>He has ample evidence of how petty Tygart can be: Preventing people from doing charity rides? Good thing our taxpayer dollars are being put to good use; what would we do if too many people rode charity events.


Did you read above? It's pretty clearly in the rules that banned riders can't participate in any USAC sanctioned event.

So it's only petty if there were exceptions to this rule made for other banned riders, and they're only suddenly enforcing it for Lance. I haven't seen that claim made here.

Otherwise *not* banning Lance from the ride would be making a special exception just for Lance. And that's not right either.

Except Hincapie rode in this same Fondo while serving his suspension. So great example.

---

Twitter
Instagram

"Except Hincapie rode in this same Fondo while serving his suspension. So great example."

devil's advocate: was the gran fondo sanctioned by USAC last year? if not, then, george rides no problem. if so, then, your point is spot on.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Good counterpoint. I'd have to investigate that. He rode without a bib so I'd have to guess yes. But... that's assuming so we know that usually isn't a good idea.

---

Twitter
Instagram

And what do you know. The 2012 event is listed on the USAC website. So I'm going to stick with the response from USADA/USAC being markedly petty and specifically directed at LA. Per usual.

---

Twitter
Instagram

What's the over/under that next year's event is NOT USAC-sanctioned?

I will add my small change by suggesting:
How about the Gran Fondo getting self-insured by another carrier (Philly Insurance, because according to their website road cycling events can be covered,) thus avoiding the USOC/USAC/USADA issue?
And because I am not familiar w such guidelines, are there rules which prevent pro riders and current USA Cycling riders from participating in non sanctioned events?
KS

---

Karen ST Concierge

Centuries and grand fondos are not required to seek USAC sanction, but if they do, then it's governed by USAC. In this case, the grand fondo sought and obtained a USAC sanction. Whether the reason for that was solely to tap into USAC insurance seems to be irrelevant. There are other insurance options as evidenced by all the other grand fondos and century rides as well as other cycling events that bypass USAC sanctioning.

How is this a "power grab" by USAC? Seems like Hincapie sought out USAC for sanctioning and not the other way around.

Is this the same USAC that was in Lance's corner till the very end? That sided with and aided Lance in his frivolous lawsuit challenging USADA's jurisdiction? If they say it wasn't them, they couldn't be lying. Of course not.

Or it could be George, who's credibility is above reproach. Haha.

Or perhaps, in your specualtion, USADA, who appears to be the organization pressuing USAC to prohibit Lance's participation. You know, the organization that is not a "governing body."

Of all the possibilities (being USAC gave the go ahead, George is making shit up, some other entity gave the go ahead, and USADA gave the go ahead), USADA being the party that gave the green light seems to be the least likely. By far.

But like I said earlier, this all seem irrelevant. If anyone gave the green light to Lance's participation, they were wrong. It's been corrected, and that is the right result.

It could very well be that George is not the sharpest tool in the shed (maybe not Tom Danielson stupid, but). Add to that his credibility issues and . . .

are there rules which prevent pro riders and current USA Cycling riders from participating in non sanctioned events?

Yes and no.

With some limited exceptions, riders with a UCI license cannot tecnhically participate in unsanctioned events. However, this has been extremetly controversial.

In 2006, UCI riders were threatened with punishment if they participated in an unsanctioned event that Tlyer Hamilton was planning on riding in.

Subsequently, USAC has come down on riders with UCI licenses who participated in other unsanctioned events, name mtb and cx races. This was seen as a power play and received across the board criticism. UCI and USAC have since said they would review the rule and, in the interim, not enfoce it. To my knowledge, no result of that "review" has been made public.

If you want to argue pettiness, don't you first have to establishe knowledge. If George rode without a bib, how would the sanctioning body have known.

In the instant case, Lance's involvement went "viral" before anyone did anything. While that could mean that people were turning a blind eye, it could also mean that the matter had simply not registered on their radar. I suspect that neither USAC nor USADA have a 24/7 Lance watch in place and that they only deal with these issues when it crosses their desk. In this particular case, I suspect it was public awareness and pressure that put the matter before them.

5 post monologue. You must feel strongly about this.

---

Twitter
Instagram

Says the guy has has already posted 20 times to this thread.

On the other side of the pond John Tiernan Locke (JTL), who was recently banned for bio passport issues, has been doing sportives in Britain. This has been reported in the cycling press. Today UCI president Cookson found time to castigate JTL for calling his anti-doping arbitration a Mickey Mouse court. Cookson even threatened him. Curiously, he did not mention JTL doing recreational rides.

People are getting confused about the need for USAC to have sanctioned this event for the ban to be applicable.

That's not a requirement for the ban to apply.

All that is required is the event be one organised by a club or body that is signatory to the WADA code. Any event organised by a club affiliated with USAC falls into that category (be it social or on the bike). It does not require USAC involvement or approval or sanction at all.

The only exceptions for WADA signatory bodies are specific anti-doping rehabilitation activity and events for which prior approval is granted by the sport's governing body.

The ban is for life for any cycling event organised by a WADA signatory body (e.g. any cycling club affiliated with USAC), and for 4 years for other sports, but after that time he is only permitted to participate at non-nationally or internationally competitive events or at local or recreational/participant level.

The event is organised by a USAC affiliated club, which by default means the club is a signatory to the WADA code. It could be a club BBQ fund raiser - he's still banned.

but if you post 5 times in a row it looks like you are talking to yourself.

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

"The event is organised by a USAC affiliated club, which by default means the club is a signatory to the WADA code. It could be a club BBQ fund raiser - he's still banned."

the ban seems to be because is the gran fondo is sanctioned by USAC. but by your definition if the club sought insurance elsewhere then it would still be required not to let lance ride. correct? if the club unaffiliated with USAT, but the main organizer (the front person) held a USAT racing license, it still would violate the ban? if the organizer did not hold a license, but was a USAC coach in private life, still? i'm just wondering how far the ban reaches.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Is it a USAC affiliated club? To use USAC insurance does an organization have to be an affiliated club? Can a non-profit that is not a "club" use USAC as an insurance provider?

If the Hincapie GF organization is not an official club then it does not seem that the WADA code applies, even if it uses USAC insurance.

I've never read that his ban is only 4 years for other sports. So he could be doing Ironman Hawaii in October 2016? Or running the Boston Marathon. If true, interesting. His wiki page states:


On August 24, 2012, USADA announced that Armstrong had been issued a lifetime ban from competition, applicable to all sports which follow the World Anti-Doping Agency code.

So, technically, he was a bandit in the same Fondo last year, was he not?

Yes.

Read the code (2009). Section 10.10.1. The lifetime ban applies for all sports at national/international level but only for 4 years for participation in local level events (other than cycling).

As for what can be done if he breaches the code again?

For the athlete:
Well the 4 year provision allowing eventual participation in other local sport events would reset commencement to the date of breach, and under section 10.12 the anti-doping authority may also choose to apply a financial penalty.

For the organising club that willingly permitted or facilitated it:
Section 12 of the WADA code permits USADA and USAC to apply sanctions on the club.

What are local and national events? Is the "local" literally local to where the athlete lives? Obviously USTA and ITU have official events that would count as national or world events, but WTC's "world champtionship" is not recognized by anyone but WTC. It is little different from me organizing a tri and calling it a world championship.