Can Contador just shut up and go away?

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 11, 2010
777
0
0
theswordsman said:
All Alberto wanted in the way of support was for Astana to say hey world, that story is a joke, it didn't come from our people. Or maybe a good luck, Alberto, we hope we're all still Tour winners when this is over. Instead there were cricket sounds.
Poor Aldirto.:(
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
flicker said:
Sorry your man Alberto is reaching deep into his pocket, a pocketful of douche baggage.
aint my man flickie ;) but he apparently got his pockets filled by DBs at Astana in 2009:rolleyes:
 
nowhereman said:
1/2 wall of text
My reading comprehension is fine. Desperate fanbois shouldn't be concerned with the babblings of some intardnet forum. We are free to speculate and accuse here b/c...read this slowly...this is not a courtroom. We have no burden of proof, no need to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.

You, theswordsman and whoever else can write pages of passionate prose about how AC is the victim and we're all bullies or ignorant ****s, etc. It (thankfully) won't matter the least. Set up a PayPal defense fund for AC or send Pat $25,000 to $500,000 for a new Clenalyzer 5000; that's effort well spent.

nowhereman said:
If your answer is Yes, there's no reason to talk any further.
"Yes". However, I suspect you will talk further.
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
Mambo95 said:
Yes, he should shut up.

He seems to be in some delusional world where he can expect a hearing at which he can defend himself. What sort of world of his is this?
Are they actually doing a hearing - I thought they were just throwing him in a pond to see if he'd float...

jmax22 said:
This is his quote from the article this thread refers to:

"I’m tested every six days during the year, at home, in competition, when I train. I have always been controlled and I have always been fine."
I'm happy to admit that sentence sounds very much like the horrible "I never tested positive". But when I read it, I couldn't help thinking that it's either translated from Spanish or said by Conti in English, a language he sometimes struggles with, and so his meaning could be a bit lost in translation. I'm not sticking up for him with this, but it sounds different when it's like this than when the actual words "I never tested postive" are repeatedly said by, say, an American. Along with the words "I like my story"... Contador has been very clear to state he has never doped. He's been very clear he's happy for his samples to be retested whenever. Also I think he's been very tactful in not attacking any and everything said about him (like the rumoured plastic and the rumoured HUMO source).

biopass said:
Contador:
"Sorry for the inconvenience man, but the positive testresult only came because those f*ckn farmers doped their cattle! These f*ckn spanish farmers f*ck the rules and f*ckn dope their cattle and made me a poor innocent victim of f*ckn contaminated meat!"
Sorry, doesn't quite sound like Conti - sounds more like an anon internet poster who should lay off the pills for a few days... (or get back on them).

biopass said:
WADA:
"19.431 samples of animals from Spain showed no trace of Clenbuterol."
The details of the case itself have been discussed endlessly in other threads, but please confirm to me that the 20k samples of meat were tested to the same level that Conti's blood was. To use this as an argument it is quite key as the Conti case is only here exactly because of the extreme level they were able to test his blood to...

lean said:
it's not a matter of being 100% convinced. it is a matter of what is more likely when you review all of the facts and the timing of events in their entirety. also, you can't just "forget" about the plasticizer data. because it is an imperfect test, the plasiticizer data carries less weight than the clenbuterol but it most certainly factors in.
I'm not 100% convinced, but when I (internally) condemn someone I prefer to do it based on being more convinced than not that someone's guilty. To you there's no plausible explanation apart from doping, that's fine. To me the "smoking gun" in this case is more like a faint picture of something that might as well just be a water pistol. I'm not saying I believe the meat story, but it's not impossible to me either - in the end I think it could still come from somewhere completely unknown and unprovable.

As for the plastic I may have chosen the wrong words: I didn't mean "forget it" in that sense, more in the sense that it's unofficial, it's rumour. As someone else noted we don't actually even know which method they used for the test - if it was even actually done.

