• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

A psychological analysis of Alberto Contador's response

Aug 3, 2009
81
0
0
Visit site
I realize that a guilty rider has to come up with something in a last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship, but why is it always so predictable? Why don't they just stay silent and try to pay someone off($100,000 donation to UCI?), rather than come up with ridiculous public excuses that just lead to more embarrassing press releases? And why does Alberto threaten to sue the media, rather than try to explain through them why he isn't guilty? Because he is guilty, his reaction to recent events has made it clear.

Look at the pattern, first he pulled a Floyd by claiming the steaks(alcohol for Floyd) caused the positive, and now that one of his teammates is about to pull the plug on him, he's trying to manipulate the UCI:

“Finally, the rider asks the sport authorities and especially the ICU, to provide a quick resolution of this case, as this is the best way to end the speculations and the publication of false and defamatory news about his person.”

The most interesting aspect of this request is that it comes after the "rider" said he would no longer talk to the press. He is also trying to intimidate the media into silence:

"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."

The one thing that he hasn't commented on is the positive plasticizer test, but that's only because he can't come up with a creative lie to cover that one.

First the Clenbuterol, then the plasticizer, and now the former teammate. 3 strikes and you're out: The pistol is out of caps.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
There is not a lot of new ground here that hasn't been covered in the comprehensive threads. I might add that some of us think there might have been a cover up hadn't the German media got some leaky information about the positives.
 
Aug 3, 2009
81
0
0
Visit site
scribe said:
There is not a lot of new ground here that hasn't been covered in the comprehensive threads.

I haven't seen any threads or comments dedicated exclusively to Contador's response. Also haven't seen much commentary that psychologically analyzes Contador's responses, and the implicating results of such.


scribe said:
I might add that some of us think there might have been a cover up hadn't the German media got some leaky information about the positives.

This may be true, but it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, which I intend to keep on-track until Contador is justly suspended.

***No topic-highjacking of this thread, please.
 
Oct 8, 2010
450
0
0
Visit site
scribe said:
There is not a lot of new ground here that hasn't been covered in the comprehensive threads. I might add that some of us think there might have been a cover up hadn't the German media got some leaky information about the positives.

What cover-up are you talking about? The UCI isn't allowed to release the information of a positive test. Once there is a positive test, it goes to the (corrupt) Spanish federation. The UCI doesn't prosecute the case.

So I really don't know what you're talking about when you say "cover-up."
 
ProTour said:
I realize that a guilty rider has to come up with something in a last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship, but why is it always so predictable? Why don't they just stay silent and try to pay someone off($100,000 donation to UCI?), rather than come up with ridiculous public excuses that just lead to more embarrassing press releases? And why does Alberto threaten to sue the media, rather than try to explain through them why he isn't guilty? Because he is guilty, his reaction to recent events has made it clear.

Look at the pattern, first he pulled a Floyd by claiming the steaks(alcohol for Floyd) caused the positive, and now that one of his teammates is about to pull the plug on him, he's trying to manipulate the UCI:

“Finally, the rider asks the sport authorities and especially the ICU, to provide a quick resolution of this case, as this is the best way to end the speculations and the publication of false and defamatory news about his person.”

The most interesting aspect of this request is that it comes after the "rider" said he would no longer talk to the press. He is also trying to intimidate the media into silence:

"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."

The one thing that he hasn't commented on is the positive plasticizer test, but that's only because he can't come up with a creative lie to cover that one.

First the Clenbuterol, then the plasticizer, and now the former teammate. 3 strikes and you're out: The pistol is out of caps.

the thread you started is called a "psychological" analysis-and yet you haven't come up with any at all.......apart from writing what everyone already knows then what's is it that you want to achieve from this rubbish?:confused::confused:
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
hfer07 said:
the thread you started is called a "psychological" analysis-and yet you haven't come up with any at all.......apart from writing what everyone already knows then what's is it that you want to achieve from this rubbish?:confused::confused:

Trolling?........
 
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
Visit site
ProTour said:
I realize that a guilty rider has to come up with something in a last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship, but why is it always so predictable? Why don't they just stay silent and try to pay someone off($100,000 donation to UCI?), rather than come up with ridiculous public excuses that just lead to more embarrassing press releases? And why does Alberto threaten to sue the media, rather than try to explain through them why he isn't guilty? Because he is guilty, his reaction to recent events has made it clear.

