Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[SundayRider]

I tweeted Walsh about this and he actually replied! Never replies to my Sky tweets funny enough. He said he thinks Contador level is pretty much the same as last years Tour as he was still average in the ITT.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I tweeted Walsh about this and he actually replied! Never replies to my Sky tweets funny enough. He said he thinks Contador level is pretty much the same as last years Tour as he was still average in the ITT.

Lol funny ****.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Please state what "biomarkers" you are talking about, with references to the techniques you are expecting to be used to show that a "pin-***" of blood is all that is required. The testing procedures must be in use in current accredited WADA labs and meet the requisite handling and contamination protocols.


Even a hematocrit test takes more than a pin-***, not taking into account you need to run it at least three times.


Oh, and the minute you wanted to involve team doctors I'm afraid the idea went out the window, half the doctors in the current peloton have times to large scale doping programmes. Any tests would have to be carried out by independent analysts, it's the same reason teams aren't allowed to collect their own anti-doping controls.

I will give you the team doctors argument. They would have to be independent. But you don't need a doctor to take a sample of blood. A trained nurse or technician could do this (Independent of course) I guess I am naive to believe that after the Armstrong Lie, cycling teams would not hire reputable doctors.

Those energetic and beaming faces of the doctors shown in the Sky website must all be Michael Ferrari clones and have no concern about being disciplined by the UK Medical Association and losing their licenses for doping. You can tell by their agreeing to have their faces posted in public they are part of a massive conspiracy at Sky to dope!

And we are not talking here about accredited WADA testing. That is what in and out of competition testing is for. We are talking about cyclists having to publish the results of a very basic blood composition test, not for discipline reasons but for deterrence reasons.

I don't know how much you know about the normal composition of blood. But a simple blood test using a small sample of blood (yes a pin ***) can tell one the following,

1. The amount of hemoglobin in the blood
2. The amount of testosterone in the blood
3. The per cent of red blood cells - hematocrit levels

These are called bio-markers as in biology markers as in the study of living organisms as in the living organisms in blood. At the initial testing these bio-markers provide a baseline of the composition of a cyclist's blood.

In later tests, changes in the composition of the blood may indicate doping.

Lets take hematocrit. If a cyclist was required to publish his hematocrit daily and publicly and one week before the TDF and it is 40% and then he publishes his hematocrit one day before the TDF as 48% he is legal, but it would sure indicate blood doping. You can bet your house that he would be marked for testing in the TDF. IMHO this would deter cyclists from doping i.e. the daily publicizing of these bio-markers which are really easy to test for.

Such testing does not cost thousands of dollars as does a formal doping test i.e. as an accredited in or out of composition formal test would cost.

This is not rocket science we are talking here. We are talking about the composition of constituents normally found in the blood. For example a small device the size of a stopwatch can measure the blood sugar level of a diabetic in about 10 seconds.

I am amazed at the resistance to a very simple and inexpensive way of deterring cyclists from doping when the sport is in the tub. What gives?

If you have a better idea about transparency in cycling that would deter doping please contribute! So far all I have heard from are cynics and naysayers. Do you want to keep the status quo or clean up cycling?

 

[King Boonen]

I will give you the team doctors argument. They would have to be independent. But you don't need a doctor to take a sample of blood. A trained nurse or technician could do this (Independent of course) I guess I am naive to believe that after the Armstrong Lie, cycling teams would not hire reputable doctors.

There are many posts detailing the doctors who have been involved in some way in doping scandals that still work for the teams in the current peloton.

Those energetic and beaming faces of the doctors shown in the Sky website must all be Michael Ferrari clones and have no concern about being disciplined by the UK Medical Association and losing their licenses for doping. You can tell by their agreeing to have their faces posted in public they are part of a massive conspiracy at Sky to dope!

We can do without the sarcasm. This point is akin to saying cyclists won't dope because they will be banned, or people won't commit crimes as they will go to jail. It is obviously not the case.

And we are not talking here about accredited WADA testing. That is what in and out of competition testing is for. We are talking about cyclists having to publish the results of a very basic blood composition test, not for discipline reasons but for deterrence reasons.

If it is not accredited it is meaningless and pointless, that's the bottom line.

I don't know how much you know about the normal composition of blood. But a simple blood test using a small sample of blood (yes a pin ***) can tell one the following,

1. The amount of hemoglobin in the blood
2. The amount of testosterone in the blood
3. The per cent of red blood cells - hematocrit levels

References? I know a lot about the composition of blood, I also know a lot about anti-doping testing, because I have done research in this area. I therefore know how much blood we take to do these tests. So again, please provide references.

