The president of the Cyclists’ Association of Professional Cyclists (CPA), Adam Hansen, has publicly criticized the pilot project with which the International Testing Agency (ITA) wants to use power data as a long-term monitoring tool to guide anti-doping controls.
Although the trial is planned to be voluntary and will start with four teams in 2026, Hansen says the peloton sees the measure as a new source of pressure and warns of multiple technical and regulatory unknowns.
What is the “power passport” being tested and why are cyclists opposed to it?
The idea, as explained by the UCI itself, is that the ITA is developing a performance monitoring tool based on power data from professional (male) road cyclists. The goal would be to add a layer of “intelligence” to refine targeted controls, prioritize investigations, and decide which samples should be analyzed or stored long-term.
In practice, and as Hansen describes in his appearance on the Domestique podcast, the system would require cyclists to submit their power data files so that analysts can detect “anomalous” patterns and, based on that, trigger more specific controls.
Hansen maintains that the CPA and the riders are “100% against” the proposal because it raises too many unanswered questions. Among his concerns, he cites everyday scenarios: power meters or cycling computers that malfunction, files that aren’t saved, devices that run out of battery or get lost.
His central question is what would happen if a rider can’t (or doesn’t) upload their data. Could it end up being treated as a violation comparable to a failed test? Something with very serious anti-doping consequences.
Furthermore, he questions the reliability of drawing solid conclusions solely from power data. Performance changes with the coach’s plan, pre-race training load, rest, caffeine, strength training in the gym, or even training strategies like using oxygen-rich environments—factors that can alter peaks and baselines without doping.
For Hansen, the most immediate side effect is mental. He understands that the “power passport” would add to an already overloaded ecosystem (post-race controls, location checks, and biological passports), increasing the feeling of surveillance and administrative pressure, especially for younger athletes.
In the same interview, Hansen also focused on recent changes to the location system, which, according to him, have generated more stressful situations due to “errors” or unforeseen events in daily life (changes of plan, travel, or simply not hearing the bell). This experience is part of his argument. Any new layer of obligations, if not very well defined, can end up penalizing the runner “through administration” rather than doping.
Hansen’s solution is as direct as it is improbable. He proposes that instead of expanding control through performance data, he believes the path should be to improve the ability to detect prohibited substances, something that, in his view, would reduce the psychological and bureaucratic burden on athletes.
Source: www.brujulabike.com