first Robert Miller book the surprise to me is how little his team “cared” for him. He was treated like a consultant not an employee

Something like EPO – taken in small doses (micro-dosing) – will be undetectable after about 8 hours. And it’s used in training to build up, rather than give an instant boost. So riders we injecting at 11pm, knowing they’d be clear by 8am when the drug testers could turn up from (times aren’t exact but you get the idea).

Taking a drug that would be detected at the end of a stage would be very, very stupid indeed. I’m sure Tyler Hamilton said drug testing was more of a test of basic intelligence than drug use – they were so easy to dodge that getting caught meant you were pretty stupid.

after each TdF stage the overall leader, the stage winner, and two riders at random are tested

thought they increased that a few years ago. Last i heard it was 8-10 riders per stage, jersey holders, stage winner, top 2 or 3 overall and a couple of randoms (at the finish) then a number of randoms evening/morning/rest day. Think some might be tested by the french organisation as part of the race regs and the rest by WADA.

I process testing paperwork for a small professional bike team. Everyone is tested pre Grand Tour, a day or two before racing begins. It seems to me that every stage winner gets tested, there’s a few randoms (or targeted, who knows) following each stage, and as far as I can tell the entire peloton gets tested on each rest day. Mostly both blood and urine is tested.