# Contador tests positive for clenbuterol



## NextTime

Oh no!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alberto-contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol


----------



## lastchild

just saw that.
ooops...

Andy, your jersey is ready!


----------



## monkeybullit

Food contamination? Possibly. I see a sizable backlash coming because he's not too popular with the fans. We'll have to wait and see what happens next.


----------



## jjmstang

Another that gets away from LA and the Hog then tests positive for something

The things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

just saying


----------



## Mr. Scary

Once a Kelme rider always a doper. I've been saying this for several years, and this just confirms what was so obvious!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

All of the Contador supporters: :cryin:


----------



## stevesbike

Fuyu Li from Radioshack is facing a two year ban for the same drug (his B sample was recently confirmed). Won't be easy to get out of this.


----------



## jjmstang

Looks like Andy will get his Yellow jersey now

edit: maybe Andy spiked his food LOL


----------



## Infini

Nooo!!!!!!!


----------



## davidka

I don't see how he can. His options are take the ban or have the B-sample tested but it sounds like they already know how the 2nd option will pan out and are taking the food contamination strategy. I'm not sure why, the WADA isn't concerned about how something got there, just that it's there.


----------



## robdamanii

stevesbike said:


> Fuyu Li from Radioshack is facing a two year ban for the same drug (his B sample was recently confirmed). Won't be easy to get out of this.


This was the FIRST thought that came to mind.


----------



## lastchild

davidka said:


> I don't see how he can. His options are take the ban or have the B-sample tested but it sounds like they already know how the 2nd option will pan out and are taking the food contamination strategy. I'm not sure why, the WADA isn't concerned about how something got there, just that it's there.


maybe because they know how it got there...'Berto put it there.


----------



## Ray_from_SA

Already using the defense of 'all my samples prior to that one were clean'?

Isn't that what Landis said too?


----------



## wiz525

too bad. i don't even really care for Alberto, but i don't want to see this.

word travels fast: the Wiki page for Clenbuterol already references Contador's positive test!


----------



## robdamanii

My big question is this:

Li took a 2 year hit for the same drug, the same explanation. Now, will Contador be shown the beach for 2 years, or will his "superstar status" protect him?


----------



## spade2you

robdamanii said:


> will his "superstar status" protect him?


Probably.


----------



## 97G8tr

whats good for the goose....


----------



## Retro Grouch

One can argue that Alberto rode his horse to a Chinese restaurant where he feasted on large servings of sweet-n-sour pork.

From Wiki:

*Food contamination*

_In September 2006 over 330 people in Shanghai were reported to have been poisoned by eating pork contaminated by clenbuterol that had been fed to the animals to keep their meat lean. There are also other informal reports on localized food contamination cases by clenbuterol in the U.S., which led to setting rules that limit consumption of this medicine only to horses.

In February, 2009, at least 70 people in one Chinese province (Guangdong) suffered food poisoning after eating pig organs believed to contain clenbuterol residue. The victims complained of stomachaches and diarrhea after eating pig organs bought in local markets._

If true, love or hate him, this hurts the sport.


----------



## iliveonnitro

Dear lord, the end of credibility for cycling in the public's eye is upon us.


----------



## pianopiano

It's funny/interesting that the very quickly updated Wikipedia entry for clenbuterol (as first noted by wiz525) reads word for word like his defence statement. 

Btw, goodbye SaxoBank Sunguard.


----------



## spade2you

iliveonnitro said:


> Dear lord, the end of credibility for cycling in the public's eye is upon us.


....and then there's the goofy spandex and strange helmets.......


----------



## Coolhand

I am not stunned, but still disappointed.


----------



## Coolhand

> The doping control in question was carried on July 21 during the second rest of the Tour in Pau, in the Pyrenees. The day after, Contador set up overall victory by finishing in the same time as Schleck at the summit of the Col du Tourmalet.


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alberto-contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol


----------



## robdamanii

Not sure if I'm disappointed or not. More likely, just sick of him, and enjoying the news right now.


----------



## wiz525

For those with better memory of dates than I, how does this timeline correlate with Riis' team? Contador was notified on Aug 24. When did the Contador/Riis announcement come out?? 

...maybe i should just look it up...


----------



## a_avery007

always said, how can a guy come close to the chicken and outrun spartacus??

lol
he's done.!


----------



## DIRT BOY

Like I said in another thread. He will blame this on some meat (Yes, this was a HUGE problem in Texas years ago) and will get banned. Watch!
The UCI has NO choice!

Like another poster said, credibility in the publics eye is dead. Then again what's wrong with children's couch medicine? LOL! JOKE!


----------



## DIRT BOY

Again, why do we have a doping section? This new BELONGS in the Pro Cycling section, because its PART of Pro Cycling. Like I always said, ATHLETES of all sports dope, PERIOD!!

End of discussion. If money is there, they all will dope!


----------



## Creakyknees

I agree with DIRT BOY


----------



## Zipp0

70 reading Pro Cycling, 195 in The Doping Forum,

Heads still BURIED in the sand. Truly amazing and sad- all of it.


----------



## wiz525

Zipp0 said:


> 70 reading Pro Cycling, 195 in The Doping Forum,
> 
> Heads still BURIED in the sand. Truly amazing and sad- all of it.


While I don't follow forum statistics, I imagine this is story-dependent. Of course there are more in the doping forum right now than Pro Cycling.

but i agree with the others above. they're inseparable.


----------



## WAZCO

NextTime said:


> Oh no!
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alberto-contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol


I hope it sticks simply cuz I don't like Conti and that Spanish is getting away with so much but why do I have a feeling that it won't due to cyclingnews.com of

"further scientific investigation" and “The concentration found by the laboratory was estimated at 50 picograms (or 0,000 000 000 05 grams per ml) which is 400 time less than what the antidoping laboratories accredited by WADA must be able to detect.” 

Could this really be a spike game?


----------



## dagger

wiz525 said:


> For those with better memory of dates than I, how does this timeline correlate with Riis' team? Contador was notified on Aug 24. When did the Contador/Riis announcement come out??
> 
> ...maybe i should just look it up...


Better yet, when did Cancellera decide he was leaving. Cancellera is a much bigger loss than Contador ever will be.


----------



## Wookiebiker

Is this really a surprise to anybody? Seriously  

So much for the "Doping controls are cleaning up the peloton" crowd...LOL :idea:


----------



## Perico

DIRT BOY said:


> Again, why do we have a doping section? This new BELONGS in the Pro Cycling section, because its PART of Pro Cycling. Like I always said, ATHLETES of all sports dope, PERIOD!!
> 
> *End of discussion. If money is there, they all will dope!*


The part in bold is 100% false.


If there is competition people will find ways to cheat, through doping or other means. Money does not make it happen, competition does.


----------



## pianopiano

dagger said:


> Better yet, when did Cancellera decide he was leaving. Cancellera is a much bigger loss than Contador ever will be.


I had attempted to imply in my earlier post that with Contador out of the picture, Bjarne Riis isn't left with much ammunition. Ritchie Porte is good, but...


----------



## tron

It would be kind of sly of the pistolero to take a substance that has been documented to come up from food contamination. Gives a good explanation and maybe just a year ban if not completely cleared


----------



## WAZCO

Wookiebiker said:


> Is this really a surprise to anybody? Seriously
> 
> So much for the "Doping controls are cleaning up the peloton" crowd...LOL :idea:


Seriously? You think people are surprise? I'd be surprise if someone is surprise


----------



## dagger

iliveonnitro said:


> Dear lord, the end of credibility for cycling in the public's eye is upon us.


Is this why the leader of the AFLD or whatever french doping agency resigned? That they wanted to sweep it under the rug or let Conta off the hook?


----------



## Wookiebiker

WAZCO said:


> Seriously? You think people are surprise? I'd be surprise if someone is surprise


Yes, I think some people will...Many were clamoring with the closer racing, theoretically slower speeds and bio-passport system in place that the "Big Dogs" were starting to race clean again.

But, as I've said all along, cycling as well as every other sport is "Dirty" at least as far as PED usage goes.


----------



## BuenosAires

Where's Greg Lemond?


----------



## dagger

tron said:


> It would be kind of sly of the pistolero to take a substance that has been documented to come up from food contamination. Gives a good explanation and maybe just a year ban if not completely cleared



Already had a case this year with food contamination claim that resulted in 2 year suspension. Contador is on record as having "breathing' problems which would have been a better explaination on why we would have a bronchial dialator in system.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> The part in bold is 100% false.
> 
> 
> If there is competition people will find ways to cheat, through doping or other means. Money does not make it happen, competition does.


No MONEY! When you win, you get paid.


----------



## dagger

BuenosAires said:


> Where's Greg Lemond?


You mean the guy who declared that this year was dope free based on his calculations?


----------



## dagger

monkeybullit said:


> Food contamination? Possibly. I see a sizable backlash coming because he's not too popular with the fans. We'll have to wait and see what happens next.


not popular with any riders also. Did he have to eat somebody's show cow or horse for his pre TT meal? I doubt he had a steak or porkchop the night before.


----------



## Lazy Spinner

I'm sure he just ate a pound and a half of steak tartare made with beef imported from China. You know that stuff isn't well regulated. Plus, he was nervous about how tough Andy Schleck was so, like Floyd, he downed a few shots of Jack Daniels before calling it a night.

Simple explanation.


----------



## loudog

DIRT BOY said:


> Again, why do we have a doping section? This new BELONGS in the Pro Cycling section, because its PART of Pro Cycling. Like I always said, ATHLETES of all sports dope, PERIOD!!
> 
> End of discussion. If money is there, they all will dope!



yup. agreed. who dopes more cyclists or nfl players?


----------



## WAZCO

loudog said:


> yup. agreed. who dopes more cyclists or nfl players?


There's more NFL players so that's an easy one. Sadly there's more college football players doping and 95 percent of them don't make it to the Pro. My college roomates inculded and one them was my best friend. Sad, huh?


----------



## blackjack

Lazy Spinner said:


> I'm sure he just ate a pound and a half of steak tartare made with beef imported from China. You know that stuff isn't well regulated. Plus, he was nervous about how tough Andy Schleck was so, like Floyd, he downed a few shots of Jack Daniels before calling it a night.
> 
> Simple explanation.


http://www.velonation.com/Photos/Photo-Album/mmid/614/mediaid/572.aspx


----------



## redlizard

blackjack said:


> http://www.velonation.com/Photos/Photo-Album/mmid/614/mediaid/572.aspx


FAIL.

To date, there is no indication that he showed any of the symptoms, i.e. tremors, nausea, dizziness, headaches, etc... cited in this link. Of course, he might be 'remembering' them now.

Just as interesting is that Contador's appears to be an isolated case of a world class athlete, whereas all the ones cited in this link involve significant numbers of individuals.


----------



## st3v3

Love it.


----------



## Wookiebiker

redlizard said:


> FAIL.
> 
> To date, there is no indication that he showed any of the symptoms, i.e. tremors, nausea, dizziness, headaches, etc... cited in this link. Of course, he might be 'remembering' them now.
> 
> Just as interesting is that Contador's appears to be an isolated case of a world class athlete, whereas all the ones cited in this link involve significant numbers of individuals.


Not only that, but since he was with the team during the Tour and he more than likely "ate" the same food as his teammates...wouldn't they turn up positive for the same drug as well?

His defense isn't going to hold up very well.


----------



## SilasCL

Wookiebiker said:


> Not only that, but since he was with the team during the Tour and he more than likely "ate" the same food as his teammates...wouldn't they turn up positive for the same drug as well?
> 
> His defense isn't going to hold up very well.


Do we know if his teammates were tested around the same time?

I don't see this ending up anywhere but a 2 year ban, but maybe this defense will be interesting.


----------



## ChilliConCarnage

Incidentally, his B sample has already been tested as positive as well. 

Also, fyi, the announcement by Saxo/Riis that they'd signed Alberto came on Aug. 3, well before AC was notified.


----------



## kbwh

Very low amounts though. 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-contador-positive-requires-further-scientific-investigation

We'll see...


----------



## frontierwolf

Very low amounts when tested. 

Who knows what his dosing was like or when he took it.


----------



## JohnHemlock

I don't see any way he doesn't get a ban, seeing as he tested positive for a BANNED SUBSTANCE!!!!!

Don't care about him either way but if he gets out of this it's only because his name is not Fuyu Li or Jean-Phillipe Broomwagon.


----------



## Ventruck

frontierwolf said:


> Very low amounts when tested.
> 
> Who knows what his dosing was like or when he took it.


Indeed. It's probably his best defense, as well as whatever the hell happened to him during the ITT. I couldn't tell if that tearing was rejoicing or being completely worked over by his asthma.

IMO, considering the supposed concentration of the substance found in the test, and a history of nothing else before that (well, from what I recall), this will likely blow over, and is only spoken of so the cycling media world can draw attention.


----------



## waldo425

stevesbike said:


> Fuyu Li from Radioshack is facing a two year ban for the same drug (his B sample was recently confirmed). Won't be easy to get out of this.


What was the concentration though? Seems like AC's was very low.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

Shame it's not 1999 when a back-dated TUE by a team doctor could take care of these sort of difficulties.

That being said, I thought clenbuterol is a "sprinter's drug", but with the concoctions we know dopers have taken in the past it would not surprise me if he was using it.

I say 50/50 odds he gets out of this one.


----------



## DIRT BOY

WAZCO said:


> There's more NFL players so that's an easy one. Sadly there's more college football players doping and 95 percent of them don't make it to the Pro. My college roomates inculded and one them was my best friend. Sad, huh?


About the same. But there might be more cyclists when you go world wide.

Yes, football is full of drugs, especially in the Pro ranks.


----------



## orange_julius

Mr. Scary said:


> Once a Kelme rider always a doper. I've been saying this for several years, and this just confirms what was so obvious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> All of the Contador supporters: :cryin:


I think you meant ONCE / Liberty Seguros? Back in those times I remember everybody talked about Luis Leon Sanchez the wonderboy, but very little about Alberto Contador.


----------



## orange_julius

jjmstang said:


> Looks like Andy will get his Yellow jersey now
> 
> edit: maybe Andy spiked his food LOL


Andy spiked the fried turkey and then dared Alberto to eat it!


----------



## orange_julius

Dwayne Barry said:


> Shame it's not 1999 when a back-dated TUE by a team doctor could take care of these sort of difficulties.


+1 Good one!


----------



## davidka

From Velonation's latest article:



The UCI has confirmed the news, saying that the rider is provisionally suspended. It pointed out that the level concerned was 400 times less than the minimum detection level required by WADA and, because of that, a full study will be done before any conclusion is reached

400 TIMES LESS THAN THE MINIMUM DETECTION LEVEL? Why was this released at all? Why is he provisionally suspended?

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...buterol-news-came-too-soon.aspx#ixzz110mfUUoM


----------



## tommyrhodes

My girlfriend woke me up to tell me about this. For about 10 seconds I was absolutely ecstatic. And then I realized how horrible our sport is going to look. I wish there was a way we could keep the world from knowing when riders disgrace our sport like this. I just pray AS was clean.


----------



## orange_julius

davidka said:


> From Velonation's latest article:
> 
> 
> 
> The UCI has confirmed the news, saying that the rider is provisionally suspended. It pointed out that the level concerned was 400 times less than the minimum detection level required by WADA and, because of that, a full study will be done before any conclusion is reached
> 
> 400 TIMES LESS THAN THE MINIMUM DETECTION LEVEL? Why was this released at all? Why is he provisionally suspended?
> 
> Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...buterol-news-came-too-soon.aspx#ixzz110mfUUoM


If you read the WADA prohibited substance list, certain things are banned above certain concentrations (such as Ephedrine, Leipheimer's former drug of choice) but others are banned absolutely (such as Clenbuterol, heroin, etc.). So the testing lab/agency has an obligation to report the Clenbuterol finding. 

The remark "400 times less than the minimum detection level" means that all labs to be certified has to be able to detect this substance at that minimum detection level. It is not the detection level used to determine whether a test is positive or not. So much for reporting by the cycling press. The cyclingnews article is more clear and accurate in its statement:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alb...races-of-clenbuterol-from-tour-de-france-test
_... 400 times less than the amount World Anti-Doping Agency accredited labs must be able to detect._

One can argue the accuracy of the test and I'm sure that Contador will, but refereed publications from even the mid-90s already show reliable detection below the 0.05 ng/mL that he is contesting. Just google around and you'll find a bunch of publications.


----------



## NextTime

orange_julius said:


> The remark "400 times less than the minimum detection level" means that all labs to be certified has to be able to detect this substance at that minimum detection level. It is not the detection level used to determine whether a test is positive or not. So much for reporting by the cycling press. The cyclingnews article is more clear and accurate in its statement:
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alb...races-of-clenbuterol-from-tour-de-france-test
> _... 400 times less than the amount World Anti-Doping Agency accredited labs must be able to detect._


Thanks for the clarification. The cycling press needs to impose better quality control standards. Bad reporting leads to wild discussions in this forum.