These are called bio-markers as in biology markers as in the study of living organisms as in the living organisms in blood. At the initial testing these bio-markers provide a baseline of the composition of a cyclist's blood.

In later tests, changes in the composition of the blood may indicate doping.

I know what a biomarker is, my thesis contained several. I have never heard testosterone referred to as a biomarker, or hematocrit levels or hemoglobin, mainly because testosterone (which I believe is still tested for in urine samples these days) cannot be referred to as a biomarker for testosterone and hematocrit levels and hemoglobin are non-specific.

Lets take hematocrit. If a cyclist was required to publish his hematocrit daily and publicly and one week before the TDF and it is 40% and then he publishes his hematocrit one day before the TDF as 48% he is legal, but it would sure indicate blood doping. You can bet your house that he would be marked for testing in the TDF. IMHO this would deter cyclists from doping i.e. the daily publicizing of these bio-markers which are really easy to test for.

Can you provide a reference to a longitudinal study on variations in hematocrit levels in elite cyclists using this "pin-***" method you are also going to provide a reference to?

Such testing does not cost thousands of dollars as does a formal doping test i.e. as an accredited in or out of composition formal test would cost.

Yes it does. Equipment is not cheap, neither is the person who runs it, or the person who has to independently verify the data. At the very least you are talking about maintaining and transporting thousands of dollars worth of equipment, paying thousands to the staff required (through a central UCI fund because they cannot be employed by the team, along with their travel expenses and living costs). If you want to use local equipment they will charge through the nose, I know we do.

This is not rocket science we are talking here. We are talking about the composition of constituents normally found in the blood. For example a small device the size of a stopwatch can measure the blood sugar level of a diabetic in about 10 seconds.

No, we are not, but we are not talking about the type of analysis a diabetic carries out in the back seat of their car before a meal. As I said earlier, if it does not meet the standards of WADA it is pointless and paves the way for massive law suits.

I am amazed at the resistance to a very simple and inexpensive way of deterring cyclists from doping when the sport is in the tub. What gives?

What gives is there are people who post here who know about these things, know what the costs would be, know what the implications of poor testing are and know the likely consequences of said poor testing. We all want cleaner cycling, but this is certainly not a way to get it.

If you have a better idea about transparency in cycling that would deter doping please contribute! So far all I have heard from are cynics and naysayers. Do you want to keep the status quo or clean up cycling?

The only way to have better transparency is more funding to both doping controls and research into anti-doping techniques. This should come from both the organisers and the teams and go through a central pot controlled by and independent body set up to handle doping in cycling. The problem is that cycling is a poor sport and increasing this funding could lead to its decline. It is a balancing act that is very difficult to get right.

 

[Cimber]

Well, I dunno if he is juiced or not, but he certainly isnt juiced up more than Froome. Thats a fact.

 

[HSNHSN]

I don't know if there's a general thread in the Clinic dedicated to AC. I know there's the clen case thread, and this one obviously. I don't feel like searching for hours for a thread to post that in. PS it is always more on topic than that back and forth discussion about daily testing.

Thanks for trying to get this on-topic again. A pity it didn't work, though. I have to say I also considered this a general AC thread, since it's easy to find.

I wonder if Johan Bruyneel telling everything he knows would mean the end of yet another few cycling teams...it might be good to know some more about the doping programmes around, to perhaps learn names of some more doping doctors. On the other hand, it currently wouldn't be a good thing to lose more teams, considering how hard it already appears to be to find new sponsors.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Thanks for trying to get this on-topic again. A pity it didn't work, though. I have to say I also considered this a general AC thread, since it's easy to find.

I wonder if Johan Bruyneel telling everything he knows would mean the end of yet another few cycling teams...it might be good to know some more about the doping programmes around, to perhaps learn names of some more doping doctors. On the other hand, it currently wouldn't be a good thing to lose more teams, considering how hard it already appears to be to find new sponsors.

When prices come down, there will also be new buyers.
Currently the business model can't carry the cost imo.
I think it would be very healthy to flush a great deal of the overhead down the toilet.

6 doctors on a team. Why?
$2-4M rider contacts? Too much, I would cap it in a new model
etc.

A JB initiated flushing process could bring a new model at the pro level if so desired.

The sport would recover in less than 2 years imo, but with a more healthy base.

Thats the prospect in my view, but it requires leadership and willpower.

 

[TANK91]

This proves you're clueless. I'm sorry.

I dont believe that Flo, i said many do say that though. What actually happend to him.


Anyway Flo dont reply to me again silly, im fed up ofany comment you attack me, what the heck did i say man. Read the whole damn post, i accused him of doping? I said he was not talented ?