Look at the pattern, first he pulled a Floyd by claiming the steaks(alcohol for Floyd) caused the positive, and now that one of his teammates is about to pull the plug on him, he's trying to manipulate the UCI:

“Finally, the rider asks the sport authorities and especially the ICU, to provide a quick resolution of this case, as this is the best way to end the speculations and the publication of false and defamatory news about his person.”

The most interesting aspect of this request is that it comes after the "rider" said he would no longer talk to the press. He is also trying to intimidate the media into silence:

"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."

The one thing that he hasn't commented on is the positive plasticizer test, but that's only because he can't come up with a creative lie to cover that one.

First the Clenbuterol, then the plasticizer, and now the former teammate. 3 strikes and you're out: The pistol is out of caps.

Tainted meat is actually possible with clenbuterol, getting synthetic testosteron in your body through normal whiskey is not.
He did came up with vacuum packed meat for the plasticizers, nobody knows who the teammate is, UCI is on his side for now....
I think he's doing quite well given the circumstances, too bad the media has to dig further.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
Visit site
TERMINATOR said:
What cover-up are you talking about? The UCI isn't allowed to release the information of a positive test. Once there is a positive test, it goes to the (corrupt) Spanish federation. The UCI doesn't prosecute the case.

So I really don't know what you're talking about when you say "cover-up."
Contador claiming that the UCI told him to keep schtum isn't perhaps the beginnings of a cover-up that, as another poster mentioned, could have worked but for the German press getting hold of it?

The whole order of information being presented to the public is a little skewed too. How come it took weeks for anyone to mention that they had a receipt? How come it took weeks longer than usual to announce that there was a positive test?

The Tour finished in July yet it was 10 weeks to the announcement of Contador's positive. Contrast that with the Vuelta positives being announced 3 weeks after the samples were taken. What was the reason for the 7 week delay?

Anti-doping depends on transparency both for the riders and the fans. If this kind of fudging occurs it serves only to undermine the integrity of the sport. That the UCI could think that, in the wake of the Armstrong bribe revelations, they could just sweep a positive under the carpet beggars belief. How can anyone have confidence that the system is fair with debacles like this?
 
Aug 12, 2009
505
0
0
Visit site
How come it took weeks for anyone to mention that they had a receipt? [/QUOTE said:
what about that damn receipt?! what the f... I mean, how could this explain how clen got into AC`s body or give ANY relevant information to anyone?!

receipt: salt, pepa, oignons, CLEN, plasticizers ... :rolleyes:


Sorry, offtopic, this thread was supposed to be about some psychological stuff here.
As a psychologist, I will just watch and wait and don`t believe anyone in the first place. I don' t think we will ever really know what exactly happend .

Cheers,
Jeanne
 
Oct 8, 2010
450
0
0
Visit site
ultimobici said:
Contador claiming that the UCI told him to keep schtum isn't perhaps the beginnings of a cover-up that, as another poster mentioned, could have worked but for the German press getting hold of it?

The whole order of information being presented to the public is a little skewed too. How come it took weeks for anyone to mention that they had a receipt? How come it took weeks longer than usual to announce that there was a positive test?

The Tour finished in July yet it was 10 weeks to the announcement of Contador's positive. Contrast that with the Vuelta positives being announced 3 weeks after the samples were taken. What was the reason for the 7 week delay?

Anti-doping depends on transparency both for the riders and the fans. If this kind of fudging occurs it serves only to undermine the integrity of the sport. That the UCI could think that, in the wake of the Armstrong bribe revelations, they could just sweep a positive under the carpet beggars belief. How can anyone have confidence that the system is fair with debacles like this?

There's so many things wrong with your post I don't know where to begin.

1.) The UCI is NOT permitted to notify anyone of a positive test.
2.) Contador is not obligated to inform anyone of a positive test unless he wants to.
3.) The UCI is permitted to tell a rider to be quiet about a positive doping test until the positive is determined to be a valide anti-doping violation, which has yet to occur. It's actually the way the system is designed to be.
4.) I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "anti-doping transparency." The word transparency is not used in the WADA Code or the UCI rulebook.
5.) The public isn't "owed" any information until the test is determined to be positive by the Spanish federation. This has yet to occur and likely won't occur until January or so of 2011.
6.) The difference between the Vuelta vs. Tour notification is a meaningless comparison. Riders can inform whoever they want whenever they want. In this case, Contador decided to keep quiet, which he had every right to do under the WADA Code. The fact that the German media got wind of it doesn't mean anything.


