UCI appeals Contador decision

[Merckx index]

my opinion: this case is dead in the water without ANY new evidence.

opinions ?

Dead in the water for who? If you mean Bert will lose without the DEHP evidence, I agree.

I personally think WADA brings in the plasticizers as circumstantial evidence. It would explain Pound's (?) statement eearlier on that the plasticizertest may be used as such in future cases. It would also explain Lemonde's article.
They don't usually speculate without reliable sources.

I tend to agree. If WADA/UCI feel their case is strong enough without DEHP evidence, they don't have a lot to lose. If Bert's team challenges the results, they can just say, we agree this is not beyond reasonable doubt proof, it just adds more weight to the already unassailable evidence we have that the meat was not contaminated. It's pretty hard to argue with that. Assuming the results are real, one can quibble about how much weight they add, but anything at all is a plus.

But I'd be interested to hear a lawyer's opinion on this. There is that old saying, never ask a witness a question you don't already have the answer to. Likewise, I suppose, never present as evidence what you aren't positive really is evidence.

 

[lean mean &green]

water-tight?

let's revive this thread by restating some pregnant fact and attempting to look into their potential developments.

fact 1:

regardless of what anyone WANTS to see, in a rare unison of voices the two opposing sides (the uci and conta legal team) said virtually one and the same thing: 'there is no plasticizer mention in the current dossier'.

fact 2:

wada did not deny nor confirm any rumours about about the plasticizer test (past, present, or future) SPECIFICALLY with regard to Contador.

fact 3:

cas code allows for either wada or the uci to bring NEW EVIDENCE to the table

speculation 1

some, including l'equipe and seppelt, believe that the NEW EVIDENCE will be wada bringing up the plasticizer issue (either re-testing the samples or the results of the old ones reported by ard)

Speculation 2

the plasticizer test is not ready. that's why carpani objected to l'equipe speculation 1

you realize it's WADA policy, as well as UCI policy, not to comment publicly on specific cases while they are ongoing, right? the UCI occassionally slips a little in this regard but WADA, as expected, is sealed up tighter than a frog's a$$. WADA/UCI providing no comment or trying to avoid commenting means absolutely NOTHING! their reticence is NO indication of the strength of their case, the strength of their evidence, or a clue as to what their strategy will be - NONE!

of course, contador and his attorneys are free to comment publicly if they like. they've done plenty but it's mostly just an attempt to sway a gullible public.

my opinion: this case is dead in the water without ANY new evidence.

um, no. i'd be a fool to try and predict the outcome of this case but the plasticizer data doesn't necessarily make or break it.

 

[Andynonomous]

um, no. i'd be a fool to try and predict the outcome of this case

I agree that it is impossible (unless you are an insider with some priveleged information) to predict the outcome.

There are strong indications that a fix (silent ban) was in the works when the German journo pressured the involved parties to admit that Contador tested positive.

There were strong indications that the RFEC wanted to negotiate with the UCI to lessen the punishment.

It also appeared that the Spanish Presidente interfered with the RFEC decision.

So, it would be naive to believe that a fair and just hearing is going to take place now. It seems as though the norm is "let's manipulate this to what we believe is in our short term advantage".


Of course, if there were no corruption in these institutions, you would be able to predict the outcome, based on the strength of the case.

 

[python]

snip..
So, it would be naive to believe that a fair and just hearing is going to take place now. ....snip

Of course, if there were no corruption in these institutions,...snip

the case is in cas now. are you suggesting that cas is corrupt ? any examples of past cases ?

 

[sniper]

the case is in cas now. are you suggesting that cas is corrupt ? any examples of past cases ?

I guess what he's saying is (and I agree) that in an uncorrupted cycling scene, (a) AC wouldn't have been on his bike since 2006 and (b) we could at least know safely predict that the CAS will sentence him.
The fact that he has been able to avoid a ban up to date, in spite of the fraud he is, makes the outcome of the case unpredictable, even though everybody with the slightest bit of common sense in the brain knows that he's been bloodtransfusing his way up the mountains and through the TT's.
My bet is that the CAS is not corrupt. Nonetheless, AC may get off on technicalities, due to the mess the UCI has made of the case.

