wr potential wrote:
According to the BBC, the UCI spends almost £6 million on anti-doping testing annually – much of that funded by teams under the terms of their licences – while the IAAF spends £1.3 million.
"It is going to have to invest a lot more heavily in anti-doping," said Froome. "That would be a step in the right direction.
"I believe some things have changed quite substantially [for cycling] since the dark ages of 10 to 15 years ago when the sport was really dirty," he continued.
"The testing has really evolved and the UCI has now implemented 24-hour testing. I have every confidence that the system now really works."
No wonder we are miles behind, 4x less funding..
Yes, but somehow both sports ran approximately the same number of tests last year. And came up with near identical ratios of positives - 1.01% dirty in athletics v. 0.983% in cycling...