Alberto Contador suspended until August 2012 (loses all results July 2010 - Jan 2012)

[airstream]

seems like all the things said by contador should be divided by 5 at least to make it easier to find some truth. according to his story he set a new record climbing some home hill. heck why do people have to believe him? probably his ego just gloats on how cas dared ban such a great champion. the last sentence are his alleged thoughts, rather than mine.

honestly i think initially he clearly realized he couldn't get away with it but to the bitter end hoped that name itself can save him.

 

[Nilsson]

Quoting AShenden from nyvelocity

"To my mind, there were three separate pieces of evidence that a theory needed to take into account. First, a sharp peak in plasticiser residues had been found in his urine sample on the Tuesday evening that was not present on Monday. Second, clenbuterol had been detected in his urine on the evening of Wednesday's rest day. Third, his reticulocyte results during that Tour were unusually elevated.

As I set out in my opinion to the CAS panel, which is summarised in paragraph 336 of the ruling, those facts are consistent with the reinfusion of blood at some time between Monday and Tuesday evening, the infusion of clenbuterol-contaminated plasma on Wednesday in an effort to mask the excess of red cells from the Passport blood test which was administered that morning, together with a microdose masking strategy to mask the suppression of reticulocytes that would otherwise betray the use of blood transfusions"

as he quite clearly states:

"those facts are consistent with the reinfusion of blood at some time between Monday and Tuesday evening, the infusion of clenbuterol-contaminated plasma on Wednesday"

Contador doped. End of.

Likely agree, although the clenbuterol-contaminated plasma still isn't logical. Ashenden doesn't give an explanation for that. He just brings the positive in and uses it in his very well thought theory. Everybody has to admit that without accepting Contador being incredibly stupid and lottery-winning lucky himself, having a truly stupid accomplish or an accomplish who wants to frame him in a very strange way. The transfusion and the clenbuterol could very well be separate things. The 1 pg/ml clen-containing bloodsample in the morning of the urine positive at 50 pg/ml also is an argument that probably points to ingestion of clenbuterol rather than intravenous administration. Although it is very difficult to be certain...

 

[Nilsson]

Indeed, so why were you in denial previously and now suddenly believe AC transfused?
I'm confused.

I never said he didn't dope. It's very well possible he transfused, but it's not a (legal) fact there he (apparently) didn't exceed any limits. It's that where I defend him for, as well as (even more important) the lacking logics behind the clenbuterol. He didn't use clen in the Tour, there is no trace of clen use in the past and the clen-contaminated plasma is very weak as well. Also the fact that it's probably possible to test positive on legal supplements (considering the testing standard of 100ng/g for stimulants like clen in labs WADA bases itself on in doping cases) doesn't make things more clear-cut.

I can live with the (effect of the) suspension, as a moral sentence, although I would rather have seen him walk free for clen and have a serious blood doping case opened, if there is any possibility...

 

[python]

I lost my previous post - no idea why - but in my opinion almost everyone misinterpreted ashenden...his interview was less about anything related to antidoping and more about how he sees it. Mike hugely deserved the credit for talking straight regardless of the merit in his words which I (incidentatly) find a bit confusing, just as I find the case verdict he so often referred to.

 

[Merckx index]

Very interesting interview. MA says there is evidence that DEHP actually helps preserve stored red cells, I didn't know that.

A major argument used against the transfusion theory was that if plasma were stored and administered later separately it would also be in a DEHP-containing bag. MA refutes that very strongly. He doesn't just say plasma could have been stored in a DEHP-free bag, but that it normally is, because plasma is preserved better in those conditions. And of course he wasn't allowed to testify to that, so Bert's team made hay over the unlikelihood that there could have been two separate transfusions.

MA was also prevented from rebutting the argument that Bert would have had to take a huge amount of CB to get enough of it in a blood transfusion. That was the other major argument against transfusion. I think it's reasonable to conclude that had MA been allowed to testify on these two matters, it is very likely CAS would have concluded that it was a transfusion.

MA also confirms that Bert does indeed have an exemption for a high HT. This was something that emerged a few months ago, but it was just suggestive at the time. So now we know that like Cunego, his natural or baseline HT is over 50%.

As a scientist, I loved this statement by MA. Very respectful of individuals, very critical of the system:

However I’m somewhat cynical today about the capacity of arbitrations to find the truth. The general public and media seem to treat the process with the same reverence as a criminal appeal in front of a panel of judges. That’s just not the case - CAS panels are typically comprised of lawyers, not judges. In general terms, and in my limited experience, those lawyers do an excellent job dealing with highly complex scientific matters. I’m forever amazed at their capacity to absorb an enormous amount of information. But I just don’t agree with the general sentiment that an arbitration automatically finds the truth. In reality, they rule upon the evidence put before them, and that evidence is governed by rules of law, and those rules of law can introduce all sorts of anomalies that a lay person like me finds bewildering, not to mention unsettling.

