Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[c&cfan]

Are you sure you're not a hypocrite? Do you complain or get angry when you're cheated out of something important in real life?

Yes. But when did contador cheat? who did he cheat? he played by the same rules of every single podium finisher of the last 100 years.

but what about you? do you think that ignorance, stupidity lack of money and will, different rules are excuses for merckx and other "greats" to maintain all wins they achieved through the lenght of their doped careers?

who gave you the right to see contador or lance with a different pair of eyes?

 

[c&cfan]

5 or 7 fingers, it doesn't matter. For a normally critical person any finger put up by Contador should be regarded with huge dose of scepticism.

Contadors GT wins with DC and Astana... It was during this period he, among other suspicious characters, worked with Pepe Marti, now banned for life. USADA's press release regarding ban of Marti:



http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...thers-lifetime-bans-in-u-s-postal-case_228698

Marti and Contador:



http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/06/news/who-are-the-spaniards-under-the-usada-spotlight_223914

Anyone truly believing Contador was clean when he won his first Grand Tours must be f**king stupid. Contador is a fraud. But hey, he is fun to watch, attacks all the time, so let us just love him anyway...

I agree with you. so what? he won 7 GTs fair and square. who do you admire as a GT contender?

 

[Falken]

I agree with you. so what? he won 7 GTs fair and square. who do you admire as a GT contender?

In what kind a moral universe do you live in? Just b/c you keep saying it to yourself doesn't make it true.

 

[c&cfan]

In what kind a moral universe do you live in? Just b/c you keep saying it to yourself doesn't make it true.

the same universe all fans of one or more tour winner lives in? just because someone has chosen to become hypocrite, i don't have to choose the same.

7.

 

[hrotha]

Yes. But when did contador cheat? who did he cheat? he played by the same rules of every single podium finisher of the last 100 years.

but what about you? do you think that ignorance, stupidity lack of money and will, different rules are excuses for merckx and other "greats" to maintain all wins they achieved through the lenght of their doped careers?

who gave you the right to see contador or lance with a different pair of eyes?

He cheated when he willingly broke the rules of the sport. The podium finishers aren't the only cyclists in the peloton. Some of them actually abide by the rules, whether you believe it or not.

The rules for every single podium finisher also state that, if you get caught, you're out. At the very least, that puts a cap on how much dope you can get away with. It's been an important factor ever since antidoping controls were implemented.

Merckx did lose a GT he had all but won already because he tested positive. The rest of his palmares falls outside of the statute of limitations, and furthermore, we can't prove he was doped in any particular event - same reason why Contador gets to keep his 2007-2009 titles.

Whether you like it or not, time is a factor. Just like I can't apply the same compass to Ghenghis Khan and George Bush, I can't do it with Contador & Armstrong vs Merckx.

Who gave me the right? Are you kidding? It's a right everybody has. You have a right to see things differently, which is why we're having this discussion instead of one of us being banned for stating forbidden stuff.

 

[sniper]

Yes. But when did contador cheat? who did he cheat? he played by the same rules of every single podium finisher of the last 100 years...

indeed he did. and he got caught and was punished by the same rules as well, which is why he has 5 gts on his palmares, not 7.

 

[c&cfan]

He cheated when he willingly broke the rules of the sport. The podium finishers aren't the only cyclists in the peloton. Some of them actually abide by the rules, whether you believe it or not.

The rules for every single podium finisher also state that, if you get caught, you're out. At the very least, that puts a cap on how much dope you can get away with. It's been an important factor ever since antidoping controls were implemented.

Merckx did lose a GT he had all but won already because he tested positive. The rest of his palmares falls outside of the statute of limitations, and furthermore, we can't prove he was doped in any particular event - same reason why Contador gets to keep his 2007-2009 titles.

Whether you like it or not, time is a factor. Just like I can't apply the same compass to Ghenghis Khan and George Bush, I can't do it with Contador & Armstrong vs Merckx.

Who gave me the right? Are you kidding? It's a right everybody has. You have a right to see things differently, which is why we're having this discussion instead of one of us being banned for stating forbidden stuff.

