ContadorÂ’s legal team hit back at WADA report

[sniper]

This is absolutely not true. The science behind it has to be validated and accepted by WADA for any sanction to be based either totally or in part on the results of this test.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Merckx is just saying it can be used in the case against AC. Just as Merckx, I'm also assuming it can.
In any regular legal case, experts can be asked to testify. I can imagine that one such expert may tell the judges that, because of the plasticizers, he thinks bloodtransfusion is more likely a cause for the CLEN than food contamination and, consequently, that the CLEN is likely to have entered AC's body intentionally, rather than unintentionally.

 

[hrotha]

Thanks Glenn,

Hard to give up hope! Surprising and refreshing (and I respect the broad demographic) that it isn't just an American dopers who get this kind of support.

Dear Merckx index,

Let me try again:


From the WADA Independent Observer Report on the 2010 Tour de France:



Connecting those dots for you.

The UCI elected to send Contador's samples to Cologne. And, the UCI elected not to send many other samples from other riders that they might otherwise have chosen.

WADA has questioned the subjectivity of their choices and the extremely small number of samples sent.

The UCI knew that Cologne had the capability of the tighter Clenbuterol sensitivity. They also almost certainly knew of tests, like the plasticizer test, that could and would be conducted.

WADA has questioned why more samples from more riders were not subject to more regular (e.g. EPO) and advanced tests (e.g. blood transfusions)

The UCI threw your beloved Contador under the bus/to the wolves.

He performed, or at least his samples performed, admirably. You should be proud of him.

Dave.

For that to be the case, UCI would have needed to know Contador would test positive for clenbuterol. It's very unlikely that they did. I'm inclined to think they sent the samples to appease WADA, thinking there wouldn't be any problem.

The plasticizers test isn't validated yet, so that data was supposed to remain confidential, and indeed it would have if Contador hadn't tested positive for clen and it hadn't been leaked. After all, we don't know anything about the results of other riders.

 

[Big Doopie]

For that to be the case, UCI would have needed to know Contador would test positive for clenbuterol. It's very unlikely that they did. I'm inclined to think they sent the samples to appease Armstrong...

fixed that for you.

armstrong has the uci over a barrel.

note how many of his ex-team mates turned up positive as soon as they left and potentially could rival him (or at least his legacy). when hog and armstrong split from contador it was but a matter of time...particularly when some were thinking already that contador might eventually rival armstrong's record.

 

[hrotha]

fixed that for you.

armstrong has the uci over a barrel.

note how many of his ex-team mates turned up positive as soon as they left and potentially could rival him (or at least his legacy). when hog and armstrong split from contador it was but a matter of time...particularly when some were thinking already that contador might eventually rival armstrong's record.

That's a bit of a stretch, in my opinion. I don't see UCI doing much for Armstrong after the Tour, they're probably more concerned with keeping their distance and minimizing any damage that comes their way from the federal investigation.

Don't forget UCI and Armstrong weren't friends, they were business partners.

 

[Beech Mtn]

fixed that for you.

armstrong has the uci over a barrel.

note how many of his ex-team mates turned up positive as soon as they left and potentially could rival him (or at least his legacy). when hog and armstrong split from contador it was but a matter of time...particularly when some were thinking already that contador might eventually rival armstrong's record.

+1. Agree.

That's a bit of a stretch, in my opinion. I don't see UCI doing much for Armstrong after the Tour, they're probably more concerned with keeping their distance and minimizing any damage that comes their way from the federal investigation.

Don't forget UCI and Armstrong weren't friends, they were business partners.

I believe Armstrong and Verbruggen/the McQuaids still are business partners. There are connections in more areas than just cycling - real estate deals, etc.

 

[Race Radio]

This is absolutely not true. The science behind it has to be validated and accepted by WADA for any sanction to be based either totally or in part on the results of this test.

You don't know what you're talking about.

The test is valid, it has been used for years in other areas and works well. What has not been set are the levels. How much is normal, allowable, and legally defensible is a much different question.

It is possible that they never approve the test as the sole method of sanction but can still use it as an data marker for the biopassport. Change in variety of values after a spike Plasticizers could been seen as an indicator of blood doping.

 

[Cobblestoned]

fixed that for you.

armstrong has the uci over a barrel.

note how many of his ex-team mates turned up positive as soon as they left and potentially could rival him (or at least his legacy). when hog and armstrong split from contador it was but a matter of time...particularly when some were thinking already that contador might eventually rival armstrong's record.

Yes. Wow. Huge numbers.
Not enough space here to list these masses.

Poor Contador - bad Lance. Was only a matter of time till Lance contaminated his meat.

