That's an interesting question. The first go around in the press, it wasn't clear if talk of three was Contador's idea, or Riis', or a combo of both. Saxo camp is going on right now, so it's normal for riders to give glimpses of the race schedule discussed for them. Contador is in a different position because he doesn't know if he'll be around.
I haven't seen full quotes from the paper edition of L'Equipe. Cycling News said he had just spoken to L'Equipe briefly - it wasn't a press release - they might have just caught him in the parking lot or something. It's tough to read between the lines without the actual quote, but riding all three doesn't mean trying to win all three, or even two. Sastre rode all three this year. It could be a stepping stone towards eventually going for the triple. If you've never done the whole nine weeks in one year, it would be tough trying to get the training right to target all three for wins.
There's a chance that he said it to give the UCI something to think about, but I believe there recent statement was more public posturing than anything else. They've got Caucchioli going to CAS on the 21st, and they've still not decided about whether to appeal the Pellizotti case.
They lost the first round on that one, and the Vino fine decision went against them. They've screwed up big time on the Contador situation, and I doubt they want the details brought out under oath.
Why did they wait five weeks for a test result instead of making a call?
Why didn't they announce the B test result?
Why did they put a gag order on Alberto?
Why did they lie to the German press?
Why did the tell Contador which expert to use when he asked for a suggestion, if the planned to pursue the case to through an appeal process?
There's more, but I never expected the UCI to take it to CAS, and WADA doesn't give a darn how many races Contador plans to do or how well he expects to do in them. So I just think a journalist happened across Contador at camp, asked about a race schedule, and was given the simple outline.