What I don't understand

Oct 20, 2010
87
0
0
Hello,

Hope this already hasn't been discussed somewhere else (I'm sure it has) but -

Contador only tested positive the one day? No other day? How can this be I don't understand.

Wouldn't AC have tested positive for multiple tests during the tour?
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Yes he testd positive the day after his initially positive test as well. Other than tat he did not tet positive, something that is in line with the half life of clen
 
Sep 14, 2010
212
0
0
flatclimb said:
Hello,

Hope this already hasn't been discussed somewhere else (I'm sure it has) but -

Contador only tested positive the one day? No other day? How can this be I don't understand.

Wouldn't AC have tested positive for multiple tests during the tour?
What seems to be the accepted reasoning is that the positive was likely caused by Contador re-injecting his blood. This theory also explains the presence of the plastic molecules that would have come from the bag storing the blood.
 
Oct 20, 2010
87
0
0
So only Vino and AC were tested on the 2nd rest day? Seems silly that more wouldn't be subjected to testing. Their only difference was that Vino ate different meat so he tested clean.

I think the ball was dropped big time on this one. If any of the other riders who also ate the meat tested + it would be game over. Without any other positives the blood transfusion theory is only a possible option so how do you go from theory to a confirmed truth when it comes to doping?

I think the case will go back to the UCI and they'll have a tough time making a decision about this. I sure am.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
flatclimb said:
So only Vino and AC were tested on the 2nd rest day? Seems silly that more wouldn't be subjected to testing. Their only difference was that Vino ate different meat so he tested clean.

I think the ball was dropped big time on this one. If any of the other riders who also ate the meat tested + it would be game over. Without any other positives the blood transfusion theory is only a possible option so how do you go from theory to a confirmed truth when it comes to doping?

I think the case will go back to the UCI and they'll have a tough time making a decision about this. I sure am.
Its already a "confirmed truth" - Contador has tested positive for Clenbuterol.

Also the case will not go back to the UCI.
WADA, UCI or the athlete can appeal any decision from the Spanish Fed (RFEC) which is heard by CAS.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,463
0
0
WADA pretty much gives every cyclist a ban after they tested positive without looking at anything else. But when it's a tennis player or some other sport they listen to the biggest bullcrap =D

I still think it's disgusting what WADA and CAS did with Iljo Keisse.

If I was Contador I wouldn't even bother with a defence. WADA is going to appeal anyway. I'd just tell them to **** off and then laugh at their faces when I start winning again after the ban.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
El Pistolero said:
WADA pretty much gives every cyclist a ban after they tested positive without looking at anything else. But when it's a tennis player or some other sport they listen to the biggest bullcrap =D

I still think it's disgusting what WADA and CAS did with Iljo Keisse.

If I was Contador I wouldn't even bother with a defence. WADA is going to appeal anyway. I'd just tell them to **** off and then laugh at their faces when I start winning again after the ban.
You realize that WADA do not sanction people?

They can only appeal a case which is adjudicated separately by CAS.
 
flatclimb said:
Hello,

Hope this already hasn't been discussed somewhere else (I'm sure it has) but -

Contador only tested positive the one day? No other day? How can this be I don't understand.

Wouldn't AC have tested positive for multiple tests during the tour?
I think you fully understand.
 

Skandar Akbar

BANNED
Nov 20, 2010
177
0
0
El Pistolero said:
WADA pretty much gives every cyclist a ban after they tested positive without looking at anything else. But when it's a tennis player or some other sport they listen to the biggest bullcrap =D

I still think it's disgusting what WADA and CAS did with Iljo Keisse.

If I was Contador I wouldn't even bother with a defence. WADA is going to appeal anyway. I'd just tell them to **** off and then laugh at their faces when I start winning again after the ban.
:D this stuff hurts? The Pistol got caught trying to lose a few pounds....LMAO @ anyone who wants to defend the doper.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Yes, they actually had six tests in a row from Contador. The Clenbuterol levels were 0 on days 1, 2, 5 and 6. Day 3 had the amount everyone knows about, and day 4 had less than half of that.

