“If you were to draw up a profile of someone suspicious, it would be Oier Lazkano”: Brian Holm questions why Movistar & Red Bull didn’t raise doping concerns earlier

The fallout from Oier Lazkano’s suspension continues to ripple through the sport, with former Quick-Step sports director Brian Holm suggesting the warning signs were visible long before the rider’s biological passport results triggered UCI action and his dismissal from the peloton.

Holm, speaking to Feltet, argued that Lazkano’s rapid rise always warranted scrutiny — and expressed surprise his former employers did not act before the governing body stepped in.

“Oier Lazkano came from nowhere, suddenly could do a bit of everything. There can of course be natural reasons. But if you were to draw up a profile of someone suspicious, it would probably be him. He can ride the classics and climb, and I think: ‘Where on earth has he come from?’”

Lazkano, who has since issued a statement protesting his innocence, was suspended after repeated tests reportedly returned suspicious values. Red Bull - BORA - hansgrohe terminated his contract following the announcement, with the case also reflecting back on his previous team Movistar Team — where his breakthrough performances first drew widespread attention.

Holm insisted the case should not be seen as a step backwards for cycling, but rather the opposite — proof that oversight systems continue to function.

“They will come again. This is neither the first nor the last we’ll see. Of course some people will get caught. You would have to be naive to think they won’t.”

Far from condemning the sport’s current state, Holm framed detection as a sign of maturity in a still-healing environment. “Some will say the sport stands worse. I would say it stands better, because somebody reacts.”

While Holm stopped short of accusing Movistar or Red Bull - BORA of negligence, he did question how a rider showing such pronounced progression could have passed internal checks without flags. “It surprises me that the doctors on the team weren’t more alert.”

Offering an anecdote from his HTC-Colombia days, Holm recalled how suspicion alone prompted action. “When I was at HTC, we had (Serhiy) Honchar. Our doctor could see that something looked strange — that he could suddenly ride so fast. They go through all his blood values, and he ends up being released. Even though we couldn’t prove anything. We ended up in court, but the team won.”

Still, Holm acknowledged the difficulty in drawing firm conclusions without the biological data the UCI reviewed. “It’s impossible to say when we don’t have the blood values. I’m not an expert and don’t know how big the fluctuations were. But I can’t imagine anyone covering anything up today… I don’t think anyone is turning a blind eye. Rather the opposite.”

For Holm, Lazkano’s case is less a dramatic twist and more a reminder that outliers will continue to surface — and that scrutiny remains essential.

“If someone was going to be caught, it didn’t surprise me that it was him — without me really being able to say why.”

As the UCI’s process continues and Lazkano contests the allegations, the episode reinforces an uncomfortable truth in a sport still rebuilding its credibility: trust is earned slowly, and vigilance remains a permanent requirement.