However I do completely agree that the low level of clen could be because of a transfusion and that the plastic could be backing that up - I'm just not resigned to accept it just like that because it can all too easily be explained by other factors. Just like an adverse blood value - the fact alone that it's statistically rare only means it happens rarely. It still happens.

lean said:
WRONG :( catching dopers and sending the message that testing is rigorous is a very good thing no matter what the outcome/sanctions that result from this case are. i can't believe i have to explain that one.

...

i have to agree that this isn't the most clear cut case i've ever seen but only because of the decision to use a more sensitive test. do you believe contador when he says he never doped and has never done anything wrong? seriously? you realize he's won multiple grand tours in dominating fashion in an era of doping riding for ONCE/Liberty, Disco, & Astana? do you think he did all of those things on bread and water? you lend credibility to this person's comments but none to a scientific plasticizer test?
I think it's funny you can simply, and in capital letters, state that I'm wrong to have an opinion of my own. I can't believe I have to explain that one... I also can't believe you didn't understand what I wrote - sorry about that, must be my fault.
Just for the record; I think it's great to catch and ban dopers - full stop.
But just as you yourself point out it's not the most clear cut case and the case is not about obvious, long term blood manipulation. Even if the Clen pos is because of clen abuse it could still very well be about losing a bit of baby fat - hardly the darkest of doping stories. I just wish that when a rider of Conti's stature is tested positive it was for something more significant then that. If he'd been positive for Perflouro-whats-its-name or some masking agent I'd been saying completely different things about the case...

I'm completely uninterested in the judicial side of the discussion (the strict liability and reversed responsibility of proof) as far as this case goes - all I'm interested in there is if I feel there's proof he's a hardcore doper - and I don't. The strict liability is only interesting to me in a discussion of whether it's a good or bad idea and which situations is should be so (if any).

lean said:
3. contador saying what you'd expect from someone who is innocent. sorry bro, this has ZERO influence as this has been all but perfected by liars the world over ;)
Please note I didn't say that as a defence or to point to his innonce. I noted it because the OP vehemently and very aggressively bemoaned the simple fact that Conti has a voice and a right to speak. In that context it's perfectly acceptable to point out that Conti only speaks what an innocent person in his place would.

The argument that liars would say the same thing is not better than what comes from"woman in mob" in The Life of Brian. Ever seen it?

Woman in mob: "Only the true saviour would deny his divinity"

So basically if Conti denies doping, it's just another proof of his guilt??
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
sniper said:
Doping evidence has already been found. only question is whether he'll officially be found guilty.
Nobody just "thinks" he's guilty.
There is just a number of sane people who go by the facts at hand and make a plausible inference from these facts.
There are others who "think" AC's unguilty, though any arguments are not presented and available facts to the contrary are ignored or dismissed as rumors.
Evidence of minute traces of Clen has been found - some people, myself included, might have an issue with the strict liability position and hence argue that it does not proof doping. We might also argue that some people do indeed then "just think" he's guilty if they ignore that there are issues with strict liability. We might still agree with you, though, that according to the rules he should be banned based purely on the strict liability - whether we think it's a fair process or not.

I have no doubt that a number of sane people do as you put forth - I can also tell you that a number of sane people beg to differ. Please don't infer from an opinion on this whether people are sane and not, that insults your own intelligence.

There are no doubt people who think AC is innocent. Some of us believe there's a possibility he's innocent - there's a difference there, please note it. There are several arguments presented to establish why certain people think there's a possibility he's innocent - it appears, though, that certain people choose to ignore those arguments, which is fine. Ask yourself this: Has anybody in this thread argued that AC is definitely innocent? I haven't seen it. What I have seen is several people argue that he might not be guilty. Again, please note the difference... Please also note the original premise of this whole thread was that he was definitely guilty and as such he should have no right to a voice. That is the point some of us take issue with...

sniper said:
By the way: so you buy the steak-story over the bloodtransfusion story?
Is it possible not to buy one story over the other, but simply have the opinion that neither is certain to be right?

sniper said:
- an anonymous but in all likelihood reliable source in the HUMO (nb: I haven't seen AC file charges against the HUMO)

