Mauro Gianetti – the boss of UAE Team Emirates-XRG, the team of Tadej Pogačar – cuts an unmissable figure on the sidelines of the biggest bike races on the calendar. Lean, bald, patient, he’s forthcoming about what his riders are up to, the tactical decisions that led to a result, and the broader context behind it. A big part of that is his deep knowledge of the sport, honed over decades – as a rider, and then as a team director, and currently as the architect behind the now-dominant UAE Team Emirates squad. He’s part of the sport’s establishment. But there’s one subject that he’s noticeably taciturn about: his role in cycling’s darkest era. In fact, he appears to have tried repeatedly to scrub the traces.
On at least 17 occasions over seven years, someone – possibly Mauro Gianetti himself – appears to have edited his Wikipedia page, repeatedly deleting an entire section headlined ‘Doping incident’ while padding the page out with other accolades. These changes were reverted by Wikipedia editors, only for the process to repeat. Again, and again, from 2008 to 2015.
At a human level, that’s perhaps understandable: it is natural and normal to want to present the best version of yourself. But in a sport like cycling, which has repeatedly been battered by the spectre of its tainted past and continues to have question marks over the performances of its athletes, this apparent act of deliberate obfuscation has the look of omertà about it. Old edits, sure – but sometimes, you can learn things from the past.
Contacted by Escape Collective about Gianetti’s apparent editing of his own Wikipedia page, a UAE Team Emirates spokesperson was definitive in response:
“He hasn’t edited his own Wikipedia page, and as you know, those entries are often written and updated by third parties, not always with full context or accuracy.”
On the specific question of the 1998 ‘doping incident’ that has seen such scrutiny by a particular editor on Wikipedia, the team said:
“Mauro has spoken about this part of his personal life in the past and I’d point you to the interviews and reporting at the time for the most direct references. He won't be commenting further.”
So – case closed, right? Maybe not.
Did we do a good job with this story?
