Official 1 year ban

[Barrus]

As far as I know there is that although the letters AC appeared in a couple of places in Fuentes documents, there weren't any bloodbags with the letters AC. Don't forget, not everyone visiting Fuentes stored blood, he provided different doping programs for different athletes.

I thought it was found to have been Colom who was the supposed person for those letters?

 

[Oldman]

I got the impression that he was saddened, disheartened, frustrated, and even angry. Which is how I would feel if had done the same thing as many of my competitors in 2010 but was the only one who was caught.

He should be angry with the unethical professional system of protection he banked on not providing him that immunity, nothing more. It's not like there haven't been other preeminent contendors getting caught. Considering the general reputation of the sport and it's administrators following the Lance model at this point would be bad news and it sounds like his listening to his syncophants. He should go low profile and cut his losses.

 

[Polish]

Gosh, another ex-team mate of Lance gets popped for doping.
Floyd/Tyler/Alberto

So many others yikes.
Need to update the official list.....

 

[Lanark]

I thought it was found to have been Colom who was the supposed person for those letters?

I don't think so. The letters AC appeared on a list that consists only of Liberty Seguros riders. From the Guardia Civil report:

Of course, appearing on a list with other Liberty Seguros riders doesn't prove you're a Fuentes client.

 

[roundabout]

One would hope that this should be the end of AC=Colom

 

[hrotha]

One would hope that this should be the end of AC=Colom

Wouldn't bet on it. It's popped up countless times and rebutted every time.

 

[Barrus]

I don't think so. The letters AC appeared on a list that consists only of Liberty Seguros riders. From the Guardia Civil report:

Of course, appearing on a list with other Liberty Seguros riders doesn't prove you're a Fuentes client.

aah, misrecollection on my part than

 

[ergmonkey]

One would hope that this should be the end of AC=Colom

Yeah, but Colom later riding really well in the early season climbs before getting popped for EPO is always going to make it easy to argue the other side...

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Wouldn't bet on it. It's popped up countless times and rebutted every time.

How did the Guardia Civil make the connection of AC=Alberto Contador vs. AC=Antonio Colom? Was Colom on Liberty Seguros too?

 

[Walkman]

One would hope that this should be the end of AC=Colom

If it did, why wouldn't he let them compare his DNA to the DNA in the blood bags? This right here, litterally SCREAMS I am a D.O.P.E.R.

 

[Polish]

I thought Colom was a vegan.
How could he get clen in his system?
Do fruits and veggies contain trace clen?

 

[hrotha]

How did the Guardia Civil make the connection of AC=Alberto Contador vs. AC=Antonio Colom? Was Colom on Liberty Seguros too?

No, he rode for Illes Balears. As far as I know the Guardia Civil never linked AC to anyone but Contador, everything else is fan(boy) speculation.

 

[Maxiton]

Gosh, another ex-team mate of Lance gets popped for doping.
Floyd/Tyler/Alberto

So many others yikes.
Need to update the official list.....

Even though I'm having a laugh at Contador's expense, I do sympathize with him. Yeah, he was busted, but they were only able to do it by going to really extraordinary lengths. I think I predicted this on another forum early last year. Not that it took a genius, that's for sure. I said every rider who's gone on to rival Armstrong on another team has been busted, and why should Contador be any different. And here we are.

 

[flicker]

Even though I'm having a laugh at Contador's expense, I do sympathize with him. Yeah, he was busted, but they were only able to do it by going to really extraordinary lengths. Not to toot my own horn but I predicted this bust or something similar on another forum in March, I think it was, of last year. I think I said that every rider who's gone on to rival Armstrong on another team has been busted, and why should Contador be any different. And here we are.

Really it proves that only a doper can beat my Lance. Lance 8+9.

 

[Walkman]

Really it proves that only a doper can beat my Lance. Lance 8+9.

Since Lance practically is the definition of a doper, you sir, are probably right!

 

[Maxiton]

Really it proves that only a doper can beat my Lance. Lance 8+9.

You mean only a doper can beat your doper? I see your doper and raise you a whole team. Too bad Lance had no chance of beating him on the road (or in the hotel, even).