 

[sniper]

I think hrotha is right. no need to look for anti-AC conspiracies. After all, the guy was ranked number 1 in the Tour, so you'd expect the UCI to send his samples for (additional) testing (rather than the samples of, say, the number 134 in the ranking). Normal procedure so far. And indeed, the UCI is likely to have assumed nothing suspiscious would pop up in AC's samples, since nothing popped up in the previous three Tours he rode either.

 

[Beech Mtn]

I suspect the humble cyclist from Pinto didn't pay the UCI "protection money" and his samples got chosen to go to the ultra-sensitive lab. I suspect AS, son of a rider, probably understands better how this game is played. I would doubt any of his samples went to Cologne. Can't prove it, just a suspicion.

 

[BotanyBay]

I suspect the humble cyclist from Pinto didn't pay the UCI "protection money" and his samples got chosen to go to the ultra-sensitive lab. I suspect AS, son of a rider, probably understands better how this game is played. I would doubt any of his samples went to Cologne. Can't prove it, just a suspicion.

I suspect that it is more complex than mere protection money. Nothing that I've seen indicates any kind of "close" relationship with McQuaid. I think McQuaid probably thinks he's a stupid hick Spaniard, and he wants his educated, articulate, Anglo hero to step-up to the stage.

McQuaid will be protecting the Schlecks now.

 

[Merckx index]

This is absolutely not true. The science behind it has to be validated and accepted by WADA for any sanction to be based either totally or in part on the results of this test.

You don't know what you're talking about.

In addition to what Sniper and RR pointed out, I'll just note that WADA's Howman himself was quoted as saying that the test could be used in Bert's case. Again, we're not talking about a standalone test, just relevant analyses.

If everything had to be "validated and accepted by WADA", then Bert and other athletes could never raise the meat contamination possibility, since CB analysis of meat in catlle (as opposed to urine in humans) is not a WADA-validated test. There is nothing in the WADA rules that states that a certain level of CB in meat establishes that an athlete could have tested positive for CB by eating that meat. It's simply understood by all parties that a) CB concentrations can be measured fairly precisely in meat; and b) eating meat containing a certain amount of CB could result in a detectable level of that substance in the urine. Use of the DEHP test in Bert's case would be carried out in much the same spirit.

 

[Oldman]

I suspect that it is more complex than mere protection money. Nothing that I've seen indicates any kind of "close" relationship with McQuaid. I think McQuaid probably thinks he's a stupid hick Spaniard, and he wants his educated, articulate, Anglo hero to step-up to the stage.

McQuaid will be protecting the Schlecks now.

While McQuaid has always had the Promoter's attitude toward talent he is getting out of his league these days. His concern over his own fragile empire may mean he can't protect anyone.

 

[dolophonic]

Beech Mtn and BotanyBay.. I like the way you guys see it.. That sounds like the way the senario played out. Quite likely.

 

[sniper]

Beech Mtn and BotanyBay.. I like the way you guys see it.. That sounds like the way the senario played out. Quite likely.

me too. however, I like Oldman's objection that Pat may well be panicking as we speak. And Novitzky/Landis may soon be shedding additional light on mal practices within the UCI. So to predict what McQuaid's politics will be next year is risky.
Desperate needs lead to desperate deeds. He may build himself an ark and float off to far-away land together with Verbruggen.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

me too. however, I like Oldman's objection that Pat may well be panicking as we speak. And Novitzky/Landis may soon be shedding additional light on mal practices within the UCI. So to predict what McQuaid's politics will be next year is risky.
Desperate needs lead to desperate deeds. He may build himself an ark and float off to far-away land together with Verbruggen.

To Texas? Apparently the Chamber of Commerce has no issue lauding those who are b*lls-deep in trouble. Kudos all around!

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

To Texas? Apparently the Chamber of Commerce has no issue lauding those who are b*lls-deep in trouble. Kudos all around!

Sorry, I meant b*ll-deep...

 

[theswordsman]

I haven't been back to this thread since my own last post. Frankly, once pro athletes in Spain and elite athletes in Europe started making official calls for a minimum threshold for Clenbuterol and questioning the legality of a strict liability system where athletes are found innocent but punished anyway, I decided I didn't need to argue any more.

But when last I was here, some questioned my thoughts that even if Contador's urine samples from the 19th and 20th might have been tested in Lausanne rather than Cologne (I've never read it stated one way or another), that the B samples would have been tested with the most accurate equipment possible. For me it was a no-brainer; they had scientists from around the world scrutinizing everything available for weeks, compiling 600 pages of data for the case. Contador had given carte blanche via the press for freezing and retesting his samples.

