Holy Cr*p, the UCI did it (Contador)

[poupou]

that's the problem. As I said in an earlier post. I saw a story where they found the store where the meat was bought and tested all their meat (all came back negative). the problem was that the store bought it's meat from multiple wholesalers which makes it pretty much impossible to trace where the meat came from. It might not have even come from Spain. It was just bought in Spain. This doesn't help Contador. This makes it worse because it's up to AC to find evidence to back his claim. They say that Contador is innocent until proven guilty but really it's the opposite. By UCI rules, AC is guilty and it his responsibility to prove his innocence.

If the food was bad, that is a cooking problem. Why did they need to bring meat from Spain? They can have bought it in France.
They could have gone elsewhere to eat... they could have requested access to kitchen... that story is difficult to understand!

 

[Dimtick]

If the food was bad, that is a cooking problem. Why did they need to bring meat from Spain? They can have bought it in France.
They could have gone elsewhere to eat... they could have requested access to kitchen... that story is difficult to understand!

The Astana team chef is from Spain (Contadors request). The organizer from the Vuelta was coming from Spain to have dinner with the team on the rest day to convince AC to ride in the race. The chef wanted to do something special and wasn't happy with the quality of the meat at the hotel. He's friends with Jose Cerron (Vuelta organizer) and asked him to bring some meat from Spain with him.

 

[Escarabajo]

The Astana team chef is from Spain (Contadors request). The organizer from the Vuelta was coming from Spain to have dinner with the team on the rest day to convince AC to ride in the race. The chef wanted to do something special and wasn't happy with the quality of the meat at the hotel. He's friends with Jose Cerron (Vuelta organizer) and asked him to bring some meat from Spain with him.

Somebody was lying. We have gone over this about 1,000,000 times:

Durante los tres días que han permanecido alojados en un Novotel de Lescare le prohibieron entrar en la cocina y hacer uso de sus instalaciones: “Me las he apañado en un furgón, con una vitrocerámica y un microondas”. En estas condiciones ha cocinado para 20 personas. Cada vez que los corredores se acercaban al ‘buffet’ del hotel, se interponía Olalla entre los ciclistas y los alimentos: “Las salsas, ni tocarlas. Sois como niños”. Ayer 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”.

http://www.sport.es/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=44&idioma=CAS&idtipusrecurs_PK=7&idnoticia_PK=722519

This story puts Contador in a bad situation because according to him he ate meat the rest day, the Tourmalet day and the left overs after the Tourmalet day. This is quite a cyclist.

 

[flicker]

Somebody was lying. We have gone over this about 1,000,000 times:



http://www.sport.es/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=44&idioma=CAS&idtipusrecurs_PK=7&idnoticia_PK=722519

This story puts Contador in a bad situation because according to him he ate meat the rest day, the Tourmalet day and the left overs after the Tourmalet day. This is quite a cyclist.

Contador is out of his tailspin now. It was amusing for the first 4 days when everything he said did not coincide with what others said.

Quite the farce, the next part with the Spanish arbitrators and the UCI is going to be a Punch and Judy show.

 

[TheMight]

Valverde's case was a bit of an anomaly though. Contador tested positive in a run-of-the-mill anti-doping test. There's no way he could get a 9-month ban and still keep his TdF title, and chances are the RFEC has no choice but to give him at least a one-year ban and hope WADA is cool with it.

Why not? If they ban him then he's banned. If they don't then he races until WADA and CAS can put a case together and go through the process. He could very will win some big races before then.

UCI has already taken way longer than they need, they don't want him banned. Spain doesn't want him banned.

It's about as open and shut as a case comes, they found banned drugs, the b-sample verified it. That's 2 years and his win goes away, those are the rules, how/what/why doesn't matter. It doesn't take months to test the b-samples. What's more, Paddy was talking about 4 year bans not too long ago, let's hear him utter that statement and Contador's name in the same breath.

 

[python]

snip
UCI has already taken way longer than they need, they don't want him banned. snip

right. there is some hard evidence that whilst the uci had actively sought (and found) wada's broad back to hide behind, they at the same time fed contador's team some sensitive lab information not normally available until much later when a laboratory documentation package (ldp) is sent to the athlete. ironically, it looks like needling/poking/stabbing in the back whilst hiding behind it.

i suspect that the volume and depth of testing information passed by the uci to contador's side is of the magnitude that it would make any successful appeal to cas problematic.

 

[Paco_P]

The thing that appalls me the most is the UCI has waited this long to hand this over to the Spanish Federation. Frank Schleck says he does not know what this means (nor do I), in regard to a timely resolution to this matter. However, IMO, this is bound to cause delays.

