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

[Nilsson]

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.

I think you don't understand the paradox. If you test for doping, you will find dopers. If you test more and better, you will find more. It's a pretty simple principle. Even if you manage to bring back the percentage of users under 1 percent, and you would test everything perfectly, you would still have more positives than you have now. Every positive case, due to good work, confirms cycling's image...

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.

The fact that you talk about 'riders think' proves that it starts and ends with the riders. It's a riders choice to dope. Corrupt authorities, lacking testing, etc. are circumstances that can influence the choice, but it's still his choice to do it...

 

[Race Radio]

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden

Excellent interview with Ashenden

 

[LaFlorecita]

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.

Your post makes me sad.

I can't understand how you can talk this way about such a great person that Alberto is.

 

[Cloxxki]

Your post makes me sad.

I can't understand how you can talk this way about such a great person that Alberto is.

Great people often have very dark sides. All that makes Alberto great is being nice to his underpriviledged brother, and the genes he was born with that allow him to be a world class bike rider. The rest is just being a guy on a bike, with a race licence.
Yes he keeps his cool under pressure. He's a bike racer. Try any local crit or CX race to understand what it takes. Any TdF level rider (there are 500-1000 of those on any given year, even if just selected teams are invited and make a team selection to suit their tactics), would be a superstar with Alberto's legs and lungs. They all train hard and smart. They all want it, badly. That's how they became pro's, even if they had less of a genetic tailwind than Alberto's.

I hope you will find a new hero soon. Someone in everyday life, with more everyday life accomplishments, that can really be an influence on you in a good way. It's easy to pick the wrong hero in sports, and especially in pro cycling. I was like you, but learning what I did on here, made me realistic. I prefer to be disappointed than clueless. You keep on reading here, so it seems you aspire to not be clueless any longer. Step away from the dark side, don't be dependent on it.
All the pro peloton is, is the local crit crowd; minus the day job, plus better genes, plus much more fame. Being on TV should not make one a hero, although reality TV tried to make it such.

 

[skidmark]

Also something interesting is that Ashenden said that his reticulocyte results were unusual for him in the 2010 Tour and that they were higher then at any other time of his other major victories. And of course he says there was a sharp peak in plasticisers residues that was found on the Tuesday which werent there on the Monday.

Yeah, great article. What WAS up with Contador in Tour 2010? This interview just makes it more intriguing. Was he off-form and desperate? Does this imply that he didn't dope for his other victories, or just not as much/as obviously?

Either way, reading this makes me more angry that Ashenden stepped down from the Bio Passport panel.

 

[Nilsson]

@Race Radio:

Also something interesting is that Ashenden said that his reticulocyte results were unusual for him in the 2010 Tour and that they were higher then at any other time of his other major victories. And of course he says there was a sharp peak in plasticisers residues that was found on the Tuesday which werent there on the Monday.

Nothing new in comparison to what was already known from the CAS-award. By far the most interesting, I think, is the fact that, considering he doped (more than usually) in the TDF 2010, it didn't really seem to help him. If not the opposite...

 

[LaFlorecita]

Whats wrong with people criticising him?

Cloxxki criticised him for doping. I find nothing sad about that. I find this blind loyalty sad.

If you want to see what Alberto is like read the interview with Michael Ashenden on the link that Race Radio posted.

Edit: its is also up on CN now.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ashenden-speaks-out-on-leaving-biological-passport-panel

The reason why he wont appeal is that he has been found to lie out through his teeth and he doesnt have a leg to stand on.

I have read it. And I can't seem to find where the bolded is stated.

 

[LaFlorecita]

@Cloxxki;

I don't need another hero. I have one already and I prefer him over anyone else.

He's not my hero because he's "clean", or a great cyclist. No, he's my hero because he's everything a great human being should be.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Very interesting about Contador.

* His retics were higher.
* His Hb was "more or less what I would have expected", but apparently differed from previous victories.
* He was arguably weaker than in previous victories.

All of this can be explained by less blood doping but the same EPO-microdosing.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Nothing new in comparison to what was already known from the CAS-award. By far the most interesting, I think, is the fact that, considering he doped (more than usually) in the TDF 2010, it didn't really seem to help him. If not the opposite...

It doesn't say he doped more than usual, it says his retics were higher. This could just as well be the result of transfusing less cc's than usual, which is also consistent with his Hb being pretty much as expected, but not in line with his other Tour (or GT?) wins.

 

[LaFlorecita]

To be honest with you, you would be better off reading the linterview from nyvelocity. Thats where the full interview is published. CN has only published part of the interview. Race Radio has already posted the link to it.

Anyway i will quote the part of the interview I am on about:

Since the ruling was announced, I have read bits and pieces of the media and noted that Contador has championed the panel’s ruling as evidence to reassure the public that he did not knowingly dope. (Editor's note: Contador just did so again today.) Before the ruling was announced, he had referred to supplement contamination as a preposterous speculation. I can’t help but reflect on paragraph 467 of the ruling which notes that Contador’s testimony was that he did not take any supplements on the Tuesday or Wednesday. So according to his sworn testimony it was an impossibility that the clenbuterol came from a supplement.

"Therefore, it seems to me, that in order for the panel’s finding to be correct Contador must not have told the truth about taking a supplement. But that brings with it an entirely new set of contradictions, which to my mind make it implausible that Contador lied. One must question, as did his lawyers during their submissions, how on earth he knew which supplement not to disclose. Companies don’t label their products as being contaminated, so I just cannot grasp how he could have known which product to lie about. It just does not add up."