I can agree with that and have a decent discussion based on it, as long as the other person apply that rule when judging palmares, for example.

However decency, ethics and science in cycling mean 0 to you. is that it? if contador was tested on another lab (pretty much anyother lab would not be able to detect that amount of clen), would you be okay?

all podium finishers willingly broke the rules of the sport, since the beginning.

Yes, who gave you the right to tell that contador is unworthy of GTs when i don't see the same applied to other "legends". who gave you the right to single out contador and based on what.

*Do not forget that that amount of clen wasn't considered PED.

You are willingly choosing to ignore the obvious, to ignore facts, to close your eyes to knowledge and common sense. that's hypocrisy..

 

[sniper]

I can agree with that and have a decent discussion based on it, as long as the other person apply that rule when judging palmares, for example.

However decency, ethics and science in cycling mean 0 to you. is that it? if contador was tested on another lab (pretty much anyother lab would not be able to detect that amount of clen), would you be okay?

all podium finishers willingly broke the rules of the sport, since the beginning.

Yes, who gave you the right to tell that contador is unworthy of GTs when i don't see the same applied to other "legends". who gave you the right to single out contador and based on what.

*Do not forget that that amount of clen wasn't considered PED.

You are willingly choosing to ignore the obvious, to ignore facts, to close your eyes to knowledge and common sense. that's hypocrisy..

AC is singling out himself by ignoring cycling's ethics such as not riding when you're under doping suspicion.
One set of ethics for contador, another set for everybody else?

 

[c&cfan]

indeed he did. and he got caught and was punished by the same rules as well, which is why he has 5 gts on his palmares, not 7.

No. that's a stupid thing to say.

was merckx banned for 2 years? did someone take any results away from him? was he tested like alberto? was the threshold the same for the same substances? is contador allowed to drink amphetamines? does contador have his own secret and rich team? is contador riding against farmers?

was cycling the same?

7. i saw it, you saw it.. you won't forget it.
7 nice wins.

 

[sniper]

No. that's a stupid thing to say.

was merckx banned for 2 years? did someone take any results away from him? was he tested like alberto? was the threshold the same for the same substances? is contador allowed to drink amphetamines? does contador have his own secret and rich team? is contador riding against farmers?

was cycling the same?

7. i saw it, you saw it.. you won't forget it.
7 nice wins.

so we agree: merckx was treated differently. contador wasn't. (he would have been treated differently though if it were up to the RFEC and King Carlos.)

p.s. Your claim that his 7 wins were "nice" belongs in the "Only in Spain"-thread.

 

[Falken]

the same universe all fans of one or more tour winner lives in? just because someone has chosen to become hypocrite, i don't have to choose the same.

7.

So you are ****ed that not all other GT winners are treated the same way as Contador, and since their wins are considered "fair and square" by some so should Contadors wins. So your view is conditional upon how other GT winners are judged. If all other GT winners were considered cheaters you would also consider Contador a cheater who didn't win "fair and square"? Or do you have some additional reason for considering his wins "fair and square"? Like, every GT contender dopes, and Contador was forced to dope to be competitive, and he won among dopers, so therefore his wins should be considered "fair and square". He just did what everybody else did.

 

[rhubroma]

Unfortunately there hasn't been a clean rider in the top 10 of a GT for decades and there's rarely a case as deep as 50 placing’s, even if probably 90-95% of the peloton isn't riding on bread and water alone.

None of us likes doping, yet we still follow the sport. Why? Because we are hypocrites? No, because we don't feel we should be denied something we enjoy that doping should have no right to withhold from us. Each then is free to choose which doper he finds exciting to watch, whose athletic gestures drag him into the passionate world that only this sport, doped or not, knows how to create for its tifosi.