 

[python]

I guess what he's saying is (and I agree) that in an uncorrupted cycling scene, (a) AC wouldn't have been on his bike since 2006 and (b) we could at least know safely predict that the CAS will sentence him.
The fact that he has been able to avoid a ban up to date, in spite of the fraud he is, makes the outcome of the case unpredictable, even though everybody with the slightest bit of common sense in the brain knows that he's been bloodtransfusing his way up the mountains and through the TT's.
My bet is that the CAS is not corrupt. Nonetheless, AC may get off on technicalities, due to the mess the UCI has made of the case.

my question was not about 2006 and the operation puerto.neither was it about the uci and whoever else may be corrupt. allegoric generalizations don't interest me at the moment. and besides, there're 3 dozens threads on these topics...

my question was very specific to a poster who implied that the cas is corrupt. if so, i'd like to see examples.

 

[Andynonomous]

Who are making the submissions ?

the case is in cas now. are you suggesting that cas is corrupt ? any examples of past cases ?

I have no idea if the CAS is corrupt, however :

The two parties making the case that the RFEC decision was wrong are :
1) UCI - who by all appearances are certainly corrupt.
2) WADA - who have been less "vigorous" in their pursuit of CHEATS since Ricky Pound is no longer the top guy there.


If the UCI decides that it is not in their interests to sanction Contador, is it unreasonable to assume that a highly political institution will make a less than vigorous submission to the CAS for political reasons ?

 

[sniper]

German anti-doping agency NADA gives athletes Clenbuterol warning for Mexico, after travelers (non-athletes) returning from Mexico test positive for CLEN.

http://newsticker.sueddeutsche.de/list/id/1136125

 

[roundabout]

when is the warning for Spain happenning?

 

[Andynonomous]

New Spanish sports minister

Does anyone think that the new Spanish sports minister will do as well to "maintain the country's fight against doping" than did Jaime Lissavetzky ?


http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1562348

 

[sniper]

SEPPELT Part 2

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...re-on-the-Alberto-Contador-positive-case.aspx

Saxo Bank SunGard has also contacted VeloNation on the issue, stating that the UCI is looking at Clenbuterol alone, and that it was time for the plasticizer issue to be put to one side by the media.

Since then, it has not yet responded to a follow-up question about whether it believes that issue has also been ruled out by WADA.

 

[sniper]

Are you satisfied that your information about plasticizers being present came from a good source?

Hajo Seppelt: Yes. I can say that the source who gave me information about the positive test for Clenbuterol and all things relating to that [including plasticizers] was a very serious one.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...rto-Contador-positive-case.aspx#ixzz1IecyX0wA

 

[sniper]

I could not get an answer to the question if these plasticizers which, according to my sources, might have been found in Contador’s sample are different to usual plasticizers you find, for example, in a French fries package in the supermarket. I didn't get a confirmation at this time about the specific plasticizer type they might have found in the Contador sample. But scientific experts told me that - in general - plasticizers are easy to differentiate. They said that you can analyse with a high level of probability that it came, for example, from a blood bag.

The plasticizer levels were apparently very high. For me, the only problem is that they [the RFEC] didn’t take it into consideration in their decision. The International Skiing Federation FIS is now testing for plasticizers, doing it at the cross country championships. They already do that.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...rto-Contador-positive-case.aspx#ixzz1IedTfRyu

 

[sniper]

The problem is that in Autumn 2010, the plasticizer test had not been ratified. Otherwise, if you see the WADA Code you know that everything which indicates possible drug use could form part of a decision. If the issue is introduced to the case in the future, I could imagine that it will play a role [in deciding]…maybe not the most decisive one, but perhaps it could play a role.

The question at the end will be if you can compare the Ovcharov case [a German table tennis player positive for Clenbuterol who was cleared after ingesting food in China] with the Contador case. I think that everyone who is a little bit more involved in these two cases knows that they are not comparable.