- the plasticizers (nb: though a rumor it is, it is still a rumor, and AC has not addressed it in any of his public performances)
Personally I like that he doesn't comment on rumours. It's show class IMO.

sniper said:
- AC's initials on Fuentes' list (nb: I haven't heard AC address that ever. Jaksche, a Fuentes customer, has confirmed the initials were
Contador's.)
I don't really know much about the initials, but definitly remember reading in the clinic that AC was indeed someone else... Also don't forget that that for "AC" the direction was "Nada o egal JJ"... Not the heaviest proof, wouldn't you say?

sniper said:
- the fact that AC won 3 TdF's and a couple of other GT's amid doped riders (haven't heard AC complain about other doped riders ever)

Now I challenge you (and others AC fanboys): give me one piece of data concerning AC's CLEN-positive that cannot be explained by the bloodtransfusion theory.
Personally I believe many of the top riders are clean - so I can also find it credible that AC is. Sue me... (or you can call me Al if you want).

I'll give you a challenge back: Give one piece of data that cannot be explained by a mutant cow from Mars putting it in his hot milk before he went to bed the night before. I can come up with more if you want - it doesn't prove any points, though... Lately Roger Penrose has documented that there might not be a Big Bang - so what? Doesn't mean either theory is more right than the other.

Dr. Maserati said:
Again a word of caution.
The IO report (on page 32)stated that "For those samples sent to the Lausanne Laboratory, the UCI requested expedited analysis of the negative results no later than 72 hours from the time samples were received by the laboratory" - no such arrangement was done with the Cologne lab but they did have negative results issued within '10 working days'.

This does not mean that a 'no negative' test can be declared positive - it may mean it is required for further testing and evaluation.
This is covered in WADAs International Standard for Laboratories.
So a turnaround of a month to declare an AAF is both normal and acceptable.
Thanks Doc, Hadn't seen that before and the time-lag is mentioned in so many places, so definitely important info.

sniper said:
hm. think Dave was merely saying (a) people get executed in cases where there is far less clear-cut evidence than there is in AC's case and (b) AC is not being hanged, but merely being banned for two (?) years, and will nonetheless remain one of the richest (ex)riders on the planet, so will really have very little to complain afterwards.
So the amount of required certainty diminishes with the wealth accrued? Lovely judicial system you've got going there...
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JPM London said:
<snipped for brevity>


The details of the case itself have been discussed endlessly in other threads, but please confirm to me that the 20k samples of meat were tested to the same level that Conti's blood was. To use this as an argument it is quite key as the Conti case is only here exactly because of the extreme level they were able to test his blood to...
I found this doing a very quick search of Clen testing in livestock - this article relates to 1997 but even then they were able to test for minute quantities of clen in cattle.

The calibration curve for clenbuterol in hair was linear in the range 20–5000 pg/mg. The limit of detection of clenbuterol was 16 pg/mg in hair and 0.14 ng/ml in urine. Hair testing was effective after 7–10 days of treatment, and concentrations were in the range of 20 to 4372 pg/mg. Urinalysis can detect clenbuterol for up to two weeks after discontinuation of the drug. Conveniently, this is around the time when the hair samples attain greatest sensitivity. Therefore, the combination of the two matrices appears to be the method of choice for testing for the illegal use of drugs in meat-producing animals.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
JPM London said:
I have no doubt that a number of sane people do as you put forth - I can also tell you that a number of sane people beg to differ. Please don't infer from an opinion on this whether people are sane and not, that insults your own intelligence.
You're right, I shouldn't make any judgements in terms of sanity. Apologies for that.

Anyway: What strikes me is that most who now think AC is a blooddoper, already thought he was a blooddoper way before he tested positive.
Then, since August, we get one confirmation after the other:
he tests positive, on the second restday, rumours about plascticizers, the HUMO story, the fictive contaminated-steak story..etc.. in other words: all pure uncut confirmations of what many already thought.
Of course, I'll be the first to admit that chance/coincidence can never be excluded as an explanatory model, but to say that there is a 50-50 percent chance AC is innocent, well, not me. I'd rather say the chances of AC being a blooddoper are 90-10 (guilty-innocent), on the basis of what we know thus far.