 

[RobbieCanuck]

If it is not accredited it is meaningless and pointless, that's the bottom line.

I know what a biomarker is, my thesis contained several. I have never heard testosterone referred to as a biomarker, or hematocrit levels or hemoglobin, mainly because testosterone (which I believe is still tested for in urine samples these days) cannot be referred to as a biomarker for testosterone and hematocrit levels and hemoglobin are non-specific.

Can you provide a reference to a longitudinal study on variations in hematocrit levels in elite cyclists using this "pin-***" method you are also going to provide a reference to?

Yes it does. Equipment is not cheap, neither is the person who runs it, or the person who has to independently verify the data. At the very least you are talking about maintaining and transporting thousands of dollars worth of equipment, paying thousands to the staff required (through a central UCI fund because they cannot be employed by the team, along with their travel expenses and living costs). If you want to use local equipment they will charge through the nose, I know we do.

No, we are not, but we are not talking about the type of analysis a diabetic carries out in the back seat of their car before a meal. As I said earlier, if it does not meet the standards of WADA it is pointless and paves the way for massive law suits.

What gives is there are people who post here who know about these things, know what the costs would be, know what the implications of poor testing are and know the likely consequences of said poor testing. We all want cleaner cycling, but this is certainly not a way to get it.



The only way to have better transparency is more funding to both doping controls and research into anti-doping techniques. This should come from both the organisers and the teams and go through a central pot controlled by and independent body set up to handle doping in cycling. The problem is that cycling is a poor sport and increasing this funding could lead to its decline. It is a balancing act that is very difficult to get right.

I don't think you are following my suggestion about publishing bio-marker data.

You have to start with the fundamental fact that blood contains many constituent elements. So does urine. I agree you would need urine to test for testosterone. A very simple blood and urine test can tell us the constituency of a persons blood and urine. You do not need a lot of blood or urine to do this. Blood tests to determine what is in ones blood or urine have been around for years. They are simple and quick and not rocket science.

These tests can measure the testosterone, hemoglobin and hematocrit levels normally found in a persons blood or urine. They are basic, routine tests done in doctors offices labs all the time. They are not time consuming or expensive. We are not talking about taking a sample to determine the existence of PEDs that would need all the controls and the expense that goes with it.

All we are talking about is a simple test to measure the normal constituent elements of a cyclists blood and urine. The sample can be drawn by anyone trained to withdraw blood. It takes no training to watch a cyclist pee and collect a pee cup. It takes less than say 2 minutes to do this for both blood and urine.

It is a simple matter for the blood technician to maintain chain of custody leading to the test of the content of a persons blood. It is a bag it and tag it method. Very simple. Cops do it all the time. Down the chain everyone who handles the sample signs and dates it. Basic stuff. They are trained to do this.

The hemoglobin, hematocrit and testosterone results are then published. The test is done by an independent doctors lab. The baseline biomarkers are then compared with future blood and urine tests. Any discrepancies can indicate doping. Don Catlin refers to these results as biomarkers. And logically that is what they are. Again no rocket science involved here in spite of your thesis.

Now the point of all of this is to deter doping and in my opinion if a cyclist knows his biomarker data is being published it will deter him from doping.

You don't need WADA for this. All you need is for UCI to make this mandatory and for them to approve the technicians taking the blood and a local lab to do the tests. The teams would be responsible for publishing the data. My hunch is team doctors are already doing this anyways.

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

There probably are no longitudinal studies conducted about hematocrit levels unless teams who during the acute doping era were prepared to give up their hematocrit data to a researcher. We know for example that Ferrari was a fastidious record keeper of the hematocrit levels of several USPS riders. I do not know if the Italian police seized his records. Or perhaps the records of Fuentes would do. But without this data your request for a longitudinal study is disingenuous.

About cycling being poor! It is so poor that LA amassed about $130 million, Hincapie is not eating Kraft dinner. Sponsors are dumping millions into teams and according to the most recent sponsorship report the average sponsor is getting about $88.4 million in advertising value. It is estimated that Sky has received about $550 million in advertising value since its inception.

Sponsors can pay for bio-marking data.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I dont believe that Flo, i said many do say that though. What actually happend to him.

Why even mention it then if it's not your opinion anyway I mean what does it add to the discussion?

I haven't seen that many people claim it was the result of doping, and the ones who do just make themselves look stupid.

 

[King Boonen]

...deleted for brevity...

I've replied in the sidebar thread as this is very off-topic.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1421753#post1421753

 

[RownhamHill]

Back on topic, if bruynel does implicate Conti for 2009, does anyone know what the legal ramifications would be? Could Conti get banned again for offences that pre-date his existing ban? Or could he go to the CIRC commission thing and cut a deal on pre-ban offences and the shady way that the clenbuterol positive became public? It would seem harsh to get eight years for a second offence when it was before your first one!

