Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[vedrafjord]

Re: Re:

Bertie is my favourite rider but age catches up with everyone. Simple. The body will not react the same way as you get older otherwise we would see riders retiring in their 50's.

My baloney has a first name, it's H-O-R-N-E-R
My baloney has a second name, it's R-E-B-E-L-L-I-N

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

About the other one though (about the one which he 'doping is only on low levels' or sth like that) there is no excuse for it. He could have simply said 'I believe there is not doping in cycling' but no, he said that doping is only on low levels which is a hypocritical thing to say.

If he said that, it would be easy to prove him wrong by just pointing at the dozens of riders that test positive each year at continental level, around the globe. That is probably why he said low level still dopes, in for example South America so many riders test positive for outdated drugs.

 

[jilbiker]

Re: Re:

Bertie is my favourite rider but age catches up with everyone. Simple. The body will not react the same way as you get older otherwise we would see riders retiring in their 50's.

My baloney has a first name, it's H-O-R-N-E-R
My baloney has a second name, it's R-E-B-E-L-L-I-N

Wait but Horner was on the beach (relative to the conquests of AC) most of his career so where was wear and tear? I don't think its a fair comparison. But he seems like he got a special age boosting juice. Please share Horner.

 

[roundabout]

Re: Re:

Contador: [..] 3. more or less check [...]

http://www.abc.es/videos-deportes/20110128/contador-considero-ejemplo-limpieza-767561428001.html

That's a "nope" in my book.

There are better examples than this, tbh.
For example, the one where he said that the doping is only on the low levels or sth like that. (from 2015 or 2016)
Or the one where he said he wishes for more ban for blood doping.
I wish he wouldn't speak about these matters btw. It doesn't reflect him well. And certainly enough reason for people to dislike him. (Even though I'm a fan)

Well, what is he supposed to answer when he is asked about such topics? The difference between him and other moralists is that he doesn't come out to crucify riders that have been caught, doesn't claim to be better (cleaner) than everyone else, doesn't claim his victories are victories for clean cycling, etc.
If Froome is a 'nope', then Contador definitely deserves to be 'more or less check', simply because he usually keeps his mouth shut.

Argh. Two quotes above Contador says he considers himself an example of cleanliness. Two quotes below apparently Contador doesn't claim to be cleaner than everyone else.

 

[roundabout]

Re: Re:

Contador: [..] 3. more or less check [...]

http://www.abc.es/videos-deportes/20110128/contador-considero-ejemplo-limpieza-767561428001.html

That's a "nope" in my book.

There are better examples than this, tbh.
For example, the one where he said that the doping is only on the low levels or sth like that. (from 2015 or 2016)
Or the one where he said he wishes for more ban for blood doping.
I wish he wouldn't speak about these matters btw. It doesn't reflect him well. And certainly enough reason for people to dislike him. (Even though I'm a fan)

Well, what is he supposed to answer when he is asked about such topics? The difference between him and other moralists is that he doesn't come out to crucify riders that have been caught, doesn't claim to be better (cleaner) than everyone else, doesn't claim his victories are victories for clean cycling, etc.
If Froome is a 'nope', then Contador definitely deserves to be 'more or less check', simply because he usually keeps his mouth shut.

Froome is even worse than 'nope' in that category. Contador would get 0 while Froome would get -0,5.

About the blood doping one, they probably asked him about it and he answered like that (from what I remember) though he could have said sth like 'We don't need making the ban longer, everyone deserves a 2nd chance, 2 (if it was 4 years when he saif that make 2 a 4 instead) years is enough'. But there can be an answer 'If he had answered like you said some people would have criticized for him' which can be fair enough.

About the other one though (about the one which he 'doping is only on low levels' or sth like that) there is no excuse for it. He could have simply said 'I believe there is not doping in cycling' but no, he said that doping is only on low levels which is a hypocritical thing to say.

So outright lying is preferable?

 

[Forever The Best]

Re: Re:

http://www.abc.es/videos-deportes/20110128/contador-considero-ejemplo-limpieza-767561428001.html

That's a "nope" in my book.