The best potential evidence for a stronger case was in the samples from the 19th and 20th. If there was a higher amount of Clenbuterol than the 50 picograms on the 21st, they would have used that amount for the case, and had a better idea that it might have been taken intentionally for performance enhancement during the race.

But the kicker is, if there was any Clenbuterol in his system at all on the 19th or 20th, before he ate the imported steak, his case would have been blown to bits. Does anyone really believe the two organizations would have done all the research and spent all the money checking out the steak theory, and allowing headlines hurting the sport to run for months, without retesting (if it wasn't done in Cologne originally) a sample that could have won them the case? Clenbuterol the day before the steak? Give us back the trophy, Alberto.

I really don't think I was overstepping things with the assumption. Cheers.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Does it really matter at this point? I mean... you're busting a guy and ruining his career on 50 picograms of clen. Once you allow that done onto cyclists... kinda makes me wish they brough back the anal searches before a competition. (And they can't use vaseline because they'll test positive for something).

 

[biopass]

The best potential evidence for a stronger case was in the samples from the 19th and 20th. If there was a higher amount of Clenbuterol than the 50 picograms on the 21st, they would have used that amount for the case, and had a better idea that it might have been taken intentionally for performance enhancement during the race.

Come on, anyone can figure out why Contador took some weight losing drug like Clenbuterol prior to the showdown on Tourmalet. Its really not that hard to imagine, especially if you saw he couldnt drop Andy during the Tour. Of course Contador took Clenbuterol intentionally to be fitter and have less bodymass to carry over the last deciding mountain stage.

 

[Ferminal]

Come on, anyone can figure out why Contador took some weight losing drug like Clenbuterol prior to the showdown on Tourmalet. Its really not that hard to imagine, especially if you saw he couldnt drop Andy during the Tour. Of course Contador took Clenbuterol intentionally to be fitter and have less bodymass to carry over the last deciding mountain stage.

At times I've wondered if it was a transfusion or Contador actually used Clen mid-Tour. He hadn't really got the better of Schleck on a major climb so far and could have been worried that Andy may outclimb him on the Tourmalet. Dropping another Kilo may have been the answer to Andy's strength.

 

[hrotha]

I thought it was widely accepted that taking clen during a competition was a bad idea, as it can have some nasty short-term side effects. That's even assuming microdosing clenbuterol is effective at all (clen is easily detectable at anything but the tiniest doses after all) and that it works that fast.

 

[icefire]

AC's defense is adding some more noise to the case pointing to German farms closed over dioxins as an example that food poisoning is not unlikely no matter the regulations:

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundodeporte/2011/01/09/ciclismo/1294590290.html

 

[peloton]

I thought it was widely accepted that taking clen during a competition was a bad idea, as it can have some nasty short-term side effects. That's even assuming microdosing clenbuterol is effective at all (clen is easily detectable at anything but the tiniest doses after all) and that it works that fast.

+1

I'm also curious of what kind of side effects can clen use cause to someone like AC, with a pretty severe medical history?
I don't know if anyone can microdose 50 picograms of clen, but if so, I wonder what, if nothing, is the benefit of that?

 

[webvan]

Besides Willy Voet found Clen made him feel "like a bull" when he tested it before giving it to the boys at Festina in the good old days...so it's not just about losing weight!

 

[lean mean &green]

+1

I'm also curious of what kind of side effects can clen use cause to someone like AC, with a pretty severe medical history?
I don't know if anyone can microdose 50 picograms of clen, but if so, I wonder what, if nothing, is the benefit of that?

here we go again,

athletes take clenbuterol mostly for it's thermogenic effects which result in rapid weight loss. its actions in the body are similar to that of any CNS stimulant. metabolism is sped up and excess calories are burned even while resting or performing activities of daily life. the side effects are what you would expect from a stimulant. jittery hands, headaches, difficulty sleeping, etc. anecdotally some report stomach cramping which wouldn't surprise me either, gastrointestinal distress would seem logical.

clenbuterol can also act to dilate breathing passages and has some anabolic characteristics (muscle building effects). these are hard to quantify but they're generally small and are probably just an added bonus for someone trying to lose weight.

clenbuterol can be effective in a short period of time, a cycle generally lasts at least 2-3 weeks. could it be taken for a few days to drop a kilo or two during a stage race? anything is possible but i doubt it.

again, he didn't take a 50 picogram dose. 50 picograms is what was metabolised (broken down) from a larger dose on the day he was tested. that larger dose was most likely taken weeks or months earlier and transfused back in during the tour.

lastly, the contador case is a strong argument FOR strict liability, not against it.