- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Vuelta 2013 Stage 10 - Chris Horner wins (© Unipublic:Graham Watson)Testers unable to find Chris Horner for out-of-competition doping test; team says they were in wrong hotel
Spanish drug testing officials acting for the US Anti-Doping Agency went looking for Vuelta a Espana winner Chris Horner this morning to administer an out-of-competition test, but were unable to find him, according to reports from Spain.
However, Horner’s Radio Shack-Leopard team claims that he had updated his whereabouts on the Anti-Doping and Management System (ADAMS) system the previous day and the testers were simply looking in the wrong place.
Horner was not at the Hotel Princesa in Madrid, where the rest of the team were staying. The testers apparently went to another hotel in search of Horner, but did not find him there either.
A team spokesman told cyclingnews.com: "There is no problem. They went to the team hotel but he is in another hotel. He had mentioned this in his ADAMS. They should do their administration more correctly than they did. They need to check their whereabouts, too."
RadioShack-Leopard press officer Tim Vanderjeugd subsequently tweeted: "The second hotel they went to was a randomly picked Ibis where they thought he could be."
The team later issued the following statement, accompanied by a screenshot of an automated email from USADA acknowledging Horner’s registered whereabouts at 6am to 7am this morning.
The management of RadioShack Leopard Trek wants to clarify the situation about the alleged missed out of competition anti-doping test of Chris Horner.
Chris Horner updated his whereabouts with USADA before the start of the final stage, giving the agency the name of his hotel for the night, phone number and room number for his one hour window between 6 and 7 AM. This is all according to the rules and Chris Horner received a confirmation email.
The anti-doping inspectors from the Spanish Anti-doping Agency that were asked to do the test by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) showed up at the wrong hotel in Madrid, where the team was staying but Horner was obviously not to be found.
The team believes the communication between the Spanish Anti-doping Agency and the media is a violation of the privacy of Chris Horner, especially since it comes down to a clear mistake by the tester.
The team asks the media to report correctly on this matter and will seek compensation for this matter with the responsible anti-doping agencies.
Horner was sought for testing under World Anti-Doping Agency rules that apply to top-level athletes. Athletes in the program must register their whereabouts for a one-hour period each day between 6 am and 11 pm.
If an athlete cannot be found three times in 18 months at his or her specified locations, and cannot satisfactorily explain those absences, then they are subject to a disciplinary proceeding by the relevant anti-doping agency. Sanctions range between one and two years.
John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Latest Comments
- HoarseMann 3 sec ago
The grey menace strikes again. There are calls every year to have driving licence reviews implemented for elderly drivers, but nothing seems to...
- hawkinspeter 33 min 39 sec ago
Well, a large amount of traffic going along e.g. Beaufort Rd would be people not living in St George but merely travelling through the area and...
- Steve K 1 hour 2 min ago
It is, apparently, "packed with high visibility reflective details on back and shoulder."
- Rendel Harris 6 min 42 sec ago
The Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC) was one of the most important battles of the ancient world, where 7,000 Greeks, led by the Spartans under...
- ktache 10 hours 24 min ago
The people at Hexlox have asked me to tell others about their black Friday deals, but I don't quite know what the offer is yet. But saving anything...
- biking59boomer 13 hours 36 sec ago
Sadly the cyclist hate in this country seems to have worsened of late. Dangerous motoring combined with anti-cycling officialdom in some places is...
- Cyclo1964 15 hours 32 min ago
Brilliant 🤣
Add new comment
59 comments
Head hunters? Read the posts. There is a big difference between saying someone is guilty and suggesting there should be suspicion. If you're not even a little suspicious of this GT win (forget the missed test), then you should go and have a word with Pat, he'll probably have a job for you in the UCI's antidoping team.
Given cyclings past, there has to be questions about his ability to ride like that. Fool me once...
I didn't call him a cheat. I said there is every reason to be suspicious given the circumstances. It sounds like we have a similar pov but are expressing it differently.
My point is that if he is clean, then he should be breaking his balls to take every test put in front of him to prove it. Not missing one, for whatever reason, and then buggering off home immediately. In many peoples eyes, the suspicion has only increased, and is now a cloud his win will be under for ever.
The other thing that does not help is how he completely ignored the subject in every Vuelta interview I saw, coming out with airy-fairy shit about 'people should value something they might never see again'. If I was in his position, I would address it head on.