There are better examples than this, tbh.
For example, the one where he said that the doping is only on the low levels or sth like that. (from 2015 or 2016)
Or the one where he said he wishes for more ban for blood doping.
I wish he wouldn't speak about these matters btw. It doesn't reflect him well. And certainly enough reason for people to dislike him. (Even though I'm a fan)

Well, what is he supposed to answer when he is asked about such topics? The difference between him and other moralists is that he doesn't come out to crucify riders that have been caught, doesn't claim to be better (cleaner) than everyone else, doesn't claim his victories are victories for clean cycling, etc.
If Froome is a 'nope', then Contador definitely deserves to be 'more or less check', simply because he usually keeps his mouth shut.

Froome is even worse than 'nope' in that category. Contador would get 0 while Froome would get -0,5.

About the blood doping one, they probably asked him about it and he answered like that (from what I remember) though he could have said sth like 'We don't need making the ban longer, everyone deserves a 2nd chance, 2 (if it was 4 years when he saif that make 2 a 4 instead) years is enough'. But there can be an answer 'If he had answered like you said some people would have criticized for him' which can be fair enough.

About the other one though (about the one which he 'doping is only on low levels' or sth like that) there is no excuse for it. He could have simply said 'I believe there is not doping in cycling' but no, he said that doping is only on low levels which is a hypocritical thing to say.

So outright lying is preferable?

Froome was calling for more tests in Teide when he was leaving. (Nibali and Contador were there as well)
Or this coming from the person who won Romandie '14 with a TUE: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/froome-calls-on-anti-doping-authorities-to-urgently-address-tue-system/

Also Contafor only answered when asked (which still doesn't forgive his answer on the one about doping in low level) yet those 2 examples of Froome didn't have a question to him. He just said those things without being asked.
Also these: (even though they aren't clinicky)
Whining about Contador attacking on a descent in Gap '13
Whining about Nibali attacking in La Touissure '15
Or the identity theft.
Or his 'The Climb' book. The coffee thing, for example.
Or the animal cruelty which he was even boasting about.

And yes, there is a difference about answering when asked (which still doesn't forgive his answer on the one about doping in low level) and saying those things without being even asked.

 

[Forever The Best]

Re: Re:

About the other one though (about the one which he 'doping is only on low levels' or sth like that) there is no excuse for it. He could have simply said 'I believe there is not doping in cycling' but no, he said that doping is only on low levels which is a hypocritical thing to say.

If he said that, it would be easy to prove him wrong by just pointing at the dozens of riders that test positive each year at continental level, around the globe. That is probably why he said low level still dopes, in for example South America so many riders test positive for outdated drugs.

I disagree. He should have said sth like 'Cycling is hopefully clean' without mentioning the low level riders are doping thingy.

 

[hrotha]

I don't care if you're asked, "I see myself as a paragon of cleanliness" really goes the extra mile and is up there with the worst Froome or Nibali have said. But if you want unprompted declarations, how about his 2006 open letter?

 

[Forever The Best]

Re:

I don't care if you're asked, "I see myself as a paragon of cleanliness" really goes the extra mile and is up there with the worst Froome or Nibali have said. But if you want unprompted declarations, how about his 2006 open letter?

Woah, when did he say the bolded? Curious about it.
Also I think the one on your link is about Operacion Puerto. So he was probably defending himself to not get caught. (Wasn't he being investigated at that time about Operacion Puerto?)

 

[hrotha]

It's the video I already posted. "Ejemplo" in this context doesn't merely mean "example" as in "sample" or "representation", it means "paragon".

 

[Forever The Best]

Re:

It's the video I already posted. "Ejemplo" in this context doesn't merely mean "example" as in "sample" or "representation", it means "paragon".

I don't see any video in your link. I don't see 'ejemplo' word in the letter of Contador either.
Wrong link perhaps?

Edit: Nevermind, you were talking about the first link. :redface:
He was defending himself to not get a ban there, though saying 'I see myself as a paragon of cleanliness' is just hypocritical and up there with Froome and Nibali and just insulting the likes of Bassons who have never doped. (There can be no excuses for that sentence, just like the 'there is doping only in low level' thingy.)
At first I thought 'ejemplo' was 'example' thus I said that it isn't a great example but it is a great example.

 

[Pennino]

Dear Trek,
Please give him the Cancellara bike for the TT. For the sake of cycling.

 

[tweak37]

So... somebody had quite a refreshing restday.

