UCI Won't Speed Up Clentador Decision

[HoustonHammer]

i don't follow berzin's suggestion but you're incorrect, i believe, clen is not a specified substance according to wada code and several cas rulings. there is a definition some place in wadc.

This statement is correct. 'Specified substances' are actually a subcategory of 'prohibited substances' within the code that are considered less serious and carry lighter penalties in some instances, no automatic provisional suspension pending results management, etc. Because Clenbuterol is classified by WADA as an 'anabolic agent' it is explicitly excluded from the 'specified substances' category. It's in the big league class that carries the heavier penalties.

 

[python]

Again - forget the blood doping, or dhep test, or if he has an outstanding parking ticket, its all irrelavant.

He has Clen in his system - thats it.
Its not up to the UCI to 'delay' the case - it is up to Contador to speed it up so he can contest his AAF.

where did you see me endorsing the delay save trying to understand the reasons for one or giving the uci a pass ?

one thing you could jumping a gun hear on, though the clen aaf is a fact, could be that it's not completely out of the question (yet) that under the wada influence they could be working on a larger charge than just just clen.

then, at least given the sports condition, i'd support a delay because i don't want to see it thrown out of cas.

 

[Rocksteady]

They traced salmonella contamination in the US back to a single farm, I don't think it would difficult to trace the meat back to it's source and prove the farmer used Clen.

There is one fault in your logic there. There were left over eggs and/or egg cartons... The ones that didn't get eaten and the labels on the cartons were traced back to the farm (not very far from where I live actually).

For Conti, We've heard nothing about any still contaminated meat or packaging that would allow the meat to be traced.

I think its still possible to trace back, and is probably in process, but we would know if they found a farm full of Clen Cows. Pretty unlikely but still possible.

 

[scribe]

I'd think Spain would be motivated to find the source of this contamination. Go to the point of origin and start tracing through the channels, questioning and testing. I don't think they are taking it seriously for a reason. Not because Spain gives athletes a free pass so much, but because the thought of it coming from there is rather fantastical.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

i don't follow berzin's suggestion but you're incorrect, i believe, clen is not a specified substance according to wada code and several cas rulings. there is a definition some place in wadc.

Ok - its not a 'specified substance', but it is a 'Prohibited Substance'.
It is up to Contador to establish how clen got in to his system, otherwise he is looking at a 2yr ban.

 

[Merckx index]

I assume this has been posted somewhere here before, but it seems strange for McQ to come out with this while AC's case is unresolved. If a blood transfusion charge could be established, Bert's career would be virtually over. And even if not, one could argue that setting the bar higher means that reduced penalties also end up longer.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...-bans-for-first-serious-doping-violation.aspx

In the wake of some recent high profile cases, the UCI has confirmed that it is recommending doubling the length of bans for a serious doping offences. Riders transfusing blood or using substances such as EPO, CERA, testosterone and other similar products will face sanctions of up to four years, a measure the governing body will hope has a serious deterrent effect.

And this:

FDJ trainer Frederic Grappe has said...he found it difficult to understand how [Contador] could improve ‘by ten percent’ between the Critérium du Dauphiné and the Tour de France.

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...in-form-for-Tour-de-France.aspx#ixzz13106blA1

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If we want the sport to develop, we would have to start from the top down.

If you start from the riders up, it will never get past that point. It will stay there like it has. The men in positions of power will do what they can to consolidate their positions-how easier to do that than to put the onus of all doping positives squarely on the shoulders of the riders when the reality is they are the last cog in the whole machine?

This is how we got from Hein Vergruggen to Pat McQuaid. They are virtually the same person. And the person being groomed for McQuaids' position when he decides to step down will be a carbon copy of him.

Thats why I keep saying that anti-doping needs to be run independently outside of the UCI.

Then it does not matter who is in charge of the UCI - as they will have no control over it. And they can get back to what they were meant to be doing, regulating and developing the sport of cycling.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I assume this has been posted somewhere here before, but it seems strange for McQ to come out with this while AC's case is unresolved. If a blood transfusion charge could be established, Bert's career would be virtually over. And even if not, one could argue that setting the bar higher means that reduced penalties also end up longer.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...-bans-for-first-serious-doping-violation.aspx

And this:

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...in-form-for-Tour-de-France.aspx#ixzz13106blA1

McQuaids comments? he said the same 3 years ago -as I highlighted on this thread.
Its just part of his "seriously, I am really really tough on doping, so I am" PR shit.

