slcbob

I did. But it's drowned out by #20 and #28.

Absolutely take precedent into consideration in the penalty phase and perhaps in informing the immediate actions in response to an adverse finding. Maybe even dig harder to find that adverse finding. But until there is one, we either have a system where riders come back from their mandatory time in the wilderness, or we don't. Like MinnMan , I read your pass for Pogacar and your non-pass for Valverdemort, he who shall not be named, as advocating applying a standard that isn't part of the sport at this time. I don't grasp what else is different in the cases other than the offense for which the penalty has either been served and it's in the past, or it isn't (what I infer from your #20 and #28, despite musings to the contrary).

Perhaps there could or should be a more severe or enduring sanction, but that's a separate discussion.

I also note that the pressure for a lesser specimen to dope so that they could be a marginal rider may be just as great as it is for a proven mutant specimen like Pogacar to dope so he can win it all, but the surveillance is much less for those off the podium. It's no less meaningful that the sport be cleaned up in the grupetto and domestiques, to level the playing field for those that didn't dope and didn't get a contract.