Chris Froome insists he has not “broken any rules” in response to yesterday’s revelation that he had twice the permitted limit of the anti-asthma drug Salbutamol when tested at the Vuelta in September.
The Team Sky rider won the race, becoming just the third rider to have won the Spanish Grand Tour and the Tour de France in the same year, and the first since the Vuelta moved to its current late-season slot.
Speaking to the BBC, Froome said: “I understand this comes as a big shock to people. I certainly haven’t broken any rules here.”
Yesterday, the Guardian and French newspaper Le Monde revealed that the 32-year-old had returned an adverse analytical finding after he was tested on Stage 18 of the Vuelta.
> Chris Froome faces ban and losing Vuelta title after failed drugs test
Statements from Team Sky and the UCI following publication of the newspapers’ articles confirmed the result of the test, taken on 7 September.
Froome’s A and B samples both showed that he had 2,000 nanograms per millilitre of Salbutamol in his urine, double the level permitted under World Anti-Doping Agency rules.
The drug is not banned outright, but with the test returning a result beyond the levels that are allowed, Froome now has to prove somehow that he kept to permitted dosage and explain why the reading was so high.
Should he fail to satisfy the authorities, it is likely that he will be stripped of his Vuelta title and receive a ban.
Froome told the BBC: “I can understand a lot of people’s reactions, especially given the history of the sport. This is not a positive test.
“The sport is coming from a very dark background and I have tried to do everything through my career to show that the sport has turned around.”
He continued: “I have been a professional cyclist now, treating my symptoms and racing with asthma, for 10 years.
“I know what those rules are, I know what those limits are and I have never been over those limits.
“I have got a very clear routine when I use my inhaler and how many times. I have given all that information to the UCI to help get to the bottom of it.”
In a statement released by Team Sky yesterday, Froome said that his dosage of the drug, which he takes via an inhaler, was increased on the advice of a team doctor in the days before the test that gave rise to his adverse analytical finding.
He told the BBC that during the race, he said to journalists that he was in a good condition because he didn’t want his rivals to know he was struggling,
“I am racing against guys who are looking for any kind of weakness,” he said.
“I am not going to admit through a Grand Tour that ‘yes. I am suffering with something’, because the next day my rivals will come out absolutely swinging.”
41 thoughts on “Chris Froome: “I haven’t broken any rules””
Which stage was it he
Which stage was it he admitted struggling on?
alansmurphy wrote:
The test was the day after the Los Muchachos (sp?) stage where Nibbles took 40 seconds out of him on those insane concrete ramps.
Big % ramps seem to be a weak point for him, same thing happened on the Bottlegate stage in the TdF
“Chris Froome insists he has
“Chris Froome insists he has “broken any rules” in response to yesterday’s revelation that he had twice the permitted limit of the anti-asthma drug Salbutamol when tested at the Vuelta in September.”
Does anyone ever proof read anything on this site before submitting it?
LastBoyScout wrote:
Give them a break, it’s probably just an unconscious bias …
LastBoyScout wrote:
As I understand it, the part you quoted is actually correct. The regulation is that you can’t take more than X amount of Salbutamol and they will test your urine and expect if to be under Y if you haven’t overdosed.
“Expect” is the key word, hence the requirement for him to prove that despite the high reading he didn’t take more than allowed.
If the rule was no more than Y in your urine test then he’d be in trouble, but that is not exactly the case here.
Look again.
Look again.
“Chris Froome insists he has “broken any rules…
If you’re not on the dope,
If you’re not on the dope, you won’t cope.
I’m a big Froome fan and I
I’m a big Froome fan and I really hope he’s innocent. But…..
He said that he was suffering with particularly accute symptoms in this particular case, and hence upped his dosage. Now, being in a team of marginal gains where every small detail matters and every tiny difference could win a race, why was Froome not already taking the maximum permitted amount of salbutamol?
take a load of salbutamol to
take a load of salbutamol to drop the weight in the winter while altitude training, donates a bag and has it reinfused during the Vuelta…pop.