Consider also that people who know more about it all than we (or at least I) do, such as Heulot, Jaksche, UCI and WADA, to name just a few, all seem to believe AC is guilty of doping and do not buy the steak-story, not even as a possibility.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JPM London said:
I'm not going to say I'm convinced he's innocent, but I'm far from convinced he's guilty as well - and that's the key problem Berzin is pointing to about the clen positive; that it's not very significant on it's own (and forget the plastic, cos no official party has confirmed it and so it's only rumour for the moment).
But it is. Very significant.
JPM London said:
If all they have actually ever found in him is a tiny bit of clen, then this case will not do anything for fight against doping other than underline the situation that we have a bunch of people firing in the dark against anything that moves cos they need to show they're doing something but have no idea what and how to do it. Oh yeah, for the same reason we can only fire at the famous riders if somebody hears about it...
A "tiny amount of Clen" is too much when there is no threshold - this was set by WADA and accepted by the UCI.

The IO report states that certain samples (10) from targeted tests were sent to Cologne "to complement those performed by Lausanne Laboratory and that a focus should be placed on the analysis of new substances and/or methods drugs and/or with new analytical methods in use by the Cologne laboratory".

In short - those samples were sent to Cologne to detect that minute traces of PEDs.

JPM London said:
MAYBE the reason he feels he's lacking support from Astana -and complains about money not paid - is because he's actually innocent. Just maybe...

I haven't heard him say "I never tested positive", what I have heard though is him saying he's never doped, never done anything wrong and that he therefore feels very disillusioned with the whole situation and most of the time feels like hanging up his boots (or bike as it may be). Incidentally to my mind the last bit is NOT to "threaten that if he gets suspended he will stop".

To be honest I don't think the case is very clear cut and I think most of his behaviour and comments are in line with what would come from an innocent person.
For many who dope they justify it by believing "everyone (or the majority) dopes" - so when they are caught they feel an injustice - a bit like being singled out for speeding when in a line of traffic doing the same speed.

His public comments are no different than what we heard from Basso, Landis or Valverde.
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
sniper said:
You're right, I shouldn't make any judgements in terms of sanity. Apologies for that.

Anyway: What strikes me is that most who now think AC is a blooddoper, already thought he was a blooddoper way before he tested positive.
...
And sorry for taking it (kinda) personal - I was just in that kind of mood. I for one can dish out far worse sometimes (don't think I've done it on here though) so should be able to have a laugh at something that's not even anything but a tiny slight joke. Sorry :)

I think you're striking a main point here. Because of what this positive is, it's not really liable to change a lot of people's minds. If I thought he was clean before, I can live happily on and call it "insignificant". If I believed him a doper before, it's just the proof I need.

Dr. Maserati said:
For many who dope they justify it by believing "everyone (or the majority) dopes" - so when they are caught they feel an injustice - a bit like being singled out for speeding when in a line of traffic doing the same speed.

His public comments are no different than what we heard from Basso, Landis or Valverde.
Yeah, really unfortunate, the psychological thing. I like the traffic analogy - ever felt pressured to drive faster than you like because the psycho behind you is almost inside your trunk? No wonder it can be difficult NOT to dope (apart from all the egotistical reasons)...

Re Basso, Landis and ValvPiti I'm not sure I agree - but that might be mainly because of the more serious allegations they faced - or because ones recollection get tainted when viewed in hindsight. ValvPiti definitely did sound ridiculous as did Basso when trying to dodge the "is that your dog?" questions. Landis just didn't come across as very sincere in my optics - I dunno why, but I'm happy to believe (hope?) in Conti a bit longer.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
But it is. Very significant.

A "tiny amount of Clen" is too much when there is no threshold - this was set by WADA and accepted by the UCI.

The IO report states that certain samples (10) from targeted tests were sent to Cologne "to complement those performed by Lausanne Laboratory and that a focus should be placed on the analysis of new substances and/or methods drugs and/or with new analytical methods in use by the Cologne laboratory".

