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

[airstream]

Uhm...what? So if AC dopes, everybody dopes? But if he's not then none does? How about, AC dopes to the gills and is this eras Armstrong while Schleck and Evans and Sanchez are like Ullrich, more talented but cannot compete with AC because of all the juice?

typical line for most of contador fans. and yet if he's on form, the opponents' fate is the fight for 2-... places. the likelihood, that the rivals themselves are able to improve greatly, isnt even taken into account.

 

[Angliru]

At least, they didn't like to talk about doping and treated this issue quite reservedly. The guy declared himself the face of a new clean cycling after the most doping ever 2007 Tour. Ah, its so pity that Franke didn't manage to organize a press-conference then. Apparently, someone thanked him a lot for that. Nobody lies about doping so enthusiastically as Contador. It seems the proverbial modesty helps him in it. How does a theoretically сlean rider (Wiggins) have to handle a cheat? The argument on Schleck is highly far-fetched, or you think he needed some nutrition to show more than mediocre results in 2006?

If you're going to condemn Contador then you have to at the same time be suspicious of Frank's payments to Fuentes regardless of what he claims they were for. I can't see how you can dance around that.

 

[Benotti69]

Don't you see the contradiction here? You can't prove innocence, and you shouldn't try it as well. If you try to prove your innocence you will, by definition, look suspicious. It's better to catch the ones who are guilty. Although you have to keep in mind that's problematic in relation to public opinion as well. If you look for doping, you'll find doping. It's the paradox of serious anti-doping policy. Cycling has the reputation and every positive test, every effort to make te sport (relatively) cleaner will confirm the reputation or make it worse.

It doesn't mean cycling should give up the fight though, definitely not, but we have to understand (and accept) that things probably will not get much better. If a fierce battle against doping is reality, so is athletes getting caught and damaging your reputation. Most people will not understand the paradox of fighting doping...

No you cant prove innocence but you can do your best to remove the doubt.

There has been a decline in the number of tests. A few riders have commented. Why is there not an outcry from the peloton who are sick of seeing mainstream media only write about doping in cycling? Are they that stupid, no why because they dope!

To clean up the sport it has to start with the riders. UCI is not gonna do it. Teams run by the likes of Bruyneel, Riis, Gianetti etc are not going to do it, so it needs to start with the riders. Not easy I know but they will be the main beneficiaries.

 

[hrotha]

The argument on Schleck is highly far-fetched, or you think he needed some nutrition to show more than mediocre results in 2006?

What.
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider_palm.asp?riderid=75&year=2006&all=1&current=0

Most people would say Fränk took a significant step forward in 2006.

 

[airstream]

If you're going to condemn Contador then you have to at the same time be suspicious of Frank's payments to Fuentes regardless of what he claims they were for. I can't see how you can dance around that.

Again, about 100 riders were implicated into OP and only 10-15 of them were punished. I don't call Contador a doper in regards to OP. Do you seriously think flew over Peyresourde being clean?

hrotha, I'm saying about Andy. Though, UCI is always entitled to challenge a decision of a cycling federation, but it didn't happen in the case of Frank.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Try me....Please.

Hitch already explained it.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Nobody lies about doping so enthusiastically as Contador. It seems the proverbial modesty helps him in it.

1)Tell me everything you know. You seem to have some inside knowledge.
2) What's proverbial about modesty?

 

[LaFlorecita]

How about answering to my post insted of just calling me a "hater" on the sole basis that I don't like dopers and that I think AC is a doper.

Show me then, what part of your post should I have answered to?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Its not alright for Contador to do it if others are doing it. Like i said why couldnt he be like Wiggins and Pinotti with his stance. He would of earned my respect. And if there is some thing that happens with the Schlecks, Evans with regards to doping they will be ridiculed by me in the same way Contador has been. I am consistent in my opinions on dopers. You are nothing but a flip flopper whose opinions and stance on doping changes like the weather. You dont have cycling`s best interests at heart if you dont want to stop doping. You said you dont care about doping.

You are only interested in whats best for Contador over the best interests of cycling so thanks for clarifying your point to me La Florecita

And like i said to La Florecita you can hold me to my statement when i said Wiggins wont put the sport in the situation that Conyador just put it. Wiggins and Pinotti dont come out with half hearted anti-doping comment for PR, they are vehemently anti-doping and know by the context of what they are saying they mean it. So i say good on them and i dont care if you are fanboy of Sir Bertie and Valverde, coz they are 2 Spanish speaking riders i despise for what they have done to cycling. They have dragged the sport through the mud.

As for La Florecita her signature says she maybe biased. I dont mind her being biased to defending Contador with chaingate or any racing issue but not with doping. I stand by what i say. She said she doesnt care about doping in general and her opinion on it changes where the wind blows. She sheds a tear for a cheat in Contador but if the Schlecks, Evans or Wiggins were in the situation that Contador was just in she would be off celebrating for joy at their demise. That is an inconsistent approach to the issue and you are as bad as her if you feel that way as well. Dont leave your blinded fan loyalty to Contador compromise your opinion on doping. I didnt celebrate what happenned to Contador and i dont celebrated any positive doping test of a rider. Its bad for the sport i love.

It's really bothering me that you continue to misinterpret my posts.

This is what happened:

You said you don't understand why I dislike anti-doping Wiggins and like "cheat" Alberto.

I replied with: "I don't care about doping".

As in: Doping matters don't change my likes or dislikes for riders.

I like Contador as a cyclist because he's exciting to watch. I love him as a person because from what I've been able to gather from interviews, articles etc. he's one of the nicest guys out there.

That are the only things I take into account.