Nothing was done wrong in the Contador case as far as disclosure goes. I suggest you read the WADA Anti-Doping Code. There's nothing in there about the public being notified within so many days of a positive test.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
Visit site
TERMINATOR said:
There's so many things wrong with your post I don't know where to begin.

1.) The UCI is NOT permitted to notify anyone of a positive test.
2.) Contador is not obligated to inform anyone of a positive test unless he wants to.
3.) The UCI is permitted to tell a rider to be quiet about a positive doping test until the positive is determined to be a valide anti-doping violation, which has yet to occur. It's actually the way the system is designed to be.
4.) I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "anti-doping transparency." The word transparency is not used in the WADA Code or the UCI rulebook.
5.) The public isn't "owed" any information until the test is determined to be positive by the Spanish federation. This has yet to occur and likely won't occur until January or so of 2011.
6.) The difference between the Vuelta vs. Tour notification is a meaningless comparison. Riders can inform whoever they want whenever they want. In this case, Contador decided to keep quiet, which he had every right to do under the WADA Code. The fact that the German media got wind of it doesn't mean anything.


Nothing was done wrong in the Contador case as far as disclosure goes. I suggest you read the WADA Anti-Doping Code. There's nothing in there about the public being notified within so many days of a positive test.
Evidently you didn't read my post that well.

The UCI can and does announce positive tests. It is for the rider's federation to sanction him if the B sample is also found to be positive or if the rider declines to have it tested.

I was contrasting the speed at which other riders' positives were made public with the lethargy in the Contador affair. Fuyu Li returned his positive on 23 March, his suspension was announced on 22 April. the substance was the same as Contador in similarly tiny concentration. Yet it took almost 3 times as long to suspend Contador, why?
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
ultimobici said:
Evidently you didn't read my post that well.

The UCI can and does announce positive tests. It is for the rider's federation to sanction him if the B sample is also found to be positive or if the rider declines to have it tested.

I was contrasting the speed at which other riders' positives were made public with the lethargy in the Contador affair. Fuyu Li returned his positive on 23 March, his suspension was announced on 22 April. the substance was the same as Contador in similarly tiny concentration. Yet it took almost 3 times as long to suspend Contador, why?

Because Contador is not a small meaningless Chinese cycllist.

Sheesh, not everybody is equal. You only realized that now?
 
I really wanted to start an "Is he a sociopath" thread but it would probably only be funny to me. Turns out he is a sociopath...

From an old LA thread. The signs of a sociopath are listed below, I'm pretty sure Pharmador trips more than that other evil doper.

•Glibness/Superficial Charm
•Manipulative and Conning
•Grandiose Sense of Self
•Pathological Lying
•Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
•Shallow Emotions
•Incapacity for Love
•Need for Stimulation
•Callousness/Lack of Empathy
•Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
•Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
•Irresponsibility/Unreliability
•Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
•Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
•Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
•Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
•Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
•Authoritarian
•Secretive
•Paranoid
•Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
•Conventional appearance
•Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
•Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
•Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
•Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
•Incapable of real human attachment to another
•Unable to feel remorse or guilt
•Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
•The Hog thinks you're a super nice guy
 
May 2, 2010
466
0
0
Visit site
ProTour said:
...blahblahblah...

You could start by psychoanalizing yourself and wait till there's legal evidence before accusing somebody on the grounds of, so far, speculation.

The Contador haters have jumped like a pack of volwes as soon as there was the slightest doubt about his performance.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
JRTinMA said:
I really wanted to start an "Is he a sociopath" thread but it would probably only be funny to me. Turns out he is a sociopath...

From an old LA thread. The signs of a sociopath are listed below, I'm pretty sure Pharmador trips more than that other evil doper.

•Glibness/Superficial Charm
•Manipulative and Conning
•Grandiose Sense of Self
•Pathological Lying
•Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
•Shallow Emotions
•Incapacity for Love
•Need for Stimulation
•Callousness/Lack of Empathy
•Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
•Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
•Irresponsibility/Unreliability
•Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
•Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
•Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
•Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
•Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
•Authoritarian
•Secretive
•Paranoid
•Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
•Conventional appearance
•Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
•Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
•Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
•Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
•Incapable of real human attachment to another
•Unable to feel remorse or guilt
•Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)
•The Hog thinks you're a super nice guy

I'm pretty sure you don't know Contador personally.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
Alberto is the best bike rider in the business. I do think he has a flawed personality. I wish him the best but I think he extremely sensitive and emotional and I think that hurts him.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
flicker said:
Alberto is the best bike rider in the business. I do think he has a flawed personality. I wish him the best but I think he extremely sensitive and emotional and I think that hurts him.