 

[webvan]

The MA interview is rather damning, looks like Bertie was right not to appeal, could have gotten uglier for him, at least as far as the general public is concerned, the Clinic knows better of course...

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

'...' MA also confirms that Bert does indeed have an exemption for a high HT. This was something that emerged a few months ago, but it was just suggestive at the time. So now we know that like Cunego, his natural or baseline HT is over 50%.

As a scientist, I loved this statement by MA. Very respectful of individuals, very critical of the system:

Very interesting about the HT exemption. It's good the super high hemoglobin concentrations reported don't fly under the radar.

I thought the comments about higher retics, similar hgb, but a different hgb trend related to plasma expansion were interesting too. If we assume MA meant hgb trended flatter than in other races (consistent with higher than normal retics) that implies a different program than previous years. So in previous years might he have used more blood and plasma masking and less EPO? Or is it really possible that he doped less, yet had better form in previous years?

I liked the comment about legal process too. Unsettling indeed.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Very interesting about the HT exemption. It's good the super high hemoglobin concentrations reported don't fly under the radar.

I thought the comments about higher retics, similar hgb, but a different hgb trend related to plasma expansion were interesting too. If we assume MA meant hgb trended flatter than in other races (consistent with higher than normal retics) that implies a different program than previous years. So in previous years might he have used more blood and plasma masking and less EPO? Or is it really possible that he doped less, yet had better form in previous years?

Ashenden's comments:

As I explained earlier, I regard haemoglobin and reticulocytes as separate entities and when I examined Contador's haemoglobin values during the 2010 Tour I found his results to be more or less what I would have expected. However since I already had his data from previous major victories in hand, I went ahead and compared his 2010 haemoglobin results with those other races and I was concerned that I was not able to see consistency between races. In very general terms, you'd expect the same rider to show the same response each race. There is a dilution of the haemoglobin as the cumulative impact of multiple days of stage racing leads to an influx of water into the circulation. Whereas I would have been reassured to find the same characteristic signature in Contador during every one of his victories, I did not.

I take that to mean his 2010 Hb trend was "more or less" what you'd expect from a clean rider (i.e showing a significant decline from start-3rd week). Ashenden states; "There is a dilution of the haemoglobin as the cumulative impact of multiple days of stage racing leads to an influx of water into the circulation", so he would surely deem a flat profile very suspicious in itself. But there's no mention of the Hb-profile being suspicious when assessed in isolation. Only when compared with previous Tours.

I suggest AC probably transfused less in 2010, which is consistent with higher retics and arguably worse performances.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

MA also confirms that Bert does indeed have an exemption for a high HT. This was something that emerged a few months ago, but it was just suggestive at the time. So now we know that like Cunego, his natural or baseline HT is over 50%.

Do we really? Surely you don't need a baseline above 50% to get an exemption for a high HT? They have to allow for normal variation.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I take that to mean his 2010 Hb trend was "more or less" what you'd expect from a clean rider (i.e showing a significant decline from start-3rd week). Ashenden states; "There is a dilution of the haemoglobin as the cumulative impact of multiple days of stage racing leads to an influx of water into the circulation", so he would surely deem a flat profile very suspicious in itself. But there's no mention of the Hb-profile being suspicious when assessed in isolation. Only when compared with previous Tours.

It's open to a number of interpretations and I'm not sure what exactly was intended. However, I took it to mean that the individual values were ok, but the trend wasn't. To me, the the wording "characteristic signature" relates to a trend, not absolute values. He talks about inconsistency between races, then hemoglobin dilution, then the lack of the same characteristic trend. It seems odd that the comment about hemoglobin dilution is sandwiched between two comments about differences between races, if the hemoglobin trend is irrelevant to such differences.

I suggest AC probably transfused less in 2010, which is consistent with higher retics and arguably worse performances.

That's plausible too. If that's the case, its kinda sad and ironic that he busted after easing up on the juice. One wonders how he managed to be so lucky in the past

 

[L'arriviste]

Very interesting interview. MA says there is evidence that DEHP actually helps preserve stored red cells, I didn't know that.

A major argument used against the transfusion theory was that if plasma were stored and administered later separately it would also be in a DEHP-containing bag. MA refutes that very strongly. He doesn't just say plasma could have been stored in a DEHP-free bag, but that it normally is, because plasma is preserved better in those conditions. And of course he wasn't allowed to testify to that, so Bert's team made hay over the unlikelihood that there could have been two separate transfusions.