----------



## DMFT

Dwayne Barry said:


> Shame it's not 1999 when a back-dated TUE by a team doctor could take care of these sort of difficulties. /QUOTE]
> 
> 
> - That's right people! It's all Lance's fault!! Lance spiked Alberto's punch...I saw him do it.
> 
> Funny how everything comes back full circle.... :thumbsup:


----------



## rugger

This could be the tip of an iceberg. I have long suspected spanish riders, including operation puerto. Spain does not have the agency resources to follow up and track down these instances. I remain skeptical of Miguel Indurain as well. Other nations have been dilgently testing, catching and suspending riders, rarely hear any news like this from Spanish authorities. It's difficlut to believe that they have been clean while otehrs in many other nations have been caught


----------



## nathanbal

waldo425 said:


> What was the concentration though? Seems like AC's was very low.


I cant find the link again but I read today that it was supposedly 0.05-0.10. If that's the case Alberto is gone for sure.


----------



## nathanbal

1996 - Bjarne Ris - on drugs
1997 - Jan Ullrich - on drugs
1998 - Marco Pantani - on drugs
1999-2005 - soon to be confirmed Lance on drugs
2006 - Floyd on drugs
2007 - Alberto... tainted
2008 - Carlos... the only one not under a cloud?
2009-10 - Alberto - tainted and now a positive

Its a sad thing to see it all written down like this.


----------



## robdamanii

orange_julius said:


> Andy spiked the fried turkey and then dared Alberto to eat it!


So full of win!


----------



## davidka

Thanks for the clarification O_J.


----------



## Pablo




----------



## Dwayne Barry

nathanbal said:


> 1996 - Bjarne Ris - on drugs
> 1997 - Jan Ullrich - on drugs
> 1998 - Marco Pantani - on drugs
> 1999-2005 - soon to be confirmed Lance on drugs
> 2006 - Floyd on drugs
> 2007 - Alberto... tainted
> 2008 - Carlos... the only one not under a cloud?
> 2009-10 - Alberto - tainted and now a positive
> 
> Its a sad thing to see it all written down like this.


Seems to be some pretty good reasons to go back to at least Indurain, in the "modern" era of doping.


----------



## MSH

Some additional info from another cyclingnews article...

_The Cologne, Germany, laboratory that tested Contador’s July 21 sample is known for being one of the worlds’ most advanced for clenbuterol detection. Had Contador’s sample been tested anywhere else the traces are so minute that the substance would likely have been undetected.

Samples from this year’s Paris-Nice and Tour de France weren’t tested at the French Châtenay-Malabry laboratory in Paris, France, making it the first time in history another lab has handled the Tour’s samples. This is the result of the constant war between the French anti-doping agency French Anti-doping Agency (AFLD) and the UCI._


Article - http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contador-food-contamination-or-political-victim


----------



## merckxman

The only rider on Contador's team that was tested the same day was Vinokourov....but Vinkourov had the lousy restaurant steak whereas Contador had the steak brought in from Spain by his friend (Josè Luis Lopez Terron,organizer of the Vuelta Castilla y Leon).


----------



## DuctTape

This info puts a new light on why Contador is not in Aussie for the World's, prefering to stay home and "prepare for the professional season"


----------



## 95zpro

Based on his press conference, the minute traces that wouldn't boost performance, and the fact that it showed up not in his pre-rest day test he will walk away scott free.


----------



## robdamanii

95zpro said:


> Based on his press conference, the minute traces that wouldn't boost performance, and the fact that it showed up not in his pre-rest day test he will walk away scott free.


How do you figure that? It's possible for people to return a positive sandwiched in between negatives. It just depends when he took the offending substance and how much he took.


----------



## Len J

95zpro said:


> Based on his press conference, the minute traces that wouldn't boost performance, and the fact that it showed up not in his pre-rest day test he will walk away scott free.


Not a chance!

I read this on several forums and it doesn't account for the actual usage.

He was tested at the end of racing on the day after the rest day.
This substance is utilized to speed up recovery (At least by cyclist). It is recognized as both one of the best at this and it's also recognized as one that metabolizes quickly.
So, more likely than not, he took it after the testing on the day before the rest day (or 48 or so hours before the failed test), and then again on the rest day,( probably 36+ or so hours before the failed test)......by the time he finished racing on the day after the rest day, and was tested, the concentrations in his blood would be expected to be negligible........it's how cyclist have gotten away with this for years. Unfortunatly for Roberto, the testing sensitivities have improved.

Trust me, the doping agencies know what I just posted. He's toast.

Len


----------



## Dan Gerous

DuctTape said:


> This info puts a new light on why Contador is not in Aussie for the World's, prefering to stay home and "prepare for the professional season"


Has Contador ever raced Worlds? If there is a similarity between him and another certain multiple Tour winner is that they race to to prepare for the Tour before the Tour then stop racing after the Tour...


----------



## loudog

hes a doper, end of story. arguing they werent getting good meat in france is absurd. my guess tho is that he transfused with blood that was tainted. clen is big for weight loss and i bet he took out some blood earlier in the season and had been using clen to lose the baby fat. these guys are so particular about what they put in their bodies that its ridiculous to think this was a food related accident.


----------



## orange_julius

robdamanii said:


> How do you figure that? It's possible for people to return a positive sandwiched in between negatives. It just depends when he took the offending substance and how much he took.


Also, it is likely that the other samples were processed at different labs. This particular one in Koln has accuracy that is 52 dB higher than the required accuracy for WADA certification. It could be that he lucked out that the other ones didn't have good enough accuracy to detect it.


----------



## Perico

Two comments:

1) DirtBoy, you are kidding yourself if you think money is the only reason people cheat. Steroids used by kids to look good on the beach being a great example of what I am saying. 60 Minutes did a big piece on this a few years back.

2) It's funny how many are here talking about how the amount found in AC is too small to help, yet go after LA talking about his '99 cortisone positive. Hypocritical?


----------



## Dan Gerous

Johan supports him... Not sure if that's good for Alberto, I mean, he has a reputation... That also adds to the long list of riders who got busted after they left one of his team.


----------



## Brad the Bold

WAZCO said:


> Seriously? You think people are surprise? I'd be surprise if someone is surprise


I'm not surprised. 

Both by Contador testing positive and your lack of surprise over my lack of surprise.


----------



## Coolhand

Brad the Bold said:


> and your lack of surprise over my lack of surprise.


I'm surprised at that.


----------



## kokothemonkey

It sounds like there is a rumor about clen being a masking agent for transfusions, and that conti had plasticisers (spelling?) found in his system as well indicating blood bag transfusions.


----------



## merckxman

Contador's scientific expert, Dr. Douwe de Boer....

De Boer is the same expert used by Team RadioShack rider Fuyu Li, who was found positive for Clenbuterol with similar levels to Contador in May.

How can they not give the same punishment to Contador they gave Li?


----------



## FR hokeypokey

Quick thoughts after reading the various articles today....

1) I will be suprised if AC gets more than a slap on the wrist and his current off-season "suspension" he is currently serving.

2) Interesting how quickly UCI, industry notables and cycling media release statements of support for AC, minimizing minute levels of banned PED, political nature of German labs high standard of testing, etc...

3) Same individuals/organizations giving support are also first ones in line to condemn every rumor or allegation and demand the newest scientific testing for decade old samples of LA. Has anyone seen same demands of re-testing for any other riders?

4) Sub text reasoning this story should not have even been released due to the above mentioned inconsistancies and the immflammatory nature of the news for cycling. Why should this rush to assumption and judgement be any different than others before it?

Going to be interesting to watch this one develop for so many reasons!


----------



## terzo rene

I'm quite surprised there is no minimum level for a positive result. That's guaranteeing there will be false positives when you can detect a couple molecules in a sample.

The half life for Clenbuterol is 36-39 hours so if the prior day was negative there's no way he took a dose large enough to have any performance effects. The detected level was half as high the second day and zero again the third, which is consistent with a very low initial dose and the half life numbers. Sure he's a doper but unfortunately this test result doesn't prove it.


----------



## Blue 58

From his press conference:

"When they confirmed to me what had happened the first thing I did was ask the UCI which of my fellow riders had passed the test.

"They said the only one who passed the control ... was Alexandre Vinokourov. [He was the only one of the riders] who did not eat the meat on that day." 

If everyone else on Astana who ate the same meat tested positive for approximately the same level of clenbuterol, his story makes some sense.


----------



## Perico

Blue 58 said:


> From his press conference:
> 
> "When they confirmed to me what had happened the first thing I did was ask the UCI which of my fellow riders had passed the test.
> 
> "They said the only one who passed the control ... was Alexandre Vinokourov. [He was the only one of the riders] who did not eat the meat on that day."
> 
> If everyone else on Astana who ate the same meat tested positive for approximately the same level of clenbuterol, his story makes some sense.


I thought I read that only Vino and AC were tested. Sounds like he throwing things and hoping something will stick.


----------



## rugger

If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding...How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat??


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> Two comments:
> 
> 1) DirtBoy, you are kidding yourself if you think money is the only reason people cheat. Steroids used by kids to look good on the beach being a great example of what I am saying. 60 Minutes did a big piece on this a few years back.
> l?


I am talking about ATHLETES, not scrawny high school kids. I know exactly what your talking about after being in the "body Building World" for many, many years and still in the fitness business as well.


----------



## Perico

DIRT BOY said:


> I am talking about ATHLETES, not scrawny high school kids. I know exactly what your talking about after being in the "body Building World" for many, many years and still in the fitness business as well.


Yes and athletes competing for nothing more then a medal or points to Cat up cheat and dope as well. Like I said, competition causes cheating.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Len J said:


> Not a chance!
> 
> I read this on several forums and it doesn't account for the actual usage.
> 
> He was tested at the end of racing on the day after the rest day.
> This substance is utilized to speed up recovery (At least by cyclist). It is recognized as both one of the best at this and it's also recognized as one that metabolizes quickly.
> So, more likely than not, he took it after the testing on the day before the rest day (or 48 or so hours before the failed test), and then again on the rest day,( probably 36+ or so hours before the failed test)......by the time he finished racing on the day after the rest day, and was tested, the concentrations in his blood would be expected to be negligible........it's how cyclist have gotten away with this for years. Unfortunatly for Roberto, the testing sensitivities have improved.
> 
> Trust me, the doping agencies know what I just posted. He's toast.
> 
> Len


Clen will do NOTHING to speed up recovery, trust me and research it. Its basically asthma medicine and a Beta II antagonist. Its a brochidiolator, and has thermogenic effects when taken a high does. Its also perseveres muscle while burning fat.

Another great side effect it seems to have mild anobolic effects as well.

Years ago a fair had issues with Prize Bulls and tainted meat being consumed by people after they were butchered. Clen allowed the bulls to get bigger and leaner without any muscle loss. But people who ate it had the usual symptoms of someone using it.

Canada and Mexico have it OTC in Grape and Cherry flavor liquid for kids.

as a cyclist, you would take it to preserve muscle on long training weeks and help with breathing.

*Clenbuterol:*

Clenbuterol is a non-steroidal β2 adrenergic agonist[1] with some structural and pharmacological similarities to epinephrine and salbutamol, but its effects are more potent and longer-lasting as a stimulant and thermogenic drug. It causes an increase in aerobic capacity, central nervous system stimulation, and an increase in blood pressure and oxygen transportation. It increases the rate at which fats are metabolized, simultaneously increasing the body's BMR. It is commonly used for smooth muscle relaxant properties. This means that it is a bronchodilator and tocolytic. It is usually used in dosages anywhere from 20-60 micrograms a day when prescribed. A dose of about 120 μg should never be exceeded in a day[citation needed]. It is also prescribed for treatment of horses; however, equestrian usage is usually the liquid form of clenbuterol. Clenbuterol is also a sympathomimetic in the peripheral nervous system.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> Yes and athletes competing for nothing more then a medal or points to Cat up cheat and dope as well. Like I said, competition causes cheating.


Well when you win what happens? Sponsorships, contracts, etc. MONEY!

I am not talking about a cat 5 guy trying to win a swag bag. I am talking about elite amateur and Professional athletes trying to score big contracts, scholarships, fame, etc.

Elite athletes want to succeed in sports for MONEY! Then fame comes with that.


----------



## civdic

Pretty soon pro cycling will go the way of pro bodybuilding. Everyone will accept it and the "dope-free" individuals will be the one's frowned upon. Or is that how it is now?


----------



## erol/frost

JohnHemlock said:


> Don't care about him either way but if he gets out of this it's only because his name is not Fuyu Li or Jean-Phillipe Broomwagon.



That made me


----------



## Dizzy812

+1 kokothemonkery

The Clen was in blood taken and transfused - busted. Sloppy!

Gosh, they're all big boys doping under a doctors supervision, I say let 'em go for it. Our TV viewing will improve watching their superhuman performances.

Just don't let your kids dope though . . .


----------



## Perico

DIRT BOY said:


> Well when you win what happens? Sponsorships, contracts, etc. MONEY!
> 
> I am not talking about a cat 5 guy trying to win a swag bag. I am talking about elite amateur and Professional athletes trying to score big contracts, scholarships, fame, etc.
> 
> Elite athletes want to succeed in sports for MONEY! Then fame comes with that.


It's interesting how many caveats you keep adding in order to avoid being wrong.

Keep digging.


----------



## ragweed

kokothemonkey said:


> It sounds like there is a rumor about clen being a masking agent for transfusions, and that conti had plasticisers (spelling?) found in his system as well indicating blood bag transfusions.


Apparently this has been reported on German TV -- 
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...ays-rider-may-have-received-transfusions.aspx
All this is a real bummer because I thought this was a clean tour based on no one rider having a super human performance.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> It's interesting how many caveats you keep adding in order to avoid being wrong.
> 
> Keep digging.


What ever! I am not wrong or right, neither are you. Mine is an opinion, that pretty much sums up everything I said. I could go on and on and on and on, about why people do it. 99.9% it comes down to money.

Again we are here talking about a PRO Cyclist caught doping, this what i keep my conversation on. You are bringing in everybody else into the argument.

Yes, people use PED drugs for cosmetic reason, competition, etc.
Yes, for many, competing and winning is enough. But once you get to a high level, its about getting PAID for all your wins, dedication, etc.

if you don't understand this, I am sorry you can't follow along or understand.:mad2: :frown2: ut: 

Good bye!


----------



## waldo425

nathanbal said:


> I cant find the link again but I read today that it was supposedly 0.05-0.10. If that's the case Alberto is gone for sure.


I wouldn't hold your breath on that one if I were you. Even though it doesn't take a whole lot for a conviction it is Alberto Contador we are talking about here. He is one of the power players in cycling right now and I would be surprised if he (AKA his legal army) doesn't pull out all the stops just like Tom Boonen (different substance and thus different regulations but same defense I bet.)


----------



## Pablo

So, thanks to Al and Floyd, the lesson is: avoid whiskey and meat during stage races . . . wait, what? I guess I'll never be a stage racer.


----------



## Perico

DIRT BOY said:


> What ever! I am not wrong or right, neither are you. Mine is an opinion, that pretty much sums up everything I said. I could go on and on and on and on, about why people do it. 99.9% it comes down to money.
> 
> *So you claim it is an opinion and neither is wrong, after you responded to my initial post with "No MONEY (sic)? Then claim a certain percentage is about money. Sounds like you need to look up the definition of opinion and have a look in the mirror as well.*
> 
> Again we are here talking about a PRO Cyclist caught doping, this what i keep my conversation on. You are bringing in everybody else into the argument.
> 
> *You said "If money is there, they all will dope!" after saying "Like I always said, ATHLETES of all sports dope, PERIOD!!" Now you say we are talking about pro cyclists. As I said, you are adding caveats to avoid being wrong.*
> 
> Yes, people use PED drugs for cosmetic reason, competition, etc.
> Yes, for many, competing and winning is enough. But once you get to a high level, its about getting PAID for all your wins, dedication, etc.
> 
> if you don't understand this, I am sorry you can't follow along or understand.:mad2: :frown2: ut:
> 
> Good bye!


Ouch, those emoticons really got me. Keep trying sparky.


----------



## Dan Gerous

waldo425 said:


> I wouldn't hold your breath on that one if I were you. Even though it doesn't take a whole lot for a conviction it is Alberto Contador we are talking about here. He is one of the power players in cycling right now and I would be surprised if he (AKA his legal army) doesn't pull out all the stops just like Tom Boonen (different substance and thus different regulations but same defense I bet.)


And remember Valverde, the spanish federation will probably do all they can to protect Contador. Plus, the UCI already look like they're taking his defense...