The only thing which they have in common is that we talk about Clenbuterol, but the other stuff is totally different. The Spanish people argued, for example, the question of the dioxin scandal in German eggs, this is unbelievable. My feeling is: they use every argument, even the weakest they find, to get him free.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...rto-Contador-positive-case.aspx#ixzz1Iedyw2FE

 

[sniper]

Finally, you mentioned the Ovcharov case, and said that it was different to Contador’s. Why do you feel it is different?

HS: They did hair testing and they found the same substance in other colleagues of his. That makes it more believable. And then you have to consider that he was in China. The Cologne lab recently published a research on tourists coming back from China. 22 out of 28 came back contaminated with Clenbuterol, so that makes it really, really different. You can see there is a problem in that country, and that is why the cases cannot be compared.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...rto-Contador-positive-case.aspx#ixzz1IefefrCq

 

[hrotha]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8...rto-Contador-positive-case.aspx#ixzz1IefefrCq

Interesting quote. Has anyone seen that publication? I assume they tested random people at the normal levels they test athletes. Did they do any similar research for Europe? It would be a good way to put certain theories to rest.

 

[sniper]

Interesting quote. Has anyone seen that publication? I assume they tested random people at the normal levels they test athletes. Did they do any similar research for Europe? It would be a good way to put certain theories to rest.

What I recently read is that they did the same for Mexico/Mexican tourists, with similar results.
Consequently, the German Anti Doping Agency (NADA) has posted an official CLEN-warning for athletes traveling to either China and Mexico.
But unfortunately no further details e.g. about levels of CLEN found in these tourists samples.

 

[theswordsman]

Here's a twist I didn't see coming. I'm used to headlines for Chinese imports to the U.S. containing melanine, or lead paint. Here's a Chinese publication complaining about imported beef from the USA contaminated with Clenbuterol. Are there some ranchers who know their beef is headed to China so they think they can get away with it, or should U.S. athletes start to worry?

Not for the first time in recent months, a batch of beef imported from the United States has been found to contain clenbuterol residue. The Taichung-based Wang Pin restaurant chain has applied to return the shipment of boned beef, totaling 23 metric tons, to the United States.

The imported beef with residue concentrations exceeding 3.8ppb is currently in storage in a customs warehouse and has not found its way onto the market.

Since early February, five batches of US beef have found to contain clenbuterol residue. These included two shipments of tendon, two shipments of boneless beef and one batch of cattle bones

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1103&MainCatID=&id=20110225000130

 

[sniper]

Weinheim: Internationales Doping Archiv eröffnet

06.04.11, 20:11
Weinheim. Für Uwe Trömer ist die heutige Einweihung des Internationalen Doping Archivs in Weinheim eine Herzensangelegenheit: „Wir haben die Chance, dass alles zusammengetragen wird, dass Opfer erfahren, welche Medikamente ihnen verabreicht wurden und in welchen Mengen,“ so der 49-jährige Sprecher des Dopingopfer-Hilfevereins. In dem Archiv warten Fachbücher, Stasi-Unterlagen, geheime Doktorarbeiten aus DDR-Zeiten und Vernehmungsprotokolle nicht nur aus Deutschland. „Wenn künftig jemand fragt, ,wo kriegen wir das her’, lautet die Antwort: Weinheim“, verdeutlicht Professor Werner Franke die Bedeutung des Archivs. Der streitbare Dopingexperte übergab ein besonderes Geschenk zum offiziellen Start des Archivs in der Kreisstadt: die Unterlagen der Operation Puerto samt deutscher Übersetzung sowie weitere Anlagen zum Fall Contador. (jako/red)

http://www.morgenweb.de/region/rhei..._Internationales_Doping_Archiv_eröffnet_.html

Brief summary:

Weinheim opens an international doping archive.
German doping-guru Werner Franke brings a special gift to the opening of the Archive: all his documents on Operacion Puerto including German translations, as well as other documents pertaining to Contador's case.
"When in the future somebody asks: where do we get that? the answer is: in Weinheim".