 

[python]

Ok - its not a 'specified substance', but it is a 'Prohibited Substance'.
It is up to Contador to establish how clen got in to his system, otherwise he is looking at a 2yr ban.

yes, but the difference between 'specified' and other listed banned substances is substantial and, as HH explained, a specified would have made contador's job regarding how clen got into his system much easier, perhaps opposite of what you or others thought. so, it was important to point out the inaccuracy. i was not picky or being pedantic or disrespectful.

regarding the actual mechanics of how clen got into his system, again, blood transfusion probability, plays an enormousness factual and evidentiary role, regardless of whether you want to entertain it or not.

it comes down to how wadac article 10.5 gets addressed. earlier in the thread there was some interesting discussion about that.

 

[Polish]

I'd think Spain would be motivated to find the source of this contamination. Go to the point of origin and start tracing through the channels, questioning and testing. I don't think they are taking it seriously for a reason. Not because Spain gives athletes a free pass so much, but because the thought of it coming from there is rather fantastical.

I believe it was the FDA that cracked the unhealthy salmonella case.
Did not take all that long.

Hey! - maybe the FDA could be a "good neighbor" and help get to the bottom of the Alberto Clen Doping Case.

WADA could act as a liason between the FDA, Interpol, and Spanish authorities.

You are going down, Spanish Clen Doping Rancher People. Grrrr.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

yes, but the difference between 'specified' and other listed banned substances is substantial and, as HH explained, a specified would have made contador's job regarding how clen got into his system much easier, perhaps opposite of what you or others thought. so, it was important to point out the inaccuracy. i was not picky or being pedantic or disrespectful.

regarding the actual mechanics of how clen got into his system, again, blood transfusion probability, plays an enormousness factual and evidentiary role, regardless of whether you want to entertain it or not.

it comes down to how wadac article 10.5 gets addressed. earlier in the thread there was some interesting discussion about that.

No, wasn't disagreeing - just acknowledging my mistake - personally I prefer it when someone is pedantic, as 'we' can than offer our opinion's based on facts.

Again though - while I think the blood transfusion theory has some merit - i believe it should be discounted as I somehow doubt Mr. Contador and his legal team will offer that as the explanation to how Clen got in his system.

 

[Polish]

the thing that you have to keep in mind, as i noted in an earlier post, that dehp is:
(i) not validated
(ii) we don't know if the leak was valid
(iii) if it was valid, which rider did it belong to
(iv) if the other top 5-10 did not show DEHP
(v) if it agreed with the only officially validated method - biopass
etc...etc

it just simply can't be applied for in legally defensible manner w/o something more substantial. thus, as i said a million times, it's practically worthless as a standalone test, even after the validation. this fuzziness works in contador's favour

But the "Plastisizer Fail" is a major fail in the Court of Public Opinion.

And the Court of Public Opinion is the most important Court in this case.
The Court of Public Opinion will make orbreak young Alberto, make no mistake.
The Court of Public Opinion is on the mind of the UCI and WADA duh.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sports/cycling/05cycling.html

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=5649979

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/05/tour-champ-contador-fails_n_750544.html

Of course Humo will be happy to see Alberto continue to race. It would lead to explosive sales for a follow-up story next June...

 

[Polyarmour]

And please don't come back with the Colo thing, unless you can add more info or address the questions I posed up-thread. Cause if not, Colo is no relevant precedent!

I don't know how you can say that Colo is not a relevant precedent???

I have tried to backtrack the questions you have raised about Colo as follows.

18% of the meat may be tainted, but what % of the population show positive. Is it close to 100% because lots of steak gets eaten, and you only need one dodgy steak a fortnight to test positive......or is it for example 12%, because people generally eat animals from the same source, and the chance of testing positive after eating contaminated meat is 67%?