----------



## robdamanii

waldo425 said:


> I wouldn't hold your breath on that one if I were you. Even though it doesn't take a whole lot for a conviction it is Alberto Contador we are talking about here. He is one of the power players in cycling right now and I would be surprised if he (AKA his legal army) doesn't pull out all the stops just like Tom Boonen (different substance and thus different regulations but same defense I bet.)



What's a greater offense? Recreational drug out of competition or performance enhancer while leading a grand tour?

Granted, they both should just take their licks and deal with it, but if you're going to point fingers, it looks a whole lot worse getting snared with performance enhancers during the Tour as opposed to snorting coke and banging broads after winning Paris Roubaix.


----------



## Cableguy

It would be interesting to see the overall performance of riders in the TdF if the organizers just said f**k it one year and required the following,


One week before the race, all cyclists must report to and sign in at a fully monitored living quarter, equipped with an indoor gym and track. Cyclists are free to set up trainers inside the fascility as well. Every room is video taped, including bathrooms, and monitored by a team of officials. Team managers, family, friends, etc. are not permitted to enter a cyclist's room, but can use designated privacy booths for personal discussions. Cyclist's rooms are almost entirely bare, and any bags or equipment that can be used to conceal items are prohobited. No one can enter the entire fascility without being inspected and patted down. 
 
Cyclists are forbidden to leave these quarters at any time until the Tour comes to a conclusion without formal authorization and accompaniment by one police escort and a cycling official. In the event a cyclist is permitted to leave the fascility, these escorts will be chosen at random. The time permitted for the cyclist to leave will be agreed upon by the governing body. 

When racing begins, all cyclists will be transported to the site of the stage via official tour buses. Each team will have a generic bus driven and monitored by officials. These officials, again, are chosen at random. Cyclists may not leave the bus unless given permission. Other members of the team, including mechanics and managers, will meet cyclists at their designated bus - however, they may not enter the bus and no cyclist can move more than approximately 10 meters from their bus until the stage is beginning and their team is rolling towards the start. All team cars will be accompanied by a racing official and no cyclist is permitted to enter a team car at any point in the race. Immediately after the race (after crossing the finish line) cyclists must report straight back to their assigned team bus where after the stage they will be transported, with their team, back to the fascility. 

Drug testing will continue as normal as it has in the past.

Covering, blocking, or impeding a video camera is grounds for disqualification and may induce a drug test on the spot. 

Failure to comply to any of the above constitutes disqualification from the race.


----------



## Perico

Why not just test every rider every day from one week before to one week after the Tour.


----------



## Len J

Dirt Boy......ask any elite cyclist that's willing to confide in you what this substance is used for And then come back and tell us that they don't believe it aids recovery and is used for this purpose....it is what they believe and what they use it for.

Both the UCI and the anti-doping people know how this is used by cyclist.......it's why the other ban was 2 years.

Len


----------



## robdamanii

Cableguy said:


> It would be interesting to see the overall performance of riders in the TdF if the organizers just said f**k it one year and required the following,
> 
> 
> One week before the race, all cyclists must report to and sign in at a fully monitored living quarter, equipped with an indoor gym and track. Cyclists are free to set up trainers inside the fascility as well. Every room is video taped, including bathrooms, and monitored by a team of officials. Team managers, family, friends, etc. are not permitted to enter a cyclist's room, but can use designated privacy booths for personal discussions. Cyclist's rooms are almost entirely bare, and any bags or equipment that can be used to conceal items are prohobited. No one can enter the entire fascility without being inspected and patted down.
> 
> Cyclists are forbidden to leave these quarters at any time until the Tour comes to a conclusion without formal authorization and accompaniment by one police escort and a cycling official. In the event a cyclist is permitted to leave the fascility, these escorts will be chosen at random. The time permitted for the cyclist to leave will be agreed upon by the governing body.
> 
> When racing begins, all cyclists will be transported to the site of the stage via official tour buses. Each team will have a generic bus driven and monitored by officials. These officials, again, are chosen at random. Cyclists may not leave the bus unless given permission. Other members of the team, including mechanics and managers, will meet cyclists at their designated bus - however, they may not enter the bus and no cyclist can move more than approximately 10 meters from their bus until the stage is beginning and their team is rolling towards the start. All team cars will be accompanied by a racing official and no cyclist is permitted to enter a team car at any point in the race. Immediately after the race (after crossing the finish line) cyclists must report straight back to their assigned team bus where after the stage they will be transported, with their team, back to the fascility.
> 
> Drug testing will continue as normal as it has in the past.
> 
> Covering, blocking, or impeding a video camera is grounds for disqualification and may induce a drug test on the spot.
> 
> Failure to comply to any of the above constitutes disqualification from the race.


Really, it's a race. How in the hell would you logistically make that work? And frankly, since it's a sport (and entertainment) who cares?

The guys who are busted get busted. That's all there is to it.


----------



## AdamM

- This helps explain the WADA / UCI dust up a few weeks ago. 


- It's obvious that the UCI is fully backing AC and will do whatever it takes to protect him. I think the odds are slim to none that he's suspended for any races next year. The only thing in the way of the UCI whitewash might be WADA.


----------



## LostViking

Cableguy said:


> It would be interesting to see the overall performance of riders in the TdF if the organizers just said f**k it one year and required the following,
> 
> 
> One week before the race, all cyclists must report to and sign in at a fully monitored living quarter, equipped with an indoor gym and track. Cyclists are free to set up trainers inside the fascility as well. Every room is video taped, including bathrooms, and monitored by a team of officials. Team managers, family, friends, etc. are not permitted to enter a cyclist's room, but can use designated privacy booths for personal discussions. Cyclist's rooms are almost entirely bare, and any bags or equipment that can be used to conceal items are prohobited. No one can enter the entire fascility without being inspected and patted down.
> 
> Cyclists are forbidden to leave these quarters at any time until the Tour comes to a conclusion without formal authorization and accompaniment by one police escort and a cycling official. In the event a cyclist is permitted to leave the fascility, these escorts will be chosen at random. The time permitted for the cyclist to leave will be agreed upon by the governing body.
> 
> When racing begins, all cyclists will be transported to the site of the stage via official tour buses. Each team will have a generic bus driven and monitored by officials. These officials, again, are chosen at random. Cyclists may not leave the bus unless given permission. Other members of the team, including mechanics and managers, will meet cyclists at their designated bus - however, they may not enter the bus and no cyclist can move more than approximately 10 meters from their bus until the stage is beginning and their team is rolling towards the start. All team cars will be accompanied by a racing official and no cyclist is permitted to enter a team car at any point in the race. Immediately after the race (after crossing the finish line) cyclists must report straight back to their assigned team bus where after the stage they will be transported, with their team, back to the fascility.
> 
> Drug testing will continue as normal as it has in the past.
> 
> Covering, blocking, or impeding a video camera is grounds for disqualification and may induce a drug test on the spot.
> 
> Failure to comply to any of the above constitutes disqualification from the race.


Wow, sounds like prison. Sign me up!


----------



## BuenosAires

Perico said:


> I thought I read that only Vino and AC were tested. Sounds like he throwing things and hoping something will stick.


So, he tests positive, then immediately connects it to the meat he got from Spain and knows exactly which riders ate it and which ones didn't? My, what a great memory you have Alberto.


----------



## Cableguy

> Wow, sounds like prison. Sign me up!


Yeah, for good measure they should be chained together in a chain gang between stages LOL

But as ridiculous as that sounds I'd love to see the outcome, perhaps some of the bigger names would suddenly not do so hot.


----------



## asgelle

BuenosAires said:


> ... then immediately connects it ...


So you missed the part where he was notified a month ago? Have to wonder how much else of the story you missed.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Len J said:


> Dirt Boy......ask any elite cyclist that's willing to confide in you what this substance is used for And then come back and tell us that they don't believe it aids recovery and is used for this purpose....it is what they believe and what they use it for.
> 
> Both the UCI and the anti-doping people know how this is used by cyclist.......it's why the other ban was 2 years.
> 
> Len


I can tell you form experience, I never heard anyone mention recovery. Any sport. Maybe recovery as you can breather easier, aiding recovery.

You can rider harder and and keep your LTH down because of the easier breathing.
but there is NOTHING in Clenbuterol itself that aids in "recovery."

Now maybe its anti-catabolic effects in a sense could aid "recovery" as it has minor anabolic side effects. So in a sense, maybe.

But never hard anyone in any sport who used/uses it saying it aids in recovery.

This is form first handle knowledge. I have worked with professional players in baseball and basketball and a few friends who played pro football or know others that did.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> Ouch, those emoticons really got me. Keep trying sparky.


Do you have ANY first hand experience in the subject? If not, then this is a useless debate.


----------



## lastchild

ragweed said:


> Apparently this has been reported on German TV --
> http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...ays-rider-may-have-received-transfusions.aspx
> All this is a real bummer because I thought this was a clean tour based on no one rider having a super human performance.


if any of this is even remotely true, he's [email protected]#ked. proper [email protected]#ked.


----------



## BuenosAires

asgelle said:


> So you missed the part where he was notified a month ago? Have to wonder how much else of the story you missed.


I guess YOU missed the part where he met with the UCI two days after being notified and discussed it at length. So it was implied that it had been discussed at that time. 

I guess you're believing the contaminated beef story? What pro eats steak during a stage race anyway?


----------



## asgelle

BuenosAires said:


> I guess you're believing the contaminated beef story? What pro eats steak during a stage race anyway?


Perfect. Because I point out there was a month lag between being notified and publicly discussing tainted beef (we don't know what was discussed with the UCI), you conclude that I believe the beef was tainted. That's some deductive reasoning there Sherlock.


----------



## BuenosAires

asgelle said:


> Perfect. Because I point out there was a month lag between being notified and publicly discussing tainted beef (we don't know what was discussed with the UCI), you conclude that I believe the beef was tainted. That's some deductive reasoning there Sherlock.


"When they confirmed to me what had happened the first thing I did was ask the UCI which of my fellow riders had passed the test.

Which part of this statement don't you understand?


----------



## blackjack

Len J said:


> Dirt Boy......ask any elite cyclist that's willing to confide in you what this substance is used for And then come back and tell us that they don't believe it aids recovery and is used for this purpose....it is what they believe and what they use it for.
> 
> Both the UCI and the anti-doping people know how this is used by cyclist.......it's why the other ban was 2 years.
> 
> Len



Joe Papp, literally a guinea pig AND a drug dealer, discounts Clenbuterol's effectiveness on twitter.

http://twitter.com/joepabike

PED scale 1-100: EPO = +110; Clenbuterol = (-)200 [the one time I used it I had to abandon the race b/c of cramp] 
about 21 hours ago via web

Reply Retweet . considering suicide if taken during the Tour. Yes, I've tried it - there's nothing redeeming about it for cyclists, even in the off season. 
about 21 hours ago via web 


Reply Retweet . EPO is a great doping agent for cyclists. Clenbuterol is not. It produces terrible MUSCLE CRAMPS and TREMOR that would leave you ... 
about 21 hours ago via web 

Reply Retweet . There's no justifiable benefit to be derived from clenbuterol that is worth the risk of testing (+) for it. EPO, T, HGH, all yes. Clen - no. 
about 23 hours ago via web 

-----------------------------

Willy Voet OTOH says it's very effective.


----------



## Perico

DIRT BOY said:


> Do you have ANY first hand experience in the subject? If not, then this is a useless debate.


Based on your posts you are clearly two things:

1) The king of caveats and moving the goalposts.

2) A doper.(see your post quoted above)


----------



## a_avery007

we have a winner!

as another has already stated, whatever machine they were using could not detect that low of a level.


----------



## snippy

it was the "beek meat"


----------



## 95zpro

Len J said:


> Not a chance!
> 
> I read this on several forums and it doesn't account for the actual usage.
> 
> He was tested at the end of racing on the day after the rest day.
> This substance is utilized to speed up recovery (At least by cyclist). It is recognized as both one of the best at this and it's also recognized as one that metabolizes quickly.
> So, more likely than not, he took it after the testing on the day before the rest day (or 48 or so hours before the failed test), and then again on the rest day,( probably 36+ or so hours before the failed test)......by the time he finished racing on the day after the rest day, and was tested, the concentrations in his blood would be expected to be negligible........it's how cyclist have gotten away with this for years. Unfortunatly for Roberto, the testing sensitivities have improved.
> 
> Trust me, the doping agencies know what I just posted. He's toast.
> 
> Len


Wrong this is a slow metabolizing drug; my son has taken a form of it for his asthma so I know; after a treatment he was usually good to go for a few days after. In order to speed recovery an adult would have had to take a significant dosage amount which would have stayed in his system for a minimum of 3 to 4 days at the very least and at a higher concentration level than which was detected in his system. 
As stated before he will walk but the fact that something like this still showed up especially when Armstrong is going through his puts a stain over the sport!


----------



## rideorglide

"50 picograms (50 trillionths of a gram) which is 400 times less than what the antidoping laboratories accredited by WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) must be able to detect,” it said, adding that testing of a second “B” sample taken at the same time confirmed the result."


I wonder what concentrations an asthma inhaler like the one I use, delivers - all I know is I need 2 good puffs some days to even be able to ride. [A study conducted in 12 healthy male and female subjects using a higher dose (1,080 mcg of albuterol base) showed that mean peak plasma concentrations of approximately 3 ng/mL occurred after dosing when albuterol was delivered using propellant HFA-134a. The mean time to peak concentrations (tmax) was delayed after administration of VENTOLIN HFA (tmax= 0.42 hours) as compared to CFC-propelled albuterol inhaler (tmax= 0.17 hours). Apparent terminal plasma half-life of albuterol is approximately 4.6 hours.]

A few picograms, wouldn't be worth a doodly of help. I wonder if you could be in the same room as someone priming an inhaler and get exposure to a few picograms?


"Dutch anti-doping expert, Douwe de Boer, who said the amount found in his body points “clearly in the direction of a contamination” and that such a low dose would not aid performance. De Boer points out that a series of samples taken both before and after the July 21st positive, suggest that there was only a small level of clenbuterol present in Contador’s system and that peaked on the 21st. De Boer points to the 32-hour half-life of the drug as a strong indication that Contador ingested the drug in a small dose, most likely to be from contaminated food."

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/09/news/contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol_143791

Much as I'd like to see Schleck awarded the victory, I'd give Contador the benefit of the doubt on this.


----------



## dagger

+1. Same reason the AFLD chief resigned, the tour doesn't want Alberto to be guilty either



AdamM said:


> - This helps explain the WADA / UCI dust up a few weeks ago.
> 
> 
> - It's obvious that the UCI is fully backing AC and will do whatever it takes to protect him. I think the odds are slim to none that he's suspended for any races next year. The only thing in the way of the UCI whitewash might be WADA.


----------



## Perico

rideorglide said:


> "50 picograms (50 trillionths of a gram) which is 400 times less than what the antidoping laboratories accredited by WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) must be able to detect,” it said, adding that testing of a second “B” sample taken at the same time confirmed the result."
> 
> 
> I wonder what concentrations an asthma inhaler like the one I use, delivers - all I know is I need 2 good puffs some days to even be able to ride. [A study conducted in 12 healthy male and female subjects using a higher dose (1,080 mcg of albuterol base) showed that mean peak plasma concentrations of approximately 3 ng/mL occurred after dosing when albuterol was delivered using propellant HFA-134a. The mean time to peak concentrations (tmax) was delayed after administration of VENTOLIN HFA (tmax= 0.42 hours) as compared to CFC-propelled albuterol inhaler (tmax= 0.17 hours). Apparent terminal plasma half-life of albuterol is approximately 4.6 hours.]
> 
> A few picograms, wouldn't be worth a doodly of help. I wonder if you could be in the same room as someone priming an inhaler and get exposure to a few picograms?
> 
> 
> "Dutch anti-doping expert, Douwe de Boer, who said the amount found in his body points “clearly in the direction of a contamination” and that such a low dose would not aid performance. De Boer points out that a series of samples taken both before and after the July 21st positive, suggest that there was only a small level of clenbuterol present in Contador’s system and that peaked on the 21st. De Boer points to the 32-hour half-life of the drug as a strong indication that Contador ingested the drug in a small dose, most likely to be from contaminated food."
> 
> http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/09/news/contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol_143791
> 
> Much as I'd like to see Schleck awarded the victory, I'd give Contador the benefit of the doubt on this.


Did you give Armstrong the same benefit of the doubt in '99 with the extremely low level of corticosteroid that showed up?


----------



## Mr. Scary

terzo rene said:


> I'm quite surprised there is no minimum level for a positive result. That's guaranteeing there will be false positives when you can detect a couple molecules in a sample.
> 
> The half life for Clenbuterol is 36-39 hours so if the prior day was negative there's no way he took a dose large enough to have any performance effects. The detected level was half as high the second day and zero again the third, which is consistent with a very low initial dose and the half life numbers. Sure he's a doper but unfortunately this test result doesn't prove it.