 

[python]

Here's a twist I didn't see coming. I'm used to headlines for Chinese imports to the U.S. containing melanine, or lead paint. Here's a Chinese publication complaining about imported beef from the USA contaminated with Clenbuterol. Are there some ranchers who know their beef is headed to China so they think they can get away with it, or should U.S. athletes start to worry?



http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1103&MainCatID=&id=20110225000130

this is interesting. 23 tons of clen-contaminated beef from the us !

for those still keeping the perspective, if measured in typical units used in the european union, 3.8ppb=3.8 micrograms/kg of meat. this is 38 times the legal limit for clen in european bovine muscle (.1 ug/kg).

incidentally, 3.8ppb also relates in aqueous solutions to 3.8 ng/mL.

since contador’s urine is supposedly aqueous ) ), his 50pg/mL was 76 times lower than the illegal american beef.

 

[Merckx index]

Here's a twist I didn't see coming. I'm used to headlines for Chinese imports to the U.S. containing melanine, or lead paint. Here's a Chinese publication complaining about imported beef from the USA contaminated with Clenbuterol. Are there some ranchers who know their beef is headed to China so they think they can get away with it, or should U.S. athletes start to worry?



http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1103&MainCatID=&id=20110225000130

This is Taiwan, not mainland China. Beef exports to China have been banned since 2003, following discovery of some cases of mad cow disease in the U.S. However, apparently a lot of U.S. beef enters China from other countries, see: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a__gtbZr_ZPk

The article linked by swordsman also notes:

Wu Zhong-xi, section chief of the food and drug division of the National Health Administration, said it was the first time that US beef imported by Wang Pin was found to contain clenbuterol, a drug used to make meat leaner.

Overall however, Wu said, this was the second time that a similar US supplier has exported clenbuterol-contaminated beef to Taiwan. Following the first case, authorities raised the rate of random checks to 20% and will continue to apply that rate to the same US beef supplier to ensure that imported beef will not present a threat to public health.

So Taiwan apparently does extensive testing of beef entering the country, while it seems that there may not be any testing of beef as it's exported from the U.S. Also, note that it's legal in the U.S. to treat cattle with certain growth-promoting hormones that are banned in Europe. I believe that CB is NOT one of these allowed substances, but others are.

 

[sniper]

Yeah, the Americans always wanna be the best at everything:

best steak, best tainted steak.

http://www.dallasnews.com/lifestyle...w-to-make-the-best-steak-you-can--at-home.ece

Before you ruin another perfectly good porterhouse by charring it à la Fred Flintstone, take our refresher course on the basics of buying and grilling steak.

Let's be honest. Most civilians can't make a steak come out exactly the way a high-end steakhouse does, because most civilians probably don't own an infrared broiler packing 20,000 BTUs of heat.

So, before you fire up, take our tips from the steak experts. Armed with the right equipment and the basics of grilling technique, you need never embarrass yourself by producing another overcooked, rubbery rib-eye.

SKILLET STEAK

Cooking steak needn't involve a grill at all. For this old-fashioned "cowboy steak" method, you need only a burner, an oven, a heavy-bottomed, cast-iron skillet, a little olive oil and seasonings, and a lot of preheating. Steaks should be at least 1 inch thick.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Also, note that it's legal in the U.S. to treat cattle with certain growth-promoting hormones that are banned in Europe. I believe that CB is NOT one of these allowed substances, but others are.

Correct. IMHO, mass market beef product in the U.S. is really inferior to a european product. In the U.S the closest possible widely available analogue to European standards is usda certified Organic with a 'grass fed' AND 'grass finished' label. All three, not one or two labels.

 

[icefire]

AC has chosen Prof. Ulrich Raas to be part of the CAS board ruling on his case. Strange choice from Alberto, taking into account that Prof. Raas ruled against Valverde one year ago.

http://www.elmundo.es/blogs/deportes/escapa-dos/2011/04/12/un-taliban-para-contador.html

 

[sniper]

mi no sabe

AC has chosen Prof. Ulrich Raas to be part of the CAS board ruling on his case. Strange choice from Alberto, taking into account that Prof. Raas ruled against Valverde one year ago.

http://www.elmundo.es/blogs/deportes/escapa-dos/2011/04/12/un-taliban-para-contador.html

How come AC get's to "choose" anybody in the first place?
What's that all about?