I'm not actually following the thread these days, but the Competition Committee decision is imminent, and I just stumbled across an old Twitlonger post of mine.
You'll remember that Juliet Macur and the New York Times, with an anonymous source, were the main impetus behind the "Clenbuterol came from a blood transfusion" theory. A lot of you trust that source and the Times story. Here's what I wrote back in December:
I just gave the Juliet Macur article about Contador and plasticizers another read to refresh my memory. It doesn't state that it was a person from the Cologne lab leaking the info, just a person who apparently has no integrity:
"The International Cycling Union drug-testing chaperones took the urine sample from Contador on July 20, the eve of the Tour’s final rest day, said the person, who wanted to remain anonymous because of an agreement to keep the information confidential while Contador’s investigation is continuing. "
So yeah, a person gives their word to keep information secret, then rushes to the phone to share the information with the world. I hate people like that in all walks of life - politics or whatever. Did they plan to keep the promise at the time they made it, or did they lie to get the information and then betray the trust? The only thing they're able to keep confidential is their own name?
But the big sentence of the story is kind of buried.
"Now, however, the failed test for clenbuterol and for the plasticizers appear to have occurred on different days."
People claim that the existence of the plasticizers proves that the Clenbuterol was not from contamination, but he had used it on purpose previously, stored blood, and absolutely positively transfused on the rest day.
But the alleged high plasticizer level was on July 20, a day the urine sample showed no Clenbuterol whatsoever. If what so many people believe is true, the Clenbuterol level would have been more on the 20th than the 50 picograms found on the 21st. Yet there was zero. If anything, it makes a stronger case that the Clenbuterol, which is the only thing named in the doping case, was from contamination, and that if there was transfused blood, it showed no evidence of prior consumption of Clenbuterol.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sports/cycling/05cycling.html?ref=juliet_macur
In the past week, Contador did radio interviews with Cadenaser and Cope (19:00), then an interview with Sport.ES, then a 25:00 interview on RTVE, plus Andy Ramos did a couple of interviews, and now Alberto was interviewed on TV for over an hour. All of it is available on the Internet, and so far, the coverage in English was one article in Velonews a few days ago. There's a whole lot of information out there people who don't actively look aren't ever going to see. Here's a sample - copied and pasted tweets:
Audio of @AlbertoContador interview at Cadenaser
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4k9g4vk
Another audio of interview with @AlbertoContador
http://www.ondacero.es/OndaCero/play/A_12549338
19:00 audio interview with @AlbertoContador & COPE
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6dlae53
25 minute radio interview of @AlbertoContador discussing 33 pages submitted to RFEC today
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4nbdegn
Andy Ramos talks about the @AlbertoContador case
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4gve2od
Competition Committee to decide within a week, Contador did previously file a complaint about the steak
http://preview.tinyurl.com/4raqssd
Lab methodology - "How to find 0.00000000005 grams of doping"
http://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/videnskab_og_teknik/article1500925.ece
Video 1 of 5 of the lengthy @AlbertoContador interview on Veo 7 yesterday
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t5ih2wc_yA
If the Competition Committee declares him innocent, don't be too surprised if Contador shows up at the Giro. But do be surprised if you see the possibility raised in English.