He transfused on the rest day, of course the sample was diluted. The drug being present is enough to convict-the amount doesn't matter, he loses his Tour title and can join Alejandro and the other two Spanish guys (and maybe Ricco will be swinging by based upon the raid today at his home in Italy) so they can have a dopers party!


----------



## Mr. Scary

rideorglide said:


> "50 picograms (50 trillionths of a gram) which is 400 times less than what the antidoping laboratories accredited by WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) must be able to detect,” it said, adding that testing of a second “B” sample taken at the same time confirmed the result."
> 
> 
> I wonder what concentrations an asthma inhaler like the one I use, delivers - all I know is I need 2 good puffs some days to even be able to ride. [A study conducted in 12 healthy male and female subjects using a higher dose (1,080 mcg of albuterol base) showed that mean peak plasma concentrations of approximately 3 ng/mL occurred after dosing when albuterol was delivered using propellant HFA-134a. The mean time to peak concentrations (tmax) was delayed after administration of VENTOLIN HFA (tmax= 0.42 hours) as compared to CFC-propelled albuterol inhaler (tmax= 0.17 hours). Apparent terminal plasma half-life of albuterol is approximately 4.6 hours.]
> 
> A few picograms, wouldn't be worth a doodly of help. I wonder if you could be in the same room as someone priming an inhaler and get exposure to a few picograms?
> 
> 
> "Dutch anti-doping expert, Douwe de Boer, who said the amount found in his body points “clearly in the direction of a contamination” and that such a low dose would not aid performance. De Boer points out that a series of samples taken both before and after the July 21st positive, suggest that there was only a small level of clenbuterol present in Contador’s system and that peaked on the 21st. De Boer points to the 32-hour half-life of the drug as a strong indication that Contador ingested the drug in a small dose, most likely to be from contaminated food."
> 
> http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/09/news/contador-tests-positive-for-clenbuterol_143791
> 
> Much as I'd like to see Schleck awarded the victory, I'd give Contador the benefit of the doubt on this.


Why, it's in his system so it doesn't matter whether his SRM displayed improved wattage numbers? It's in his system, end of discussion. And the amount is low due to the transfusion he did on the rest day so it doesn't matter the performance benefit, he knows the rules and he broke them. See you in two Alberto...


----------



## rideorglide

Perico said:


> Did you give Armstrong the same benefit of the doubt in '99 with the extremely low level of corticosteroid that showed up?



Yes, I'll freely admit, I tend to give to give most people the benefit of the doubt, including Lance. 

I'm no hardcore racer, just a casual fan, and while I realize there's a lot of it going on -- and many riders do it because they believe it's the only way to be competitive if the top of the field are all doing it — I hope that the sport will clean itself up eventually.

Pissed at Floyd though, he really played many of us for a merry ride. That was sad all around.


----------



## BAi9302010

With so much at stake, they could start with...

"Alberto, who gave you the meat?" (supposedly is was a "friend")

"Alberto's friend, where did you buy the meat?"

"Butcher, who supplies your beef."

"Cattleman, do you use clenbuterol in raising your livestock?"

If the cattleman declines, there is probably grounds for some kind of Spanish FDA equivalent to search the premise of their farm considering a consumer tested positive for a substance that is banned in the use of raising livestock.


----------



## orange_julius

Mr. Scary said:


> Why, it's in his system so it doesn't matter whether his SRM displayed improved wattage numbers? It's in his system, end of discussion. And the amount is low due to the transfusion he did on the rest day so it doesn't matter the performance benefit, he knows the rules and he broke them. See you in two Alberto...


Yes, exactly. But this kind of 'excuse' or maybe 'diversion' is usefully summoned often by dopers. Right now Contador is pleading with the public, so he and his groupies are more than happy to offer up useful 'facts' such as misinterpreting the meaning of "400 times lower than the threshold" and "usefulness of clenbuterol". 

Fact is that clenbuterol of any concentration is banned. And why would it make it to the banned list unless there is intention to abuse it for sports doping purposes?


----------



## baker921

This will play out on the bigger stage of national pride and politics. AC is a superstar in Spain.
The way to cut AC's legs from under him is to apply to the WHO and more directly the EU Agricultural Commission for a worldwide ban on the export of Spanish beef and cattle!


----------



## Gatorback

baker921 said:


> This will play out on the bigger stage of national pride and politics. AC is a superstar in Spain.
> The way to cut AC's legs from under him is to apply to the WHO and more directly the EU Agricultural Commission for a worldwide ban on the export of Spanish beef and cattle!


Too good. You must know your politics.


----------



## albert owen

If you recall, AC had asthma symptoms earlier in the season. Maybe he had a transfusion of early seaon blood on his rest day (the day before the big show down with Schleck - remember!) which was contaminated by accident? His "doctors" simply made a mistake, which is why such a small dose showed up.
I am a huge AC fan, but this doesn't look good. His story, like all drug cheat stories, is utterly ridiculous.


----------



## C6Rider

*Another AC fan here*



albert owen said:


> If you recall, AC had asthma symptoms earlier in the season. Maybe he had a transfusion of early seaon blood on his rest day (the day before the big show down with Schleck - remember!) which was contaminated by accident? His "doctors" simply made a mistake, which is why such a small dose showed up.
> I am a huge AC fan, but this doesn't look good. His story, like all drug cheat stories, is utterly ridiculous.


This has certainly been a bad week for cycling. First it was the shock from hearing the news...then the anger...and now the hurt.


----------



## Len J

95zpro said:


> Wrong this is a slow metabolizing drug; my son has taken a form of it for his asthma so I know; after a treatment he was usually good to go for a few days after. In order to speed recovery an adult would have had to take a significant dosage amount which would have stayed in his system for a minimum of 3 to 4 days at the very least and at a higher concentration level than which was detected in his system.
> As stated before he will walk but the fact that something like this still showed up especially when Armstrong is going through his puts a stain over the sport!


Nope...depends on its format.


----------



## Len J

blackjack said:


> Joe Papp, literally a guinea pig AND a drug dealer, discounts Clenbuterol's effectiveness on twitter.
> 
> http://twitter.com/joepabike
> 
> PED scale 1-100: EPO = +110; Clenbuterol = (-)200 [the one time I used it I had to abandon the race b/c of cramp]
> about 21 hours ago via web
> 
> Reply Retweet . considering suicide if taken during the Tour. Yes, I've tried it - there's nothing redeeming about it for cyclists, even in the off season.
> about 21 hours ago via web
> 
> 
> Reply Retweet . EPO is a great doping agent for cyclists. Clenbuterol is not. It produces terrible MUSCLE CRAMPS and TREMOR that would leave you ...
> about 21 hours ago via web
> 
> Reply Retweet . There's no justifiable benefit to be derived from clenbuterol that is worth the risk of testing (+) for it. EPO, T, HGH, all yes. Clen - no.
> about 23 hours ago via web
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> Willy Voet OTOH says it's very effective.


I'm telling you what cyclist believe.

Len


----------



## Dwayne Barry

Len J said:


> I'm telling you what cyclist believe.
> 
> Len


Exactly. People take what they think or have been told works. Doesn't necessarily mean it works. Also there is always the possibility that it works for some people and not for others.


----------



## covenant

BAi9302010 said:


> With so much at stake, they could start with...
> 
> "Alberto, who gave you the meat?" (supposedly is was a "friend")
> 
> "Alberto's friend, where did you buy the meat?"
> 
> "Butcher, who supplies your beef."
> 
> "Cattleman, do you use clenbuterol in raising your livestock?"
> 
> If the cattleman declines, there is probably grounds for some kind of Spanish FDA equivalent to search the premise of their farm considering a consumer tested positive for a substance that is banned in the use of raising livestock.


Were there plasticizers in the beef as well? There was no meat.


----------



## malanb

it is not all about the money, but also fame i know money and fame usually go together


----------



## terzo rene

Hey! I thought L'Equipe was supposed to be just a bunch of anti-American LA haters who made up everything about his 1999 EPO use. So what's with the anti-Spanish AC hating? 

The Clenbuterol positive doesn't prove much (though it's enough for CAS to uphold a 2 year suspension) but your urine testing positive for the plastic used for blood bags is a bit hard to explain with food contamination. Since that test isn't yet approved I suspect they will be retesting old samples to see if they can find something else. 

But ultimately the Spanish Federation will refuse to punish him, the UCI will stand aside and WADA or AFLD will end up appealing to CAS, where based on precedent they will likely rule he's out for 2 years. Based on the speed these things move that should happen around mid-2012 after he wins his 4th TdF Then Riis can repeat his Basso performance and say "he told me he didn't" and promptly fire him. lol


----------



## FreeFloat

Not surprising. It will do more harm to cyclings credibility in my eyes if Contador gets a pass on this.


----------



## lastchild

Mr. Scary said:


> Why, it's in his system so it doesn't matter whether his SRM displayed improved wattage numbers? It's in his system, end of discussion. And the amount is low due to the transfusion he did on the rest day *so it doesn't matter the performance benefit, he knows the rules and he broke them. See you in two Alberto...*


couldn't agree more.
he has a banned substance in his system. how it got there, or whether or not it had any benefit, is completely irrelevant.


----------



## loudog

from the sportscientists blog:
The tablet theory

Speaking of the pharmacokinetics, one of the most interesting posts in discussion to yesterday's article came from Dr Robert Greene. I'm pasting it below:

I just searched Medline for data on clenbuterol pharmacokinetics (how the body processes a drug during and after its introduction) and found one research article on clenbuterol’s use in humans (most of the articles report data obtained in horses). I currently only have access to the abstract. This is the reference:


Yamamoto et al. Pharmacokinetics of plasma and urine clenbuterol in man, rat, and rabbit. J Pharmacobiodyn 8:385-391, 1985.


Quoting from the abstract: Following a “therapeutic dose (20, 40 and 80 micrograms/man) of clenbuterol hydrochloride”, “plasma levels of clenbuterol reached the maximum value of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.35 ng/ml, respectively, in a dose-dependent manner within 2.5 h, which lasted for over 6 h after the administration. The half-life of clenbuterol in plasma was estimated to be about 35 h.” Further only “about 20%” appears in the urine if one collects the urine cumulatively for 72 hours following a single oral dose.


In other words, a therapeutic oral dose of 20 micrograms would yield a MAXIMUM plasma level of 100 pg/ml – just twice the level found in Contador’s urine.

So, interestingly, it is not entirely inconceivable that the low concentrations came from the acute ingestion of the drug. The problem with this is the timing - I appreciate that these athletes would try anything to get an edge. But taking only 10 to 20 micrograms of clenbuterol would offer so little benefit that I'm skeptical that they'd try it. There are other more effective substances that could be taken in low amounts. But the point is, the low concentration is not only explainable by a transfusion theory.


----------



## loudog

from the sportscientists blog:
The tablet theory

Speaking of the pharmacokinetics, one of the most interesting posts in discussion to yesterday's article came from Dr Robert Greene. I'm pasting it below:

I just searched Medline for data on clenbuterol pharmacokinetics (how the body processes a drug during and after its introduction) and found one research article on clenbuterol’s use in humans (most of the articles report data obtained in horses). I currently only have access to the abstract. This is the reference:


Yamamoto et al. Pharmacokinetics of plasma and urine clenbuterol in man, rat, and rabbit. J Pharmacobiodyn 8:385-391, 1985.


Quoting from the abstract: Following a “therapeutic dose (20, 40 and 80 micrograms/man) of clenbuterol hydrochloride”, “plasma levels of clenbuterol reached the maximum value of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.35 ng/ml, respectively, in a dose-dependent manner within 2.5 h, which lasted for over 6 h after the administration. The half-life of clenbuterol in plasma was estimated to be about 35 h.” Further only “about 20%” appears in the urine if one collects the urine cumulatively for 72 hours following a single oral dose.


In other words, a therapeutic oral dose of 20 micrograms would yield a MAXIMUM plasma level of 100 pg/ml – just twice the level found in Contador’s urine.

So, interestingly, it is not entirely inconceivable that the low concentrations came from the acute ingestion of the drug. The problem with this is the timing - I appreciate that these athletes would try anything to get an edge. But taking only 10 to 20 micrograms of clenbuterol would offer so little benefit that I'm skeptical that they'd try it. There are other more effective substances that could be taken in low amounts. But the point is, the low concentration is not only explainable by a transfusion theory.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Perico said:


> Based on your posts you are clearly two things:
> 
> 1) The king of caveats and moving the goalposts.
> 
> 2) A doper.(see your post quoted above)


1. King of only my opinion matters

2. Have you ever consumer caffein or chocolate? If yes, then you a "doper" sir!

Now get lost as you are clueless.

I expressed my thoughts in the end what it comes down to. You can understand or accept someone elses thoughts so I broke it down for you.


----------



## Coolhand

*Moderators Note*

Enough with the insults, just put each other on ignore. 

FYI- Caffeine is no longer restricted.


----------



## Coolhand

If true, he's probably done:



> The French sports daily L'Equipe reported Friday that the German lab that found a tiny amount of the banned drug clenbuterol in Contador's urine sample also found plastic residues of the kind that might turn up after a transfusion of blood from a plastic bag.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101001...jA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yaWVzBHNsawN0ZGZ3aW5uZXJhbGI-


----------



## ElvisMerckx

Is plastic now on the banned list? Yeesh, this sport just isn't fun anymore.

Also, whodathink it would be so hard for a multi-millionaire to get a decent slice of meat in France?


----------



## DIRT BOY

Coolhand said:


> Enough with the insults, just put each other on ignore.
> 
> FYI- Caffeine is no longer restricted.


Done.

Correct. But it was at one point and its a PED. Or drug, just like chocolate. Anything that can alter one's mood is considered a drug by definition. Just saying....


----------



## DIRT BOY

Conti is COOKED! If another rider can get 2 yrs go a minuscule amount of Clen, he should as well. Fair is fair.

Now if plastic is found? They will go back retest his blood and he is COOKED!

The UCI wants to do this right? test every rider after every stage. DONE!


----------



## Cableguy

> The UCI wants to do this right? test every rider after every stage. DONE!


We can only hope the tests are accurate enough to catch every type of doping, but we all know, in truth, that's probably not the case. The only reason Contador got caught this year is because they used a better testing lab, as opposed to the previous years. So up until this point, it certainly wasn't true.


----------



## DuctTape

Contador with a new rebuttal:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69041Z20101001 

Interesting comment about the system being in doubt and requiring change. I for one have a greater concern that the doping testing is missing more offenders than mistakenly identifying riders who are actually innocent.


----------



## Coolhand

> Sympathy for Contador's current plight was in short supply in the French camp. Chavanel's countryman Yoann Offredo (FDJ) offered his own candid assessment of the Contador case, saying that he was not surprised by the news.
> 
> “It’s a story that we’ve been expecting,” Offredo said to RMC.fr. “We’re not unduly surprised. A little [surprised] about the Clenbuterol because we’d really have expected something else. It’s like the tree that hides the forest.
> 
> “Right now, amongst the riders, I can tell you that we’re not that shocked.”


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chavanel-says-contador-must-prove-his-innocence


----------



## rendus

delete


----------



## black_box

> contador: "There should be... the norms have to evolve, just as they have done for other substances like caffeine, where they changed the regulations because they realized they weren't right. In the case of clenbuterol, positives should be positives because of the quantity found, with a specific limit, not because of the substance itself."
> 
> Contador repeated that the presence of clenbuterol in his system, in an amount 40 times less than the minimum required for authorized anti-doping labs to be able to detect, was due to contaminated meat containing minute traces of the substance.


it would be amusing if they evolved such that the required level of detection was lower  A crappier lab might not have caught it.


----------



## BAi9302010

covenant said:


> Were there plasticizers in the beef as well? There was no meat.


Maybe his friend wrapped it in plasticizers to keep it fresh while he transported it from Spain.


----------



## Perico

terzo rene- How can you compare this to the way L'Equipe handled Armstrong, Landis and Hamilton? Keep in mind it took a month for this to become public, whereas in the above cases L'Eqipe put out info before even the athletes were informed.

DirtBoy- Once again moving goalposts. You said "Do you have ANY first hand experience in the subject? If not, then this is a useless debate" which, based on the amount of things you are saying on the subject, clearly implies that you have doped. Oh, and I don't seem to recall this conversation being about caffiene or chocolate...perhaps you should practice what you preach. One more item, it's interesting how you turn to insults and personal attacks (in addition to caveats) instead of simply stepping up to the point. I guess you have to do what's best for you.


----------



## NextTime

The Danish cycling community can't possibly be happy with Contador - first, with the positive itself, and second, with his failure to inform Riis of his positive at the time he signed with Saxo Bank. 

Danish cyclists helped to "out" Rasmussen as they didn't want a doper in their midst. Now, their one professional team, Saxo-SundGard, which helps to provide a gateway for young and talented Danish riders advance through the professional ranks, may be at risk of folding because of Contador.