 

[airstream]

1)Tell me everything you know. You seem to have some inside knowledge.
2) What's proverbial about modesty?

there is no inside knowledge. just a slight dash, harmoniously сomplementing the portrait of "100% perfection"

 

[LaFlorecita]

there is no inside knowledge. just a slight dash, harmoniously сomplementing the portrait of "100% perfection"

Your words..

 

[LaFlorecita]

Gooner, after re-reading the last few pages of this thread, I've come to the conclusion you're almost as obsessed with Wiggo as I am with Alberto. And that is not a compliment.

 

[Benotti69]

I<snip>

I like Contador as a cyclist because he's exciting to watch. I love him as a person because from what I've been able to gather from interviews, articles etc. he's one of the nicest guys out there.

That are the only things I take into account.

I hope for Contador's sake it is purely platonic.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I hope for Contador's sake it is purely platonic.

 

[The Hitch]

also what David Millar said when he refused to do his turn on the front on the Champ Elysees for Farrar in 2009 left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Never heard about that one, what happened?

 

[Benotti69]

Never heard about that one, what happened?

wondered had he agreed verbally to ride for Sky at that stage

 

[Caruut]

wondered had he agreed verbally to ride for Sky at that stage

Oddly for a Brit, I dislike Sky and Wiggins. Their conduct is just stupidly arrogant, all these holier than though pronouncements and the like, snatching riders so aggresively, doesn't sit so well. I get that Sky were posting up big money, but I also don't like that they got a free pass to the WT.

Have always liked Cav though, so I dunno what to do now.

 

[Caruut]

I dont know if you have read Millar`s book yet. I am looking at the book again now as i tell you the details of it.

Well in it he was on about this. Millar said everyone done their job for Farrar on the Champs Elysees except Wiggins. Millar went on to say himself and Vandevelde were leading the peloton into the final km and when Millar peeled off he was expecting Wiggins to be in position to set up Farrar`s final sprint but he was nowhere to be seen and Millar said Wiggins was about 80 places back in the peloton. Millar said the team gave everything for him for 3 weeks and Wiggins was asked to give something back that day. Millar was furious over it. Millar felt as though as he wasnt bothered and didnt try for it that day.

Was that why they had their huge falling out? Man you can see why Millar would be ****ed at that - I'd heard that he thought Brad didn't give his team suitable credit, I remember a line like "Say what you want about Cav, at least the first thing he does is thank his team for the work they've put in for him"

 

[Nilsson]

No you cant prove innocence but you can do your best to remove the doubt.

Agree with that, although you still have to deal with the paradox. Really looking for doping means finding doping. Like I said, it's questionable if you'll succeed to remove the doubt. It's the hard way, but the only way.

There has been a decline in the number of tests. A few riders have commented. Why is there not an outcry from the peloton who are sick of seeing mainstream media only write about doping in cycling? Are they that stupid, no why because they dope!

There has been decline in testing, yes, according the UCI due to more targeted testing. Which could be right (it's probably not coincidental that the riders who ring the alarm are the ones that are less tested, for that matter) although there have also been mentions of races where has not been tested at all - which would be problematic...

For the second part of your remark, I think it's a different question. There have been lots of guys who told they were sick of seeing mainstream media only write about doping in cycling. Andreas Klöden even boycots the German media, and that says it all, isn't it?

To clean up the sport it has to start with the riders. UCI is not gonna do it. Teams run by the likes of Bruyneel, Riis, Gianetti etc are not going to do it, so it needs to start with the riders. Not easy I know but they will be the main beneficiaries.

Absolutely, everything starts and ends with the riders...

 

[Cloxxki]

According to nu.nl , El Pais has reported that Contador has decided to not appeal to Swiss courts. "My lawyers have advised me that there is virtually no chance of success".

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Agree with that, although you still have to deal with the paradox. Really looking for doping means finding doping. Like I said, it's questionable if you'll succeed to remove the doubt. It's the hard way, but the only way. '...'

I don't think the paradox is that challenging. The are so many false negatives, even a comprehensive and impartial testing regime would not suddenly lead to a flood of positives. What is possible is to gradually sink the lid on doping, by gradually improving the testing. The passport would be a step in the right direction, if they continued to collect enough data to sanction people.

Absolutely, everything starts and ends with the riders...

Seriously? How exactly might individual riders bring about an end to the insidious corruption in cycling's heirarchy? Anti doping ideals will never be respected while riders think the unwritten rule allows some to bribe their way out of trouble.

 

[LaFlorecita]

According to nu.nl , El Pais has reported that Contador has decided to not appeal to Swiss courts. "My lawyers have advised me that there is virtually no chance of success".

He also says that even if the Swiss court overrules the CAS ruling they would send the case back to CAS and Alberto says that he doesn't trust CAS anymore.

 

[airstream]

He also says that even if the Swiss court overrules the CAS ruling they would send the case back to CAS and Alberto says that he doesn't trust CAS anymore.

If he had said otherwise, it would have meant he doped and trust has nothing to do with it.

So we are the champions, my friend

 

[LaFlorecita]

If he had said otherwise, it would have meant he doped and trust has nothing to do with it.

So we are the champions, my friend

Why has trust got nothing to do with it? He says he can't trust sports courts anymore.

And who are the champions?

 

[Cloxxki]

Why has trust got nothing to do with it? He says he can't trust sports courts anymore.

And who are the champions?

A dirty rider of course can't trust CAS. They are the least corruptable factor in doping. If justice takes place, it's by their hands.

What's Alberto's word worth anyway when it comes to trust and doping? His coach was Landis' dope dealer. There is no shame, because it's all out in the open. Your random night dreams about say smurfs hiding in your handbag are closer to reality than the words coming from Alberto's mouth on doping. Snap out of it girl, he's a great human but a nasty hardcore lying deceiving currupted doper.