You know him personally.:rolleyes: He has not shown his personality to the general public yet i imagine. what the public see is a professional bike racer.

In the case of the Uniballer he wanted to project a jesus christ back from the dead cured his own cancer do gooder type of megaman, but what we, by that i mean people with open eyes and minds saw was;

•Glibness/Superficial Charm
•Manipulative and Conning
•Grandiose Sense of Self
•Pathological Lying
•Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
•Shallow Emotions
•Incapacity for Love
•Need for Stimulation
•Callousness/Lack of Empathy
•Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
•Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
•Irresponsibility/Unreliability
•Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
•Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
•Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
•Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
•Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
•Authoritarian
•Secretive
•Paranoid
•Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
•Conventional appearance
•Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
•Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
•Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
•Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
•Incapable of real human attachment to another
•Unable to feel remorse or guilt
•Narcissism, grandiosity (self-importance not based on achievements)

:D
 
Jul 22, 2009
754
1
0
Visit site
I agree with Contador came up with a lame story to cover up an "anomaly" in a test carried out by WADA. I haven't the slightest doubt that Alberto doped, may be doping as we speak and, if the field is as good as him, will dope after his (posible) suspension.

Having said all of this, step back a bit. Forget about the fact that he is the TdF winner. Forget about the fact that he is another one in the bunch who says he doesn't dope. Forget about all the rumours.

This is cycling we're talking about. I'm not in favor of doping here, but... for peace sake, are we going to allow the "authorities" to shove their finger(s) up a cyclists rear end because he is suspected to be hiding something (ala Virenque)? Are we this low of scum?

Yes, I am a Contador fan and would really like to know how the clenbuterol got in his blood. But at the same time, the cyclists do have rights. Put Warren Buffett in Alberto's shoes and I guarantee you no Belgian or Dutch "newspaper" would be saying anything about his business affairs. Do you think Warren carries out his business without hurting anyone? Nope. Lots of 401ks and other retirement funds have to "go dry" so that this SOB can make his 8% while the market is tanking. A bítch is a bítch and a pimp is a pimp.

So, as cycling fans we can all step back and watch people who sit in offices analyzing graphs destroy our sport. Since they can't bust them they've, and by "they" I mean WADA, devised pseudo-mechanisms to prove someone's doping. They need not a positive sample, all they need is a rumour, an "anomaly" (which is the equivalent of putting aside science [positive test] and bringing in pseudo-positives [opinion]), and all these suspicious "media outlets" run the story, again suspiciously, and without any tacit proof, automatically without asking a question.

I really wish the people at WADA the worst.

I really do.
 
Se&#241 said:
I agree with Contador came up with a lame story to cover up an "anomaly" in a test carried out by WADA. I haven't the slightest doubt that Alberto doped, may be doping as we speak and, if the field is as good as him, will dope after his (posible) suspension.

Having said all of this, step back a bit. Forget about the fact that he is the TdF winner. Forget about the fact that he is another one in the bunch who says he doesn't dope. Forget about all the rumours.

This is cycling we're talking about. I'm not in favor of doping here, but... for peace sake, are we going to allow the "authorities" to shove their finger(s) up a cyclists rear end because he is suspected to be hiding something (ala Virenque)? Are we this low of scum?

Yes, I am a Contador fan and would really like to know how the clenbuterol got in his blood. But at the same time, the cyclists do have rights. Put Warren Buffett in Alberto's shoes and I guarantee you no Belgian or Dutch "newspaper" would be saying anything about his business affairs. Do you think Warren carries out his business without hurting anyone? Nope. Lots of 401ks and other retirement funds have to "go dry" so that this SOB can make his 8% while the market is tanking. A bítch is a bítch and a pimp is a pimp.

So, as cycling fans we can all step back and watch people who sit in offices analyzing graphs destroy our sport. Since they can't bust them they've, and by "they" I mean WADA, devised pseudo-mechanisms to prove someone's doping. They need not a positive sample, all they need is a rumour, an "anomaly" (which is the equivalent of putting aside science [positive test] and bringing in pseudo-positives [opinion]), and all these suspicious "media outlets" run the story, again suspiciously, and without any tacit proof, automatically without asking a question.

I really wish the people at WADA the worst.