----------



## Italophile

Oops. To follow... (We need a Delete button!)


----------



## Italophile

Chavanel's comment is ridiculous: he is asking Contador to prove a negative, which we all know is impossible. I think this is a case in which Ockham's Razor should be employed.

It is amazing that so many people make, from one trace clenbuterol finding by a new lab, one of the two or three on Earth that can even make this finding, the leap to blood doping. It is probably more likely that Contador's story is valid, since we know that beef producers do use the stuff for the enhancement of their cattle's meat.

As for the plastic, I am quite sure that at some time in his past, Contador has received IV saline/electrolytes to recover from major workouts on hot days. It's common practice. Same bag, no? The there is BAi9302010's suggestion. I believe that plastic substances can hang around in the body for months, or even years, since many of them are not well metabolized.

Let's see Chavanel prove that Contador doped. Maybe he did, but this doesn't prove it. In the absence of a single bit of evidence, I think the UCI should do nothing, aside from establishing a reasonable threshold for clenbuterol, and using one lab for everybody's testing.


----------



## covenant

Italophile said:


> As for the plastic, I am quite sure that at some time in his past, Contador has received IV saline/electrolytes to recover from major workouts on hot days. It's common practice. Same bag, no? .


No, not the same bag. Plasticizers are used in blood bags to keep the blood from coagulating when in contact with the walls of the bag. It's not needed for saline bags.


----------



## Mr. Scary

Italophile said:


> Chavanel's comment is ridiculous: he is asking Contador to prove a negative, which we all know is impossible. I think this is a case in which Ockham's Razor should be employed.
> 
> It is amazing that so many people make, from one trace clenbuterol finding by a new lab, one of the two or three on Earth that can even make this finding, the leap to blood doping. It is probably more likely that Contador's story is valid, since we know that beef producers do use the stuff for the enhancement of their cattle's meat.
> 
> As for the plastic, I am quite sure that at some time in his past, Contador has received IV saline/electrolytes to recover from major workouts on hot days. It's common practice. Same bag, no? The there is BAi9302010's suggestion. I believe that plastic substances can hang around in the body for months, or even years, since many of them are not well metabolized.
> 
> Let's see Chavanel prove that Contador doped. Maybe he did, but this doesn't prove it. In the absence of a single bit of evidence, I think the UCI should do nothing, aside from establishing a reasonable threshold for clenbuterol, and using one lab for everybody's testing.


I applaud Chavanel, if you are racing clean you should show outrage. If somebody continuously cheated you at work would sit by and idly accept that?


----------



## Mr. Scary

ElvisMerckx said:


> Is plastic now on the banned list? Yeesh, this sport just isn't fun anymore.
> 
> Also, whodathink it would be so hard for a multi-millionaire to get a decent slice of meat in France?


Did you read the article and the ramification of the type of plastic? Your statement is the equivalent of a CEO that rather than presenting his company's board a detailed budget of anticipated revenues, investments, etc for the fiscal year walks in and says "well shoot guys we gotta spend money to make money"!


----------



## jorgy

Italophile said:


> Chavanel's comment is ridiculous: he is asking Contador to prove a negative, which we all know is impossible.


Eh, not really impossible in this situation. Contador's team needs to create a null that, when disproven, lends to support to the notion Contador is "innocent."


----------



## Axe

Italophile said:


> Chavanel's comment is ridiculous: he is asking Contador to prove a negative, which we all know is impossible.


Welcome to the world of modern doping control.

All we know is that there is banned substance in Cantador's blood - and a very plausible theory for a reason why it is there, backed by a second set of data consistent with blood transfusion use. That theory just shoots down all this - "but it is a very low level" nonsense.


----------



## merckxman

*Spanish ranchers...*

...want an investigation into the Contador case after he attributed the positive doping control to a steak bought in Irun.

Article says that clenbuterol is banned in Spain and that the ranchers want the Ministry of Agriculture to trace where the meet originated (traceability is in place in Spain).

http://www.abc.es/agencias/noticia.asp?noticia=538506

The ranchers don't want the world to think their beef is tainted....


----------



## jorgy

merckxman said:


> ...want an investigation into the Contador case after he attributed the positive doping control to a steak bought in Irun.
> 
> Article says that clenbuterol is banned in Spain and that the ranchers want the Ministry of Agriculture to trace where the meet originated (traceability is in place in Spain).
> 
> http://www.abc.es/agencias/noticia.asp?noticia=538506
> 
> The ranchers don't want the world to think their beef is tainted....


Good to see this.


----------



## Gatorback

Anyone know whether there are masquing techniques for this drug? You would think any doping program for such an elite cyclist would be sophisticated and they would know exactly how to beat the tests. There are several explanations on why they could have slipped up. But could masquing techniquies not have worked in this instance, whent they usually do, because the lab in question has better detection abilities?


----------



## orange_julius

Gatorback said:


> Anyone know whether there are masquing techniques for this drug? You would think any doping program for such an elite cyclist would be sophisticated and they would know exactly how to beat the tests. There are several explanations on why they could have slipped up. But could masquing techniquies not have worked in this instance, whent they usually do, because the lab in question has better detection abilities?


This is a great question, but I don't think that doping in cycling is nearly the most sophisticated. My reasoning is simple: there is very little money in cycling compared to other sports (proper football, american football, basketball, baseball, etc.). 

This is why dopers in cycling tend to get caught because they rely on shared resources, i.e., doping rings. Only the most paid ones can possibly afford an exclusive ahem ... "service provider". Everybody else goes to homeopaths (like Sainz), veterinarians (like Landuyt), online sources (like Papp), and decidedly poor-quality doctors (like the entire Kelme team used to). 

So I don't think the entire doping network in cycling has enough coordination nor funds to do any original R&D. That's why Hamilton's blood doping was caught using a technique that was really already established in medicine for other applications.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

DIRT BOY said:


> Now if plastic is found? They will go back retest his blood and he is COOKED!


I doubt it. WADA and the courts will only be able to look at the Clenbuterol. My understanding is that the plastics are still in its investigatory phase as use for evidence of doping.

I still think 50/50 shot of him getting off.


----------



## atpjunkie

*this is my take as well*



albert owen said:


> If you recall, AC had asthma symptoms earlier in the season. Maybe he had a transfusion of early seaon blood on his rest day (the day before the big show down with Schleck - remember!) which was contaminated by accident? His "doctors" simply made a mistake, which is why such a small dose showed up.
> I am a huge AC fan, but this doesn't look good. His story, like all drug cheat stories, is utterly ridiculous.


like Floyd the drug was administered during a training cycle and then some was present when they drew some blood for later autologous transfusions

explains small amounts
explains plastic marker in sample


----------



## tranzformer

Anyone read this article yet? Here is an excerpt: 



> However, according to the New York Times, an expert in the field of Clenbuterol contamination has said that he is very sceptical that the positive test could be due to meat, unless the rider ate the liver of the animal in question.
> 
> Frenando Ramos, who is a professor at the University of Coimbra in Portugal and who has studied this subject for two decades, spoke to the paper. *He noted that that the concentration would have to be so high that the animal would have died before being slaughtered.*
> 
> “I can say 99 percent, it’s impossible,” he said, when asked if meat could be the source of the contamination.



Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...results-management-of-case.aspx#ixzz11PZom7zi


----------



## babylou

Since Contador was not the only rider on the team to eat the tainted meat (per Contador) shouldn't a teammate or two also have a positive result?


----------



## 95zpro

babylou said:


> Since Contador was not the only rider on the team to eat the tainted meat (per Contador) shouldn't a teammate or two also have a positive result?



Nobody on his team was tested beside Vino and he already said he didn't partake of any of the beef. If you believe the conspiracy theorists though, it's kind of weird how Contador never failed any of his pre- or post- rest day tests? And even more weird is if this lab found it, then how come they did not use the lab to do the testing for the whole race? Many questions that need some answers!


----------



## Axe

95zpro said:


> Nobody on his team was tested beside Vino and he already said he didn't partake of any of the beef. If you believe the conspiracy theorists though, it's kind of weird how Contador never failed any of his pre- or post- rest day tests? And even more weird is if this lab found it, then how come they did not use the lab to do the testing for the whole race? Many questions that need some answers!


Do we really need answers? Just strip the dick of his TDF win and suspend him for two years, and forget about it.

It is like getting a speeding ticket - everybody does that, but sometimes it is your day, even if you are over just a little bit.


----------



## Mr. Scary

95zpro said:


> Nobody on his team was tested beside Vino and he already said he didn't partake of any of the beef. If you believe the conspiracy theorists though, it's kind of weird how Contador never failed any of his pre- or post- rest day tests? And even more weird is if this lab found it, then how come they did not use the lab to do the testing for the whole race? Many questions that need some answers!


Where did you see that they didn't use this lab at any other time? The only conspiracy is the same old tired defense exclaiming they have no idea how that drug would be in their sample...


----------



## jorgy

The plasticizers story appears to be solid. He had 8x the minimum level considered indicative of doping detected in urine collected after the stage on July 20. It was the very next day he was popped for clenbuterol.

I do have to say he sure puts on a good show, proclaiming his innocence. But we've all seen it before with Tyler, Landis, et al.

Bernard Kohl also chimed in.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sports/cycling/05cycling.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

_By Juliet Macur

A test new to the antidoping movement was used for the first time at the Tour de France last summer, and now it appears that the three-time Tour winner Alberto Contador — who tested positive for a banned drug at the race — may have more explaining to do.

That new test detects a specific type of chemical, called a plasticizer, that is found in plastic IV bags. Evidence of that chemical in an athlete’s urine could mean the athlete has used a blood transfusion to boost endurance. The World Anti-Doping Agency bans blood transfusions or any intravenous infusions, except in a medical emergency.

A test performed on at least one of Contador’s urine samples from the Tour revealed levels of that chemical eight times higher than the minimum amount that signifies doping, according to a person with knowledge of the test results.

The International Cycling Union drug-testing chaperones took the urine sample from Contador on July 20, the eve of the Tour’s final rest day, said the person, who wanted to remain anonymous because of an agreement to keep the information confidential while Contador’s investigation is continuing.
.
.
.
Bernhard Kohl, the Austrian rider who was stripped of his third-place finish at the 2008 Tour for doping, said Monday he was not surprised a top cyclist had tested positive for more than one banned thing.

“It’s impossible to win the Tour de France without doping,” said Kohl, who was in Leesburg, Va., to speak at the United States Anti-Doping Agency’s science conference. “You can tell by looking at the speed of the race. Every year it has been about 40 kilometers per hour. It’s the same the year I raced, the year Floyd Landis won, this year. It shows riders are still doping.”

Kohl, who said he retired from the sport to avoid having to think about doping every day, has no specific knowledge of Contador’s case but said most of the top riders rely on transfusions of their own blood and of designer, undetectable drugs like different types of the blood-booster EPO.

“I was tested 200 times during my career, and 100 times I had drugs in my body,” he said. “I was caught, but 99 other times, I wasn’t. Riders think they can get away with doping because most of the time they do. Even if there is a new test for blood doping, I’m not even sure it will scare riders into stopping. The problem is just that bad.”
​_


----------



## lastchild

jorgy said:


> The plasticizers story appears to be solid. He had 8x the minimum level considered indicative of doping detected in urine collected after the stage on July 20. It was the very next day he was popped for clenbuterol.
> 
> I do have to say he sure puts on a good show, proclaiming his innocence. But we've all seen it before with Tyler, Landis, et al.
> 
> Bernard Kohl also chimed in.
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sports/cycling/05cycling.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
> 
> _By Juliet Macur
> 
> A test new to the antidoping movement was used for the first time at the Tour de France last summer, and now it appears that the three-time Tour winner Alberto Contador — who tested positive for a banned drug at the race — may have more explaining to do.
> 
> That new test detects a specific type of chemical, called a plasticizer, that is found in plastic IV bags. Evidence of that chemical in an athlete’s urine could mean the athlete has used a blood transfusion to boost endurance. The World Anti-Doping Agency bans blood transfusions or any intravenous infusions, except in a medical emergency.
> 
> A test performed on at least one of Contador’s urine samples from the Tour revealed levels of that chemical eight times higher than the minimum amount that signifies doping, according to a person with knowledge of the test results.
> 
> The International Cycling Union drug-testing chaperones took the urine sample from Contador on July 20, the eve of the Tour’s final rest day, said the person, who wanted to remain anonymous because of an agreement to keep the information confidential while Contador’s investigation is continuing.
> .
> .
> .
> Bernhard Kohl, the Austrian rider who was stripped of his third-place finish at the 2008 Tour for doping, said Monday he was not surprised a top cyclist had tested positive for more than one banned thing.
> 
> “*It’s impossible to win the Tour de France without doping*,” said Kohl, who was in Leesburg, Va., to speak at the United States Anti-Doping Agency’s science conference. “You can tell by looking at the speed of the race. Every year it has been about 40 kilometers per hour. It’s the same the year I raced, the year Floyd Landis won, this year. It shows riders are still doping.”
> 
> Kohl, who said he retired from the sport to avoid having to think about doping every day, has no specific knowledge of Contador’s case but said most of the top riders rely on transfusions of their own blood and of designer, undetectable drugs like different types of the blood-booster EPO.
> 
> “I was tested 200 times during my career, and 100 times I had drugs in my body,” he said. “I was caught, but 99 other times, I wasn’t. Riders think they can get away with doping because most of the time they do. Even if there is a new test for blood doping, I’m not even sure it will scare riders into stopping. The problem is just that bad.”
> ​_



Yep, pretty much impossible.


----------



## asgelle

Dwayne Barry said:


> I doubt it. WADA and the courts will only be able to look at the Clenbuterol. My understanding is that the plastics are still in its investigatory phase as use for evidence of doping.


From http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sports/cycling/05cycling.html?ref=sports
"The test to detect plasticizers from IV bags has been around for more than a year in antidoping, but is not yet validated for use, so an athlete could easily question its validity in court. Still, the test could be used in conjunction with other facts to build a doping case, antidoping experts said. 

" 'Even without a validated test, it could be looked at in a case-by-case basis,' Francesco Botré, the chief of the World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited laboratory in Rome, said. 'If someone has a very, very high level of plasticizers in the urine, it would be hard for that athlete to explain how that happened if not for doping. If the level is lower, it obviously would make it much harder, but it would still be possible to prove.'

It's Alice in Wonderland time again. The test hasn't been validated so experts in the field are not sure of it's validity, but if the results come back positive, the burden falls on the athletes to figure out the flaws in the test.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

asgelle said:


> It's Alice in Wonderland time again. The test hasn't been validated so experts in the field are not sure of it's validity, but if the results come back positive, the burden falls on the athletes to figure out the flaws in the test.


Figure out for who's benefit? You and I or the Spanish doping authorities?

Most likely scenario is the Spanish doping authority will only look at the Clenbuterol positive, dismiss it as a result of contamination from food and then the ball will be in the UCI court (or can WADA appeal?) to appeal their decision to CAS.

Seems unlikely UCI would appeal since they were apparently trying to work this out behind closed doors.

Contador back riding next year and mysteriously not quite as good he was previously


----------



## asgelle

Dwayne Barry said:


> Most likely scenario is the Spanish doping authority will only look at the Clenbuterol positive, dismiss it as a result of contamination from food and then the ball will be in the UCI court (or can WADA appeal?) to appeal their decision to CAS.


http://forum.slowtwitch.com/cgi-bin...ring=;guest=121079163&t=search_engine#3012069


----------



## 55x11

lastchild said:


> Yep, pretty much impossible.


Not that it matters much, but I am quite curious as to who is the top "clean and never tried to dope" TdF GC finisher of the past, I don't know, 10 years or so. Quite possible it's someone not very well known.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

55x11 said:


> Not that it matters much, but I am quite curious as to who is the top "clean and never tried to dope" TdF GC finisher of the past, I don't know, 10 years or so. Quite possible it's someone not very well known.


Absolutely no way to tell. I think we can be reasonably confident of many riders who weren't playing clean, but almost no confidence that someone we may think was clean actually was.

If nothing else we know over the years many dopers have been bald-faced liars so I think it matters very little how much someone might be vociferous in their anti-doping talk to the public.


----------



## tommyrhodes

Actually. Bill strickland did an article a few weeks ago that answered this question. It was really interesting to see. I think he did the last 10 years and removed all convicted dopers. There were a few years where we barely had a podium from the top 10. Check it out. Bicycling.com ran it in Bill's "sitting in" column. Worth the read.


----------



## blackjack

55x11 said:


> Not that it matters much, but I am quite curious as to who is the top "clean and never tried to dope" TdF GC finisher of the past, I don't know, 10 years or so. Quite possible it's someone not very well known.


Danny Pate.


----------



## Coolhand

My favorite bit of revisionist history by Kohl:



> Kohl, who said he retired from the sport to avoid having to think about doping every day,


Yeah, that's it. . . .