 

[LaFlorecita]

Back on topic, if bruynel does implicate Conti for 2009, does anyone know what the legal ramifications would be? Could Conti get banned again for offences that pre-date his existing ban? Or could he go to the CIRC commission thing and cut a deal on pre-ban offences and the shady way that the clenbuterol positive became public? It would seem harsh to get eight years for a second offence when it was before your first one!

I think it would be hard to ban him again for it. After all if he had admitted to years of doping right after he tested positive he would have gotten "only" two years too. He could just claim that he stopped doping after he got banned. However, he would lose his wins.

 

[Jelantik]

Back on topic, if bruynel does implicate Conti for 2009, does anyone know what the legal ramifications would be? Could Conti get banned again for offences that pre-date his existing ban? Or could he go to the CIRC commission thing and cut a deal on pre-ban offences and the shady way that the clenbuterol positive became public? It would seem harsh to get eight years for a second offence when it was before your first one!

I guess my first question, why is Contador implicated? Bruyneel's trial is about doping in US Postal. And the reason decision (whatever the name of that doc), is all about the systematic doping at US postal, not about Bruyneel doping practice in general. The witness are also those 14 riders named in the document. Contador never rides at US postal. So I'm not sure how Bruyneel just immediately go off tangent by implicating other rider that wasn't in US Postal.

 

[Granville57]

I guess my first question, why is Contador implicated? Bruyneel's trial is about doping in US Postal. And the reason decision (whatever the name of that doc), is all about the systematic doping at US postal, not about Bruyneel doping practice in general.

The Reasoned Decision was USADA's case specifically against Armstrong. All the evidence in that was used to corroborate their charges against him.

UNITED STATES ANTI-DOPING AGENCY, Claimant,
v.
LANCE ARMSTRONG,
Respondent.

The specifics of Bruyneel's hearing have yet to be made public. So we don't know exactly what or when those accusations revolve around.

 

[Jelantik]

I believe he is clearly talented just like i believe LA is talented but Contador was doping in 07 when he beat Rassmussen also many believe is brain stuff happend cuz of doping.

This proves you're clueless. I'm sorry.

@TANK91. Sorry, LaFlo call you out on this one. She is right.

Alberto Contador's life could have come to a stop on a descent in the Asturian mountains May 12, 2004. The young Liberty Seguros rider lies on the ground without moving. He fell all of a sudden for no apparent reason. When Santiago Fernandez Zubizarreta arrives on the scene, Contador is still breathing.

The Tour of Asturias doctor attempts first aid without real conviction. However, these first survival efforts will have their importance. Nobody knows it yet, but Alberto Contador has just experienced the beginning of a brain aneurysm. Admitted as an emergency case to Oviedo hospital, his condition is serious but the first aid performed on the side of the road has clearly saved his life. He recovers consciousness and asks to return home.

At his home in Pinto, a dormitory town of 40,000 inhabitants, located in the southern suburbs of Madrid, the Contador family is worried. They have already experienced, several years earlier, their quota of drama. Raul, Alberto's younger brother, suffers from cerebral palsy. Their worries are justified, when less than a week later Alberto has to be admitted once again, this time to Madrid hospital. The diagnosis is ominous: the Madrid rider has a cavernoma, a lesion of the brain resulting from a congenital vascular malformation.

http://www.albertocontadornotebook.info/tourbookspec.html

Google yourself what is cavernoma - "congenital vascular malformation". It sorta birth defect i guess. So it got nothing to do with doping. If you want more proof about a brain aneurysm, that 19 year old guy from Astana who just died after training due to his brain vessel bursts out. So contador almost died, he was lucky someone showed up.

 

[Jelantik]

The Reasoned Decision was USADA's case specifically against Armstrong. All the evidence in that was used to corroborate their charges against him.

The specifics of Bruyneel's hearing have yet to be made public. So we don't know exactly what or when those accusations revolve around.

you are right. It's about Bruyneel involvement with Lance (aka US Postal). I was just answering the hypothetical statement that say if Contador implicated by Bruyneel? I guess, I didn't see how that would happen.

 

[Publicus]

you are right. It's about Bruyneel involvement with Lance (aka US Postal). I was just answering the hypothetical statement that say if Contador implicated by Bruyneel? I guess, I didn't see how that would happen.

If he wanted to reduce his ban, he could give up the names of all of the athletes that doped under his or his team's supervision. It would be up to the UCI and the Spanish Cycling Federation whether to open a new case against Contador in that instance. Where that would lead is anybody's guess.

 

[RownhamHill]

you are right. It's about Bruyneel involvement with Lance (aka US Postal). I was just answering the hypothetical statement that say if Contador implicated by Bruyneel? I guess, I didn't see how that would happen.

Surely it's more about Bruyneel's involvement with doping in cycling?

It would be very odd if the anti-doping authority were investigating a DS for doping offences, but limited that to his work with just one rider? I know that's what Lance's PR wants us all to believe, but I don't.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I guess my first question, why is Contador implicated? Bruyneel's trial is about doping in US Postal. And the reason decision (whatever the name of that doc), is all about the systematic doping at US postal, not about Bruyneel doping practice in general. The witness are also those 14 riders named in the document. Contador never rides at US postal. So I'm not sure how Bruyneel just immediately go off tangent by implicating other rider that wasn't in US Postal.

What you are missing is Contador and Armstrong rode together on Astana with Bruyneel as DS in 2009. USADA alleges that the conspiracy to dope continued into 2010. Therefore Bruyneel may have knowledge of Contador's doping in 2009 (assuming AC doped). The USADA investigation was not just based on the USPS years but a conspiracy that ran from 1998 to 2010.

In the Reasoned Decision (which is the name of the legal document published by USADA, as is required by their rules) USADA concluded that there was a substantial likelihood that Armstrong doped in 2009 and 2010. Bruyneel would have known about that. What is unclear is whether or not Astana had a team doping program similar to USPS. I cannot recall if the RD deals with that issue.

 

[JohnDev]

Alberto Contador ‏@albertocontador 22h
Hard day of cycling today. Cold and snow. In the pic it looks that I'm 10 years older than yesterday! Keep working!

Vayer just had a beer with Bruynel, responds:

Antoine VAYER ‏@festinaboy 21h
@albertocontador You are. Stop Bike. Win enough.

I have a feeling that Contador will soon have the same number of GT wins like Armstrong.

to add :

For a greater sense of a global perspective there were a total of 4,352 bio passport out-of-competition blood tests in 2012 in cycling with 3,262 of those directly coming from the UCI. Compare Colombia's lack of tests with Spain's national federation, who conducted just three tests in the same period and one can ascertain that out-of-competition blood tests are well below the in-competition number. For reference the Republic of Ireland carried out 30 blood tests out of competition in 2012, USADA did 62, and Russia 128.

from
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/does-colombias-anti-doping-stand-up-to-scrutiny

This is pretty sad.

And to answer to the question : im sure Contador is now doped to match Sky 2013, along with Movistar (especially Valverde), all colombians and the ridiculous Ag2R 2014 version.

In fact it's slowly going back to EPO times in terms of doping spread. And Cookson seems more interested in wasting time with ghost boards instead of upping the controls.

 

[ChrisE]

If he wanted to reduce his ban, he could give up the names of all of the athletes that doped under his or his team's supervision. It would be up to the UCI and the Spanish Cycling Federation whether to open a new case against Contador in that instance. Where that would lead is anybody's guess.

I don't know. All of the evidence provided by riders in the RD stopped doping in 2006. And why would JB be involved in AC's doping in 2009 when he and LA were busy being mean to him by hiding his TT wheels and not sitting next to him at supper?

 

[Publicus]

I don't know. All of the evidence provided by riders in the RD stopped doping in 2006. And why would JB be involved in AC's doping in 2009 when he and LA were busy being mean to him by hiding his TT wheels and not sitting next to him at supper?

I don't think I said that Bruyneel had actual information on Contador. I was just explaining to another person how any information Bruyneel had on other riders (including Contador) could be useful in reducing his suspension and the potential impact on Contador and other riders (presumably) implicated by his alleged statements.

 

[ChrisE]

I don't think I said that Bruyneel had actual information on Contador. I was just explaining to another person how any information Bruyneel had on other riders (including Contador) could be useful in reducing his suspension and the potential impact on Contador and other riders (presumably) implicated by his alleged statements.

I was making a joke about poor old victim Alberto in 2009 as a jab to his fans in the clinic. You are saying the same thing two posts in a row, so your position is valid and understood.

 

[Race Radio]

Vayer just had a beer with Bruynel, responds:

Antoine VAYER ‏@festinaboy 21h
@albertocontador You are. Stop Bike. Win enough.

I have a feeling that Contador will soon have the same number of GT wins like Armstrong.

Last week I heard that Johan was telling Contador stories to some media. Johan didn't like that too much, started yelling at me on twitter. Lots of noise but no response to the question if he was talking $hit about AC.

Contador is aware something might be coming, surprised nothing is out yet