I really do.

which begs the question: who's pimping who & who's the b!tch?:)
 
ProTour said:
I realize that a guilty rider has to come up with something in a last-ditch effort to save their sinking ship, but why is it always so predictable? Why don't they just stay silent and try to pay someone off($100,000 donation to UCI?), rather than come up with ridiculous public excuses that just lead to more embarrassing press releases? And why does Alberto threaten to sue the media, rather than try to explain through them why he isn't guilty? Because he is guilty, his reaction to recent events has made it clear.

Look at the pattern, first he pulled a Floyd by claiming the steaks(alcohol for Floyd) caused the positive, and now that one of his teammates is about to pull the plug on him, he's trying to manipulate the UCI:

“Finally, the rider asks the sport authorities and especially the ICU, to provide a quick resolution of this case, as this is the best way to end the speculations and the publication of false and defamatory news about his person.”

The most interesting aspect of this request is that it comes after the "rider" said he would no longer talk to the press. He is also trying to intimidate the media into silence:

"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."

The one thing that he hasn't commented on is the positive plasticizer test, but that's only because he can't come up with a creative lie to cover that one.

First the Clenbuterol, then the plasticizer, and now the former teammate. 3 strikes and you're out: The pistol is out of caps.

I cut and pasted your "psychological analysis" to two clinical psychologists who specialize in sports/athlete analysis and they enjoyed it, feeling more secure their positions are not threatened by you.
 
Se&#241 said:
I agree with Contador came up with a lame story to cover up an "anomaly" in a test carried out by WADA. I haven't the slightest doubt that Alberto doped, may be doping as we speak and, if the field is as good as him, will dope after his (posible) suspension.

Having said all of this, step back a bit. Forget about the fact that he is the TdF winner. Forget about the fact that he is another one in the bunch who says he doesn't dope. Forget about all the rumours.

This is cycling we're talking about. I'm not in favor of doping here, but... for peace sake, are we going to allow the "authorities" to shove their finger(s) up a cyclists rear end because he is suspected to be hiding something (ala Virenque)? Are we this low of scum?

Yes, I am a Contador fan and would really like to know how the clenbuterol got in his blood. But at the same time, the cyclists do have rights. Put Warren Buffett in Alberto's shoes and I guarantee you no Belgian or Dutch "newspaper" would be saying anything about his business affairs. Do you think Warren carries out his business without hurting anyone? Nope. Lots of 401ks and other retirement funds have to "go dry" so that this SOB can make his 8% while the market is tanking. A bítch is a bítch and a pimp is a pimp.

So, as cycling fans we can all step back and watch people who sit in offices analyzing graphs destroy our sport. Since they can't bust them they've, and by "they" I mean WADA, devised pseudo-mechanisms to prove someone's doping. They need not a positive sample, all they need is a rumour, an "anomaly" (which is the equivalent of putting aside science [positive test] and bringing in pseudo-positives [opinion]), and all these suspicious "media outlets" run the story, again suspiciously, and without any tacit proof, automatically without asking a question.

I really wish the people at WADA the worst.

I really do.
Who's ruining the sport?
a) People who try to enforce the rules
b) People who cheat

You chose (a), and I pity you.

edit: also, there's a positive for clenbuterol, a banned substance with no legal threshold. That's not rumour or opinion.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
B. 69,
I do not know Alberto personally. I do think he doped in this tour and the past. I do think he is flawed.

You know him personally. He has not shown his personality to the general public yet i imagine. what the public see is a professional bike racer. B. 69

Right there I think you are wrong. Last year I saw Alberto gifting races to Valverde. That was a flaw by Alberto. Last years tour when he absolutely put everyones face in the dirt on the mountain stage in the tour. Personality flaw. Attacking Schleck when Schlecks chain dropped. Personality flaw. You-Tube appology, personality flaw. Tainted meat from Spain,personality flaw. Made his cattle raising in Spain look bad. Said his team (ASTANA)had meat receipt if they chose to come up with it(priceless).

What Albert has done is created bad blood with first the Shack now with ASTANA, now obviously with the doping control.

He was scrutinized for a reason. That reason to me is that he is burning bridges. Notice the damage control Alberto was doing with Andy during the tour. For the sport Alberto should have put Andys face in the dirt.

For your info I am a big Schleck fan also. I am very sorry that Contador doped and was caught. I am going out on a limb and pull a LeMond here and say "follow your conscience Alberto and come clean."