Regardless, it is done, there is no proof. But there is suspicion. And if we stop being suspicious, we have no one else to blame when the next Lance comes along and cleans up
My last comment on this tired thread:
He did not miss a test. He informed USADA where he would be, they failed to tell the Spanish testers this information. He has not avoided a test, the testers failed to follow the information he gave them.
Its reasonable not to trust Horner or anyone else, unless you know them personally and can do so with authority, but equally don't take a news-story like this and misinterpret it to bolster your pre-supposition that he must be cheating.
And just for a moment ask, what is so suspicious about a family-oriented, mature rider wishing to spend his victory night with his wife, given that he DID inform the relevant authorities of his whereabouts, or that an American wishes to return to the USA shortly after being away from his family for about a month. Seriously, do you think these guys are robots?
I don't want to add any more to this post, Im sorry if you think people like myself are gullible. I am not gullible, but I am careful not to take reports like this at face value and jump to conclusions that fit my prejudices. I just think that a lot of trusting people who swallowed the Lance myth have swung to the other side of the pendulum and are determined that any outstanding or unexpected performance is proof of cheating. Its another extreme, and in my view ruins the whole ethos of sport when you think about it.
Isn't the Tour of Britain exciting? Much more interesting than this rubbish...
If my time zones are correct.
The e-mail was received at USADA at 11.01 (GMT +2) ie. Spanish time, which is 03:01 in Colorado (USADA headquarters)on SUNDAY morning.
Assuming USADA work normal office hours on a Sunday (9-5), it would have been dealt with at earliest 09:01 Colorado time, which is 17:01 Spanish time.
Assuming Spanish Drug Agency work normal hours on a Sunday their office will have been closed.
It shouldn't be a surprise the testers went to the wrong hotel.
I hope the testers are forced to either admit they were wrong and (or) were ill-informed. The story's too cool for it not to be true!
And Chris has talked so much about his kids watching it and how it's so unique that I hope he's not lying! If the team do get a correction of the story by the media and seek compensation and get it, well, I hope the money goes to a charity of Horner's choice just to show goodwill... I do hope they're wrong and have to issue an apology 
Perhaps if he spent the night with his wife he was worried of a Viagra positive?
I think you might need some help in that department at the end if a three week GT!!
His email seems quite clear... I mean far be it from me to look at the flight timetables back to the US to see the flights leave relatively early so if they didn't test him in the window that he was there, he'd be on a plane.
In any case, what about tests every other day?
I recall reading or hearing an interview with a rider who said they give stupidly early times as they will be at home in bed. So whilst it's a ball ache to get knocked up out of bed by a tester it's preferable to having them turn up when you've just nipped out the shops or dropping the kids off at school etc.
I can't help but feel suspicious at a 41-year-old GT winner smiling his way up an endless series of painful (judging by the expressions on other top riders faces) climbs. However, that cynicism also makes me feel sorry for him if he's clean.
This, however, is a non-story. He updated ADAMS at fairly short notice, but he's permitted to do so. That info didn't reach the guy with the clipboard and the pisspot.
Let's face it, if he's doping, then he knew full well he was on some batshit-crazy undetectable shit.
Ruins what could of been a fairy tale ending.... Where have I seen that before, let me think!!!!
Judging from the confirmation e-mail, only USADA (the administrator of ADAMS) knew where Horner was. So they gave a wrong/not updated information to the Spanish DA and eventually they failed to find him. Was it a foolish mistake? Was it deliberate? Who knows. Probably WADA should operate ADAMS but as it seems they only set the rules...
Usual crap. some one wins there he is doping.
More interesting to me are 2 points:
1) USADA requested the test as soon as possible after a UCI sanctioned test would have surely been done, i.e. the automatic testing of the GC leader after a stage is completed. This can only mean that USADA are target-testing Horner for some reason, and also signifies that they have no faith in the current UCI when it comes to catching dopers (for reasons we are all too well aware of).
2) The email gives a 1 hour window each day at the where-abouts address. Does this mean that out-of-competition testing could be sprung on any day, but only ever within that 1 hour window given by the rider? If so, I can understand the practicality of this, but it surely makes managing a micro-dosing programme that bit easier. Or is my understanding of the 1 hour window wrong? Anybody have any knowledge in this area?
My (probably incorrect) understanding is that have to make themselves available at some address within 1 hour. So you put your home address down as the place you will be, they call you to say that they will be arriving there and then you need to get back to that address within one hour.
