Anti-doping authorities deny favouritism after Paul Seixas testing questions
Anti-doping officials have dismissed allegations that teenage French rider Paul Seixas has received preferential treatment during testing at the Tour de France. The 19-year-old, currently fourth overall, and his Decathlon CMA CGM team underwent standard evening tests, but Seixas has not yet faced a nocturnal test that some rivals have taken.
The dispute centres on the selection and timing of targeted tests amid the race. Anti-doping authorities say the wider peloton was sampled on Monday evening as part of the biological passport testing programme, while critics point to the absence so far of a night-time sample for Seixas. The claims of favouritism prompted a response from officials who also denied that the French anti-doping agency has any role in determining which riders are subject to particular tests.
Organisers and testing bodies maintain that the biological passport programme governs the sampling schedule and the riders selected. Seixas and his team did participate in the routine evening sampling with the rest of the peloton, officials noted, underscoring that the procedure was carried out as part of the established programme. Those raising concerns have contrasted Seixas’s testing record with that of other leading riders, who have undergone nocturnal testing sessions during the event.
Two high-profile names cited in those comparisons are the race leader Tadej Pogacar and the now-withdrawn Jonas Vingegaard, both of whom underwent nocturnal tests. The distinction between evening and nocturnal sampling has fuelled the debate among rivals and commentators, with attention fixed on whether any riders have been treated differently. In response, anti-doping chiefs have reiterated that the French agency does not influence who is selected for particular tests.
Seixas’s status as a home rider and his position in the general classification have intensified scrutiny of his testing history during the Tour. The rider is 19 years old and classified fourth overall at this stage of the race, facts that have been cited by those questioning the selection process. Officials have pushed back against suggestions that national affiliation has affected testing choices.
Those defending the testing protocols pointed to the Monday evening sampling as evidence of consistent application of the biological passport programme across the peloton. At the same time, the absence to date of a nocturnal sample for Seixas remains a focal point for rival teams and observers who continue to monitor testing patterns. Anti-doping authorities have kept to their position that decision-making rests with international testing processes rather than the national agency.
The dispute highlights tensions around targeted sampling during a high-stakes grand tour and the scrutiny applied to leading contenders. Anti-doping bodies have publicly rejected claims of special treatment and denied that the French doping agency plays a role in selecting who is tested.