MA was also prevented from rebutting the argument that Bert would have had to take a huge amount of CB to get enough of it in a blood transfusion. That was the other major argument against transfusion. I think it's reasonable to conclude that had MA been allowed to testify on these two matters, it is very likely CAS would have concluded that it was a transfusion.

MA also confirms that Bert does indeed have an exemption for a high HT. This was something that emerged a few months ago, but it was just suggestive at the time. So now we know that like Cunego, his natural or baseline HT is over 50%.

As a scientist, I loved this statement by MA. Very respectful of individuals, very critical of the system:

Glad you answered my earlier question (probably unwittingly ) about whether I had read correctly that DEHP might have other per se relevance than a poor choice of blood bags.

I recall from our previous correspondence that you were very interested in the DEHP aspect. I wonder if, given my understanding that the DEHP test was new / uncommonly applied in August 2010, there could exist the possibility of some established practice of DEHP use in blood doping rather than this being a mere freak occurrence.

 

[GJB123]

Very interesting about the HT exemption. It's good the super high hemoglobin concentrations reported don't fly under the radar.

I thought the comments about higher retics, similar hgb, but a different hgb trend related to plasma expansion were interesting too. If we assume MA meant hgb trended flatter than in other races (consistent with higher than normal retics) that implies a different program than previous years. So in previous years might he have used more blood and plasma masking and less EPO? Or is it really possible that he doped less, yet had better form in previous years?

I liked the comment about legal process too. Unsettling indeed.

This might very well be true. Its is quite clear that AC wassn't at his best during 2010 and perhaps he got desparate, who knows.

Regards
GJ

 

[GJB123]

As a scientist, I loved this statement by MA. Very respectful of individuals, very critical of the system:

I told you before that legal truth can mean something quite different than actual truth. Personally as a man of the law I don't find it unsettling one bit that the proceedings (also for the burden of proof) are governed by rules. Yes, those rules may be imperfect, but they are designed to protect people in th eprocess and therefore serve a purpose (albeit not always finding the truth).

His statement on the diffrence between "lawyers" and "judges" I find quite baffling (but then I am not scientist). In my experience and in my mind there is no difference, both apply the rules and it wouldn't have made a scrap of difference if tha panel had been judges rather than lawyers.

Regards
GJ

 

[sniper]

I never said he didn't dope. It's very well possible he transfused, but it's not a (legal) fact there he (apparently) didn't exceed any limits. It's that where I defend him for, as well as (even more important) the lacking logics behind the clenbuterol. He didn't use clen in the Tour, there is no trace of clen use in the past and the clen-contaminated plasma is very weak as well. Also the fact that it's probably possible to test positive on legal supplements (considering the testing standard of 100ng/g for stimulants like clen in labs WADA bases itself on in doping cases) doesn't make things more clear-cut.

I can live with the (effect of the) suspension, as a moral sentence, although I would rather have seen him walk free for clen and have a serious blood doping case opened, if there is any possibility...

So now you believe AC transfused (see couple of posts back) but still find the contaminated plasma theory unlikely?
I'm still confused.

To me the WADA scenario was always the most plausible explanation, even though I have no clue about the science behind it.
Let's call it common sense, or, the writing's on the wall. We can also cal it "Humo". Or "AC initials on Puerto list", or "Plasticizers in AC's blood", or "AC didn't do a hairtest", or "AC+Bruyneel+Astana".

 

[GJB123]

You still don't get it, do you? Stating you don't understand the science shoud have made you say "I am going to shut up, because I will probably say something stupid everytime I use my keyboard".

Nilsson quite correctly stated (as I have on many occassions) that is it is likely AC doped one way or the other. However transfiusion was legally and still isn't on the table. The legal procedure wasn't about transfusion and there was no proof provided and no case to answer. That is what he is saying and he is correct.

Now even if we were to assume that transfusion took place (and note that even MA isn't stating unequivocally taht it took place) it might still not explain the clen-positive (that's the science part you admit to not understanding). If it is still more likely to have come from ingestion we could have a coincidence of two seperate events that are not necessarily interlinked.

The question then still remains how the clen got into AC's system. He could be innocent of any wrongdoing on that issue, in which case he should have walked. If they want to burn him for transfusion they should prosecute him for that and make the case for that. They couldn't so they didn't.

By the way. I am fine and happy with the case not being dragged out even longer. I still have my doubts as to the conclusion the CAS reached and the way in which they reached it. I still don't like the system whereby you have to proof your innocence, but I can certainly live and move on and let this be done with. More people should probably take that line.

Regards
GJ

 

[LaFlorecita]

Anyone who doesnt care about the issue of doping doesnt have the best interests of cycling and sport at heart. That attitude is sad and pathetic.

And since you are at it, I dont have the time of the day for Vino as well. That guy ruined the `07 Tour. The 2 of them are just as bad as each other. Well matched is what I say.