I'm not sure how Colo proved his case, but do these percentages really matter? If he can prove he ate Clen tainted meat that's all that is required isn't it? How does he prove he ate Clen tainted meat? Maybe he constructs a case based on samples from the same butcher (after the fact), tests on other people who also ate the same meat (if he has them), tests on other people who shop from the same butcher (after the fact), generic studies on Clen contamination in the local population, testimonies from farmers/abbatoirs/livestock agents that supply the butcher or the region (if he can get them)? And anything else he can get his hands on. Maybe all together this is enough to convince a jury that he (probably) accidentally ingested Clen.

Not a theory really. Just demonstrating that the 18% stat is pretty useless in determining the likelihood of an individual having an AAF due to contaminated meat, without stats on how that translates into the population.

Pretty useless? We know Colo successfully proved his case and you can bet the 18% had a lot to do with it one way or another. Just because we don't know the details doesn't mean we should ignore it. Contador is trying to prove his accidental contamination case based on a 0% figure.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Thats why I keep saying that anti-doping needs to be run independently outside of the UCI.

Then it does not matter who is in charge of the UCI - as they will have no control over it. And they can get back to what they were meant to be doing, regulating and developing the sport of cycling.

+1 Couldn't agree more.

 

[HoustonHammer]

I'm not sure how Colo proved his case, but do these percentages really matter? If he can prove he ate Clen tainted meat that's all that is required isn't it? How does he prove he ate Clen tainted meat? Maybe he constructs a case based on samples from the same butcher (after the fact), tests on other people who also ate the same meat (if he has them), tests on other people who shop from the same butcher (after the fact), generic studies on Clen contamination in the local population, testimonies from farmers/abbatoirs/livestock agents that supply the butcher or the region (if he can get them)? And anything else he can get his hands on. Maybe all together this is enough to convince a jury that he (probably) accidentally ingested Clen.



Pretty useless? We know Colo successfully proved his case and you can bet the 18% had a lot to do with it one way or another. Just because we don't know the details doesn't mean we should ignore it. Contador is trying to prove his accidental contamination case based on a 0% figure.

I tend to think the Colo case is pretty relevant, and I think you're quite right that "all" he has to do is prove he ate tainted meat. Of course that might be hard to do if he got the Clen from a pill bottle, but as AC himself has said, 'where there's a will, there's a way'.

I also agree that the 18% value probably had a lot to do with the Colo ruling, but that's where the cases diverge. AC has no such statistic to work with, which means he might actually have to find the farm in question. Poor farmer.

The thing to remember is that in the end, this route only gets him down to a one year ban and a TdF disqualification. Which says to me that he and Pat have some entirely different up their sleeves.

 

[python]

Which says to me that he and Pat have some entirely different up their sleeves.

why are you consistently overlooking that wada is involved ? i would suggest that the simplicity of your scenario does not get wada enough credit or you may have overlooked some elements in the case.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

But you see the problem, right? There are two elements: how did it happen, and could the athlete have reasonably foreseen it.

Yeah I get the catch 22. It means that population data on contamination should never be enough evidence for an athlete to get a reduced ban. They need some separate evidence demonstrating contamination was likely to have occurred in that particular case. They hardly ever have the necessary separate evidence......so a ban almost always happens, and it's reasonable to expect that is what will happen to Contador.

If he can prove he ate Clen tainted meat that's all that is required isn't it?

He needs to show that he wasn't negligent in eating that meat. He needs to show that he couldn't reasonably expect the meat to be tainted. So food from a country where there was low % contamination would be good......as long as he has some other evidence that he had a rare contaminated steak from that country.

Pretty useless? We know Colo successfully proved his case and you can bet the 18% had a lot to do with it one way or another. Just because we don't know the details doesn't mean we should ignore it. Contador is trying to prove his accidental contamination case based on a 0% figure.

I said, the 18% stat is pretty useless in determining the likelihood of an individual having an AAF due to contaminated meat, without stats on how that translates into the population, as explained more fully here. I'm not saying Colo didn't make good use of it in his case. I'm saying the 18% doesn't tell us what the probability is that the Clen got into his system from meat, because that number will not be 18%. (I suspect it will be a lot LOWER than 18%)

So, we actually don't know how strong Colo's case was. If the stats were about all he had, I think his case was very weak......a case where the athlete had direct evidence that they actually had contaminated food would be much stronger. That's what makes it difficult to use the Colo case as a precedent.