More Saudi Investment Rumors; Implications of Valieva Ruling; the "Enhanced Games;" What to Expect from Red Bull; Good Weekend for the Americans ...

Key Takeaways:

·       More Saudi Investment Rumors

·       Broader Implications of the Valieva Doping Ruling

·       The “Enhanced Games”

·       Ineos Prospects Going Forward

·       What to Expect From Red Bull

·       Good Weekend for the Americans

There was yet another Reuters media report regarding the “One Cycling” project over the weekend, this time presaging an imminent investment of €250 million by the Saudi sovereign wealth fund into the sport of cycling – via some still undefined collaboration of certain top teams. Although there wasn’t much new information here, vis-à-vis the media giant’s last report on the topic more than three months ago, this most recent piece (written by two of the same reporters who wrote the earlier story) suggested confidential input from three different people. And once again, the report cautioned that “a deal may not be sealed and talks are ongoing.” The updated article suggested that the Saudi fund had prevailed in an “auction” for the opportunity, and that the deal could be completed within two months. And perhaps more notably, the new piece said definitively that neither ASO nor RCS were involved in the project – which would seemingly diminish its chances for success. We have now touched on this rumor – and the objectives of the so-called “One Cycling” initiative – several times over the past few months, most recently in a Special Issue commentary by Steve Maxwell and former UCI President Brian Cookson a few days ago. Based on the available evidence, although it might be great for the sport, we have to conclude that there is more smoke here than fire. For anything substantive to happen, it seems there needs to be both a universal and uniform support from all the teams, and buy-in from ASO to support the initiative. But in the meantime, provocative rumors like this keep fans clicking on the cycling websites.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport punished Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva with a four-year ban for doping at the 2022 Beijing winter Olympics, but in doing so has opened a Pandora’s Box of criticism over inflexible anti-doping policies and the consequences ‒ or lack thereof ‒ for athlete abusers. Valieva’s case is black and white from a WADA perspective, as she tested positive for a banned substance prior to the Olympics. However, the CAS case highlighted two important factors that could lead to future changes. First, Valieva was 15 years old and under adult supervision at the time of her positive test, bringing into question whether the WADA code is aligned with laws that protect the privacy, measure the consequences, and create the potential for rehabilitation of underage actors. Second, her coaches likely played an outsized role in her doping case, as someone would have had to procure and convince a minor to take a performance enhancing drug. And to anyone who witnessed the abusive berating of Valieva by her coaches during the free skate competition in those games, that undue influence was obvious.

Follow-up statements by various anti-doping agencies were confusing: critical of systemic Russian doping enablement and affirming Valieva’s ban as a symbolic victory, while simultaneously leaving the door open for Russian athletes ‒ many with coaches and enablers named in prior Russian cases ‒ to compete under a neutral “flag” in the next Olympics. By calling for nations to criminalize the doping of minors, anti-doping organizations are essentially deflecting focus away from their entrenched and draconian “strict liability” policies. That passive-aggressive stance ‒ to disproportionately punish the underage victims ‒ while simultaneously providing a path for their abusive enablers to be rehabilitated and included into future Olympics has invited fair criticism. With sports like cycling identifying and exploiting ever-younger talent pools, the implications here have potentially broad impact. Whether your position is to punish dopers, punish enablers, or hold the Russian system accountable for its actions over Olympic cycles back to 2014, we hope the Valieva case invites new debates over athlete rights, policy fairness, and sporting integrity.

On the other end of the spectrum, the so-called “Enhanced Games” seeks to hold unrestricted competition, including the use of performance enhancement drugs or other techniques that are banned under the WADA code ‒ and the upcoming event has landed several billionaire backers. What at first seemed like an elaborate practical joke (it was actually the subject of a Saturday Night Live skit a few years ago) the event apparently now has the funds necessary to move ahead. And for the athletes, there is apparently adequate compensation for the risks they will take while using any means necessary to push the limits of human physiology. On one hand, the athletes and the event itself will run counter the WADA code and the aforementioned Rodchenkov Act, regarding the potential consequences of lifetime competition bans and jail time. Travis Tygart, head of USADA, called it “farcical … likely illegal in many states and a dangerous clown show, not real sport.” On the other hand, from a medical perspective, doping in the new games could be structured and classified as longitudinal healthcare studies that will advance the knowledge, methodologies, and techniques for improving human lifespans ‒ the use of human enhancement drugs (HEDs) for athletes to extract maximum performance and unlock new treatments that increase our potential to live longer lives. This notion is central to HED research and transhumanist philosophy ‒ that we should seek knowledge and freely explore the scientific means to exceed societal limitations which govern what we can or can’t do with our bodies within a finite lifespan.

