March 4, 2004
Dear VeloNews,
Call it bureaucracy, call it fair, unfair or simply logical (see "Jeanson gets U.S. license"). As a competitor myself, and without going into the issue of one's getting a license from Canada versus from USA Cycling, I just want to know if Ms. Jeanson is going to give her fellow competitors a reason why she tested with a high hematocrit before world's last year
. Like a few years ago, Paola Pezzo never bothered to explain to any of us competing against her as professional mountain bikers how she tested positive for Nandrolone. That same year, as she won many races, she never bothered to explain to us, the ones who really deserve an explanation, what happened there.
I am still waiting...
Jimena Florit
Dear Editors and VeloNews readers,
Y'all are welcome to speculate on Geneviève innocence or guilt. USA Cycling is not. They issue licenses based on the rules of the organization and the laws of this country. I'm not inclined to have a lot of faith in altitude tents, so I'm incredulous myself, but USA Cycling is not at liberty to say, "We have no evidence to speak of, but... well... We think you're cheating. So although you're a U.S. resident, we're not going to issue you a license, because we don't feel like it."
Is that the response you expected from USA Cycling? USAC is not in a position to demand medical records from anyone, you, me, or Geneviève. Under the jurisdiction of USADA, Geneviève will probably receive more out of competition tests than any North American except Lance, Horner, and the Barry family. I'm as anti-doping as the next guy, but the only thing worse for this sport than doping is rampant speculation about doping from people who are not in a position to know what's actually going down.
The situation is not as simple as it seems. Look at all the Nandrolone positives. Did you know that Nandrolone is another name for DECA NOR 50 which is the most popular steroid for recreation bodybuilders, but remains in your system for longer than any other steroid. I can't personally speak about Amber's or Kirk's or Scott's character, but none of them are stupid. If you were going to take a steroid, would you take the only one that stays in your system for up to a year? Me thinks not. If you were going to test positive for a contaminant, it would most likely be DECA. I'm not saying they're absolved of any responsibility for knowing what goes into their bodies, but I'm near certain none of them took it intentionally. This "get those damn dopers" attitude is not going to solve our problems.
On a somewhat related note, in a Wednesday letter, Paul Spencer writes: How can any country that doesn't automatically send their current national champion to the Olympics be taken seriously ?
He uses this as an example of why USA Cycling is clearly superior to Canadian cycling. Surely you're kidding, Mr. Spencer? Is this an attempt at irony? We don't send our current national champion to the Olympics. I actually don't know of any country that does.
Geoff Rapoport
San Diego, California
Dear editor,
I am responding to some of the comments made about Geneviève Jeanson's licensing woes. Jason Gareau writes that the Canadian Cycling Association doesn't seem to want to support Jeanson in her quest for a racing license. He and a couple of other readers state that the Jeanson' situation is due to some culturally determined monolithic bureaucracy that pervades Canadian life.
Jeanson was unable to compete in last year's Worlds or gain a valid Canadian license this year due to an abnormally high hematocrit level prior to the World Championships last October. Canadian Cycling Association regulations state she must explain this unusual level. To date, she hasn't submitted the documentation required to explain this result. The solution seems simple to me. Submit the necessary paperwork that explains why your level was above accepted limits, submit it early enough so you don't jeopardize your season, get your license and then you are free to compete for your country and any team you like.
This has nothing to do with defective Canadian institutions (contrary to what some maple leaf cyclists think, the CCA does not represent our entire nation). Further, the CCA is merely doing what it should do - wait for a legitimate explanation of an elevated hematocrit level from one of its former licensees. It doesn't matter whether it's Jeanson or anyone else. And since when is a high hematocrit test result "just an excuse" for not issuing a rider a license or preventing them from competing, as Paul Spencer claims? Please. And a wee bit of hysteria comes from Jean Gareau. He claims this is just another example of Canada doing its best and brightest wrong. A little exaggeration perhaps? This is just an athlete who failed a health test and has yet to meet the criteria for setting the situation straight. No reason to pull down the flag and move the family south, surely.
Jeanson needs to meet her obligations then get on with her season. She is a great athlete whom I have followed closely since her early days. I am looking forward to watching her this season but she needs to step to the plate on this one. And I hope against hope that she is clean. Otherwise it's another cyclist not worthy of cycling fans' respect and admiration.
Sincerely,
Sandra Bender
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
page mise en ligne le 4 mars 2004 par SVP