----------



## blackjack

Coolhand said:


> My favorite bit of revisionist history by Kohl:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's it. . . .



He's human just like the rest of us.

Why do you doubt that he doesn't want to be part of this whole charade?

Maybe it's possible that being nabbed was the best thing that ever happened in his life.

Kohl just happened to be in the position where his fraud was exposed. Cheating on a test in school, shoplifting a candy bar, cheating on a girlfriend, taxes, or anything for that matter is all on the same continuum.

The only difference is that Kohl's fraud was exposed on a bigger stage. There's nothing wrong from learning from past mistakes, or is there?


----------



## robdamanii

blackjack said:


> He's human just like the rest of us.
> 
> Why do you doubt that he doesn't want to be part of this whole charade?
> 
> Maybe it's possible that being nabbed was the best thing that ever happened in his life.
> 
> Kohl just happened to be in the position where his fraud was exposed. Cheating on a test in school, shoplifting a candy bar, cheating on a girlfriend, taxes, or anything for that matter is all on the same continuum.
> 
> The only difference is that Kohl's fraud was exposed on a bigger stage. There's nothing wrong from learning from past mistakes, or is there?


You're getting into dangerous moral ground there. Is cheating and only harming a few people the same as cheating and accepting a bunch of cash for it? Is it different than cheating on something at work? Is that the same as cheating on your wife?

He's trying to save his own skin (or should I say was). AC is doing the exact same thing. No remorse about it at all.


----------



## tempeteOntheRoad

*Animal Diet*

but we all know that plastic and Clenbuterol are part of the daily animal's diet. As well as anvil, platypus' placenta extract and cornbread...


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> You're getting into *dangerous* moral ground there. Is cheating and only harming a few people the same as cheating and accepting a bunch of cash for it? Is it different than cheating on something at work? Is that the same as cheating on your wife?
> 
> He's trying to save his own skin (or should I say was). AC is doing the exact same thing. No remorse about it at all.



It depends on the philosophical construct one lives their life according to. I'm a Christian so I hold myself to a higher standard.

I have no right to foist that standard on anyone else. I'm entirely permitted to air my opinion as to the validity of my philosophy, and others can either accept or deny it free from coercion.

If one accepts a social contract, he agrees to abide by laws. I assume most here believe they are part of a social contract. The legal system is quite precise and is designed to account for many variations in behavior and ideally is responsive to new situations which may crop up from time to time. There are different sanctions for crimes which have varying degrees of impact on society. The legal system recognizes this and I think it's the best system to apply to all. It's not perfect.

Kohl has gone through the legal process regarding his crimes. He's expressed remorse and regret. Is it genuine?

I suspect AC is completely caught up in the game of cycling as it now exists and is guilty of what he's accused of .


----------



## Coolhand

> Kohl has gone through the legal process regarding his crimes. He's expressed remorse and regret. Is it genuine?


No. He got caught redhanded and tossed from the sport. He didn't retire willingly _because he didn't want to think about doping_, he cheated and got caught and now nobody will hire him. 

He would be still happily doping himself to the gills if he could.


----------



## 55x11

blackjack said:


> Danny Pate.


Ha!
.........


----------



## den bakker

Coolhand said:


> he cheated and got caught and now nobody will hire him.
> 
> He would be still happily doping himself to the gills if he could.


Load of bull. He hung up the bike, spilled the beans and called it a day, he never tried to get a new contract. Not that he would after talking. doping scumbag? sure, but at least he told the story how things work.


----------



## blackjack

55x11 said:


> Ha!
> .........


 Good Ha or bad Ha?


----------



## OES

Oh hell. Go back and read the Landis threads. The Hamilton threads. The (fill in the blank) threads. They're all the same, almost word for word. 'There are many unanswered questions here.' And frankly, no, there aren't. Not really. Not on the fundamental question.

This post comes from someone in the 'let 'em dope' fringe. Do what you want. No penalty. The only requirement is, come clean to a reputable doc about your program, so he can tell you the risks. Then God's mercy on you.


----------



## SilasCL

den bakker said:


> Load of bull. He hung up the bike, spilled the beans and called it a day, he never tried to get a new contract. Not that he would after talking. doping scumbag? sure, but at least he told the story how things work.


My thoughts exactly. I would guess the vast majority of riders caught doping get back into the professional ranks. There are some notables who didn't, like Ullrich or Rasmussen, but most get another shot if they either deny it or say they made a mistake and move on.


----------



## den bakker

SilasCL said:


> My thoughts exactly. I would guess the vast majority of riders caught doping get back into the professional ranks. There are some notables who didn't, like Ullrich or Rasmussen, but most get another shot if they either deny it or say they made a mistake and move on.


Rasmussen did get a contract with Miche. He also later got a slightly better deal with another team but fought tooth and nail to get out of it again because he saw a possibility for a pro tour team. Bad call


----------



## SilasCL

den bakker said:


> Rasmussen did get a contract with Miche. He also later got a slightly better deal with another team but fought tooth and nail to get out of it again because he saw a possibility for a pro tour team. Bad call


Even better. Quick list off the top of my head of riders who were found to be doping and ended up riding professionally again.

Rasmussen
Basso
Virenque
Millar
Ricco
Sinkewitz
Vinokourov
Kashechkin
Landis
Hamilton
Garzelli
Vandenbroucke
Meirhaeghe
Hondo


----------



## ElvisMerckx

tempeteOntheRoad said:


> but we all know that plastic and Clenbuterol are part of the daily animal's diet. As well as anvil, platypus' placenta extract and cornbread...


I like your style, tempeteOntheRoad.


----------



## loudog

blackjack said:


> It depends on the philosophical construct one lives their life according to. I'm a Christian so I hold myself to a higher standard.


spurrious claim there... certainly ZERO evidence that being christian has anything to do with a higher standard. hilarious.


----------



## merckxman

Italy's CONI anti-doping prosecutor, Ettore Torri, says it's not enough for Contador to say the meat was tainted...he will have to prove it.


----------



## redlizard

loudog said:


> spurrious claim there... certainly ZERO evidence that being christian has anything to do with a higher standard. hilarious.


He didn't say it did. You read that into it and you read it wrong. Hilarious.

Why do you feel the need to pick a fight? Are you short? Do you drive a red Porsche?

p.s. I'm not Christian, Muslim or of any other organized faith or religion.


----------



## Perico

blackjack said:


> It depends on the philosophical construct one lives their life according to. I'm a Christian so I hold myself to a higher standard.


...except when having a discussion with people who disagree with you, then you threaten, curse and insult.


----------



## Coolhand

*Moderators Note*

Back on topic please.


----------



## Perico

Coolhand said:


> Back on topic please.


It is on topic, he is using his Christianity and the higher standards he claims it brings in response to someone's comments about the topic. I am merely pointing out how his standards include the things I mentioned.


----------



## rydbyk

Originally Posted by blackjack
It depends on the philosophical construct one lives their life according to. I'm a Christian so I hold myself to a higher standard.


...except when having a discussion with people who disagree with you, then you threaten, curse and insult.

Blackjack. Wow Seriously...too serious! I agree with what most have said so far in this thread??


----------



## blackjack

Perico said:


> It is on topic, he is using his Christianity and the higher standards he claims it brings in response to someone's comments about the topic. I am merely pointing out how his standards include the things I mentioned




I lose my patience sometimes, and that's not good. Just because I don't meet my standards doesn't mean I don't have them or aspire to meet them.

This is the exchange you were referring to.



blackjack said:


> He's human just like the rest of us.
> 
> Why do you doubt that he doesn't want to be part of this whole charade?
> 
> Maybe it's possible that being nabbed was the best thing that ever happened in his life.
> 
> Kohl just happened to be in the position where his fraud was exposed. Cheating on a test in school, shoplifting a candy bar, cheating on a girlfriend, taxes, or anything for that matter is all on the same continuum.
> 
> The only difference is that Kohl's fraud was exposed on a bigger stage. There's nothing wrong from learning from past mistakes, or is there?





robdamanii said:


> You're getting into dangerous moral ground there. Is cheating and only harming a few people the same as cheating and accepting a bunch of cash for it? Is it different than cheating on something at work? Is that the same as cheating on your wife.
> 
> He's trying to save his own skin (or should I say was). AC is doing the exact same thing. No remorse about it at all.






blackjack said:


> It depends on the philosophical construct one lives their life according to. I'm a Christian so I hold myself to a higher standard.
> 
> I have no right to foist that standard on anyone else. I'm entirely permitted to air my opinion as to the validity of my philosophy, and others can either accept or deny it free from coercion.
> 
> If one accepts a social contract, he agrees to abide by laws. I assume most here believe they are part of a social contract. The legal system is quite precise and is designed to account for many variations in behavior and ideally is responsive to new situations which may crop up from time to time. There are different sanctions for crimes which have varying degrees of impact on society. The legal system recognizes this and I think it's the best system to apply to all. It's not perfect.
> 
> Kohl has gone through the legal process regarding his crimes. He's expressed remorse and regret. Is it genuine?
> 
> I suspect AC is completely caught up in the game of cycling as it now exists and is guilty of what he's accused of ..


Anyway, you still feel slighted by me and I think that's more due to me getting the upper hand in the reasoning, because if you look back, you were taking part in the insults on at least the same level I was. I do regret my petty behavior because obviously it diminishes me and if I can't express my points without getting nasty, it detracts from me and only serves to annoy others without changing their opinion. 

You're comments are somewhat irrelevant but they do show that it is not the righteous, but the sick(me), who are in need of a physician and I recognize that; this is why I have my religious beliefs.

You believe my proclamation of faith, and my engaging in insulting back and forth with you makes me a hypocrite. I think you misunderstand the place or relevance of religion.


----------



## BAi9302010

Spanish farmers want to look at Contador's meat...


http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2010/10/05/spanish-farmers-contadors-meat/


----------



## blackjack

loudog said:


> spurrious claim there... certainly ZERO evidence that being christian has anything to do with a higher standard. hilarious.


I thought the standard was the Golden Rule?

Love your enemies; if they're hungry give them something to eat, if they're thirsty give them something to drink, it''ll be like heaping fiery coals on their head.

IOW, kill them with kindness.

He who hath no sin, cast the first stone.

To err is human, to forgive is divine.

Loudog, I don't know what you're referring to.


----------



## yurl

BAi9302010 said:


> Spanish farmers want to look at Contador's meat...


LOL. great headline.:thumbsup:


----------



## Perico

blackjack said:


> I lose my patience sometimes, and that's not good. Just because I don't meet my standards doesn't mean I don't have them or aspire to meet them.
> 
> This is the exchange you were referring to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, you still feel slighted by me and I think that's more due to me getting the upper hand in the reasoning, because if you look back, you were taking part in the insults on at least the same level I was. I do regret my petty behavior because obviously it diminishes me and if I can't express my points without getting nasty, it detracts from me and only serves to annoy others without changing their opinion.
> 
> You're comments are somewhat irrelevant but they do show that it is not the righteous, but the sick(me), who are in need of a physician and I recognize that; this is why I have my religious beliefs.
> 
> You believe my proclamation of faith, and my engaging in insulting back and forth with you makes me a hypocrite. I think you misunderstand the place or relevance of religion.



It's funny how often you will use personal attacks and insults against people who disagree with you, then start claiming "victory" on the internet...and it always seems to happen when people are killing you with facts and logic. I actually feel sorry for you now.


----------



## ®andyA

yurl said:


> LOL. great headline.:thumbsup:


I was hoping there would be a headline somewhere that would say that! Where's Jay Leno when you need 'im!? :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## blackjack

Perico said:


> It's funny how often you will use personal attacks and insults against people who disagree with you, then start claiming "victory" on the internet...and it always seems to happen when people are killing you with facts and logic. I actually feel sorry for you now.



I suggest you re read the threads if you think this is the case.

*I've gone back over most of my statement's in the other thread The only (very mildly) insulting things I posted, I wrote after you called my posts "excrement."*



Don't feel sorry for me.

About the only things I presented were facts that are in, or not in, evidence and are completely obvious.

I stated something from my recollection about a former American TdF winner that I couldn't find a link to on the internet. Ultimobici cited the book and the page that fact was on.

It was obvious that an event had happened for a certain reason, which I stated, and spade2you/axe was still insulting me and calling me a moron.

Please tell me what I have stated that is factually incorrect and I'll have a look at it.

You do really need to apply your above post to yourself. YOU are coming in here unarmed factually.


----------



## Perico

Thank you for providing more evidence to make my case. Perhaps you will get this thread added to the quickly expanding list of threads closed do to your anonymous internet tough guy routine and your desperate need to be the "winner" of the internet. lol


----------



## merckxman

Riis: "“I've just met with Alberto Contador and I have no reason not to believe in him,” Riis told the Danish website DR.DK. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-believes-in-contador-but-fears-consequences)

So laughable coming from Riis that admitted to doping 9 years after he doped for 5 years...


----------



## blackjack

merckxman said:


> Riis: "“I've just met with Alberto Contador and I have no reason not to believe in him,” Riis told the Danish website DR.DK. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-believes-in-contador-but-fears-consequences)
> 
> So laughable coming from Riis that admitted to doping 9 years after he doped for 5 years...


Doesn't Riis own the team? He's hardly and unbiased arbiter.


----------



## waldo425

blackjack said:


> Doesn't Riis own the team? He's hardly and unbiased arbiter.



If Riis didn't believe him I would suspect that he would run away from AC like he had airborne AIDS and was trying to cough on everyone. Although, I bet that if/when things start to hit the fan Riis will distance himself from AC and just leave him flopping in the breeze. I don't think that it is his responsibility put himself on the line looking after AC when he messes up.


----------



## orange_julius

waldo425 said:


> If Riis didn't believe him I would suspect that he would run away from AC like he had airborne AIDS and was trying to cough on everyone. Although, I bet that if/when things start to hit the fan Riis will distance himself from AC and just leave him flopping in the breeze. I don't think that it is his responsibility put himself on the line looking after AC when he messes up.


If AC leaves Riis' team by his own choice or otherwise, Riis is going to be left with a team with no GC stars. And his sponsor's contract runs out after next season. He doesn't have much of a choice. This is why teams are more than willing to throw lowly riders under the bus (such as RadioShack with Fuyu Li) but they'll protect their stars. 

If I were Riis I'd be wishing upon a star too, however tainted. And I'm not even a fan of Riis, not after he lied for years about his previous doping practices.


----------



## den bakker

orange_julius said:


> If AC leaves Riis' team by his own choice or otherwise, Riis is going to be left with a team with no GC stars. And his sponsor's contract runs out after next season. He doesn't have much of a choice. This is why teams are more than willing to throw lowly riders under the bus (such as RadioShack with Fuyu Li) but they'll protect their stars.
> 
> If I were Riis I'd be wishing upon a star too, however tainted. And I'm not even a fan of Riis, not after he lied for years about his previous doping practices.


not only GC, no star what so ever.


----------



## jorgy

den bakker said:


> not only GC, no star what so ever.


Kind of makes you reassess why Saxo was shedding riders left and right these last couple months. I'll be it was about more than just the Schleck brothers starting a new team.

My guess is that quite a few people knew about Contador's non-negative before the press did.


----------



## den bakker

jorgy said:


> Kind of makes you reassess why Saxo was shedding riders left and right these last couple months. I'll be it was about more than just the Schleck brothers starting a new team.
> 
> My guess is that quite a few people knew about Contador's non-negative before the press did.


except for many the time line does not line up. e.g. schlecks, breschel, most likely fuglsang etc. 
maybe cancellara but he has been courted by other teams for a long long time so it's not clear if it is contador, contador being dirty or just being fed up with uncertain sponsorships that is the deciding factor.


----------



## rydbyk

blackjack said:


> I thought the standard was the Golden Rule?
> 
> Love your enemies; if they're hungry give them something to eat, if they're thirsty give them something to drink, it''ll be like heaping fiery coals on their head.
> 
> IOW, kill them with kindness.
> 
> He who hath no sin, cast the first stone.
> 
> To err is human, to forgive is divine.
> 
> Loudog, I don't know what you're referring to.



Superiority complex. Hypocrisy. Back handed compliments. Jabs and insults. Get over yourself...find some humility fast...and start practicing what you preach please!

Can someone teach me how to use this "ignore" feature? How does it work and where is it? I have just about had it. I don't want to read this garbage any longer... Does the "ignore" feature just block out the person you don't want to hear from any longer??


----------



## blackjack

rydbyk said:


> Superiority complex. Hypocrisy. Back handed compliments. Jabs and insults. Get over yourself...find some humility fast...and start practicing what you preach please!
> 
> Can someone teach me how to use this "ignore" feature? How does it work and where is it? I have just about had it. I don't want to read this garbage any longer... Does the "ignore" feature just block out the person you don't want to hear from any longer??