The past weekend saw a flurry of racing, highlighted by Mathieu van der Poel – capping off a mind-bending Cyclocross season in which he won 13 out of 14 races – who cruised to a sixth career Cyclocross World Championship victory. The dominant win was made even more lopsided due to the absence of Tom Pidcock and Wout van Aert, who both ended their off-road season early in order to focus on road racing goals. Van der Poel led almost effortlessly from start to finish, making for a rather bland race that mostly highlighted the vast delta between him and the rest of the sport. Cyclocross fans are excitedly watching Van der Poel’s march toward Erik De Vlaeminck’s record seven CX world titles. However, even as he is on the doorstep of history, Van der Poel has raised the idea of stepping away from Cyclocross to focus on the road, apparently at least partly to avoid continued fan abuse during races. While this could be true, his proclamations may also be a subtle communication to the UCI – which recently raised the idea of banning riders from CX World Championships who don’t race the entire CX World Cup season earlier this season. 

Red Bull’s now-approved investment in the Bora-Hansgrohe team promises to bring new energy to the WT peloton, but what might that look like? To see where the giant energy drink business is going, it’s worth looking at some of the other sports that they’ve invested in. The brand owns five soccer teams, the dominant Oracle Red Bull Racing in Formula 1, as well as ice hockey and eSports teams – and they invest for the long term. Another trademark of Red Bull teams is the long-term development of talent. Two of the most dominant F1 drivers of the last 20 years, Sebastian Vettel and Max Verstappen, were developed within Red Bull’s system before ascending to their F1 racing team. We should expect more of this philosophy in cycling, with talented young riders and staff being carefully groomed for future leadership roles. We can also expect a significant commitment to media. That is one of Red Bull’s strongest skills, and road cycling could definitely utilize broader and more sophisticated media reach. What we don’t see with Red Bull is a serious commitment to women’s sports. While the brand does have individual sponsorships with some female athletes (Zoe Backstedt, Kate Courtney and Blanka Vas in cycling), there are no Red Bull-owned teams in, for example, the UCI Women’s World Tour, the NWSL or the WNBA. With the continuing growth in popularity, Red Bull could play a major role in promoting women’s sports.

Sunday’s racing produced a clear manifestation our of reflections last week on the rising quality of top-tier American riders – with Team UAE’s Brandon McNulty becoming the first American to take the overall at the Volta a la Comunitat Valenciana, and Movistar’s Will Barta getting his first career professional win on the final stage in Valencia. Outside of its historic status, the overall win is significant since it gives the 25-year-old McNulty a strong proof-of-concept to his UAE team management, which has been adding more talented and young potential leaders every off-season. This could put McNulty in a perilous position if he doesn’t seize the limited opportunities he gets as a designated leader.

After French company Ekoi shook up the long-stagnant road pedal technology with the recent release of their innovative PW8 pedal – which offers an oversized platform and a claimed eight watt saving – they were quickly brought back down to earth by the UCI. Race commissaires deemed the pedals non-compliant mid-way through the Etoile de Bessèges stage race. The ruling, which came down just an hour before the start of a stage, caused riders from the two sponsored teams, Nice Métropole and Burgos-BH, to frantically beg for spare shoes and pedals from rival teams, or purchase them from local retailers in the start town. While the UCI may have been correct to restrict the new technology, the extremely strange and unprofessional manner in which they did so leaves some lingering questions. How, and why, were riders allowed to race with the equipment in the first place, and why did the commissaires wait until the last minute to inform the affected teams and riders. This seems like yet another silly example of why teams and riders may feel disenfranchised by the current system, and why initiatives like the rumored One Cycling are often bubbling below the surface. 

Following his ascent from a defining thought leader in the relatively niche world of professional cycling to perhaps the most talked-about sports executive in the world following the Ineos takeover of the sporting side of Manchester United, Dave Brailsford recently surrendered his title of team principal of the Ineos Grenadiers cycling team. This move, which leaves John Allert, who was recently appointed to CEO of the team, solely in charge of the team. This is no surprise, since Brailsford will have his hands full rebuilding one of football’s most storied clubs. It’s not clear why it took so long for the formal change to occur. Although Allert has publicly said that the team’s direction and budget is steady, it seems the organization has suffered a bit of a talent drain at both the athlete level and the management level. And as Allert acknowledged, the team is “no longer the hunted, now we are the hunters.” One has to wonder if the long period of Brailsford still being technically in charge of the team, but not involved at a day-to-day level, created a bit of a “worst-of-both-worlds” situation that has left the team with a steep uphill battle to get back to their former glory.