Tell everyone it’s for your asthma and not to be so harsh to asthmatics etc etc. nothing to see here.
I’m pretty sure that there’s
I’m pretty sure that there’s a rule that says you can’t have any more than X amount of medicine in your system. Which appears to have been broken.
Rapha Nadal wrote:
This was included in the UCI statement.
“The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.”
So it appears Froome is sort of right.
He won’t be deemed to have definitely broken the rule until after the pharmacokinetic study.
P.S. This is interesting. Who
P.S. This is interesting. Who had Bilharzia again? Was it Chris? Worm may turn the Asthma tide
I wonder what… To early to
I wonder what… To early to tell…
He’s right. It’s only
He’s right. It’s only performance enhancing if you’re Italian.
Thanks Kilo! Interesting, I
Thanks Kilo! Interesting, I agree on the slopes but he admitted feeding badly on the stage, I suppose this could suggest there was more going on.
Other than that it’s great to know the plasterer, Jackson, Dr and Rapha will be off their bike tonight as saddles plus erection equals uncomfortable…
alansmurphy wrote:
As I said before; it’s endearing that I seem to be at the forefront of your mind and you are right that I won’t be riding tonight as it’s the work Xmas do.
However, A test failed, B test failed, twice over the acceptable limit, hiring a lawyer who seems to be pretty good at getting suspicious athletes off the hook across a number of sports…
Not looking good, is it? Perhaps the lawyer is on a retainer with Sky as he did some good work for the Henao vs UCI case a while back.
As for your later comments on never seeing Froome have a puff on his puffer; divert youer eyes from your wipe clean photo of him and have a look. There’s plenty out there of him tooting away whilst he’s in the midst of the peloton.
Some interesting, dare I say
Some interesting, dare I say measured, bits and bobs here…
http://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/
fukawitribe wrote:
Some of it was very interesting, he appeared to be drinking when writing and go on an anti British rant at the end though 🙂
alansmurphy wrote:
Ross Tucker tends to be on the fringes of objectivity. He wasn’t convinced by Froome’s published power data either.
davel wrote:
Some interesting, dare I say measured, bits and bobs here…
http://sportsscientists.com/2017/12/brief-thoughts-froomes-salbutamol-result/
— davel Some of it was very interesting, he appeared to be drinking when writing and go on an anti British rant at the end though 🙂— alansmurphy Ross Tucker tends to be on the fringes of objectivity. He wasn’t convinced by Froome’s published power data either.— fukawitribe
I believe he begrudgingly accepted things after a while.
Bloody nora it’s Lance
Bloody nora it’s Lance Armstrong Jr!!!
Actually Chris, you have
Actually Chris, you have broken a rule. By design or not, the rule has been broken.
And given their confidence
And given their confidence you’d presume they can do so…
“Chris FroomeVerified
“Chris FroomeVerified account @chrisfroome
It’s sad seeing the misconceptions that are out there about athletes & salbutamol use. My hope is that this doesn’t prevent asthmatic athletes from using their inhalers in emergency situations for fear of being judged. It is not something to be ashamed of @asthmauk #asthma”
Staring to emotionally blackmail, well, everyone. It’s not his fault and please leave him alone!!
Despite me liking Froome and
Despite me liking Froome and Sky I am quite objective about all of this (unlike some strange folk on here) and I agree Don.
Not sure I’ve ever seen Froome take it let alone in an emergency situation. This doesn’t mean he shouldn’t use as required and usually prevention is better than cure; but this tweet really doesn’t hold much credence!
If Froome can’t explain the
If Froome can’t explain the results then it is a great disappointment, a sad day for Kenyan/Monegasque sport.
It will indeed. He is a hero
It will indeed. He is a hero there and supports a hell of a lot of charities over there. It would be a shame if one of their greatest ambassadors reputations was put into doubt. A fine point you raise.
alansmurphy wrote:
This is going to be an interesting time for you mate
I really don’t get the
I really don’t get the picture you’ve posted.
It’s already interesting as I’m intrigued by what will have caused the reading, why Sky are so confident, the science behind it all.