In short - those samples were sent to Cologne to detect that minute traces of PEDs.



For many who dope they justify it by believing "everyone (or the majority) dopes" - so when they are caught they feel an injustice - a bit like being singled out for speeding when in a line of traffic doing the same speed.

His public comments are no different than what we heard from Basso, Landis or Valverde.
If we repeat this every couple of pages maybe the opinions of degrees of guilt will become less troublesome:

Two points-one irrelevant and one obvious.
Point one-Clen is illegal and no cyclist at Contador's level would have it in his system unknowingly. If the potential source was as common and insignifcant as he'd like us to believe there would be much more common evidence. The UCI and WADA rules indicate Contador must prove that point, whether they like it or not.

Point two-UCI tried to hide this one and make it go away. They are now in a fight for their own sorry hides. Who do you think will lose? The Pirates can find another performer to promote.

Another note: The fact that the race results have been proven fraudulent only two times should be the real issue.
 
Jun 22, 2009
794
0
0
JPM London said:
I think it's funny you can simply, and in capital letters, state that I'm wrong to have an opinion of my own. I can't believe I have to explain that one... I also can't believe you didn't understand what I wrote - sorry about that, must be my fault.
i didn't say you're wrong to have an opinion or anything even close to that. IMO your logic is flawed, and quite obviously so if you think that the contador positive doesn't discourage other athletes from doping.

JPM London said:
Just for the record; I think it's great to catch and ban dopers - full stop.
But just as you yourself point out it's not the most clear cut case and the case is not about obvious, long term blood manipulation. Even if the Clen pos is because of clen abuse it could still very well be about losing a bit of baby fat - hardly the darkest of doping stories. I just wish that when a rider of Conti's stature is tested positive it was for something more significant then that. If he'd been positive for Perflouro-whats-its-name or some masking agent I'd been saying completely different things about the case...
i have to admit i don't understand that comment at all. do you believe there's a possibility that contador would ingest minute amts of clenbuterol DURING the TdF to lose weight? you'll just have to trust me on this one, that didn't happen. if he used clenbuterol for any reason the only way it would appear in July is because he transfused it. transfusions ARE a dark doping story, maybe the darkest. the darkest part of this story is how organized and brazen AC and his advisors are in their program. to still attempt a transfusion with so much publicity about those methods during the lead up to this year's tour says they're a very confident and prepared bunch. so much so that you're not going to catch these guys with something as "significant" as you would like. there won't be a smoking gun. the only way to catch them is by doing things like surprise testing well below the thresholds they're prepared to beat.
 
May 15, 2010
833
0
0
pedaling squares said:
How many of them ever shut up and go away? The more I follow cycling, the more I like Jan Ullrich.
The more I follow cycling, the less likely I am to continue following. Those of you who have been following for the past 20 years are either gluttons for punishment or just hopeless romantics. The sport of cycle racing has so very much to offer and yet the 1 thing it delivers with consistency is heartbreak and sadness.

I really refuse to bear it any longer. Conti's clenbuterol was the last kick in the groin for me.
 
May 15, 2010
833
0
0
sniper said:
You're right, I shouldn't make any judgements in terms of sanity. Apologies for that.

Anyway: What strikes me is that most who now think AC is a blooddoper, already thought he was a blooddoper way before he tested positive.
Then, since August, we get one confirmation after the other:
he tests positive, on the second restday, rumours about plascticizers, the HUMO story, the fictive contaminated-steak story..etc.. in other words: all pure uncut confirmations of what many already thought.
Of course, I'll be the first to admit that chance/coincidence can never be excluded as an explanatory model, but to say that there is a 50-50 percent chance AC is innocent, well, not me. I'd rather say the chances of AC being a blooddoper are 90-10 (guilty-innocent), on the basis of what we know thus far.