 

[PPAR-delta]

I have a question for someone a little more knowledgeable about the sport than I am. Who is the body that is responsible for drug testing at the Grand Tour's. For example, at this years Vuelta ... is it the UCI that does the testing? ASO? or the Spanish anti-doping group. Is it just one organization, or can any of those organizations request a test?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

I have a question for someone a little more knowledgeable about the sport than I am. Who is the body that is responsible for drug testing at the Grand Tour's. For example, at this years Vuelta ... is it the UCI that does the testing? ASO? or the Spanish anti-doping group. Is it just one organization, or can any of those organizations request a test?

UCI and WADA, I believe.

 

[lenric]

Re:

I have a question for someone a little more knowledgeable about the sport than I am. Who is the body that is responsible for drug testing at the Grand Tour's. For example, at this years Vuelta ... is it the UCI that does the testing? ASO? or the Spanish anti-doping group. Is it just one organization, or can any of those organizations request a test?

One could see that coming from a mile away :lol:

 

[PPAR-delta]

Re: Re:

I have a question for someone a little more knowledgeable about the sport than I am. Who is the body that is responsible for drug testing at the Grand Tour's. For example, at this years Vuelta ... is it the UCI that does the testing? ASO? or the Spanish anti-doping group. Is it just one organization, or can any of those organizations request a test?

One could see that coming from a mile away :lol:

It is a legitimate question. In the US, it appears that the USADA is responsible for implementation of the World Anti-Doping Code (Code) in the United States. For example, reading the USADA annual report from 2016, it appears that testing at the Tour of California was implemented by the USADA. I was also under the impression that testing at prior Colorado races were also under the responsibility of the USADA. (don't know this with certainty)

In Europe is it done the same way? ... ie when a race is in France (TDF, Dauphine, etc) the French anti-doping agency there implements the WADA code, in Italy the Italian anti-doping agency handles all testing? In Spain the same?

I recently watched Icarus, and it seems like this approach has potential for abuse if local officials put pressure on the "local" anti-doping agency to show favoritism for local athletes.

 

[LanLions]

Anyone else think Contador has seriously upped his program since the second rest day? He's absolutely flying. To be honest I hope he has, and I hope he's changed his blood too. Would love it if he pulled off something spectacular tomorrow.

 

[purcell]

I half expect Sky to lodge a complaint by tomorrow to have Alberto tested 9 different ways and his bikes seized for testing.

And the UCI will send them a letter thanking them for being so clean.

 

[Rollthedice]

Rest day magic, old school.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re: Re:

I think the damage to his image will be big if he tests positive again. Not everyone thinks like us.

what does that mean?

I've always been told the clinic is not one being, your post proves that wrong....Thanks

Us = cyclingnews forum posters
Obviously most on here don't care too much about doping as shown by Contador's popularity.

Now go to bikeradar where 90% thinks doping became a thing of the past when Sky popped up and see, most posters despise Contador. Big difference.

I feel inclined to open an account there and refer to him as the Great One in every 2nd post.

Do it. Especially if he wins it all tonight!

 

[LaFlorecita]

I half expect Sky to lodge a complaint by tomorrow to have Alberto tested 9 different ways and his bikes seized for testing.

And the UCI will send them a letter thanking them for being so clean.

I hope Alberto if careful , I don't want to hear any more about him after his retirement, if you know what I mean...

 

[Bolder]

I half expect Sky to lodge a complaint by tomorrow to have Alberto tested 9 different ways and his bikes seized for testing.

And the UCI will send them a letter thanking them for being so clean.

I hope Alberto if careful , I don't want to hear any more about him after his retirement, if you know what I mean...

Whether he's on a program or not right now, his Vuelta performance hasn't been on another level. He's attacked but he hasn't gained major chunks of time, still 3'34" behind Froome. Actually, outside of a few attacks from MAL, this Vuelta hasn't shown any irregularities, at least based on past performances...

 

[wheresmybrakes]

He is so juiced up since Andorra it's unbelievable. :lol:

 

[Bolder]

Re:

He is so juiced up since Andorra it's unbelievable. :lol:

But yet he's only gained 20 seconds on Froome since then, no? None of his attacks really stuck, not the level of "this guy is on rocket fuel while everyone else is on pump gas."

Look, I have no illusions about anyone in the peloton, but while Contador has attacked whenever he can, he has had nothing to lose, and the fact is that Nibali/Zakarin et al were riding to preserve a podium spot or possibly gain one. He rode with more panache and it almost paid off with a podium.