Vino was the only other Astana rider tested that day, but he did eat other meat at a different time. There's no word that his samples even went to the same lab as Contador's, though, and even if his Spanish teammates had been tested, they would not have gone there either. Almost all of the Tour de France samples went to the Lausanne Lab. They would not have been able to detect the amounts of Clenbuterol found in Contador, as labs are only required to find forty times that level. If they existed, I guess the B samples could have gone to Cologne to be tested at the higher standard, but who would have a clean test and volunteer to have it looked at by much more exacting equipment?

The UCI arranged to have samples on three days sent to the Cologne Lab for testing for new substances. In real life, they only sent ten samples for the whole Tour. We know that at least six of Alnerto's went there, because of the Clenbuterol tests on those six days in a row.

Damsgaard was the first one to say that Contador must have transfused on the rest day. He had access to zero data when he announced that to the press, so I have zero respect for him as a human being.

The UCI has made no statement on plasticizers, and as far as I know, they don't exist in the 600 pages sent to the Spanish Federation's Competition Committee. Some people believe what a lab employee allegedly broke his confidentiality agreement to tell the New York Times, but that was an unspecified amount on an unverified test.

The OP laments that more teammates weren't tested that same day. I'm afraid a lot of us think that there was better testing at the Tour than there was. Remember that the main interest of the UCI is to maintain an image of a clean sport - they aren't an aggressive policing force.

There were 198 riders at the start of the race. Not wasting time counting the drop-outs, over 21 race days and 2 rest days, there were around 4500 rider/days where guys could have been tested.

There were 251 urine tests for the whole race. That includes: (these are total tests, not people)

65 standard
144 Standard +EPO (so not everyone was tested even once)
30 IRMS (for steroid profiling)
12 "other"

There were 215 total blood tests during the race, out of those 4500 rider/day opportunities. The tests:

124 were for the Biological Passport only, testing for values to be compared over time, not for doping substances. That leaves 91 blood tests that were checked for anything at all, and none of those were tested for more than one thing

33 samples. not riders, were tested for HGH only

32 samples, not riders, were tested for CERA only

26 samples were only tested for Homologous Blood Transfusions (blood doping but not with your own blood)

10 of the above blood samples, mostly or all Contador, were subjected to the extra scrutiny of the Cologne Lab.

The UCI made no arrangements to have any samples other than Contador's stored for more than three months.

Some riders considered the highest risk of cheating weren't tested at all. If you deduct the stage winners and those in the yellow jersey, the odds of other guys being tested for even one substance during the whole race diminish.

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Independent-Observer/WADA_IO_Report_TDF2010_EN.pdf
 
Aug 4, 2009
1,056
0
0
If it wasnt for the fact you are required to sign away your rights to a proper civil court such as a Federal Court WADA would not stand a chance of any sanctions.
It is all done via CAS and WADA control CAS .

Challenge WADA is a Federal Court and they dont have a chance there much stronger laws .
As it is these people are above the LAW and above human rights laws.
But if no one took drugs for 2 years they would be out of Business quick.

They cant find something that isnt there so nothing to do except pack up and go home. Funding would dissapear.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
theswordsman said:
snip

The OP laments that more teammates weren't tested that same day.
snip
as i pointed out countless times, this could be the essence of contador's defence.

i would not be surprised if his lawyers lamented the same regarding urine samples but smiled with joy regarding the hair samples.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
theswordsman said:
Yes, they actually had six tests in a row from Contador. The Clenbuterol levels were 0 on days 1, 2, 5 and 6. Day 3 had the amount everyone knows about, and day 4 had less than half of that.

Vino was the only other Astana rider tested that day, but he did eat other meat at a different time. There's no word that his samples even went to the same lab as Contador's, though, and even if his Spanish teammates had been tested, they would not have gone there either. Almost all of the Tour de France samples went to the Lausanne Lab. They would not have been able to detect the amounts of Clenbuterol found in Contador, as labs are only required to find forty times that level. If they existed, I guess the B samples could have gone to Cologne to be tested at the higher standard, but who would have a clean test and volunteer to have it looked at by much more exacting equipment?

