Isn’t that rather the point of the biological passport, that it picks up the physiological changes consisted with doping without there needing to be a positive test?
It is. And one assumes they have set their limits in such a way that they can be fairly confident in their assessments. But its not exactly simple science, and all the data they are collecting from tests on athletes in the system is, arguably, biased towards that population.
No idea how much “neutral” baseline data they also have access to, but I wouldn’t be surprised to find that some people who have done nothing wrong appear to be doping by the current understanding of the data. And if you were asked what you had been doing 12 months ago that might have caused odd blood values, what would you say?
So, great to collect the data, but lets not pretend it is the end of all doping, or impossible to reasonably challenge the results. Hopefully the safeguards with multiple experts etc mean that the chances of false positives are slim
Also, wasn’t Endura not of a high enough level for the riders to be subject to the passport?
No.