I read it on that site.

But, if I'm reading it correctly, he says that either the panel came to the wrong conclusion, or Alberto lied. Now if I read the bolded, it makes me think that Ashenden is saying Alberto spoke the truth. Because he could not have known which supplement to lie about.

Edit: I could be wrong though.

 

[Benotti69]

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.

 

[sniper]

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.

yep, the story makes sense, adds up, sounds plausible, etc.
in fact, it always made sense, always added up, and always sounded plausible (just not to a couple of posters on here who were in denial and are now likely to stay low for a while).

 

[sniper]

Nothing new in comparison to what was already known from the CAS-award. By far the most interesting, I think, is the fact that, considering he doped (more than usually) in the TDF 2010, it didn't really seem to help him. If not the opposite...

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

 

[L'arriviste]

Did I understand it correctly that there might be a bona fide use for DEHP plasticisers in blood doping beyond the suggestion of a poor choice of blood bags?

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I think you don't understand the paradox. If you test for doping, you will find dopers. If you test more and better, you will find more. It's a pretty simple principle. Even if you manage to bring back the percentage of users under 1 percent, and you would test everything perfectly, you would still have more positives than you have now. Every positive case, due to good work, confirms cycling's image...

It is a pretty simply principle. I don't think you realize how few dopers can actually be caught, even by the best testing methods available. Impartial and thorough testing will not lead to a massive increase in AAFs. The only situation where your paradox would be a real problem is if retrospective testing was carried out across the board, when new tests became available.

The fact that you talk about 'riders think' proves that it starts and ends with the riders. It's a riders choice to dope. Corrupt authorities, lacking testing, etc. are circumstances that can influence the choice, but it's still his choice to do it...

Being pedantic, what I "talk" about proves nothing.

Lets assume a scenario where doping was the norm and imagine a rider suddenly decides he wants to change that. He would need to get agreement from his colleagues to make changes for the collective benefit, or he will lose his place in the peloton. So, some kind of organisation would need to happen, perhaps a "union of cyclists".......it starts with the organisation, and ends with the riders. JMO

Sorry, off topic

 

[Polish]

I agree.

I cant see how the Contador fan club can dance their way around this one.

Ashenden's opinion is highly respected and I cant see how Contador's fans can dismiss him.

Well I suppose they could quote Mr Ashenden himself:

First of all, let me reiterate that I did not say Contador transfused

Yes, Mr Ashenden iterated it and then reiterated it.
"I did NOT say Contador transfused"
He goes on to add...its "possible" he transfused.
Oh, its "possible". Sure its "possible".
It is also "possible" he did not transfuse.

 

[sniper]

Well I suppose they could quote Mr Ashenden himself:

Yes, Mr Ashenden iterated it and then reiterated it.
"I did NOT say Contador transfused"
He goes on to add...its "possible" he transfused.
Oh, its "possible". Sure its "possible".
It is also "possible" he did not transfuse.

I'm not sure MA would appreciate you putting words in his mouth.
nowhere is he saying it's possible AC doped.
rather, he's saying AC's blood patterns are fully consistent with, and can only plausibly be explained by assuming, blooddoping.
(which indeed doesn't equal saying AC doped.)

 

[sniper]

Well I suppose they could quote Mr Ashenden himself:

Yes, Mr Ashenden iterated it and then reiterated it.
"I did NOT say Contador transfused"
He goes on to add...its "possible" he transfused.
Oh, its "possible". Sure its "possible".
It is also "possible" he did not transfuse.

I'm not sure MA would appreciate you putting words in his mouth.
nowhere is he saying it's possible AC doped.
rather, he's saying AC's blood patterns are fully consistent with, and can only plausibly be explained by assuming, blooddoping.
(which indeed doesn't equal saying AC doped.)

 

[Polish]

I'm not sure MA would appreciate you putting words in his mouth.
nowhere is he saying it's possible AC doped.
rather, he's saying AC's blood patterns are fully consistent with, and can only plausibly be explained by assuming, blooddoping.
(which indeed doesn't equal saying AC doped.)

I used a direct quote from the article.
What words did I put in his mouth??

Mr Ashenden said "First of all, let me reiterate that I did not say Contador transfused"

Why did he have to reiterate that?

 

[Cloxxki]

Since you used a direct quote why dont you read the direct quote from Benotti69 which he posted a page back. I notice you didnt use that "direct quote".

Look at the way people have interpreted his interview in general. Look at the headline that Velonation uses:

Ashenden raises questions about Contador’s blood levels in 2010 Tour

What about a full blood flushing with UV light treatment? That could stuff him with plasticizers and not affect his levels.

 

[sniper]

I used a direct quote from the article.
What words did I put in his mouth??

Mr Ashenden said "First of all, let me reiterate that I did not say Contador transfused"

Why did he have to reiterate that?

you said

He goes on to add...its "possible" he transfused.

I couldn't find that anywhere in the interview though.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I agree.

I cant see how the Contador fan club can dance their way around this one.

Ashenden's opinion is highly respected and I cant see how Contador's fans can dismiss him.

It's quite simple.

I don't care if he doped. I simply don't know. Therefore I choose to trust him. Call me clueless if you want, but that's just how I am.

 

[sniper]

(...)

I stand corrected. sorry polish.

 

[Vino attacks everyone]

It's quite simple.

I don't care if he doped. I simply don't know. Therefore I choose to trust him. Call me clueless if you want, but that's just how I am.

Even better, i don't care, and no i do NOT think he didn't dope, i just don't care :=)