The UCI arranged to have samples on three days sent to the Cologne Lab for testing for new substances. In real life, they only sent ten samples for the whole Tour. We know that at least six of Alnerto's went there, because of the Clenbuterol tests on those six days in a row.

Damsgaard was the first one to say that Contador must have transfused on the rest day. He had access to zero data when he announced that to the press, so I have zero respect for him as a human being.

The UCI has made no statement on plasticizers, and as far as I know, they don't exist in the 600 pages sent to the Spanish Federation's Competition Committee. Some people believe what a lab employee allegedly broke his confidentiality agreement to tell the New York Times, but that was an unspecified amount on an unverified test.

The OP laments that more teammates weren't tested that same day. I'm afraid a lot of us think that there was better testing at the Tour than there was. Remember that the main interest of the UCI is to maintain an image of a clean sport - they aren't an aggressive policing force.

There were 198 riders at the start of the race. Not wasting time counting the drop-outs, over 21 race days and 2 rest days, there were around 4500 rider/days where guys could have been tested.

There were 251 urine tests for the whole race. That includes: (these are total tests, not people)

65 standard
144 Standard +EPO (so not everyone was tested even once)
30 IRMS (for steroid profiling)
12 "other"

There were 215 total blood tests during the race, out of those 4500 rider/day opportunities. The tests:

124 were for the Biological Passport only, testing for values to be compared over time, not for doping substances. That leaves 91 blood tests that were checked for anything at all, and none of those were tested for more than one thing

33 samples. not riders, were tested for HGH only

32 samples, not riders, were tested for CERA only

26 samples were only tested for Homologous Blood Transfusions (blood doping but not with your own blood)

10 of the above blood samples, mostly or all Contador, were subjected to the extra scrutiny of the Cologne Lab.

The UCI made no arrangements to have any samples other than Contador's stored for more than three months.

Some riders considered the highest risk of cheating weren't tested at all. If you deduct the stage winners and those in the yellow jersey, the odds of other guys being tested for even one substance during the whole race diminish.

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Independent-Observer/WADA_IO_Report_TDF2010_EN.pdf
To the highlighted - is that how you know that Contador had 6 of the samples that went to Cologne??
They would also have been testing for clen at Lausanne - but the UCI wanted some target tested samples sent to Cologne as the IO report stated:
to complement those performed by Lausanne Laboratory and that a focus should be placed on the analysis of new substances and/or methods drugs and/or with new analytical methods in use by the Cologne laboratory.
Page 32 of the IO report.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
To the highlighted - is that how you know that Contador had 6 of the samples that went to Cologne??
They would also have been testing for clen at Lausanne - but the UCI wanted some target tested samples sent to Cologne as the IO report stated:
Page 32 of the IO report.

If the Lausanne lab had tested for Clenbuterol, it would have not been as precise as the one at Cologne, as labs are only required to be able to test for a minimum of 40 times the level found in Contador.

I've read the whole report a number of times. You might have missed this from page ten:

There are also new substances and/or methods that can now be detected or suspected, yet the UCI only sent ten target test samples to the WADA-Accredited Laboratory of the German Sports University, Cologne, for additional analysis for new substances and/or methods
I say that six of Contador's samples ended up at Cologne (not knowing if they were all part of the original ten) because they had the six days in a row of Clenbuterol results published in the De Boer report.

WADA and UCI scientists had two months to build a case against Contador. If he tested positive for 50 picograms of Clenbuterol on July 21, and for 20 picograms on July 22, both figures at least 40 times below the minimum required testing standard, and they had urine samples available from July 19 and July 20, they would have had the urine from the prior days tested or retested at Cologne to see if there were higher amounts, rather than trying to build a whole legal case on the 50 picogram amount. If they could have found 100 on July 20 and 200 on July 19, their case would have been much stronger.

