Riders' union CPA critical of night time tests, but confirm Pogačar and Vingegaard not the only riders tested

The CPA, which stands for “Cyclistes Professionnels Associés” and is also known as the riders’ union, has reacted critically to the nighttime doping tests that Tadej Pogačar and Jonas Vingegaard were required to undergo. A statement also confirms that the Slovenian and the Dane were not the only two riders who were woken up at night.

The nighttime checks have stirred up an unprecedented amount of controversy, and new reactions and developments continue to emerge. On Sunday, for example, the riders’ union issued a critical statement on X. That statement provides us with a bit more information and context.

The very first sentence reads: “In response to the doping tests conducted on the night of July 18–19—on Tadej Pogačar around 5:00 a.m. and on Jonas Vingegaard around 2:00 a.m., and on other riders—the CPA, on behalf of all riders, wishes to reaffirm its full support for a strong, credible, and effective anti-doping approach.”

This confirms, then, that Pogačar and Vingegaard were not the only riders who were woken up in the middle of the night. The CPA goes on to say that it supports a clean sport and is committed to funding it, but it also raises questions about the nighttime checks.

"We also want to ensure that fairness in sports remains guaranteed for all athletes and that everyone can benefit from proper recovery. These targeted and physically demanding tests actually hinder this," according to the CPA. “An effective fight against doping is essential. An intelligent fight against doping is just as essential,” the statement concludes.

Chairman Adam Hansen then went on to express his own critical views in what could be described as a very detailed response:

"Our position is clear: the CPA is deeply disappointed with the current state of anti-doping efforts in professional cycling."

"Did you know that cyclists are the only athletes in the world who pay out of their own pockets for additional doping tests, long-term storage of samples, and data analysis? This financial burden is a direct consequence of our sport’s past. Although modern cycling is significantly cleaner today, active riders are paying for the mistakes of previous generations. Is that fair?"

"Within the SafeR initiative, members often claim that crashes happen because riders lose their concentration or look at their bike computers. But consider the human cost of the current doping system. Think about how you perform at your regular job after just four hours of sleep, or after being woken up in the middle of REM sleep at 2 a.m. for a blood test. Now imagine this happening during a Grand Tour, between two crucial mountain stages after two full weeks of racing. The pressure on your shoulders. I’m not saying this was the cause of Jonas Vingegaard’s crash, but subjecting an athlete to this during the most important race of the year, after two weeks of racing, certainly affects his daily performance or can simply linger in the back of his mind during the stage."

"It's not just about Jonas; all professional cyclists have to be available 365 days a year."

"The Hour: During their assigned hour each day, riders must be at the exact location listed in their accommodations."

"The remaining 23 hours: Outside of that one-hour window, doping control officers (DCOs) can still show up unannounced. If a rider isn’t home—because he went out to get coffee or took his child to the park—he must provide proof of where he was and why. Failure to prove their whereabouts can be recorded as a missed doping test. Riders are terrified of missing a doping test. I’ve seen cases where users had to obtain a statement from restaurant owners—along with the receipt—stating that they were out to dinner and not at home during their designated time slot. So how are they supposed to get a written statement from their 3-year-old child if the child went to the park?"

"To make matters worse, the ADAMS app—which users are required to use to submit their location data—is known for technical issues and frequent outages."

"We have said: quality over quantity. Users fund the ITA directly, and we have repeatedly argued that more tests are not the solution, but a waste of resources. Instead, those resources should be invested in upgrading the testing equipment in the laboratories."

"Currently, equipment standards vary by accredited laboratory. Some are much more advanced in detecting traces of banned substances than others. We want an approach that prioritizes quality over quantity, using state-of-the-art laboratory equipment capable of detecting even the smallest traces of banned substances. This means fewer but more accurate tests that identify actual cheaters while reducing the constant harassment of honest users."

"If progress is made in testing technology, this would extend the detection window for banned substances. This would lead to a more efficient approach, eliminating the need for these tests in the middle of the night, reducing the stress and workload on riders, and increasing the likelihood of catching cheaters."

"But this isn’t the direction things are heading. The funding won’t be used to improve laboratory equipment, but to increase the number of tests, monitor data, and all that sort of thing—which means more work and stress for the riders. They’re already having a hard enough time. We want doping offenders to be caught; we don’t want to bother clean riders; and we want to see a report showing that the total number of tests is increasing year after year, with fewer positive results."

"We need to ask ourselves whether we want to continue contributing to a system that isn't becoming more efficient, that tracks down cheaters, causes less trouble for clean athletes, and doesn't treat riders like criminals."