What? I believe in the Golden Rule. Unlike others, I don't believe in "Lance."

Funny how people who are against hypocrisy, superiority complexes, lying, cheating, believe wholeheartedly in ......."Lance."

What does it say about a person when they refer to a lousy individual such as Armstrong, by his first name?


----------



## worst_shot_ever

BJ -- unless you are a personal acquitance with access to first-hand interaction and observation, it seems you have drawn your firm conviction about the character of Lance Armstrong based on circumstantial evidence of varying reliability: from the pretty clear to the pretty dubious. Maybe he doped. I tend to think so. Maybe not. I tend to think that's unlikely. This, based on the same sort of incomplete factual record that you and the rest of us armchair drug testers rely on.

Getting back to AC, however, can we take stock of what we actually know with any sense of certainty and what the source of that information is? I have not been following this as closely as others, so please let me know if I'm in error here....

- A and B samples both tested pos for clen [official announcement]
- amount was small, just 50 picograms [official announcement]
- immediate prior tests reflected no detectable clen presence [right?]
- UCI says more study required before results can be confirmed / action taken [official sources]
- pos results shared with AC about a month ago [official announcement]

- urine tested pos for plasticizers [journalists, not an official announcement]

- the meat made me do it [AC statement]
- I did not transfuse [AC statement]
- there should not be a strict liability rule for clem [AC statement]
- the UCI required me not to tell anyone {i.e., don't blame me Riis!} [AC statement]
- other cyclists suspected the bast**d all along [other cyclists]

Is this all we have to date? If so, it seems all we can say with certainty is that AC may suffer suspension for clen unless subsequent scientific and investigative work shows a compelling defense (i.e.,. contamination), and even that is not likely sufficient if past actions by the UCI is precedent.


----------



## blackjack

worst_shot_ever said:


> BJ -- unless you are a personal acquitance with access to first-hand interaction and observation, it seems you have drawn your firm conviction about the character of Lance Armstrong based on circumstantial evidence of varying reliability: from the pretty clear to the pretty dubious. Maybe he doped. I tend to think so. Maybe not. I tend to think that's unlikely. This, based on the same sort of incomplete factual record that you and the rest of us armchair drug testers rely on.
> 
> Getting back to AC, however, can we take stock of what we actually know with any sense of certainty and what the source of that information is? I have not been following this as closely as others, so please let me know if I'm in error here....
> 
> - A and B samples both tested pos for clen [official announcement]
> - amount was small, just 50 picograms [official announcement]
> - immediate prior tests reflected no detectable clen presence [right?]
> - UCI says more study required before results can be confirmed / action taken [official sources]
> - pos results shared with AC about a month ago [official announcement]
> 
> - urine tested pos for plasticizers [journalists, not an official announcement]
> 
> - the meat made me do it [AC statement]
> - I did not transfuse [AC statement]
> - there should not be a strict liability rule for clem [AC statement]
> - the UCI required me not to tell anyone {i.e., don't blame me Riis!} [AC statement]
> - other cyclists suspected the bast**d all along [other cyclists]
> 
> Is this all we have to date? If so, it seems all we can say with certainty is that AC may suffer suspension for clen unless subsequent scientific and investigative work shows a compelling defense (i.e.,. contamination), and even that is not likely sufficient if past actions by the UCI is precedent.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/golf/article5114047.ece

I trust what Paul Kimmage says about Lance Armstrong's character, in addition to the other anecdotal evidence, in addition to what friends of mine who know him tell me.

_WE ARE on a flight to Malaga, drinking tea and shooting the breeze about another sporting icon, acclaimed for his courage and inspirational deeds. 

“Have you ever interviewed him?” Harrington asks. 

“No,” I reply. “I like to give everyone a blank sheet of paper, but I couldn’t do it with him . . . probably the most cynical, hypocritical bastard in the history of sport.” 

“Really?” he says, shifting nervously. 

“Have you read that stuff in his book about what a devoted husband and father he is? Well, he’d get up on your mother.” 

“What!” 

“He f**** everything that moves.” 
_

As for Contador, it's only going to get worse for him. He's done. I gave him the benefit of the doubt at first. I've changed my mind in the last couple of days.


----------



## merckxman

To your first set I would add:
-formally and provisionally suspended as is prescribed by the World Anti-Doping Code (official announcement)
. 


worst_shot_ever said:


> BJ -- unless you are a personal acquitance with access to first-hand interaction and observation, it seems you have drawn your firm conviction about the character of Lance Armstrong based on circumstantial evidence of varying reliability: from the pretty clear to the pretty dubious. Maybe he doped. I tend to think so. Maybe not. I tend to think that's unlikely. This, based on the same sort of incomplete factual record that you and the rest of us armchair drug testers rely on.
> 
> Getting back to AC, however, can we take stock of what we actually know with any sense of certainty and what the source of that information is? I have not been following this as closely as others, so please let me know if I'm in error here....
> 
> - A and B samples both tested pos for clen [official announcement]
> - amount was small, just 50 picograms [official announcement]
> - immediate prior tests reflected no detectable clen presence [right?]
> - UCI says more study required before results can be confirmed / action taken [official sources]
> - pos results shared with AC about a month ago [official announcement]
> 
> - urine tested pos for plasticizers [journalists, not an official announcement]
> 
> - the meat made me do it [AC statement]
> - I did not transfuse [AC statement]
> - there should not be a strict liability rule for clem [AC statement]
> - the UCI required me not to tell anyone {i.e., don't blame me Riis!} [AC statement]
> - other cyclists suspected the bast**d all along [other cyclists]
> 
> Is this all we have to date? If so, it seems all we can say with certainty is that AC may suffer suspension for clen unless subsequent scientific and investigative work shows a compelling defense (i.e.,. contamination), and even that is not likely sufficient if past actions by the UCI is precedent.


----------



## Perico

worst_shot_ever said:


> BJ -- unless you are a personal acquitance with access to first-hand interaction and observation, it seems you have drawn your firm conviction about the character of Lance Armstrong based on circumstantial evidence of varying reliability: from the pretty clear to the pretty dubious. Maybe he doped. I tend to think so. Maybe not. I tend to think that's unlikely. This, based on the same sort of incomplete factual record that you and the rest of us armchair drug testers rely on.
> 
> Getting back to AC, however, can we take stock of what we actually know with any sense of certainty and what the source of that information is? I have not been following this as closely as others, so please let me know if I'm in error here....
> 
> - A and B samples both tested pos for clen [official announcement]
> - amount was small, just 50 picograms [official announcement]
> - immediate prior tests reflected no detectable clen presence [right?]
> - UCI says more study required before results can be confirmed / action taken [official sources]
> - pos results shared with AC about a month ago [official announcement]
> 
> - urine tested pos for plasticizers [journalists, not an official announcement]
> 
> - the meat made me do it [AC statement]
> - I did not transfuse [AC statement]
> - there should not be a strict liability rule for clem [AC statement]
> - the UCI required me not to tell anyone {i.e., don't blame me Riis!} [AC statement]
> - other cyclists suspected the bast**d all along [other cyclists]
> 
> Is this all we have to date? If so, it seems all we can say with certainty is that AC may suffer suspension for clen unless subsequent scientific and investigative work shows a compelling defense (i.e.,. contamination), and even that is not likely sufficient if past actions by the UCI is precedent.


You have been around long enough to know that blackjack believes anything that helps him push his agenda and is very willing to be a hypocrite in the way he does this. The proof is all over these threads.


----------



## blackjack

Perico said:


> You have been around long enough to know that blackjack believes anything that helps him push his agenda and is very willing to be a hypocrite in the way he does this. The proof is all over these threads.


My agenda? I've politely asked you to reveal what specifically you're talking about.

I have no agenda whatsoever actually. It's just that it's completely obvious that Armstrong and every top level cyclist right now is doping. The evidence pretty much leads us to that conclusion. 

There is no evidence LeMond used PED's. That's pretty much all I've said.

Oh, also, because I'm a sick person in need of a physician, I'm a Christian.

That about wraps up what I've been saying.

Is your agenda to legalize blood doping? 

Apparently you don't see much wrong with it.


----------



## Perico

blackjack said:


> My agenda? I've politely asked you to reveal what specifically you're talking about.
> 
> I have no agenda whatsoever actually. It's just that it's completely obvious that Armstrong and every top level cyclist right now is doping. The evidence pretty much leads us to that conclusion.
> 
> There is no evidence LeMond used PED's. That's pretty much all I've said.
> 
> Oh, also, because I'm a sick person in need of a physician, I'm a Christian.
> 
> That about wraps up what I've been saying.
> 
> Is your agenda to legalize blood doping?
> 
> Apparently you don't see much wrong with it.


Interesting. Now, in addition to insults, personal attacks and cursing, you resort to lies and false assumptions. I don't even feel sorry for you anymore, I feel sorry for your family.


----------



## SilasCL

Perico said:


> Interesting. Now, in addition to insults, personal attacks and cursing, you resort to lies and false assumptions. I don't even feel sorry for you anymore, I feel sorry for your family.


Sweet jesus guys. Can you two get your own thread to argue endlessly?


----------



## blackjack

Perico said:


> Interesting. Now, in addition to insults, personal attacks and cursing, you resort to lies and false assumptions. I don't even feel sorry for you anymore, I feel sorry for your family.


You still have nothing except piffle..


----------



## worst_shot_ever

merckxman said:


> To your first set I would add:
> -formally and provisionally suspended as is prescribed by the World Anti-Doping Code (official announcement)
> .


Thanks, good point. Also, to be complete, I guess we could add:

- expert opinion that test for plasticizers is reliable, and interpretation of result depends on level of chemicals detected (journalists citing med dr.)
- expert opinion that test for plasticizers is unreliable (expert hired by AC)
- test for plasticizers not (yet) authorized as part of UCI/WADA testing regime (right?)

- RadioShack rider suspended 2 years for pos test for clen in similar amount to AC (historical fact)

I agree that the feuding is likely to cause the mods to lock this and some other threads. Perhaps you two can just choose to "ignore" each other?


----------



## yurl

worst_shot_ever said:


> - test for plasticizers not (yet) authorized as part of UCI/WADA testing regime (right?)


If the plasticizers are not authorized as part of the testing, can their detection be used as evidence or consideration in the case? 
AC's chances of getting off are a lot better if he can use a technicality to take this out of consideration.


----------



## lastchild

blackjack said:


> _WE ARE on a flight to Malaga, drinking tea and shooting the breeze about another sporting icon, acclaimed for his courage and inspirational deeds.
> 
> “Have you ever interviewed him?” Harrington asks.
> 
> “No,” I reply. “I like to give everyone a blank sheet of paper, but I couldn’t do it with him . . . probably the most cynical, hypocritical bastard in the history of sport.”
> 
> “Really?” he says, shifting nervously.
> 
> “Have you read that stuff in his book about what a devoted husband and father he is? Well, he’d get up on your mother.”
> 
> “What!”
> 
> “He f**** everything that moves.”
> _


So, let me get this straight... because the guy LOVES his pu$$y, you have issue with him?
Really, are you that vapid?
I hope the guys gets TONS of pu$$y...if I won 7 Tours you can bet your bottom dollar I would f*@k EVERYTHING in sight...twice!
And dope myself to the gills.

This is the best you got...sad little man you are.


----------



## worst_shot_ever

Actually, I think I got it wrong. The NYT article reported that the test result can still be considered as additional evidence, but I guess it cannot be used standing alone to make a blood doping finding, or something along those lines.

And now to sleep.


----------



## NextTime

merckxman said:


> To your first set I would add:
> -formally and provisionally suspended as is prescribed by the World Anti-Doping Code (official announcement)
> .


And to this you can add that (i) Astana has the receipt for the purchase of the tasty steak in Spain and (ii) the cook says he didn't dope.

Take that WADA.


----------



## rydbyk

SilasCL said:


> Sweet jesus guys. Can you two get your own thread to argue endlessly?



Agreed. The threshold has been passed. Just PM each other with debate/insults from now on. I too have been guilty of taking things personally, but enough is enough...


----------



## Perico

rydbyk said:


> Agreed. The threshold has been passed. Just PM each other with debate/insults from now on. I too have been guilty of taking things personally, but enough is enough...


You guys will have to speak with blackjack since he is the one who immediately goes to insults and personal attacks when people disagree with him. He got two threads closed on his own this week alone.


----------



## covenant

Perico said:


> You guys will have to speak with blackjack since he is the one who immediately goes to insults and personal attacks when people disagree with him. He got two threads closed on his own this week alone.


not by himself he didn't :thumbsup:


----------



## Perico

covenant said:


> not by himself he didn't :thumbsup:


Ok, you got me, he wasn't alone, but he the one constant.


----------



## worst_shot_ever

This is a re-post (my earlier one got lost in the continuum):

Wow. This article reports on a Belgian magazine's claim that a currently annonymous Astana rider has confirmed that Contador banked blood shortly after the Dauphin, when he underwent a weight loss program that featured clenbuterol and another drug. If this guy in fact exists and is ever willing to speak to authorities, and if the other evidence, such as the plasticizer finding, corroborates the details of his account, then Contador may be well and truly toasted. I am also amazed that anyone in the pro peloton is talking (if anon). Maybe Omerta is waining.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...-transfusion-prior-to-the-Tour-de-France.aspx


----------



## merckxman

Contador's legal team:"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."


----------



## blackjack

merckxman said:


> Contador's legal team:"The legal team of Alberto Contador will take legal actions against defamatory information published so far by various media and websites, due to their absolute lack of veracity," the statement continued. "Additionally, they will proceed in the same way with any defamatory information that will be published in the future."


Dumb a$s is going to go broke, just like Floyd.

The guy should have gone down four years ago with Basso and Ullrich.

I think he idolized LA a lot more than anyone realized.


----------



## blackjack

lastchild said:


> So, let me get this straight... because the guy LOVES his pu$$y, you have issue with him?
> Really, are you that vapid?
> I hope the guys gets TONS of pu$$y...if I won 7 Tours you can bet your bottom dollar I would f*@k EVERYTHING in sight...twice!
> And dope myself to the gills.
> 
> This is the best you got...sad little man you are.


I'm sad?

Just re read the ........... you posted?

You'll take drugs to win a bike race....cheat on your wife and kids....and I'm vapid?

You're also the guy who watches the Sopranos for lessons in ethics and morality.

I'll stand where I am, gladly, and you can live in the world where you have to be jacked to bag skeezers.:thumbsup:


----------



## albert owen

Deja Vu.
We've been here before......yawn. Has there ever been an example of a rider who didn't claim that a positive test was some kind of freakish mistake?
The excuses they come up with are as hilarious as the excuses children make for not doing their homework.


----------



## lastchild

blackjack said:


> I'm sad?
> 
> Just re read the ........... you posted?
> 
> You'll take drugs to win a bike race....cheat on your wife and kids....and I'm vapid?
> 
> You're also the guy who watches the Sopranos for lessons in ethics and morality.
> 
> I'll stand where I am, gladly, and you can live in the world where you have to be jacked to bag skeezers.:thumbsup:



i don't have time for your petty morals.


----------



## worst_shot_ever

By now I'm sure many have seen the other reported decision out of Spain, where a cyclist received a lesser 12-month suspension for clenbuterol. The shorter ban was attributed to the Spanish accepting the claim that the exposure was the inadvertent result of consuming contaminated meat. The meat in question there came from Latin America, however, where the practice of using clenbuterol in cattle is apparently widespread. Not so in Spain. Nonetheless, I guess this might be pointed to as precedent for a lesser punishment for Conty in the UCI process if they, like the Spanish in the other case, believe his meat story. We shall see, I guess.


----------



## blackjack

lastchild said:


> i don't have time for your petty morals.


Now this genius is written in stone.


----------



## lastchild

blackjack said:


> Now this genius is written in stone.



just like your tombstone will say 'jacka$$'


----------



## ultimobici

worst_shot_ever said:


> By now I'm sure many have seen the other reported decision out of Spain, where a cyclist received a lesser 12-month suspension for clenbuterol. The shorter ban was attributed to the Spanish accepting the claim that the exposure was the inadvertent result of consuming contaminated meat. The meat in question there came from Latin America, however, where the practice of using clenbuterol in cattle is apparently widespread. Not so in Spain. Nonetheless, I guess this might be pointed to as precedent for a lesser punishment for Conty in the UCI process if they, like the Spanish in the other case, believe his meat story. We shall see, I guess.


Not Spanish but Italian.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/colo-believes-contador-would-not-risk-taking-clenbuterol

Rider tested positive in Mexico where 18% of meat is contaminated with Clenbuterol. He apparently had 4 times the level Contador had which is still 10 times the level WADA require an accredited lab be able to detect.

Methinks Sen. Contador ain't riding the 2011 Tour.


