Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

No way. In my opinion there is absolutely nothing to suggest so.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5848/ ... e-bin.aspx

Debate with you is impossible. It's clear from your posts you simply think positively about the riders you like, and negatively about those you don't. You ignore facts and evidence. Your endless support for Valverde is pitiful - geddit.

Bakunin

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

What happens now?

He is done, his reputation is destroyed, and he joins the pantheon of the pathetic. His exciting riding style means nothing -- he is a liar and a cheat.

I wanted him to be clean. He's not and he's gone.

deepdoo

frenchfighter wrote:

No way. In my opinion there is absolutely nothing to suggest so.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5848/ ... e-bin.aspx

He doped, it's as plain as the nose on your french face

No_Ta_Doctor

Bakunin wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

What happens now?

He is done, his reputation is destroyed, and he joins the pantheon of the pathetic. His exciting riding style means nothing -- he is a liar and a cheat.

I wanted him to be clean. He's not and he's gone.

Nail on head.

Cycling as a sport is shaped for the heroic - the pain, the endurance, the effort is superhuman. Unfortunately it doesn't pay to have cycling heroes, too great a chance of them showing their all too human flaws.

afx237vi

Bakunin wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

What happens now?

He is done, his reputation is destroyed, and he joins the pantheon of the pathetic. His exciting riding style means nothing -- he is a liar and a cheat.

I wanted him to be clean. He's not and he's gone.

Or - he gets a ban, serves a suspension, then comes back and carries on where he left off. Even if it's two years, that doesn't end his career if he comes back at 29. Basso, Scarponi and Vino have all done it.

No_Ta_Doctor

afx237vi wrote:

Bakunin wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

What happens now?

He is done, his reputation is destroyed, and he joins the pantheon of the pathetic. His exciting riding style means nothing -- he is a liar and a cheat.

I wanted him to be clean. He's not and he's gone.

Or - he gets a ban, serves a suspension, then comes back and carries on where he left off. Even if it's two years, that doesn't end his career if he comes back at 29. Basso, Scarponi and Vino have all done it.

I think Bakunin was saying: "he's dead to me", rather than that he'd never race again.

Of course, if he fessed up and named names etc. I might have a bit more respect for him.

bigmat

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

But, if he is ultimately proven guilty, it looks like he was blood doping - the clenbuterol is just what caught him out. Who is to say he hasn't been cheating his entire career? He certainly has the Puerto links and the Saiz / Bruyneel associations to suggest that is quite likely. So you can't really say that its "just a lightweight dope" - its potentially a lot more serious than that.

RichN95.

It's days like this that my complete internet ban at work (richly deserved) really hurts. It's taken me a hour to catch up on this thread alone.

So there's much speculation. Here's the 'facts' as I see it:

1. This is bad for cycling

2. There was a small amount of Clen in Bertie's system. So small that it certainly wasn't injected (is it injected?) at the Tour.

3. We all have our theories, and while informed, none of us have the necessary experience in the field of doping or doping of field (of cows) to make a conclusive conclusion

4. The experts - Damsgaard, Sassi, Caitlin, Boere etc - can't agree.

5. Plasticizers are an added factor, but none of us know anything about that.

6. The idea that Clen can't be in meat purely because it's banned by the EU is stupid coming from a cycling fan

7. We will never know what really happened for sure.

In summary, it's a puzzle wrapped in a mystery couched in an enigma.

FF asked the most relevant questioned - 'So what happens now?'

By the doctrine of 'you're responsible for your own body' (I can't remember the proper phrase), then he should be stripped of the Tour and banned for two years. (Although Richard Gasquet shows that's not always the case - much to my amusement). This is a route that will see him follow the likes of Landis and Rasmussen.

So the UCI could strike up a deal. Lose the Tour, serve a year and be back in time for the 2011 Vuelta. Meanwhile certain journalists can be roped in to write how hard done by AC is, but it shows how hard cycling is on doping.

This may mean the Saxo will fold. But in sport, everyone looks after number 1.

afx237vi

No tA Doctor wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Or - he gets a ban, serves a suspension, then comes back and carries on where he left off. Even if it's two years, that doesn't end his career if he comes back at 29. Basso, Scarponi and Vino have all done it.

I think Bakunin was saying: "he's dead to me", rather than that he'd never race again.

Of course, if he fessed up and named names etc. I might have a bit more respect for him.

Sure, but if you watched Basso win the Giro this year, not a lot was said about his ban. I think it's easy to have a gut reaction about things in the heat of the moment, but as time passes people's opinion might change.

People even had grudging respect for what Vino did this year, regardless of what he did in the past. Look at Millar! People were ready to crucify him in 2004... now he's approaching sainthood.

micron

While I have no doubt Contador is as dirty as any of them, what a banal way to get popped.

Latest is a botched transfusion owing to levels of platicizers in the blood sample - however DHEP also occurs in things like plastic bidons, bottles, drinking tubes - and cling film. Bad meat and bad meat wrap??

I wonder if the UCI will want to go down that particular route, seeing as the OCLAESP investigation into the Astana 09 transfusion kits is still open and a certain Texan was on the team at the time and may well get tied fair and square to doping if transfusions start to be looked at...

No_Ta_Doctor

There's a bit more to it than that Rich, though otherwise a fair summary.

Putting my tinfoil hat on, I'd like to know about the timing of the announcement. Given the B test was done already, why the delay? Why was it only made public after a German journo tried to get some info out of the UCI?

That really doesn't look good at all.

No_Ta_Doctor

afx237vi wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Or - he gets a ban, serves a suspension, then comes back and carries on where he left off. Even if it's two years, that doesn't end his career if he comes back at 29. Basso, Scarponi and Vino have all done it.

I think Bakunin was saying: "he's dead to me", rather than that he'd never race again.

Of course, if he fessed up and named names etc. I might have a bit more respect for him.

Sure, but if you watched Basso win the Giro this year, not a lot was said about his ban. I think it's easy to have a gut reaction about things in the heat of the moment, but as time passes people's opinion might change.

People even had grudging respect for what Vino did this year, regardless of what he did in the past. Look at Millar! People were ready to crucify him in 2004... now he's approaching sainthood.

I think Millar is a case in point though, his account of what happened to him is utterly believable and open to the point of being raw. I think it's fair to say that he's redeemed himself by that and his work with Garmin. It's a bit more than just saying "it's a fair cop, I'll serve my ban".

There was a fair bit of talk about Basso's ban on here at the Giro as well, comparisons with pre ban riding etc.

Steve2020

RichN95 wrote:

1. This is bad for cycling

I don't agree. The only good things to have happened in cycling in recent years have been because of this kind of 'disaster' and the commercial pressure they bring to clean up. It might be bad in the immediate term, but for as long as doping remains endemic, the big scandals are a good thing.

Bakunin

afx237vi wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Or - he gets a ban, serves a suspension, then comes back and carries on where he left off. Even if it's two years, that doesn't end his career if he comes back at 29. Basso, Scarponi and Vino have all done it.

I think Bakunin was saying: "he's dead to me", rather than that he'd never race again.

Of course, if he fessed up and named names etc. I might have a bit more respect for him.

Sure, but if you watched Basso win the Giro this year, not a lot was said about his ban. I think it's easy to have a gut reaction about things in the heat of the moment, but as time passes people's opinion might change.

People even had grudging respect for what Vino did this year, regardless of what he did in the past. Look at Millar! People were ready to crucify him in 2004... now he's approaching sainthood.

Yes Afx -- it is a gut reaction -- and I'm a AC fanboy. Like many, I've defended him, cheered him on, etc.

But, as Ian reminds us (almost daily), Basso sort of admitted it, as did Vino (somewhat). And St. David has been out front about anti-doping (forget about his position on Flandis). Yet, at this early date, I see AC going the Valverde route -- deny, deny...and I'm a victim.

A Spanish steak in France. It is hard to take that serious.

Kléber

Steve2020 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

1. This is bad for cycling

I don't agree. The only good things to have happened in cycling in recent years have been because of this kind of 'disaster' and the commercial pressure they bring to clean up. It might be bad in the immediate term, but for as long as doping remains endemic, the big scandals are a good thing.

I'm not so sure. This is something that harms the image of the sport. It's not like a cheat has been rumbled in the way CERA users suddenly got caught out by the surprise test.

If Contador's guilty, then it's via a backdoor method. If he's innocent then the harm is done, most people will be scared of backing him just in case he eats a pork chop.

afx237vi

Bakunin wrote:

Yes Afx -- it is a gut reaction -- and I'm a AC fanboy. Like many, I've defended him, cheered him on, etc.

But, as Ian reminds us (almost daily), Basso sort of admitted it, as did Vino (somewhat). And St. David has been out front about anti-doping (forget about his position on Flandis). Yet, at this early date, I see AC going the Valverde route -- deny, deny...and I'm a victim.

A Spanish steak in France. It is hard to take that serious.

Fair enough. I can certainly understand why people would be disappointed and angry. And yes, the riders I mentioned all helped themselves to varying degrees by admitting they had made mistakes. How Contador is regarded in the future all depends on the decisions he makes in the next few weeks or months (how long did it take Millar before he flipped?).

bazbadger

What does Lopez Cerron have to say on the matter - if that's the right person?

A part of me would like to see AC get some space to fully put his of it together, but his story so far seems a little on the odd side.

RichN95.

Steve2020 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

1. This is bad for cycling

I don't agree. The only good things to have happened in cycling in recent years have been because of this kind of 'disaster' and the commercial pressure they bring to clean up. It might be bad in the immediate term, but for as long as doping remains endemic, the big scandals are a good thing.

In sporting terms, I'd agree. In terms of the sport's profile, certainly not. Cycling will survive, but even if AC is cleared, it's taken a big hit. He's the no.1 name in the sport (LA excluded). It's like Roger Federer, Usain Bolt, LeBron James, Tiger Woods or Scott Parker being busted.

LangerDan

It's little funny that if the Cologne lab has the technology to detect clenbuterol at picogram levels AND if its quite possible to inadvertently consume clenbuterol-contamined meat, how come there hasn't been a raft of low-dosage positves? Surely Contador cannot be the only red-meat eating cyclist in Europe?

No_Ta_Doctor

afx237vi wrote:

Bakunin wrote:

Yes Afx -- it is a gut reaction -- and I'm a AC fanboy. Like many, I've defended him, cheered him on, etc.

But, as Ian reminds us (almost daily), Basso sort of admitted it, as did Vino (somewhat). And St. David has been out front about anti-doping (forget about his position on Flandis). Yet, at this early date, I see AC going the Valverde route -- deny, deny...and I'm a victim.

A Spanish steak in France. It is hard to take that serious.

Fair enough. I can certainly understand why people would be disappointed and angry. And yes, the riders I mentioned all helped themselves to varying degrees by admitting they had made mistakes. How Contador is regarded in the future all depends on the decisions he makes in the next few weeks or months (how long did it take Millar before he flipped?).

Well Millar was caught "bang to rights" so the denial route was never really open to him. That said, he was busted in June '04 and giving frank and open interviews in Procycling September edition, so not all that long. He did contest some "details" though. I nicked all that from Wikipedia, I'm not that up on it!

RichN95.

LangerDan wrote:

It's little funny that if the Cologne lab has the technology to detect clenbuterol at picogram levels AND if its quite possible to inadvertently consume clenbuterol-contamined meat, how come there hasn't been a raft of low-dosage positves? Surely Contador cannot be the only red-meat eating cyclist in Europe?

[Devil's Advocate] It might be very new technology. Like the 2008 CERA test [/Devil's Advocate]

No_Ta_Doctor

RichN95 wrote:

Steve2020 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

1. This is bad for cycling

I don't agree. The only good things to have happened in cycling in recent years have been because of this kind of 'disaster' and the commercial pressure they bring to clean up. It might be bad in the immediate term, but for as long as doping remains endemic, the big scandals are a good thing.

In sporting terms, I'd agree. In terms of the sport's profile, certainly not. Cycling will survive, but even if AC is cleared, it's taken a big hit. He's the no.1 name in the sport (LA excluded). It's like Roger Federer, Usain Bolt, LeBron James, Tiger Woods or Scott Parker being busted.

Scott Parker

I disagree though - cycling already has a terrible rep (whether deserved or undeserved is up for debate). For those that follow it it'll make little difference, for those that don't it just confirms what they thought already. Non cycling fans I've spoken to have been unanimously in the "cyclist taking peds? who'd have thunk it" camp.

No_Ta_Doctor

RichN95 wrote:

LangerDan wrote:

It's little funny that if the Cologne lab has the technology to detect clenbuterol at picogram levels AND if its quite possible to inadvertently consume clenbuterol-contamined meat, how come there hasn't been a raft of low-dosage positves? Surely Contador cannot be the only red-meat eating cyclist in Europe?

[Devil's Advocate] It might be very new technology. Like the 2008 CERA test [/Devil's Advocate]

It might also be that clenbuterol contaminated meat isn't actually that common. Possible, but rare. Two this year though....

LangerDan

RichN95 wrote:

LangerDan wrote:

It's little funny that if the Cologne lab has the technology to detect clenbuterol at picogram levels AND if its quite possible to inadvertently consume clenbuterol-contamined meat, how come there hasn't been a raft of low-dosage positves? Surely Contador cannot be the only red-meat eating cyclist in Europe?

[Devil's Advocate] It might be very new technology. Like the 2008 CERA test [/Devil's Advocate]

Perhaps, but I saw trade document today which contained a 2007 paper on a commerically available product to assist in clenbuterol detection at the picogram level - and it was targetted at doping detection.

Even if we were to assume that the technology is very recent, the Tour typiclally carries out 450+ tests before and during the event and yet (apparently) no other positive?.

Bakunin

No tA Doctor wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Steve2020 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

1. This is bad for cycling

I don't agree. The only good things to have happened in cycling in recent years have been because of this kind of 'disaster' and the commercial pressure they bring to clean up. It might be bad in the immediate term, but for as long as doping remains endemic, the big scandals are a good thing.

In sporting terms, I'd agree. In terms of the sport's profile, certainly not. Cycling will survive, but even if AC is cleared, it's taken a big hit. He's the no.1 name in the sport (LA excluded). It's like Roger Federer, Usain Bolt, LeBron James, Tiger Woods or Scott Parker being busted.

I disagree though - cycling already has a terrible rep (whether deserved or undeserved is up for debate). For those that follow it it'll make little difference, for those that don't it just confirms what they thought already. Non cycling fans I've spoken to have been unanimously in the "cyclist taking peds? who'd have thunk it" camp.

Come on -- this is a disaster. And, it is much more than a big scandal.

For only the second time, the winner of the most important race of the year -- a race that everyone knows -- has been caught doping. Forms, levels, and sources of dope are irrelevant.

Yes, pro cycling will go on -- but it is hard to argue that it is not a joke.

The excuses are surreal -- a Spanish steak in France, Jack Daniels, vanishing twins, and a refusal to acknowledge a DNA match.

jerry3571

Oh yes; I should have a crystal ball or something; my post from almost a year ago-

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... t=contador

I think my general point is that if Contador moved away from Bruyneel then there would be a good chance of getting for a Positve Test and TA! DA! He's proved my right.
If he had got to Riis for next year then he would have been under smart organised mangement with small risk of a Positive Test result. The Astana set up has been found wanting before and no longer with the Bruyneel, the Team was always vulnerable.
FF must be a little bit choked; poor mucker!!

Mosquera too today; bit of shocker all round.

-Jerry

Pokerface

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

Valverde is currently serving his 2 year ban.

Is it any wonder to you - that many of the riders you love so much - that have that great attacking style, that can ride away from the rest of the field with seeming ease - all seem to get busted at some point? Do you think it is possible that the thing that gives them the edge and makes them ride like that is not just god-given talent - but instead some sort of pharmalogical help?

A rider like Contador who has always been miles better than the competition was always going to arouse suspicion. Even if you don't want to believe he has been getting extra help all these years - that doesn't make it so.

Conversely - he might just be that good. And this might be the biggest set of coincidences in pro cycling ever.

sherer

Pokerface wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

So what happens now?

At the end of the day he is a supreme rider and this clen or whatever is a lightweight dope and serves very little indeed. He would still fly up the mountains, dominate the TTs and have an exciting riding style regardless. Same as Valverde, if he is banned, he will come back and clean up and provide interesting viewing.

Valverde is currently serving his 2 year ban.

Is it any wonder to you - that many of the riders you love so much - that have that great attacking style, that can ride away from the rest of the field with seeming ease - all seem to get busted at some point? Do you think it is possible that the thing that gives them the edge and makes them ride like that is not just god-given talent - but instead some sort of pharmalogical help?

A rider like Contador who has always been miles better than the competition was always going to arouse suspicion. Even if you don't want to believe he has been getting extra help all these years - that doesn't make it so.

Conversely - he might just be that good. And this might be the biggest set of coincidences in pro cycling ever.

Things like this do make you wonder about the sport. Love Cancellara and you wonder how he does what he does at time but then you look at Millar who was second in the TT surely he must be clean now ?

cyclopath

Timoid. wrote:

I'm surprised he ate steak at all. Isn't lean white meat, fish and pasta the dieticians choice?

Its a long time since the days of Anquitel gobbling down a haunch of vension before an important stage.

Maitre Jacques would have taken exception to that remark.

It was a rare leg of lamb and a bottle of wine.

jerry3571

Miller 2nd and clean???
I have another saying about pro riders and doping and that's
"never trust a cyclist"
A pro bike rider will lie or fool themselves in to thinking that doping is benfitting thier Health. They would say" How can a person ride all these races naturally? It would kill a normal human?"

_Jerry

PS- I must stop reading Procycling Magazine as it keeps me cynical, not good.