The Lausanne Lab is only required to be able to spot 2000 picograms or more (based on the corrected UCI figure of 40 times the 50). The UCI and WADA had scientists from around the world working on this. There's no way they would have been satisfied that his July 20 level was under 2000, and not checked to see if it was more than 50 - say 1000 or 1500 or 1999. After two months of scrutiny, they stayed with the 50. So if they didn't test at least 4 in Cologne, they're morons, and they stated they had top guys looking at least at all of his Tour samples, so I feel safe with the six. I believe they ran their most stringent tests available on everything in trying to go after the three time Tour de France winner.

http://www.velonation.com/Photos/Photo-Album/mmid/614/mediaid/568.aspx

Edit: The De Boer report was requested by Contador's lawyer on August 31 and published/submitted September 3. So he was using information available at that time, before WADA and the UCI started scrutinizing all the Contador samples from the Tour in preparing a case to present to the Spanish Federation. They had almost two months to get more detailed results. No one came up with more than the 50. There's no way they didn't look for more once the positive became public.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
theswordsman said:
If the Lausanne lab had tested for Clenbuterol, it would have not been as precise as the one at Cologne, as labs are only required to be able to test for a minimum of 40 times the level found in Contador.

I've read the whole report a number of times. You might have missed this from page ten:



I say that six of Contador's samples ended up at Cologne (not knowing if they were all part of the original ten) because they had the six days in a row of Clenbuterol results published in the De Boer report.

WADA and UCI scientists had two months to build a case against Contador. If he tested positive for 50 picograms of Clenbuterol on July 21, and for 20 picograms on July 22, both figures at least 40 times below the minimum required testing standard, and they had urine samples available from July 19 and July 20, they would have had the urine from the prior days tested or retested at Cologne to see if there were higher amounts, rather than trying to build a whole legal case on the 50 picogram amount. If they could have found 100 on July 20 and 200 on July 19, their case would have been much stronger.

The Lausanne Lab is only required to be able to spot 2000 picograms or more (based on the corrected UCI figure of 40 times the 50). The UCI and WADA had scientists from around the world working on this. There's no way they would have been satisfied that his July 20 level was under 2000, and not checked to see if it was more than 50 - say 1000 or 1500 or 1999. After two months of scrutiny, they stayed with the 50. So if they didn't test at least 4 in Cologne, they're morons, and they stated they had top guys looking at least at all of his Tour samples, so I feel safe with the six. I believe they ran their most stringent tests available on everything in trying to go after the three time Tour de France winner.

http://www.velonation.com/Photos/Photo-Album/mmid/614/mediaid/568.aspx

Edit: The De Boer report was requested by Contador's lawyer on August 31 and published/submitted September 3. So he was using information available at that time, before WADA and the UCI started scrutinizing all the Contador samples from the Tour in preparing a case to present to the Spanish Federation. They had almost two months to get more detailed results. No one came up with more than the 50. There's no way they didn't look for more once the positive became public.
When you say THEY you mean ACs legal team supplied the data - so it cannot be said with any certainty if all 6 samples were tested in Cologne.

Also in the article you quoted De Boer received the information "orally" from Contadors attorney Ramos - so he has not viewed that available data.

Unfortunatley De Boer is a paid biochemist who defends those who have been caught and his bias and misinterpretation was already evident when he was dealing with Fuyu Li and he stated:
“Laboratories must be able to find 1.00 ng/mL, while a normal threshold value is considered to be 2.00 ng/mL. The value of 0.05-0.10 ng/mL that was found in Fuyu Li’s body points clearly in the direction of a contamination. On top of that, such a low dose would not help his performance in any way.”
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
flatclimb said:
Hello,

Hope this already hasn't been discussed somewhere else (I'm sure it has) but -

Contador only tested positive the one day? No other day? How can this be I don't understand.

Wouldn't AC have tested positive for multiple tests during the tour?
If the Clenbuterol was almost fully metabolizedin his blood when he banked it for a future transfusion, and then he later transfused it, that could certainly explain what you're saying.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS