Contador acquitted

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
spalco said:
Right. The real problem with doping testing is too much testing. :rolleyes:

the problem isn't "too much testing", it's having strict liability for trace amounts of substances which are present in the food and water supply.

People conveniently ignore the fact that the director of the Cologne lab called for threshold limits on substances such as this long before Contador's positive test.

No one has put forth a plausible explanation that the substance got in his system intentionally, unless it was from a blood transfusion. Get him for the blood transfusion (or, if there isn't evidence of that, let him walk).
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
131313 said:
In my opinion, strict liability simply shouldn't exist for substances which can be contained in the general food or water supply. This just simply isn't fair.

Clenbuterol is not 'in the general food or water supply' in the Industrialized nations. This is a convenience to make it okay to let Pharmador off.

I agree that false positives and widespread false negatives are an issue not being discussed at all. We know the false negatives are happening. How many riders confess and wonder aloud why it took so long to get a positive?

131313 said:
But busting him for a trace amount of something which isn't even performance-enhancing,
Again, it is performance enhancing. Another convenience to make it okay to let Pharmador off.

131313 said:
At this point, my bigger concern is for the other riders serving bans for the same thing? What about them??
Absolutely correct. This part of the story doesn't get retold enough.
 
Sep 15, 2010
1,086
3
9,985
131313 said:
the problem isn't "too much testing", it's having strict liability for trace amounts of substances which are present in the food and water supply.

People conveniently ignore the fact that the director of the Cologne lab called for threshold limits on substances such as this long before Contador's positive test.

No one has put forth a plausible explanation that the substance got in his system intentionally, unless it was from a blood transfusion. Get him for the blood transfusion (or, if there isn't evidence of that, let him walk).

This might be a sound choice if it were a consistent or widespread problem.

Aside from questionably relevant examples from other sports is there an abundance of false positives and or are trace amounts and questionable vectors a common occurrence in the current testing regiment?

The fact that the UCI and WADA requirements stipulate zero tolerance for banned substances in any quantity requires a Contador sanction.

If the answer to the question above is 'yes this is an intrinsic and recurring problem, the the rule should be reviewed and perhaps low thresholds implemented, until then - guilty as charged, unless he, his team and his lawyers can provide substantiated proof that the occurrence was unintentional.

In my experience if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck.
 
Jul 22, 2009
754
1
0
Holy cow! (No pun intended).

I've been going through the report submitted by AC's team to the RFEC and... if I'm not mistaken one the allegations is that "the said company was sanctioned in the year 2000 precisely for injecting their cattle with clenbuterol".

Anybody know the name of the company?
 
Jan 15, 2011
251
0
0
I'm very pleased with this info and hope this is the final decision. Without Contador there can't be any truth chapion at Le Tour and other races he would otherwise participaded. He's been the undisputable best rider for several years and I thing he will bee. (despite as beeing Czech I root for Kreuziger)
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
DirtyWorks said:
Clenbuterol is not 'in the general food or water supply' in the Industrialized nations. This is a convenience to make it okay to let Pharmador off.

The director of the Cologne lab disagrees with you. My money is on him. You also seem to underestimate the realities of cross-contamination of the food supply. This is a much too long-winded topic, but the bottom line is that your food/seed/fertilizer etc. could be from anywhere.

DirtyWorks said:
I agree that false positives and widespread false negatives are an issue not being discussed at all. We know the false negatives are happening. How many riders confess and wonder aloud why it took so long to get a positive?

Hey, I agree! "false negatives" are no doubt MUCH more common. That still doesn't discount the possibility of false positives, though.


DirtyWorks said:
Again, it is performance enhancing. Another convenience to make it okay to let Pharmador off.

In the amount which was present in his system, there's not a person alive who can reasonably conclude that the dose would have been performance enhancing, and it's next to impossible to envision how he could have even purposely ingested such a small amount?

The only reasonable explanation is that it's contamination, either from food or blood. Yeah, I think it's the latter, but punish him for that.
 
Jun 11, 2009
19
0
0
Sooo...

The UCI tried to sweep it under the mat and it go leaked, leaving the only hope in the spaniards coming up with some sort of mechanism to let him off...
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
JA.Tri said:
I am sad and I see no clear way forward...to a "cleaner" ethical sporting environment.

Not a good day for cycling. This is bad news for the sport. I just hope WADA take this to CAS. It is a load of bull ****. The spanish federations are so corrupt.

I would consider not watching the tdf this year. This is a load of ****.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
TubularBills said:
This might be a sound choice if it were a consistent or widespread problem.

Aside from questionably relevant examples from other sports is there an abundance of false positives and or are trace amounts and questionable vectors a common occurrence in the current testing regiment?

The fact that the UCI and WADA requirements stipulate zero tolerance for banned substances in any quantity requires a Contador sanction.

If the answer to the question above is 'yes this is an intrinsic and recurring problem, the the rule should be reviewed and perhaps low thresholds implemented, until then - guilty as charged, unless he, his team and his lawyers can provide substantiated proof that the occurrence was unintentional.

In my experience if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck.

Well, keep in mind that it hadn't been a widespread problem because labs previously didn't test down to the levels of the Cologne lab. And also keep in mind that the Cologne lab wasn't required to report the Contador finding. How many "positives" would be out there if they report all instances? And secondly, I really don't believe Contador is the only potential case out there of someone injecting something accidentally.

To you last point about him and his lawyers providing unequivocal proof, well, that's what caused this ridiculous beef story in the first place. The real answer is "it could be from anything".
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
131313 said:
The only reasonable explanation is that it's contamination, either from food or blood. Yeah, I think it's the latter, but punish him for that.

Or it was in his system at alot higher concentration before the day he got tested. Being in yellow he must have gotten tested every day the previous x days. Were those tests done by the same lab, or were some done by labs that cannot detect such small amounts?
 
May 19, 2009
529
2
9,285
auscyclefan94 said:
Not a good day for cycling. This is bad news for the sport. I just hope WADA take this to CAS. It is a load of bull ****. The spanish federations are so corrupt.

I would consider not watching the tdf this year. This is a load of ****.

stop saying bull****, do you know legal details of contador defense? do you read the besis in which this decission is based?

I bet UCI and AMA won't go to CAS, what then you and people like you would say?

If they go to CAS, moved by thousands of people thinking like you around the world (since UCI and AMA are also both corrupt) then I bet TAS might let contador walk. Sorry, but I think people like you don't like cycling.

I'm very happy today, it's a great day for the rights of riders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Jun 10, 2010
19,894
2,255
25,680
So the story is that Contador ate meat three days in a row during the Tour de France (although he never talks about the third day - and no journalist brings it up). This challenges everything we knew about nutrition. Thank God Contador has never been caught lying, otherwise I'd doubt him despite this ruling.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Aguirre said:
stop saying bull****, do you know legal details of contador defense? do you read the besis in which this decission is based?

I bet UCI and AMA won't go to CAS, what then you and people like you would say?

If they go to CAS, moved by thousands of people thinking like you around the world (since UCI and AMA are also both corrupt) then I bet TAS might let contador walk. Sorry, but I think people like you don't like cycling.

I'm very happy today, it's a great day for the rights of riders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great glorious day...it is. we get to see the Toypistol ......again. bang bang bang....3 bangs for 3 days of Clen in the system. MOO MOO MOO. :D
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
patricknd said:
he was confused. try smaller words next time :D
another post that adds zero to the discussion and concentrates on a poster in stead of the message.
 
May 2, 2010
466
0
0
Justice has been done!!! I knew Contador never doped. I wish all the slanderers pay for the damage done. This is a good day for cycling and for Alberto, and a lousy day for all the AC haters! Mwaahhahahahahah!

PS: At least you have Riccó. Haters. :D
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,870
1,278
20,680
sartoris said:
Justice has been done!!! I knew Contador never doped. I wish all the slanderers pay for the damage done. This is a good day for cycling and for Alberto, and a lousy day for all the AC haters! Mwaahhahahahahah!

PS: At least you have Riccó. Haters. :D

You forgot to put one of these :rolleyes: after that crazy statement.
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
Skandar Akbar said:
Or it was in his system at alot higher concentration before the day he got tested. Being in yellow he must have gotten tested every day the previous x days. Were those tests done by the same lab, or were some done by labs that cannot detect such small amounts?

Never mind I just google and find he was negative July 19 and 20. But my question stands which lab tested those 2 days?
 
Jun 10, 2010
19,894
2,255
25,680
roundabout said:
The same steak?

20-21-22 July?

Just makings sure of the details.
Nope, the third day was supposed to be local meat from Pau.
http://www.sport.es/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=44&idioma=CAS&idtipusrecurs_PK=7&idnoticia_PK=722519
Ayer [i.e. 7-22-2010] se fue al mercado de Pau y compró solomillos de ternera, patatas para hacer al horno y pasta, casi 500 gramos por persona. Culminó con una macedonia: “Es el menú ideal para reponerse de la batalla del Tourmalet. Han quedado como nuevos”.
 
Jun 9, 2010
2,007
0
0
Aguirre said:
I bet UCI and AMA won't go to CAS, what then you and people like you would say?

I think that They wont go to CAS because Ovtcharov case... Ovtcharov case could make a precedent... If They didnt go after Ovtcharov why they would go after Contador?

hrotha said:
So the story is that Contador ate meat three days in a row during the Tour de France (although he never talks about the third day - and no journalist brings it up). This challenges everything we knew about nutrition. Thank God Contador has never been caught lying, otherwise I'd doubt him despite this ruling.

He hit the positive with 50picograms the next positives is the Clenbuterol leaving his system that's why the number is always descending in the next days... Did you read or take a look to the studies or something? You seem to be ignorant of the case...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.