The UCI doesn't want to take responsibility, and has passed the thing off to the Spanish federation, knowing full well that the Spanish federation, trapped between those who think it is lax on dopers and Spanish press that paint the evidence against Contador as flimsy, will, as a way of protesting against the UCI passing the buck, exculpate Contador.

 

[Ney the Viking]

right. there is some hard evidence that whilst the uci had actively sought (and found) wada's broad back to hide behind, they at the same time fed contador's team some sensitive lab information not normally available until much later when a laboratory documentation package (ldp) is sent to the athlete. ironically, it looks like needling/poking/stabbing in the back whilst hiding behind it.

i suspect that the volume and depth of testing information passed by the uci to contador's side is of the magnitude that it would make any successful appeal to cas problematic.

Sauce? Havn't stumbled over that snippet before.

 

[python]

Sauce? Havn't stumbled over that snippet before.

check td2009ldoc list of required documents against what de boer already knew and put in his report (dated 3 september) way before the b-sample result was even known (8 september).

another clue can be derived from a reported fact that the uci’s chief medic zorzoli personally recommended that contador contact de boer (a former wada lab chief) for his defence.

i'll zip up until the case opens up and more evidence becomes available.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Was discussed yesterday in this very topic, apparently the RFEC have ONE MONTH to come up with a decision.

Do you know who said they have one month? Because we are hearing today it may take 3 months to resolve.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

The UCI doesn't want to take responsibility, and has passed the thing off to the Spanish federation, knowing full well that the Spanish federation, trapped between those who think it is lax on dopers and Spanish press that paint the evidence against Contador as flimsy, will, as a way of protesting against the UCI passing the buck, exculpate Contador.

I can't disagree with that logic. Especially the part about the UCI not wanting the responsibility.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The UCI doesn't want to take responsibility, and has passed the thing off to the Spanish federation, knowing full well that the Spanish federation, trapped between those who think it is lax on dopers and Spanish press that paint the evidence against Contador as flimsy, will, as a way of protesting against the UCI passing the buck, exculpate Contador.

Actually no - that is wrong.

For an anti-doping violation like this, it is always the national Federations of the licence holder (or that countries anti-doping body) that hold the hearing for the rider.
So it is not the UCI passing the buck - however, the UCI should have done all this as soon as the B sample confirmed the A sample. That is where the suspicion of the UCI trying to thwart or subvert the process comes from..

 

[BotanyBay]

The UCI doesn't want to take responsibility, and has passed the thing off to the Spanish federation, knowing full well that the Spanish federation, trapped between those who think it is lax on dopers and Spanish press that paint the evidence against Contador as flimsy, will, as a way of protesting against the UCI passing the buck, exculpate Contador.

The current rules are that the UCI must pass the buck to Spain, at least initially. They just took too long to do it.

 

[roundabout]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-confident-after-receiving-uci-report

Wonder how much of that was already known to Contador...

 

[webvan]

“The dossier prepared by the UCI and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) focuses on the hypothesis of food contamination, as expected by the rider’s defense,” the statement reads. “Thus, according to documents submitted by the UCI and WADA, food contamination remains the only reasonable explanation from a scientific point of view to justify the presence of the tiny amount of Clenbuterol in the body of the rider during the past Tour France.”

Sounds odd, why would they have taken three months for that. If it's a case it's a total disgrace though...or a trap. Let Contador and his croonies come with all kinds of ridiculous stories for the food contamination and then hit them hard with the plasticizer "problem".

Hard to believe the UCI didn't look into the Humo story too...

 

[icefire]

Sounds odd, why would they have taken three months for that. If it's a case it's a total disgrace though...or a trap. Let Contador and his croonies come with all kinds of ridiculous stories for the food contamination and then hit them hard with the plasticizer "problem".

Hard to believe the UCI didn't look into the Humo story too...

There are rumours in France that RFEC will grant Contador a 1-minute time bonus for the 2011 Tour de France

http://www.cyclismag.com/article.php?sid=6220#ancre3

 

[Dimtick]

Do you know who said they have one month? Because we are hearing today it may take 3 months to resolve.

UCI rules gives Spain one month but the Spanish Federation's rules say 3 months and that what's being followed. Of course it went way past that with Valverde and ultimately UCI had to appeal to CAS to finally get a resolution.
I doubt if the UCI will complain about the extra 2 months but if it goes past 3 then they'll take it to CAS for resolution. There is no way that they're going to let Contador compete (especially in the TDF) like what happened with Valverde.

 

[Bikelife]

Re: Contador suspension, Spanish Fed, & UCI

This is my best punt now that Contador's team have seen the UCI/WADA brief and still seem optimistic:

There will be an adverse finding from the Spanish Fed (as A&B postive & UCI/WADA looking on), but only a 6-9 month suspension (starting August when informed of positive test) in view of level so low as to only be consistent with contamination. This will not be appealed on basis of "scientific evidence" coming from WADA in the first place, and a delicate political balance between all parties.