There are so many things amiss in this. It is clear that USADA do not believe that Horner is clean, or to put it Gkam's way, would like to verify he is clean. And, after the Tour and Vuelta go on without doping being picked up, I think I agree with your assessment of the UCIs policy. I certainly think that after Armstrong the TdF did not need another dope story and it is unlikely that they were going to try to find another scandal this year. Personally I don't blame them.
But what were Radioshack and Horner doing. The story they put out has so many holes it apparent he absconded, and got on a flight to avoid any issues.
Testing is just part of the procedure. To say 'it is clear' is just rubbish.
Holes ? Like 'he notified them in advance, as he's required/allowed to do'
'apparent he absconded' ? - again, based on what ?
But carry on making stuff up, I'm sure it'll make you feel happier..
I'm with you, JonD.
+1
I don't have to make anything up. RadioShack and Horner are the ones thinking on their feet. Out of competition testing can take place at any time, but its not done a lot. Jeff Novitsky (USADA) is not a retard either, so the timing of this adds up to say that they are suspicious. Why not leave it 2 weeks, 3 weeks or a month later? Well by that time Horner has his feet up and is no where near a PED. Better to test now as the likelihood he's taken one is higher.
But if there was no suspicion then why test now when he's just been tested.
Holes you ask? If didn't want the suspicion of guilt to hang over your team you would be very helpful in locating your new champion. So why is it that they have not named the hotel to the tester? Why did they not call him to make him available? Why is there a mystery about this fact? For both the testers and the media? I would also like to know the timings for when he posted the team hotel and then 'changed it'.
To me there are two narratives:
1. 41 year old cyclist out does himself and everyone to win a GT with no previous for coming even close to that (improving even on the time for climbs in previous years) clean. And then the fact he coincidentally and unfortunately misses a doping test just after he wins - unfortunate because it draws more accusations of doping, which is exactly what he was hoping to avoid as that is what a lot of people have been saying.
2. 41 year old closing out his career takes a chance to out dope his fellow pros and does better than previous bests for himself and others. Then when they go to test him after he wins he absconds to avoid being caught, and he and his team spin a web of lies (and threaten legal action - does that sound familiar to you?!?)
I didn't make up the missed test now did I.....as Judge Judy says, 'if it doesn't sound right it probably isn't true'.
but the email gives an actual time, it states that while residing at his US address the 1 hour window is between 6am and 7am (i think - I've not re-read the article). So if a rider knew they could only receive an out-of-competition test during that particular hour of any day, then managing a 'programme' is (relatively) easy.
Bit of a nothing story really, fuelling the fire of.....people
Man, you win the Vuelta and end up staying in an Ibis for your troubles… Were the rest of the team staying in a youth hostel?
So....has he been tested?
It's odd that Mrs Horner has to book her own separate hotel room. You'd have thought the team would have booked her a room.
Quite - although Radioshack/Horner have concocted a story of excuses it certainly isn't one that is water tight. I don't even care if Radioshack booked her hotel - why didn't they call him and get him to turn up asap, or at least put him in contact with him.
The more plausible narrative is that they try to screen the testers to give Horner enough time to make his escape to places unknown.
Another plausible explanation is that the Spanish anti-doping agency is politically weak and there is no will to actually catch dopers. Testing is tokenism there. "Mr Horner are you at home?"
"NO!"
"OK. See you later."
It's effectively what they did with Armstrong/Hamilton and Co.
Huh? Where is there a reference to Mrs Horner in the article? And why would the team have booked her a room? She isn't a paid employee is she? Does the team management book rooms for the partners of other team members? Has it been done for other race winners?
There are other articles on this story that reference the fact he had swapped hotels to be in the one his wife was in.
I've read about and seen photos of other riders wives staying at the same hotels as the teams. I would have thought that at the end of 3 weeks of hard riding all the riders would stay together to celebrate a win, did all the riders wives book into different hotels? Or did many of the riders book into different hotels to be with their other halves?
And so it begins...
White wash, or dark lies. Are the Spanish doping authorities really that incompetent?
It really doesn't make Radioshack look any good considering they could have cleared things up by directing him to the correct hotel or ADAM. What a joke.
I don't find it totally unrealistic that the team would not know where he was staying, other than with his wife at another Madrid hotel. I don't know how ADAMS works, but it's also possible that, whilst USADA had the updated information, maybe the Spanish testers didn't?
I'm not making any excuses or statements - I just think it's a bit harsh to throw him under the bus on the basis of this one missed test.
Pages