Now personally I like AC's style and his unquestionable athletic prowess. The things he's done over the years have been displays of a greatness and innate talent that only very few giants of the sport in the past were capable of demonstrating - and I'm talking about the greatest here, Coppi, Merckx, Hinault (and yes, they all doped too) - which doping itself has not bestowed upon him. For this reason I can't see anybody else but he that won those GT's, which were stripped from him, even if the record books now don't say so. At the same time, on the human side, Alberto has always responded with grace in the interviews I've read and heard from Italy, complimenting his rivals while he generally projects a likeableness that is rare in champions of his caliber. Most of this, I've gotten the sensation, hasn't reached the Anglo-US fan base for reasons, in the latter case, that are hardly surprising: to not talk up someone who touches, let alone, surpasses the greatness of Lance. On the other hand the Italians admire him as if he were one of their own, which is striking because so rare in the sport scene here.

Obviously this was not the case with Armstrong, and I couldn't be more satisfied than seeing a bully get his just due. Note so much because he was a doper, but because he was a bully and a doper. This is a critical distinction. The Contador persona has never attempted to undermine rivals, intimidate the rebellious, squash the competition during the month of July. Just win wherever his immense talent has offered him a chance, practically from March to September. He rides with passion and instinct, whereas Lance was all logic and calculation. The one human, the other robotic. Yet as far as LA's wins go, cancelling them from the record books doesn't eliminate them for those who bore witness to their acts.

Sure, I'd like to close my eyes and wake up with a cycling that's 100% clean. The reality, though, is that one learns to live with it under the most paradoxical of circumstances. At least so far. What may come of the future, is another story.

 

[Falken]

Now personally I like AC's style and his unquestionable athletic prowess. The things he's done over the years have been displays of a greatness and innate talent that only very few giants of the sport in the past were capable of demonstrating - and I'm talking about the greatest here, Coppi, Merckx, Hinault (and yes, they all doped too) - which doping itself has not bestowed upon him. For this reason I can't see anybody else but he that won those GT's, which were stripped from him, even if the record books now don't say so.

So, it's the defence some fans of Lance uses. Since he won among dopers, this proves he would have won among non-dopers. Therefore, his doped wins should be seen a genuine wins.

 

[Danilot]

So, it's the defence some fans of Lance uses.

Bingo. Each generation of delusional cycling fans needs its false idol to defend under all circumstances, even at the expense of looking silly.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I agree with c&cfan, Netserk and Panda Claws

 

[Falken]

Bingo. Each generation of delusional cycling fans needs its false idol to defend under all circumstances, even at the expense of looking silly.

Then we have this:

Contador is a really nice guy and rides with such passion, so let us not bother too much with this doping stuff.

Lance has done so much for cycling, without him cycling wouldn't be where it is, so let us not bother too much with this doping stuff.

 

[c&cfan]

No surprise.

Well yee can't change history so it's 5 GTs and no Contador fan can do anything about it. It's should'nt be even up for discussion so I advise everyone who agrees with the 5 GT wins to ignore this tosh in the future. Just one more thing, the blind Contador fans who stick up him no matter what, don't come out and say Sky are doing this and that or go mad if Sky are busted or if any of Contador's rivals are busted either.

There is no middle ground when you are discussing doping. You are either against it or you are not.

what about you? why don't you follow your own advice?

 

[Sandy Chamois]

When are the Twelve Apostles of the Clinic going to finish with jostling for position in the queue to kick Armstrong in the Ball and arguing amongst one another over who is more Anti-Lance in the ****ing contests over in the phalynx of Armstrong threads, and impart their sage wisdom in the Contador threads?

 

[rhubroma]

So, it's the defence some fans of Lance uses. Since he won among dopers, this proves he would have won among non-dopers. Therefore, his doped wins should be seen a genuine wins.

No, nothing of the kind. But for that matter just about every guy that's won the Tour or a classic for the last 50-60 years (since the days of Coppi-Bartai) was doping and so their wins should be seen as genuine too (with all the noted sarcasm).

Though I was talking about athletic style and gesture in the reality of a sport that is relatively doped from the top to the bottom. In this I admitted to a paradox in wanting a clean sport, though finding certain riders (who we know have doped) to be unavoidably sensational, even if this contradicts our ethical position (which is more rational than emotional in cases like these, or vice versa our inability to not get excited by the moves of some is more emotional than rational). Yes it's a shame for the few clean riders, but again I was talking about what we have, not what we would want in an ideal world. Otherwise I'd have stopped watching the sport years ago, and so too should you have if for this reason.

