The Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC) released the results of its year-long investigation into doping, and CitSB sat down with the lead investigator, Jean-Claude Peut-être, to discuss the significance of the commission’s findings even as shock waves continue to roil the cycling community.
CitSB: After a full year of intensive research and investigation, the retention of a former war crimes prosecutor to head the effort, and a budget of €12 million, what is the commission’s most significant finding?
JP: There are actually three. First, Lance doped. Second, so did many others. Third, Betsy is still very angry.
CitSB: Wow. How confident are you regarding that first finding?
JP: I would say that we are probably 95% certain. When you add up the back-tested results, the statements of his former teammates, USADA’s Reasoned Decision, the finding of the arbitrator in his insurance case, his settlement with the Times of London, and his 12-hour confessional special on national TV, we think it’s highly likely that he doped. But of course nothing is 100% certain.
CitSB: This is going to destroy a lot of childhood dreams, isn’t it?
JP: Oh, yes. There are a lot of masters racers out there who will be taking off their yellow bracelets.
CitSB: And you are equally certain with regard to your second finding, that many others doped as well?
JP: Unfortunately, yes. We dug deeply into the history of the sport and learned some fairly shocking things which we frankly haven’t shied away from including in our report.
CitSB: Like what?
JP: Well, the biggest one is that doping has been around for a long time.
CitSB: Really? You mean that Wikipedia doping cheat web page is true?
JP: It appears to be.
CitSB: And it took you a year’s investigation and a €12 million budget to Google “doping in cycling” and click on the first link that came up?
JP: We had to be thorough.
CitSB: How is your report going to change cycling at the professional level?
JP: Fundamentally it will let cyclists at all levels know that the UCI and the organizations responsible for clean sport are now on the alert that doping used to exist, and that in all likelihood it still does.
CitSB: You’re suggesting that actual professional riders are still cheating?
JP: It’s possible.
CitSB: So when Chris Froome puts out 6.84 w/kg this past week on a mountaintop finish, you think that’s fishy?
JP: I wouldn’t say “fishy.” But It suggests that perhaps he may have an unfair performance advantage over other riders.
CitSB: Such as?
JP: Wheaties, perhaps.
CitSB: And what about corruption at the UCI? What were your findings in that regard?
JP: There was no corruption.
CitSB: Wow. What about that whole Verbruggen/McQuaid/Armstrong kerfuffle? You know, backdated TUE’s, giving Brochard a pass, letting Armstrong’s lawyer write up the results of the independent investigation, that stuff?
JP: It wasn’t corruption. There simply was no corruption.
CitSB: The preferential treatment of Armstrong to the detriment of other riders, bending the rules about Contador’s tainted meat? Accepting massive donations from a rider they were supposed to be monitoring? That wasn’t corruption? What was it?
JP: It wasn’t corruption. More like being bad boys. They were sort of bad boys, naughty, you know? Mischievous, even. But not corrupt.
CitSB: And what did the commission find regarding the current UCI and its president, Brian Cookson, who funded this completely independent report?
JP: We think he’s a wonderful chap, really, and look forward to working with him in the future.
CitSB: I’m sure you do.
For $2.99 per month you can subscribe to this blog and learn how clean the professional sport has become and about how 6.84 w/kg is not fishy. Click here and select the “subscribe” link in the upper right-hand corner. Thank you!
You can also follow me on the Twitter here: