Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[djpbaltimore]

It is a bit of a double-standard when people who freely use the term 'alien' grouse about the use of a nickname for another rider.

 

[Ironhead Slim]

Re:

It is a bit of a double-standard when people who freely use the term 'alien' grouse about the use of a nickname for another rider.

Is double-standard anything like hypocrisy?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

It is a bit of a double-standard when people who freely use the term 'alien' grouse about the use of a nickname for another rider.

But he looks like an alien
Zam says Alberto looks like ET. I have no issues with it. Changing riders' names to incorporate "doping" or whatever is just boring and cheap.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re: Re:

Changing riders' names to incorporate "doping" or whatever is just boring and cheap.

It also would seem to suggest that his rivals are somehow not doping.

As everyone is well aware, Contador's doping-by-association links, and dead-giveaway-performances were always there to be scrutinized. But not until one, marginal bust does he get these ridiculous nicknames. Of course he dopes. As do others. But this implied notion of...

Busted once = Always doping

Not busted = Always clean

is absurd. And that's what the nicknames imply, that somehow he's the only one doping. Otherwise, why not refer to all his rivals will similar dope-related names? Because the Contador ones are just so witty and clever?

 

[djpbaltimore]

To me, Contadoper is no different than Alien. Both imply doping, but the Contador nicknames are used much less often. Most everybody who uses them seems to believe that doping is rife throughout the peloton, so insinuating that this nickname suggests that the other riders are clean is not supported by the facts.

Contadoper was used twice all of 2013. Twice in all of 2014. And twice in all of 2015, prior to today.

Clentador gets a tally of 201 matches in the clinic
Clentadopucci, 129 matches, and most of them are replies to a single poster who uses it.

Alien, 1080 matches.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I am sure many people use the nickname "Alien" for Dawg just because he looks like one. Just like "Stick insect" "Twig man" "Praying mantis" etc.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Changing riders' names to incorporate "doping" or whatever is just boring and cheap.

It also would seem to suggest that his rivals are somehow not doping.

As everyone is well aware, Contador's doping-by-association links, and dead-giveaway-performances were always there to be scrutinized. But not until one, marginal bust does he get these ridiculous nicknames. Of course he dopes. As do others. But this implied notion of...

Busted once = Always doping

Not busted = Always clean

is absurd. And that's what the nicknames imply, that somehow he's the only one doping. Otherwise, why not refer to all his rivals will similar dope-related names? Because the Contador ones are just so witty and clever?

Good post

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re:

Alien, 1080 matches.

I'm having a hard time with those other stats, but "Alien" is probably more used with Basso in terms of doping.

When it comes to Froome though, the Alien title gets traction because of this:

and this

 

[djpbaltimore]

The stats are pretty easy to find. Just use the search feature. You can search by thread too. Do you have anything to support your hypothesis concerning Basso? He doesn't get much mention in the clinic. I think that nickname gets used because people can insinuate doping in the PRR forum while falling back on the plausible deniability of referring to the movie monster. YMMV

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re:

Most everybody who uses them seems to believe that doping is rife throughout the peloton, so insinuating that this nickname suggests that the other riders are clean is not supported by the facts.

I'm not so sure about that.

The Contador nicknames always seemed to be used in an insulting fashion. So if doping is rife, why the insults? It seems to imply that Contador is "dopier" than the others, or doing something that his rivals are not.

Terms like "ET" and "Alien" have been thrown around for years, and are often used generically to describe either specific riders, or an entire event. Several years ago, Basso was often the target of these particular names (but I'm not going to scour the web to support that).

I don't want to sully this fine thread with doping talk about Chris Froome but I think it's fair to say that Froome gets the Alien label for both his physical appearance and his other-wordly performances. I just feel that his often freakish appearance lends more traction to the label and encourages its repeated use, as opposed to other, doping-only titles.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Fair enough. I can respect your viewpoints. I think people use the Clentador type nicknames because they dislike him.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Maybe I'm wrong about this.

 

[djpbaltimore]

I've always thought that it was the back of the TT helmets that made them look like the alien. Especially the really long one Lance would wear in his prime.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re: Re:

Lol! It does actually. That's Exactly what Contadoper is, let's call it what it is, hypocrisy. If you choose not to believe it, that's your right. Anything out of Contadopers mouth is mostly(and probably) a lie.

How old are you

Old enough to know Contadoper is a former/current doper, hypocrite, and liar.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re: Re:

It is a bit of a double-standard when people who freely use the term 'alien' grouse about the use of a nickname for another rider.

But he looks like an alien
Zam says Alberto looks like ET. I have no issues with it. Changing riders' names to incorporate "doping" or whatever is just boring and cheap.

And most of all FUNNY

 

[86TDFWinner]

Some would say Omerta is the worst hypocrisy in pro-cycling and Contador has always been one of its leading ambassadors. He has been up there in the pro-peleton longer than a Froome or Wiggins.

Love Contador as a rider but he's on the sauce just as much as anyone.

Exactly! To say otherwise (after knowing his past history), is just foolishness.

Who the hell said otherwise?

Umm, a few here?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

Fair enough. I can respect your viewpoints. I think people use the Clentador type nicknames because they dislike him.

I use Contadoper for a few reasons:

1) he's a doper. Doesn't matter when, but he is. Probably is still.
2) it's funny
3) he's a hypocrite and a liar
4)i can.

What I find funny is how butt hurt folks get about stuff like Contadopers nicknames, yet We've all at some point, called Wonderboy(& his merry band of dopers) named too, and people are fine with that and continue calling him various names.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Some would say Omerta is the worst hypocrisy in pro-cycling and Contador has always been one of its leading ambassadors. He has been up there in the pro-peleton longer than a Froome or Wiggins.

Love Contador as a rider but he's on the sauce just as much as anyone.

Exactly! To say otherwise (after knowing his past history), is just foolishness.

Who the hell said otherwise?

Umm, a few here?

And just what is this past history you refer to? The only "provable" drug violation is his clen violation in 2010. That showed he had 50 trillionths of a gram of clen in 1 mL of blood. Every credible pharmacologist in the world would testify it is impossible for that amount of clen to have had a performance enhancing effect. The only reason he was suspended was because of strict liability!

Please, once and for all, show us the evidence that on a balance of probabilities (50.01% vs 49.99%) would prove to us, on the lowest standard possible, Contador is a doper and not the abject speculation, the conjecture, the hollow assumptions and presumptions, the guilt because he is a top rider, the guilt by association or the usual specious and hysterical reasoning of the Clinic, or saying so in order to be on the Clinic bandwagon, or the deficient power "analyses, or the blood transfusion theory and the traces of phthalates theory both of which the CAS properly debunked and ruled as clearly lacking in proof.

 

[HelmutRoole]

Some would say Omerta is the worst hypocrisy in pro-cycling and Contador has always been one of its leading ambassadors. He has been up there in the pro-peleton longer than a Froome or Wiggins.

Love Contador as a rider but he's on the sauce just as much as anyone.

Exactly! To say otherwise (after knowing his past history), is just foolishness.

Who the hell said otherwise?

Umm, a few here?

And just what is this past history you refer to? The only "provable" drug violation is his clen violation in 2010. That showed he had 50 trillionths of a gram of clen in 1 mL of blood. Every credible pharmacologist in the world would testify it is impossible for that amount of clen to have had a performance enhancing effect. The only reason he was suspended was because of strict liability!

Please, once and for all, show us the evidence that on a balance of probabilities (50.01% vs 49.99%) would prove to us, on the lowest standard possible, Contador is a doper and not the abject speculation, the conjecture, the hollow assumptions and presumptions, the guilt because he is a top rider, the guilt by association or the usual specious and hysterical reasoning of the Clinic, or saying so in order to be on the Clinic bandwagon, or the deficient power "analyses, or the blood transfusion theory and the traces of phthalates theory both of which the CAS properly debunked and ruled as clearly lacking in proof.

I think Contador and LeMond were the last clean riders to win the Tour.

Links?

Oh wait. There aren't any.

 

[Merckx index]

Please, once and for all, show us the evidence that on a balance of probabilities (50.01% vs 49.99%) would prove to us, on the lowest standard possible, Contador is a doper and not the abject speculation, the conjecture, the hollow assumptions and presumptions, the guilt because he is a top rider, the guilt by association or the usual specious and hysterical reasoning of the Clinic, or saying so in order to be on the Clinic bandwagon, or the deficient power "analyses, or the blood transfusion theory and the traces of phthalates theory both of which the CAS properly debunked and ruled as clearly lacking in proof.

There you go again. The probability that the CB derived from contaminated meat was far, far, far below 50%, that was shown very clearly in his case. CAS did not debunk the DEHP evidence, they just noted that it had never been officially approved as an anti-doping test--IOW, Contador got off on a technicality. The main evidence against the blood transfusion scenario was that 1) no one could be dumb enough to withdraw blood right after taking a large dose of CB (because, as we all know, athletes the world over show the highest degree of intelligence when it comes to doping); and 2) there would have had to have been a transfusion of serum as well as cells, which was too much complexity for the CAS panel to grasp, though riders do it all the time. There was a lot of evidence for the transfusion--just ask Ashenden, who was not allowed to present it.

Contador himself insisted he never took any supplements. If we were to take him at his word, then doping becomes the overwhelmingly probable alternative. If we don't take him at his word--and obviously, CAS did not--why should we believe anything else he says?

Even Flor, to her credit, accepts that he most likely doped.

 

[MarkvW]

Some people need ABSOLUTE proof....

 

[LaFlorecita]

Some would say Omerta is the worst hypocrisy in pro-cycling and Contador has always been one of its leading ambassadors. He has been up there in the pro-peleton longer than a Froome or Wiggins.

Love Contador as a rider but he's on the sauce just as much as anyone.

Exactly! To say otherwise (after knowing his past history), is just foolishness.

Who the hell said otherwise?

Umm, a few here?

That's just stupid. People were discussing if Contador was as much of a hypocrite as other riders. NOT if he is doped or not.

This sentence:
"Love Contador as a rider but he's on the sauce just as much as anyone."
Had absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Completely random statement. There was no discussion whether people like Contador or not or whether he dopes as much as others.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Please, once and for all, show us the evidence that on a balance of probabilities (50.01% vs 49.99%) would prove to us, on the lowest standard possible, Contador is a doper and not the abject speculation, the conjecture, the hollow assumptions and presumptions, the guilt because he is a top rider, the guilt by association or the usual specious and hysterical reasoning of the Clinic, or saying so in order to be on the Clinic bandwagon, or the deficient power "analyses, or the blood transfusion theory and the traces of phthalates theory both of which the CAS properly debunked and ruled as clearly lacking in proof.

There you go again. The probability that the CB derived from contaminated meat was far, far, far below 50%, that was shown very clearly in his case. CAS did not debunk the DEHP evidence, they just noted that it had never been officially approved as an anti-doping test--IOW, Contador got off on a technicality. The main evidence against the blood transfusion scenario was that 1) no one could be dumb enough to withdraw blood right after taking a large dose of CB (because, as we all know, athletes the world over show the highest degree of intelligence when it comes to doping); and 2) there would have had to have been a transfusion of serum as well as cells, which was too much complexity for the CAS panel to grasp, though riders do it all the time. There was a lot of evidence for the transfusion--just ask Ashenden, who was not allowed to present it.

Contador himself insisted he never took any supplements. If we were to take him at his word, then doping becomes the overwhelmingly probable alternative. If we don't take him at his word--and obviously, CAS did not--why should we believe anything else he says?

Even Flor, to her credit, accepts that he most likely doped.

WADA were completely *** coming up with such a complex explanation. They did not have to prove anything. Yet they tried to anyway, CAS thought it was ridiculously farfetched and now WADA looks stupid and Contador has a CAS decision to point at and say "see, I didn't knowingly dope".

 

[hrotha]

They simply proved AC's scenario of no significant fault of his own was not the most likely one. They didn't need to do anything else to ban him, so they didn't, and they said explicitly that the reasoning didn't mean they believed AC had necessarily used a contaminated supplement.

Also, Alpuerto Clentador > all.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

They simply proved AC's scenario of no significant fault of his own was not the most likely one. They didn't need to do anything else to ban him, so they didn't, and they said explicitly that the reasoning didn't mean they believed AC had necessarily used a contaminated supplement.

Also, Alpuerto Clentador > all.

Do you know how many people use the reasoned decision to argue Contador didn't dope?