I get the feeling though that Contador's talent is genuine and that if everyone were clean he'd still be on top. Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but unfortuntely we'll never know.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I get the feeling though that Contador's talent is genuine and that if everyone were clean he'd still be on top. Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but unfortuntely we'll never know.

I have that same feeling.

 

[LaFlorecita]

No surprise.

Well yee can't change history so it's 5 GTs and no Contador fan can do anything about it. It's should'nt be even up for discussion so I advise everyone who agrees with the 5 GT wins to ignore this tosh in the future. Just one more thing, the blind Contador fans who stick up him no matter what, don't come out and say Sky are doing this and that or go mad if Sky are busted or if any of Contador's rivals are busted either.

There is no middle ground when you are discussing doping. You are either against it or you are not.

Apparently CAS can.

 

[RownhamHill]

There is no middle ground when you are discussing doping. You are either against it or you are not.

I don't think this is necessarily true. With regards doping in the abstract I'm fairly ambivalent - personally, the most compelling reason I find for being 'against' doping is that it doping is cheating because it's against the rules. But obviously there's some circularity about that logic, and in all honesty if WADA legalised doping tomorrow I don't think I'd lose that much sleep.

And on the non-abstract level I have different feelings towards different riders. I'm pleased that Lance has finally been busted because I don't like what I know of his persona, and I never believed he was riding clean. But equally, in the absence of any evidence to suggest otherwise, I'm happy to believe for now that Wiggins is clean - partly because I'm English and have an emotional attachment to that view, and personally I quite like his sardonic approach to life. And, likewise, even though Contador has served an actual ban for a doping violation, I'm really pleased he won the Vuelta, and I'm even prepared to sell myself the idea that he was innocent of any real doping 'crime', and just fell victim to a contaminated supplement/steak and an absurdly drafted set of rules around strict liability. Because I like his style on and off the bike, and I'd like to believe emotionally that he might be clean. Even though I'm that bothered by doping in the abstract in the first place.

The point I'm making is that all of our views on the world are driven by our own existing emotional biases, and to say that everyone is absolutely 'for' or 'against' doping and there's no possibility of middle ground, just doesn't resonate with me. I'd think it would be better to acknowledge and be honest about our own bias and inconsistencies as LaFlorecita and CandC seem to be able to, rather than railing against the inconsistencies of others.

 

[hrotha]

When are the Twelve Apostles of the Clinic going to finish with jostling for position in the queue to kick Armstrong in the Ball and arguing amongst one another over who is more Anti-Lance in the ****ing contests over in the phalynx of Armstrong threads, and impart their sage wisdom in the Contador threads?

They already did, back when the Contador threads contained some actual debate and information, with just one forumer being a glaring exception and who was called out on it by pretty much everybody.

The thing is, this isn't a debate anymore. It's just a bunch of fanboys screaming "lalala 7 GTs".

 

[Panda Claws]

his team should have withdrawn him from racing.
it is customary for teams to withdraw racers that are under suspicion of doping. AC clearly was under suspicion.
That has always been an etiquette, a gentlemen's agreement, within cycling.
But Riis abd Saxo simply ignored this etiquette, setting a precedent that won't do cycling any good.

You cannot expect a team to put their best rider on the side, just because the UCI cannot make a decision.

 

[Netserk]

They already did, back when the Contador threads contained some actual debate and information, with just one forumer being a glaring exception and who was called out on it by pretty much everybody.

The thing is, this isn't a debate anymore. It's just a bunch of fanboys screaming "lalala 7 GTs".

I don't know weather or not the last sentence was directed at me, but I am all for a debate. I am against doping, believe it or not, but that doesn't change that Scarponi didn't win the Giro '11. I am also against deleting previous results (I can understand it in the race where the rider tested positive), and I think that Contador should have served a two year ban minus the sanctioned time, from Febuary instead of January '11.

PS (not directed at you hrotha): I am no Armstrong fanboy, if you thought so. I truly hate what he have done to this beautiful sport, and I hope he goes to prison, BUT he still won the Tour seven times. IMO