Allows UCI/ WADA/ Spanish to see "justice" done, Contador keeps TdF win (ASO & UCI can't afford any other outcome) and gets Contador back for Paris-Nice or at least the Dauphine and able to claim vindication.

And who really knows, as the contamination story could even be true!? I wouldn't rely on testing of random beef samples any more than I would on out-of-competition drug testing of Jamaican sprinters (when there's no WADA lab in Kingston...). Abuse of pharmaceuticals in the livestock industries is systematic, & testing of beef cattle is probably not.

WRT plasticisers in blood - apart from all the ethical considerations of using a non-validated test then leaking the results - if that was true you would think there would be a whole lot more of the TdF riders who would/should be concerned - even if they were going to claim they just took a "rehydration drip" or similar. That's unless Contador was the only one tested, which would be pretty extreme - ie take the Tour leader's samples, and only the Tour leader's, and subject them to every unvalidated and uber-sensitive test going.

Even the EPO tests of Lance's '99 TdF samples at least used a test that had been validated, even if Lance didn't give his permission , and even though the French lab didn't know they were his samples until the L'Equipe journalist lifted the sample numbers from the UCI...

BTW when is everybody going to remember that Lance's "steroid cream" script was post-dated? The prescription was only produced days after ASO & UCI informed Postal of the positive test and was not covered by a TUE certificate at the time of the test. So yes, LANCE DID HAVE A POSITIVE TEST FOR A BANNED PERFORMANCE ENHANCING SUBSTANCE. It's just that if your Lance, or his entourage, you can change reality by repeating denials & alternative versions of the truth.

But I digress....

Regards

Bikelife
Brisbane

 

[webvan]

No one with a brain has forgotten the LA "steroid cream" positive of 1999, cycling would certainly be in a better place today if he had been popped at the time.

As for your Contador scenario, lcould be on the length, but I'm pretty sure a positive makes him lose his TDF title automatically.

 

[python]

i opined this before (and this isn’t going to be contador’s miracle cure) but as of today there are only 3-4 days left for wada to appeal to cas the complete acquittal of the german table tennis player who had 50% more clen than contador. both blamed the meat except the ponger ate in china and tested 2 days later in gernany.

that case’s significance was that it was the first ever clen acquittal and it was based on the application of 2 new tests not approved by wada.

despite the unapproved tests, i suggested a month ago that neither wada nor the international table tennis fed will appeal. it looks like they wont as it would already happen if they had any intention.

can contador benefit from this case ?

may be, may be not. depends on how contador’s lawyers use the 2 tests. if they decide (and are able to) test hair follicles of those who contador shared his meat with, he may have a chance. i honestly don't see anything else that can help him.

 

[TubularBills]

i opined this before (and this isn’t going to be contador’s miracle cure) but as of today there are only 3-4 days left for wada to appeal to cas the complete acquittal of the german table tennis player who had 50% more clen than contador. both blamed the meat except the ponger ate in china and tested 2 days later in gernany.

that case’s significance was that it was the first ever clen acquittal and it was based on the application of 2 new tests not approved by wada.

despite the unapproved tests, i suggested a month ago that neither wada nor the international table tennis fed will appeal. it looks like they wont as it would already happen if they had any intention.

can contador benefit from this case ?

may be, may be not. depends on how contador’s lawyers use the 2 tests. if they decide (and are able to) test hair follicles of those who contador shared his meat with, he may have a chance. i honestly don't see anything else that can help him.

My understanding and please pardon the lack of a link, is that the table tennis player was exonerated not relative to the tests but because a related group (sample) also tested positive, unrelated to sports but related by contact - and therefore it was deemed an inadvertent consumption of a banned substance, therefore not only credible but also, verifiable.

 

[webvan]

Which is not surprising since Clen is not illegal for animals in China.

 

[python]

<snip> not only credible but also, verifiable.

the point was that the evidence that resulted in a complete exoneration was based on two test methods that wada normally does not consider credible nor verifiable and that wada apparently is forgoing it's right to challenge the evidence (or by consequence the credibility of the tests it has never accredited).

 

[Escarabajo]

...
WRT plasticisers in blood - apart from all the ethical considerations of using a non-validated test then leaking the results - if that was true you would think there would be a whole lot more of the TdF riders who would/should be concerned - even if they were going to claim they just took a "rehydration drip" or similar. That's unless Contador was the only one tested, which would be pretty extreme - ie take the Tour leader's samples, and only the Tour leader's, and subject them to every unvalidated and uber-sensitive test going.

...

They can not claim this anymore because this is illegal also.

 

[Jamsque]

Cyclocosm doing what he do once again.