 

[Barrus]

This thread has nothing to do with Lance, be warned not to involve him in this thread any longer

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

No, he rode for Illes Balears. As far as I know the Guardia Civil never linked AC to anyone but Contador, everything else is fan(boy) speculation.

Makes sense. Thanks.

 

[ergmonkey]

No, he rode for Illes Balears. As far as I know the Guardia Civil never linked AC to anyone but Contador, everything else is fan(boy) speculation.

Correct.

I think the fact that allowed the speculation to run, though, was that Illes Balears/Kelme were also so heavily mixed up in Puerto.

Claiming that the initials could reference a rider from that team didn't seem like too much of a stretch. Obviously, when you think about the group of initials as being a group of Liberty teammates, however, it does start to seem like a stretch.

 

[webvan]

I wonder why the AC bags were never tested, the Italians certainly had the opportunity to do the same for AC as they did for Valverde since AC raced the 2008 Giro and...won it...ah that might explain their lack of interest, who wants the scandal of a doped winner, right ?

Anyway AC said he would appeal : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-will-appeal-tour-de-france-doping-sanction and line of defense is the SOS : "I never failed a doping test"....until the 2010 TDF! Oh and he's no longer quitting.

 

[hrotha]

I wonder why the AC bags were never tested, the Italians certainly had the opportunity to do the same for AC as they did for Valverde since AC raced the 2008 Giro and...won it...ah that might explain their lack of interest, who wants the scandal of a doped winner, right ?

Anyway AC said he would appeal : http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-will-appeal-tour-de-france-doping-sanction and line of defense is the SOS : "I never failed a doping test"....until the 2010 TDF! Oh and he's no longer quitting.

Apparently, there were no AC bags.

 

[Juicy McDrip]

Why would you even wonder? Has AC ever lied to us?!?!

Talk to the Meat.

 

[JA.Tri]

Based on my (very) limited understanding, AC is serving a 1 year ban on the basis that the Spanish Authorities allowed his argument. That is: the 1 year penalty is a strict liability penalty arising from the positive Clenbuturol...with no attribution of SIGNIFICANT fault???

If he had been found to have deliberately doped then I understand the penalty would have been 2 years???

Or is it the case that the "strict liability penalty" is of the order of 3-6 months.

I refer to Bond Law Review
Volume 19 | Issue 1 Article 1
7-1-2007
Inadvertent Doping and the WADA Code
Anne Amos
aamo8029@mail.usyd.edu.au WADA Code...

"WADA Code Provisions dealing with inadvertent doping
There are a number of ways in which the inadvertent doping cases have been
addressed in the WADA Code, the most notable of which are the exceptional
circumstances provisions.14
2 Exceptional Circumstances
Despite doping being defined according to the strict liability principle in the WADA
Code, under Article 10.5 there is opportunity for the hearing panel to take into
account the level of fault of the athlete. Under this provision the ineligibility period
(i.e. the period of suspension after the relevant competition) can be either eliminated
or reduced due to exceptional circumstances. If the athlete is able to show that there
was no fault or negligence on their part and can establish how the prohibited
substance came to be in their system then the ineligibility period can be eliminated
under Article 10.5.1. The commentary to the Code gives an example of where this
section may apply; in the case where ‘despite all due care he or she was sabotaged by
a competitor.’15 The commentary also gives examples of where the ineligibility period
will not be reduced: sabotage by someone within the athlete’s entourage,
administration by the athlete’s physician without the athlete’s knowledge and
mislabelled or contaminated supplements.
If the athlete is unable to meet the high standard of ‘no fault or negligence’ then
Article 10.5.2 (‘no significant fault or negligence’) may be relevant. According to the
commentary, the situations listed above, although not eliminating the ineligibility
period under Article 10.5.1, might lead to a reduction in the ineligibility period under
Article 10.5.2. If the athlete can show that there was no significant fault..."

 

[sniper]

Didn't he swear on his mother's grave or was that just something certain forumites said he should do? Cuz if he had, I would believe him.

funny you remember. that was me some time ago saying that such a statement would lend him some credibility.
Of course, he never did.

 

[hrotha]

funny you remember. that was me some time ago saying that such a statement would lend him some credibility.
Of course, he never did.

Yeah but Basso did.