Consider also that people who know more about it all than we (or at least I) do, such as Heulot, Jaksche, UCI and WADA, to name just a few, all seem to believe AC is guilty of doping and do not buy the steak-story, not even as a possibility.
I was one of them who knew it before and I am not any more disgusted than before it was public, but before I was free to live in blissful ignorance. Now that freedom is gone and I am too.
 
Jun 22, 2009
794
0
0
Oldman said:

Point two-UCI tried to hide this one and make it go away. They are now in a fight for their own sorry hides. Who do you think will lose? The Pirates can find another performer to promote.
i like this one the most. pointing out UCI corruption doesn't do anything to help contador. in fact, they've been caught trying to protect him. now that this has happened they are in a position where taking him down is in their best interests and almost accidently, this is how they should proceed anyway. contador is now between a rock and a hard place. i'd love it if he abandoned this stupid defense and just went nuclear like landis and exposed the UCI/McQuaid corruption. you know he's got some dirt at this point about how they tried to make this, and possibly other situations, go away. am i the only one who imagines that behind the scenes of this there might be a good old-fashioned mexican standoff?

EDIT: it's just a figure of speech, no offense intended to mexican forumites ;)
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
lean said:
i have to admit i don't understand that comment at all. do you believe there's a possibility that contador would ingest minute amts of clenbuterol DURING the TdF to lose weight?

Ehrm, sorry... Must have shut my brain off for a moment there - thanks for pointing it out. I think I just had the weight-loss-program-before-taking-out-blood theory in my head and forgot about when the weight was to be lost and when the tour was. Doesn't bode well - apparently my mind's functions are slipping as we speak. However, I do seem to remember there being reasons to do clen in race - but that would still be more serious (in my mind) than using it for weight loss. I think my main point still is that I'd infinitely prefer there to be a positive for something like perflouro or masking agent or something - or no positive at all. It's easy to condemn someone for something that cannot possibly be anything but blooddoping than something that could...
 
Nov 9, 2010
295
0
0
JPM London said:
The details of the case itself have been discussed endlessly in other threads, but please confirm to me that the 20k samples of meat were tested to the same level that Conti's blood was. To use this as an argument it is quite key as the Conti case is only here exactly because of the extreme level they were able to test his blood to...
I dont have to.

According to Frenando Ramos, who is a professor at the University of Coimbra in Portugal and who has studied this subject for two decades, spoke to the paper. He noted that that the concentration would have to be so high that the animal would have died before being slaughtered.

“I can say 99 percent, it’s impossible,” he said, when asked if meat could be the source of the contamination.



Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5889/Contador-Investigation-WADA-chief-Howman-satisfied-thus-far-with-the-UCIs-results-management-of-case.aspx#ixzz17GxnM0tY
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
bobs *** said:
The more I follow cycling, the less likely I am to continue following. Those of you who have been following for the past 20 years are either gluttons for punishment or just hopeless romantics.
Or maybe just love a good drama?
First there's the drama of the ride and who wins the race...
Then there's the drama of the dope and who wins the race...
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
lean said:
i like this one the most. pointing out UCI corruption doesn't do anything to help contador. in fact, they've been caught trying to protect him. now that this has happened they are in a position where taking him down is in their best interests and almost accidently, this is how they should proceed anyway. contador is now between a rock and a hard place. i'd love it if he abandoned this stupid defense and just went nuclear like landis and exposed the UCI/McQuaid corruption. you know he's got some dirt at this point about how they tried to make this, and possibly other situations, go away. am i the only one who imagines that behind the scenes of this there might be a good old-fashioned mexican standoff?

EDIT: it's just a figure of speech, no offense intended to mexican forumites ;)
That is, quite possibly; what's been going on for the three months. If Contador decided to "retire" and serve up his mea culpa it could be the singular action the UCI fears. Perhaps that is behind his threat to quit.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JPM London said:
<snipped>
Re Basso, Landis and ValvPiti I'm not sure I agree - but that might be mainly because of the more serious allegations they faced - or because ones recollection get tainted when viewed in hindsight. ValvPiti definitely did sound ridiculous as did Basso when trying to dodge the "is that your dog?" questions. Landis just didn't come across as very sincere in my optics - I dunno why, but I'm happy to believe (hope?) in Conti a bit longer.
The reason I mentioned Basso, Landis & Valverde is because many of ACs claims are similar to theirs.

