The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) has started a disciplinary procedure against Spanish rider Carlos Barredo after irregularities were found in his blood profile, part of the UCI’s biological passport anti-doping monitoring system.

Barredo has ridden for the Dutch Rabobank team for the past two seasons. His last major win was a stage of the Vuelta a Espana in 2010 whilst riding for QuickStep. Prior to that, he had victories in Clasica de San Sebastian (2009), and stages of Paris-Nice (2008), the Tour Down Under (2006) and Vuelta a Asturias (2004).

In August, Rabobank issued a statement saying that Barredo had been questioned by the UCI for biological passport anomalies relating to 2007-2011. At that point, Barredo stressed that he had never doped nor used blood transfusions.

“The rider shall be accorded the right to the presumption of innocence until a final decision has been made on this matter,” said the UCI on Thursday.

The UCI’s biological passport system builds up a profile of an individual rider’s blood and urine values. Any unexpected or unnatural fluctation in these values – which include haematocrit and hormone levels – can be a sign that a rider is using banned performance-enhancing substances or blood transfusions.

  • Cherry

    Sorry Jon, I must have misread your reply to bikez so Iwill give you a break despite you once again chosing to avoid answering the original question and accusing me of being pro doping. I mus confess to not really knowing what constitutes doping though, is it taking a banned substance or using a banned procedure to enhance performance or is it doing the same whether it’s banned or not

  • Jon

    Cherry – I wasn’t aware of any name calling, and these are reader comments, not some kind of Q&A. I like the way you refer to what I ‘seem to believe’ before asserting “what this is about” based on what you seem to believe, which seems to be that it’s okay to dope. Give me a break!

  • Cherry

    Jon, instead of resorting to name calling why don’t you address the question posed by bikez? Despite what you seem to believe this isn’t about what Lance Armstrong did or didn’t do the evidence is quite clear on that score the issue is whether or not it was in contravention of the rules that applied at the time. If the answer is yes then how did he manage to get away with it until now, if the answer is no then whether you like it or not he might have been guilty of pushing the boundary of what was ethical but that’s all. How will history regard whatever the latest innovations used to give today’s stars the edge?

  • Ken Evans

    It is easier to ban a little fish, than a big fish.

    Maybe he didn’t have enough money to bribe McQuaid ?

  • Andy

    I’m afraid I agree with Jon. I was a big Armstrong fan, but I read the USADA reasoned decision, and I can’t keep kidding myself any more. I think he did it. Sour grapes doesn’t account for the corroboration across the evidence from different sources. Why would a soigneur want to take a rider down? If all the riders of his Tour winning era had been been clean, I believe he’d probably still have won a lot, but the tragedy is that we’ll never know. He had me fooled for a long time, but I have to come out now and say that, yes, I think he doped.

  • Jon

    bikez – I thought these kinds of comments were from a third world troll farm funded by Armstrong’s PR firm, but apparently there are some true believers out there!

    He doped mate – a lot – and bribed, bullied and lied. He can certainly ride a bike but if you continue to put him on a pedestal your disappointment will only be all the greater when you accept the truth of the matter. I recommend you read up on USADA’s report and the testimony of his former teammates..

  • bikez

    Witch hunts again – presumption of innocence? Out the window!! RE: Armstrong – Simple question: How is it POSSIBLE that he could dupe the various anti-doping bodies for years and years including of course the French Police who we have seen “take no prisoners” in regard to doping.

  • Proud to be British

    UCI suddenly getting strict on doping??? !!

    A little more clarity on what they are going to do with Armstrong would not go amiss. Whole rotten organisation not ft for purpose – a wasted decade (at least) for the sport and fans.