Oh boy there we go again...

 

[Von Mises]

If they want to burn him for transfusion they should prosecute him for that and make the case for that. They couldn't so they didn't.

If I am reading Ashenden corretcly, he indicates that the decison not to prosecute him for tranfusion was not made because they did not have enough evidence, but on legal grounds. The case started as clen-case, so they had to carry on as clen case and could not change it to tranfusion case even if new evidence started to point more and more on tranfusion.

 

[meat puppet]

Thanks for the link to the interview. Informative stuff. Quite damning too, especially when looked at on a level not refracted by the CAS ruling / legal discourse.

That said, I was pervertedly delighted when Ashenden pretty much confirmed my initial hunch re: the elliptical formulations in the CAS report being Bert's primary bargain when the ruling was made public. The document can be quoted as though it says he did not dope with an intent, and that's what he must have been after. It was the best he could get.

If you cannot win in the court of law, make sure you don't lose ugly, and schedule the rematch at the level of public opinion with the CAS-wording concealed in your rhetorical boxing mitts.

But yeah, the verdict read like a hybrid of a book by Hegel, a goverment memo and some political party's strategic document to begin with. Not that I'm familiar with that kinda stuff, god no no.

 

[B_Ugli]

I thought the Ashenden interview paints quite an interesting picture to the public about how they look at the blood profiles.

I am no scientist so maybe others on here with more expertise can help me with this question I have. Quite a few cyclists now including Ricco have claimed to have naturally high HT. I think Ricco had this from quite early in his pro career.

Clearly these guys know how to get around the system so how do the authorities know that their high haematocrit is natural as opposed to manipulated over such a long period so as to appear natural?

Surely the latter situation would enable them to evade testing positive on the basis that their values were being falsely misinterpreted on a favourable basis? I have thought for some time that the real doping problem is in Junior and U23 races and I dont know whether my latter hypothesis would support the idea of long term naturally high ht?

 

[GJB123]

I thought the Ashenden interview paints quite an interesting picture to the public about how they look at the blood profiles.

I am no scientist so maybe others on here with more expertise can help me with this question I have. Quite a few cyclists now including Ricco have claimed to have naturally high HT. I think Ricco had this from quite early in his pro career.

Clearly these guys know how to get around the system so how do the authorities know that their high haematocrit is natural as opposed to manipulated over such a long period so as to appear natural?

Surely the latter situation would enable them to evade testing positive on the basis that their values were being falsely misinterpreted on a favourable basis? I have thought for some time that the real doping problem is in Junior and U23 races and I dont know whether my latter hypothesis would support the idea of long term naturally high ht?

If I have read the interview correctly, they aren't quite sure. I beieve he says they tested AC independently when he claimed a natural high HT to secure a baseline. I couldn't tell how they make sure that the HT during that testing wasn't elevated by unnatural means. Perhaps somebody can expand on that.

Mind you, it seems quite a stretch to elevate it it unnaturally for such a baseline test as that woud mean that you have to keep it that high year-in, year-out also during off-season meaning non-stop manipulation. That seems highly risky to me both healthwise and from the point of getting found out.

Regards
GJ

 

[GJB123]

If I am reading Ashenden corretcly, he indicates that the decison not to prosecute him for tranfusion was not made because they did not have enough evidence, but on legal grounds. The case started as clen-case, so they had to carry on as clen case and could not change it to tranfusion case even if new evidence started to point more and more on tranfusion.

You are correct in that they naturally couldn't charge him with anything new in the procedure that was before CAS. However nothing to stop them from starting a blood passport case seperately unless the evidence for that isn't substantial and convincing enough. I think that is the case, beacuse even MA won't go on record that he is certain AC transfused (see Polish's post on MA reiterating that specifically).

Regards
GJ

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

Anyone who doesnt care about the issue of doping doesnt have the best interests of cycling and sport at heart. That attitude is sad and pathetic.

And since you are at it, I dont have the time of the day for Vino as well. That guy ruined the `07 Tour. The 2 of them are just as bad as each other. Well matched is what I say.

i would like to disagree, he made the tour of 07, coming back from that crash, winning 2(?) mountain stages, and the most epic tt ever... some extra blood or not, he was the tour of 07

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

That Tour is remembered for all the good reasons all because of Vino alright.

GTs are remembered for all the awesomeness... I don't remember the giro 09 for Di LUca getting caught, i remember it for beeing an awesome gt whith a crazy Italian guy, and an immensely stong russian guy.

 

[airstream]

LaFlorecita, explain to me please how the man who sank in his own lies a long time ago can be called "a human being everyone should be".

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

LaFlorecita, explain to me please how the man who sank in his own lies a long time ago can be called "a human being everyone should be".

it would increase the productivity of the world is everyone was as fit as Contador all right