Basso - "I'm awaiting the decision with confidence, I've always been optimistic, I've answered all the questions." (Link here)
Valverde - he said he would submit his DNA to a neutral laoratory.
Landis -(On the lab testing) "They've broken their own rules in making this public from the beginning, and forced me to make these statements as to why this may have happened"
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
The reason I mentioned Basso, Landis & Valverde is because many of ACs claims are similar to theirs.

Basso - "I'm awaiting the decision with confidence, I've always been optimistic, I've answered all the questions." (Link here)
Valverde - he said he would submit his DNA to a neutral laoratory.
Landis -(On the lab testing) "They've broken their own rules in making this public from the beginning, and forced me to make these statements as to why this may have happened"

Did AC say he would submit his DNA, i dont remember that! was he suggesting submitting something or are you saying that the tone he taking is similar to all 3. which i do agree with. But that is to be expected, it has become the standard blurb.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
Did AC say he would submit his DNA, i dont remember that! was he suggesting submitting something or are you saying that the tone he taking is similar to all 3. which i do agree with. But that is to be expected, it has become the standard blurb.
AC has said he would allow his samples to be stored so that they can be tested at a future date - my point is that talk is cheap and moreso has nothing to do with what has already transpiried.

In Valverdes case - CONI had already established it was his blood bag via DNA.
AC saying he will submit to future testing after he has been caught with a positive result.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
AC has said he would allow his samples to be stored so that they can be tested at a future date - my point is that talk is cheap and moreso has nothing to do with what has already transpired.
Of course talk is cheap.

If he doesn't say anything, he's not defending himself adequately.

If he does say something, he should just shut up and go away.

Conjecture about blood doping is, in fact, proof. Thanks to what I've read on the internet.

It doesn't matter that the plasticizers tests is unapproved by WADA. Nor does it matter that the Spanish beef industry is up in arms over their product
getting slagged even though it's an industry where drugs are used in just an unethical manner as in cycling.

And we come to these conclusions all because we put two and two together on the internet.

For the biological passport to work, you have to have set parameters that everyone can point to and say "AHA!!! Zere iz zee doping!!!"

But we don't. So the focus of everyone's ire becomes clenbutarol. Some posters, if you ask them, will tell you exactly when he had the blood removed-it must have been right after the Dauphine. And there were his initials on some piece of paper that proves without a shadow of a doubt that he was a client of Dr. Fuentes.

And let's not forget the infamous article in that Belgian magazine that popped the lid off his doping regimen. Gee, where exactly is that Astana employee, anyway?

Yes, it's all proof in the court of public opinion. All of it is proof without a reasonable doubt, as far as conjecture goes.
 
Oct 11, 2010
777
0
0
Berzin said:
Of course talk is cheap.

If he doesn't say anything, he's not defending himself adequately.
I haven't heard anyone complain about the way Petacchi is handling himself. Have you?
 
Oct 11, 2010
777
0
0
Berzin said:
And we come to these conclusions all because we put two and two together on the internet.

For the biological passport to work, you have to have set parameters that everyone can point to and say "AHA!!! Zere iz zee doping!!!"

But we don't. So the focus of everyone's ire becomes clenbutarol. Some posters, if you ask them, will tell you exactly when he had the blood removed-it must have been right after the Dauphine. And there were his initials on some piece of paper that proves without a shadow of a doubt that he was a client of Dr. Fuentes.

And let's not forget the infamous article in that Belgian magazine that popped the lid off his doping regimen. Gee, where exactly is that Astana employee, anyway?

Yes, it's all proof in the court of public opinion. All of it is proof without a reasonable doubt, as far as conjecture goes.
Big talk from someone who's about as anxious as anyone to see Armstrong go down. Try being slightly less hypocritical and people might have an easier time taking you seriously.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts