Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

rick_chasey

It's a shame isn't it? All this.

I was flicking through this month's procycling with the review of 'Bertie's bike, all the Contador sponsorship - it all looks a little sad and tragic - all feels a little hollow.

Such a shame really.

For me, it also doesn't help that Andy appears to have Stockholm Syndrome with his rival. That his rival, (who is basically a cheater) is getting the benefit of the (very little) doubt is a little disconcerting, especially since said cheater denied him of the biggest prize in his sport.

feltkuota

Why would anyone assume the butcher has anything to do with this? Surely, assuming of course the meat was contaminated (which I don't) it should be the farmer that has to be looked at.

Kléber

Rick Chasey wrote:

For me, it also doesn't help that Andy appears to have Stockholm Syndrome with his rival. That his rival, (who is basically a cheater) is getting the benefit of the (very little) doubt is a little disconcerting, especially since said cheater denied him of the biggest prize in his sport.

Well given Franck Schleck was wiring money to Fuentes, what do you expect? He's hardly going to say "I think it's disgusting, I'm sickened by anyone who cheats or works with these shady doctors".

rick_chasey

Kléber wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

For me, it also doesn't help that Andy appears to have Stockholm Syndrome with his rival. That his rival, (who is basically a cheater) is getting the benefit of the (very little) doubt is a little disconcerting, especially since said cheater denied him of the biggest prize in his sport.

Well given Franck Schleck was wiring money to Fuentes, what do you expect? He's hardly going to say "I think it's disgusting, I'm sickened by anyone who cheats or works with these shady doctors".

I wasn't talking about what I expected - I was saying what I thought was a shame. :P

epc06

Gypsum_Fantastic wrote:

I have been following this thread on and off since the news emerged but what I am still not clear on is why the authorities only seem to be going after Contador for the Clenbuterol when, at one point, there was supposedly evidence of an autologous blood transfusion.

The Clenbuterol may or may not have been ingested accidentally and that's the angle I'd expect Contadors legal advisors to take however a blood transfusion is a pretty deliberate and premeditated action. Could anyone enlighten me why they aren't pursuing this angle too?

From my basic understanding, the evidence for the transusion comes from a test for plastcisers which is not yet ratified

dulldave

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's a shame isn't it? All this.

I was flicking through this month's procycling with the review of 'Bertie's bike, all the Contador sponsorship - it all looks a little sad and tragic - all feels a little hollow.

Such a shame really.

For me, it also doesn't help that Andy appears to have Stockholm Syndrome with his rival. That his rival, (who is basically a cheater) is getting the benefit of the (very little) doubt is a little disconcerting, especially since said cheater denied him of the biggest prize in his sport.

I agree, it's a shame. FF you're just kidding yourself now. Give it up.

WADA feel this is a doping case and have analysed this case a bit more than you or I. If they say he cheated then so do I.

Gypsum_Fantastic

EPC06 wrote:

Gypsum_Fantastic wrote:

I have been following this thread on and off since the news emerged but what I am still not clear on is why the authorities only seem to be going after Contador for the Clenbuterol when, at one point, there was supposedly evidence of an autologous blood transfusion.

The Clenbuterol may or may not have been ingested accidentally and that's the angle I'd expect Contadors legal advisors to take however a blood transfusion is a pretty deliberate and premeditated action. Could anyone enlighten me why they aren't pursuing this angle too?

From my basic understanding, the evidence for the transusion comes from a test for plastcisers which is not yet ratified

Interesting, Cheers. Could WADA not ratify the test "on the fly" after all there are similar tests being conducted in the food industry?

pat1cp

frenchfighter wrote:

I'm done here. Check the sig.

Remind me, where's that bucket of sand ! :shock:

Tusher

Most excellent.

He's doomed.

And that's before we ever got to hear whatever excuses he could concoct regarding the plasticizers.

But even if it wasn't for the pasticizer thing, faced with the integrity of Spanish cycling and the integrity of the Spanish (EU) meat industry, well, it's a no brainer really.



(waves at Vino)

Tusher

Ah, reading that over, it does seem a tad harsh.
Which is ok, because I truly have no time for dopers, and contempt for caught dopers who deceive their fans with elaborate tales. They are professional sportsmen and women, not attending the creative writing class held in the village hall on Thursday evenings. Sometimes it's difficult to tell the difference.


But I can understand how Contador has got here, loyalty to Pinto and his clan, raised in dirty teams and so on.

I wouldn't like to be his psychologist. Look at Landis, little Bertie, look at Landis.

MrTapir

Gypsum_Fantastic wrote:

I have been following this thread on and off since the news emerged but what I am still not clear on is why the authorities only seem to be going after Contador for the Clenbuterol when, at one point, there was supposedly evidence of an autologous blood transfusion.

The Clenbuterol may or may not have been ingested accidentally and that's the angle I'd expect Contadors legal advisors to take however a blood transfusion is a pretty deliberate and premeditated action. Could anyone enlighten me why they aren't pursuing this angle too?

I believe its because the test that allegedly detected plastcisers in his blood is not yet ratified by the UCI or whomever needs to ratify it to be official. I'm not even sure if the test followed the correct protocols of testing A and B sample and all that. So they can't use it because its not official yet.

Seems now the meat wasn't the culprit, and so the positive for clen can be dealt with to its fullest i imagine, i.e. 2 yr ban, none of this 3 months for good behaviour or whatever.

He's been so insistent on the meat defence that he can't now change and say 'oh well it could be a supplement'.

MrTapir

EPC06 wrote:

Gypsum_Fantastic wrote:

I have been following this thread on and off since the news emerged but what I am still not clear on is why the authorities only seem to be going after Contador for the Clenbuterol when, at one point, there was supposedly evidence of an autologous blood transfusion.

The Clenbuterol may or may not have been ingested accidentally and that's the angle I'd expect Contadors legal advisors to take however a blood transfusion is a pretty deliberate and premeditated action. Could anyone enlighten me why they aren't pursuing this angle too?

From my basic understanding, the evidence for the transusion comes from a test for plastcisers which is not yet ratified

gah too late

Pokerface

Bye Bye Bertie.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Perhaps the butcher could be dodgy but the point is WADA has looked at food samples across Europe, this isn't just about the local supply chain.

If I could channel Taleb for a moment, no evidence of clen in meat is not evidence of no clen in meat

So all the testing on existing samples and the rest of europe really don't prove anything. That said, the only bovine involved in Berts positive was the one that produced the BS excuse he's using.

Kléber

iainf72 wrote:

If I could channel Taleb for a moment, no evidence of clen in meat is not evidence of no clen in meat

So all the testing on existing samples and the rest of europe really don't prove anything. That said, the only bovine involved in Berts positive was the one that produced the BS excuse he's using.

Aha, induction theory?

The point is that the rules state Contador has to prove his innocence to get a shortened ban, the A+B samples mean he's very likely to be banned. So any defence reliant on contamination by hormones has find some facts.

Since we're on a philosophical moment, what about Occam? Discard the most elaborate and improbable ideas and "pro cyclist caught doping" is a plausible outcome. That said, if Contador is the one in a million man, then so be it. It's just he needs the evidence to back this up.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Aha, induction theory?

I was going for black swan there.

If I'd been Berts lawyer, I would have suggested finding a supplement which was contaminated, copped the ban and hoped for a reduction.

Tusher

I agree with Iain.
But it still doesn't explain the plasticizer.

I can't get this Monty Python vision out of my head involving a Spanish bull who thinks he can beat the bull fighter (yes, yes, I know) and orders up some clem for himself.

LangerDan

iainf72 wrote:

If I could channel Taleb for a moment, no evidence of clen in meat is not evidence of no clen in meat

So all the testing on existing samples and the rest of europe really don't prove anything. That said, the only bovine involved in Berts positive was the one that produced the BS excuse he's using.

My understanding of the tracability of beef is that it is a requirement that beef can be traced back to the animal or batch of animals that were slaughtered. It would be possible, knowing the day of purchase of the meat, to limit the number of suspect animals to a small number - possibly even just one animal in the case of a small butcher. Once you have that, then there are a few options - there may still be meat in storage from the same animal(s).

Pokerface

And yet - you still know this will drag out in the courts - probably for years to come.

DaveyL

Bert fights back with a stream of meaningless verbiage

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contado ... ada-report

Sorry Bert - you had Clenbuterol in you - it is up to you to prove it got there accidentally, not t'other way round.

andyp

Blimey, that was a lot of verbiage. If his lawyers charge by the word his bill will be enormous.

Maybe they should read the WADA code, specifically around the concept of strict liability.

Percy Vera

What does it matter, how it got there?
The fact is, it was there and therefore Contador should be banned.

calvjones

It'll be such a shame if the last thing Bertie leaves as he closes the door is the smell of this sh1t.

I suppose the prospect of losing a TdF and missing another 2 was too much to bear.

epc06

If bertie goes, then I wonder if Lance would think he might have another chance at the TDF.
Shove schleck in a ditch and its his!

blazing_saddles

He may also come under fire from the Astana Tour dump, given that's on the Feds meet Frenchies agenda.
Perhaps he and Lance can call eachother as character witnesses.

bipedal

Odd line of defence:

“Such reasoning is fallacious,” they argue, “because if so we have to admit also that it is absurd that any athlete uses a banned substance, especially because sport's controls are much more abundant than livestock and use much more sophisticated detection methods than those used in veterinary medicine.”

So because cyclists dope, cows dope. I wonder how much they charged to come up with that gem?

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6388/ ... ation.aspx

rick_chasey

Percy Vera wrote:

What does it matter, how it got there?

The length of the ban.

If it's proven to be entirely by accident with no intent to cheat - it halves the sentence.

dave_1

27 m livestock slaughtered in 2008, 122,648 samples tested for clen, 22,518 return a + "for beta agonists, including Clenbuterol"

???

attica

Dave_1 wrote:

27 m livestock slaughtered in 2008, 122,648 samples tested for clen, 22,518 return a + "for beta agonists, including Clenbuterol"

???

I think you're reading that wrong.
Of the 122648 tested, only 22518 were tested for Clenbuterol
Contador's team aren't denying the single positive from those 22518, just pointing out that the odds are shorter than the WADA report which apparently points to one in 122648.

Either way, the chances of Contador getting meat from the one animal in however many are pretty darned slim

frenchfighter

“In fact, all the work of the detective is limited to asking the butcher in question if there the meat is sold with all the necessary health requirements, receiving the expected response and saying who their suppliers are. This was taken on their word, without any kind of questioning. The same was done with several suppliers. In the documentation sent there is not evidence that WADA has made any kind of analysis at the butcher in question, much less at the slaughterhouses which are mentioned.”

Am I to understand that there was no testing done of the meat in the Cologne labs that tested Contador? If so then the statement is useless. Totally useless. I'm you lot need to calm down. Furthermore, relating to my previous point, assume the butcher had bad meat, is anyone stupid enough to think he would also have that meat now.

According to the latest official report of the European Union for 2008, over a total of nearly 27 million cattle were slaughtered in the EU but only a total of 122,648 samples (0.48%) of which only 22,518 cases with searches for traces of beta agonists, including Clenbuterol.

First rule of statistics relates to sample size. Here are 1000 UK citizens. None of them have class A drugs in their body, so we conclude that no one in UK has class A drugs in their body. This logic is pointless. Totally pointless.

Lightweight. Lightweights.