The comment you are replying to is simply in reply to Leviathan’s none too subtle “he’s not really British” jibe but documentaries on Chris suggest he’s done a lot for his ‘native’ land. I suppose that is one comparison you can draw as Armstrong’s charity work was a plus (though used massively cynically).
What I don’t understand is people’s huge desire to simply want to knock the top athletes in a sport I presume you enjoy. I find that quite sad actually.
Hey it was subtle, remember
Hey it was subtle, remember Trump’s Birther movement? Alan you do know that LA raise millions and people still say he was pivotal to their fight against cancer. “Lance/A Helmet* saved my life” etc. Being a charitable figure doesn’t really absolve you of your sins.
*Delete as appropriate.
Leviathan wrote:
Indeed, he used the charity quite well as a form of defence but the money and awareness raised was a massive help. Although you can despise him even more based on his moral compass he will have helped save lives…
“The presence in urine of
“The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.”
Burden of proof on the athlete- once the level is too high, guilty unless proven innocent. Going to be difficult for him.
Watched as many of the Tour
Watched as many of the Tour and Vuelta stages as days off work allowed and then highlights, didn’t see it once. This clearly doesn’t mean he doesn’t do it as he says he does, just making the point.
I am attracted to you like you are to a Sky/Wiggins/Froome story. As said, I would like the evidence to tell us that there is a clear and obvious reason for it, preferrably not one that proves he’s a cheat. I will not jump to the conclusion that he’s a cheat simply due to some kind of sad crusade…
What do YOU think the reason
What do YOU think the reason for it is?
Hmmmm. I would suggest a
Hmmmm. I would suggest a combination of things, probably an increased dose, dehydration, other medication etc. It’s going to be quite difficult for him to prove he’s not done anything wrong. On the other hand, they seem amazingly confident.
It just seems somewhat amazing (or amazingly stupid) that knowing they would be tested that they would blatantly cheat.
Yes, all dopers appear to be
Yes, all dopers appear to be confident of innocence once caught. Floyd Landis is a great example!
Dehydrated riders don’t ride in the way that Froome was and it’s a bit hard to believe with Sky’s exceptional nutrional plans and forethought. Although; it can happen as we all know.
Increased doseage? Likely but by what means. To double the limit allowed by just an inhaler would mean fucking monster amounts of it coming from said dispenser. Pills have been touted as the answer and I would like to see how this pans out. A masking agent has also been mentioned but not confirmed.
I kind of agree with your last statement but again, let’s look at the stupidity of Landis as an example. There was another example of this that sprung to mind but I’ve bloody forgotten it!
Let’s revisit some cases of
Let’s revisit some cases of “seeming confident”:
Lance sued the Sunday Times successfully for £1m
Floyd crowdfunded $600k for his legal defense from 1500 regular people
Tyler Hamilton got a team of doctors to say he had a twin brother who he absorbed in the womb, resulting in an explanation for why he was caught with two types of blood in him
Indeed Rapha but they made a
Indeed Rapha but they made a few Vuelta errors, he had the day when he bonked (day before / after). It appears he was on the limit and trying not to show it. It’s not necessarily linear either although there is advice or a limit on what you should ingest, the test is on what’s in the urine so the whole physiological mix comes into it. This isn’t me necessarily defending him but as per other threads, some have been banned for being over and some let off even more over. So what’s the excuses/reasoning that achieves this.
Jackson I take your point, pick up the jersey, bravado etc. It’s more the Giro announcement that they didn’t particularly need to do at this time. Again, doesn’t mean too much but I’d keep my head down, though you could argue it’s a big bluff…
Alan – we have our answer.
Alan – we have our answer. Frrome took numerous puffs before the post stage interview so that he wasn’t coughing during it. In turn, this took him over the limit.
Honestly, if anybody buys that then I’m the pope.
If that’s the excuse then he
If that’s the excuse then he’s a bloody idiot
That’s the offical line from
That’s the offical line from Sky. I did laugh when I read it!