----------



## blackjack

*Greatest Hits Package.*



lastchild said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-vows-to-repay-floyd-fairness-fund-donors
> 
> *hey scumbag, go back to whatever rock you crawled from*.
> 
> seriously, this fool is completely off his rocker.





lastchild said:


> He's a *scumbag* because he ratted out his friends
> He's a *scumbag* because he ratted on his employers who did whatever they could to help his career.
> He's a *scumbag* because he ratted out other riders who have families to feed and with whom he had little to no contact with.
> He's a *scumbag* because he lied straight faced and took money from folks that believed in him
> He's a *scumbag* because he ratted out men who gave up their own personal goals and turned themselves inside and out so that he could accomplish his own.
> 
> He's a *scumbag* and a disgrace to the sport.
> 
> Let him come clean, let him apologize, let him payback his 'debt'...but never rat out your friends and peers.
> 
> *Scumbag*.





lastchild said:


> Doctor Falsetti sleeps wit da fishes.





lastchild said:


> yep...*me* and merckx, coppi, hinault, armstrong...all the greats.


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:




lastchild said:


> *i love it when you transcend self-parody*.





lastchild said:


> Doctor Falsetti sleeps wit da fishes.





lastchild said:


> The only 'honorable' thing for Floyd to do is fall on his own sword.






lastchild said:


> I know right?
> I'm such an idiot...screw me for still believing in honor.





lastchild said:


> So, let me get this straight... because the guy LOVES his pu$$y, you have issue with him?
> Really, are you that vapid?
> I hope the guys gets TONS of pu$$y...if I won 7 Tours you can bet your bottom dollar I would f*@k EVERYTHING in sight...twice!
> And dope myself to the gills.
> 
> This is the best you got...sad little man you are.





lastchild said:


> i don't have time for your petty morals.


but then again....



lastchild said:


> I know right?
> I'm such an idiot...screw me for still believing in honor.


You told us what Floyd is.

What's your classification?

ut: ut: :frown2: :frown2: :lol: :lol: :yikes: :yikes: ut: ut: :crazy: :crazy: :nonod: :nonod: :ciappa:



lastchild said:


> hey thanks for collecting all of my quotes...it's almost as if you're my apostle.





lastchild said:


> *i love it when you transcend self-parody*.



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## lastchild

blackjack said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but then again....
> 
> 
> 
> You told us what Floyd is.
> 
> What's your classification?
> 
> ut: ut: :frown2: :frown2: :lol: :lol: :yikes: :yikes: ut: ut: :crazy: :crazy: :nonod: :nonod: :ciappa:


hey thanks for collecting all of my quotes...it's almost as if you're my apostle.


----------



## CabDoctor

lastchild said:


> hey thanks for collecting all of my quotes...it's almost as if you're my apostle.



That has to be one of the best comebacks EVER. That was pretty clever. I'll go back to eating my popcorn now.


----------



## blackjack

CabDoctor said:


> That has to be one of the best comebacks EVER. That was pretty clever. I'll go back to eating my popcorn now.


You also offered up this "reasoning."



CabDoctor said:


> Lemond was also the first guy to use carbon bikes, clipless pedals, and aerobars(in regular competition use). So the question I have is, if he was always looking for an edge, wouldn't he use doping of some sort?





ultimobici said:


> Nope.
> 
> Carbon Bikes - 1983 Peugeot team - Vitus Carbon Robert Millar & friends (Lemond wouldn't be on carbon til 86)
> Clipless Pedals - 1985 - Bernard Hinault (Lemond was on clips & straps til 85)
> Aero Bars - 1989 - Lemond


You were one for three on the facts so maybe that's a little better than the logic.

You don't think you're the best arbiter of clever, do you?


----------



## CabDoctor

blackjack said:


> You don't think you're the best arbiter of clever, do you?


If jumping to conclusions was an Olympic even you'd have a gold medal my friend.


----------



## blackjack

CabDoctor said:


> If jumping to conclusions was an Olympic even you'd have a gold medal my friend.


Which conclusions? Always very vague....I never see any of my specific "conclusions" disputed.

I think I made two obvious ones. Armstrong is a fraud and LeMond was clean.

Very obvious unless one uses your type of "logical deductions."

The other conclusion about this lastchild person? That one's pretty obvious too and speaks for itself in my compilation of his "thoughts."


----------



## merckxman

Latest from New York Times (Sunday):
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/s...rts&adxnnlx=1286726522-mJEhnqJpFYORjMFJDYuk8w

This was interesting: "“Alberto does not know that the test was done,” Rodríguez added (his attorney on Tuesday), “and it was not legal to take his blood to test for this.” This in reference to the plasticizer test. 

The NYT continued with: "On Friday, Rodríguez said he had learned that it was indeed legal for antidoping scientists to conduct new tests on a cyclist’s urine and blood because the International Cycling Union adheres to World Anti-Doping Agency rules. Those rules do not require drug testers to tell athletes what they will be tested for.

Using new tests, often introduced without warning, is a common and effective tactic because athletes who dope are often a step ahead of the drug-testing system."


----------



## DMFT

blackjack said:


> Which conclusions? Always very vague....I never see any of my specific "conclusions" disputed.
> 
> I think I made two obvious ones. Armstrong is a fraud and LeMond was clean.
> 
> Very obvious unless one uses your type of "logical deductions."
> 
> The other conclusion about this lastchild person? That one's pretty obvious too and speaks for itself in my compilation of his "thoughts."



- It's also VERY obvious you are out of touch with reality Blackjack.

"If" Armstrong were a "fraud" he would have been: Sanctioned. Banned 2 years. Convicted by the UCI, WADA and/or CAS. NONE of the things have happened therefore he is not the drivel you claim he is above and endlessly on numerous threads.

Greg LeMond is "clean". This will never truthfully be known unless he himself were to come clean. Therefore you actually have made a legit statement for once and it happens to be one that can't be legally proven wrong. Great battle you've picked to fight. :thumbsup: 

Now, in the near future will Armstrong be "prooven" a fraud? Very good possibility....
A "doper". Maybe but I'll take the moral high-road and wait until there is absolute proof.

You should do the same sir with your Christian beliefs.... :wink:


----------



## blackjack

merckxman said:


> Latest from New York Times (Sunday):
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/s...rts&adxnnlx=1286726522-mJEhnqJpFYORjMFJDYuk8w
> 
> This was interesting: "“Alberto does not know that the test was done,” Rodríguez added (his attorney on Tuesday), “and it was not legal to take his blood to test for this.” This in reference to the plasticizer test.
> 
> The NYT continued with: "On Friday, Rodríguez said he had learned that it was indeed legal for antidoping scientists to conduct new tests on a cyclist’s urine and blood because the International Cycling Union adheres to World Anti-Doping Agency rules. Those rules do not require drug testers to tell athletes what they will be tested for.
> 
> Using new tests, often introduced without warning, is a common and effective tactic because athletes who dope are often a step ahead of the drug-testing system."


IOW, AC is guilty, but not(according to his defenders) beyond a reasonable doubt, in a court of law.

What jerks these people are. The whole "sport" needs to burned down and started over. People like AC are just as sick as anorexics and bodybuilders. One look at their doping schedules repulses a normal person. 

Put the blood in before competion, take it out after. Celebrate with a pot belge party. Very sick people.


----------



## NextTime

*Good NYT's article*

Here's a link to an interesting article in today's New York Times. (Hopefully I didn't screw this up.)

Of note is a comment made by Contador's attorney where he initially stated that the new test for plasticizers was illegal because Contador didn't know that such a test would be conducted. Subsequently, his attorney learned that in fact the test was legal under WADA rules.

Let's see how many other riders get positives for the test.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/sports/10cycling.html?scp=1&sq=contador&st=cse


----------



## terzo rene

There have always been theories about undetectable super drugs and buying influence as the explanation for LA's long run without an official positive test but the truth seems much more basic and commonplace. Most people can't excel at more than one thing and most are blissfully ignorant of their own limitations.

Deprived of LA's support structure these ex teammates don't seem to be smart enough to figure out even the most basic things about the system they are operating in and attempting to deceive, or to find the right people to keep them out of trouble.


----------



## RollingRook

merckxman said:


> Latest from New York Times (Sunday):
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/s...rts&adxnnlx=1286726522-mJEhnqJpFYORjMFJDYuk8w]





> “When there is a new test out there, *the athletes* find a way around it quite quickly,” he said.
> As an example of how advanced *athletes* could be when it came to their doping, Catlin referred to the 2006 case involving the Austrian Olympic biathlon and cross-country teams.


How far the things have gone! He casually uses “athletes” as a synonym for “crooks”.


----------



## blackjack

DMFT said:


> - It's also VERY obvious you are out of touch with *reality* Blackjack.
> 
> "If" Armstrong were a "fraud" he would have been: Sanctioned. Banned 2 years. Convicted by the UCI, WADA and/or CAS. NONE of the things have happened therefore he is not the drivel you claim he is above and endlessly on numerous threads.


OJ Simpson isn't a murderer either because he wasn't convicted? 




DMFT said:


> - Greg LeMond is "clean". *This will never truthfully be known unless he himself were to come clean.* Therefore you actually have made a legit statement for once and it happens to be one that can't be legally proven wrong. Great battle you've picked to fight. :thumbsup:


So, reality is determined soley by legal verdicts?



DMFT said:


> Now, in the near future will Armstrong be "prooven" a fraud? Very good possibility....
> A "doper". Maybe but I'll take the moral high-road and wait until there is absolute proof.
> 
> You should do the same sir with your Christian beliefs.... :wink:


We already know he's a fraud, it will be "proven" shortly.

Wait for absolute proof? It will absolutely never happen. 

Hey, thanks for telling me what I should do btw..

When Armstrong apologizes for his lying, cheating, stealing, etc...I'll forgive him.

What odds are you giving on LA apologizing?


----------



## blackjack

*How dare you!*



terzo rene said:


> *There have always been theories about undetectable super drugs and buying influence as the explanation for LA's long run without an official positive test but the truth seems much more basic and commonplace.* Most people can't excel at more than one thing and most are blissfully ignorant of their own limitations.
> 
> Deprived of LA's support structure these ex teammates don't seem to be smart enough to figure out even the most basic things about the system they are operating in and attempting to deceive, or to find the right people to keep them out of trouble.





DMFT said:


> - It's also VERY obvious you are out of touch with reality Blackjack.
> 
> *"If" Armstrong were a "fraud" he would have been: Sanctioned. Banned 2 years. Convicted by the UCI, WADA and/or CAS. NONE of the things have happened therefore he is not the drivel *you claim he is above and endlessly on numerous threads.



You're out of touch with reality too!

The truth is that Armstrong is as pure as the driven snow.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :wink:


----------



## ghost6

Abraham Lincoln


----------



## robdamanii

See, the problem here is that Blackjack is here to do nothing but argue, and trash anyone who has an opinion (which is all it is, an opinion) differing from his own. This is now and always has been his MO.

Either ignore him and he'll go away and quit trolling, or just give him enough rope and he'll hang himself (i.e. he will probably run afowl of the banhammer.)


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> See, the problem here is that Blackjack is here to do nothing but argue, and trash anyone who has an opinion (which is all it is, an opinion) differing from his own. This is now and always has been his MO.
> 
> Either ignore him and he'll go away and quit trolling, or just give him enough rope and he'll hang himself (i.e. he will probably run afowl of the banhammer.)


Again, no substance.

You have no problem with people with people like lastchild though, because he would use his fame as 7 time TdF champion to hit everything that moved. If doping could ensure his pickups he'd use everything he could get away with. You've no problem with that? You've no problem with people who are seeking to make blood doping safer?

Got it!

Regarding the banning stuff. You realize they want traffic to the site? I'm sorry if I upset the fans?? of American hero armstrong.


----------



## robdamanii

blackjack said:


> Again, no substance.
> 
> You have no problem with people with people like lastchild though, because he would use his fame as 7 time TdF champion to hit everything that moved. If doping could ensure his pickups he'd use everything he could get away with. You've no problem with that? You've no problem with people who are seeking to make blood doping safer?
> 
> Got it!
> 
> Regarding the banning stuff. You realize they want traffic to the site? I'm sorry if I upset the fans?? of American hero armstrong.


I have no problem with people using their fame to attract women. I have no problem with people cheating. I have issue when they get caught and lie about it. You play the game, you take your chances, and you accept the consequences if you get busted.

The problem with you, BJ, is that you're using your morality as the basis of your arguments. What you don't understand is that if someone doesn't share the same morality, your argument is a waste of breath. Really, your argumentative style is nothing more than troll bait. And frankly, I'm getting bloody sick of seeing you piss and moan on this board about how horrible pro cycling is, how it needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt, and thrashing people who disagree with you.

Stop acting like a spoiled 5 year old, and either accept that this is the nature of pro cycling right now, or zip your yap and go away. You're really not adding anything to the discussion here.

And furthermore, since you're hideously obsessed with Armstrong, yes, I believe he's dirty, no, I really don't give a crap because it happened so long ago, and no, I really don't give a crap if he ever apologizes because he was entertaining to watch both in and out of the sport. He owes nothing to you, me or anyone else. If you don't like that opinion, that's too bloody bad.


----------



## Perico

robdamanii said:


> See, the problem here is that Blackjack is here to do nothing but argue, and trash anyone who has an opinion (which is all it is, an opinion) differing from his own. This is now and always has been his MO.
> 
> Either ignore him and he'll go away and quit trolling, or just give him enough rope and he'll hang himself (i.e. he will probably run afowl of the banhammer.)


QFA (quoted for accuracy)


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> I have no problem with people using their fame to attract women. I have no problem with people cheating. I have issue when they get caught and lie about it. You play the game, you take your chances, and you accept the consequences if you get busted.
> 
> The problem with you, BJ, is that you're using your morality as the basis of your arguments. What you don't understand is that if someone doesn't share the same morality, your argument is a waste of breath. Really, your argumentative style is nothing more than troll bait. And frankly, I'm getting bloody sick of seeing you piss and moan on this board about how horrible pro cycling is, how it needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt, and thrashing people who disagree with you.
> 
> Stop acting like a spoiled 5 year old, and either accept that this is the nature of pro cycling right now, or zip your yap and go away. You're really not adding anything to the discussion here.
> 
> And furthermore, since you're hideously obsessed with Armstrong, yes, I believe he's dirty, no, I really don't give a crap because it happened so long ago, and no, I really don't give a crap if he ever apologizes because he was entertaining to watch both in and out of the sport. He owes nothing to you, me or anyone else. If you don't like that opinion, that's too bloody bad.


No judgement in that post.ut: 

So, unless someone falls into line with what your standards:yikes: are, you throw a hissy fit and demand they don't post?

You don't care about Armstrong? I do!

I love sentences that start out; "the problem with you."

I like how your standards are THE standards. I can see why I frustrate you. You're used to getting your own way and I'm going to keep participating on this forum as long as I'm able to or want to.

You see the Federal Investigation? Too friggin bad if YOU don't like it. You should tell Novitsky to get over it.:lol: 

Are you one of these people who also tells people what "they NEED to do?":ciappa:


----------



## robdamanii

blackjack said:


> No judgement in that post.ut:
> 
> So, unless someone falls into line with what your standards:yikes: are, you throw a hissy fit and demand they don't post?
> 
> You don't care about Armstrong? I do!
> 
> I love sentences that start out; "the problem with you."
> 
> I like how your standards are THE standards. I can see why I frustrate you. You're used to getting your own way and I'm going to keep participating on this forum as long as I'm able to or want to.
> 
> You see the Federal Investigation? Too friggin bad if YOU don't like it. You should tell Novitsky to get over it.:lol:
> 
> Are you one of these people who also tells people what "they NEED to do?":ciappa:


Frankly, I really don't care about the Novitsky investigation. It'll show what we all know already. And how does that impact your life or mine? Newsflash, it doesn't. If you think it does, you're beyond hopeless.

As for my standards being THE standards, I'm only playing by the rules you set up, kiddo. I'm only pointing out that your standards make you look like an idiot in front of the entirety of the internet. 

And again, since you're illiterate: I said "the problem here", not "the problem with you." Shouldn't you be morally obligated to being correct?


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> Frankly, I really don't care about the Novitsky investigation. It'll show what we all know already. And how does that impact your life or mine? Newsflash, it doesn't. If you think it does, you're beyond hopeless.
> 
> As for my standards being THE standards, I'm only playing by the rules you set up, kiddo. I'm only pointing out that your standards make you look like an idiot in front of the entirety of the internet.
> 
> And again, since you're illiterate: I said "the problem here", not "the problem with you." Shouldn't you be morally obligated to being correct?


Dude, do believe calling someone an illiterate is a personal attack?



robdamanii said:


> First, good joke, I chuckled.
> 
> Second, Andy needed to get the sand out of his vagina, that's all.


Do you think women get YOUR jokes or there are just no women on these forums?

You're very sensitive to ahh, women's issues, btw.


----------



## robdamanii

blackjack said:


> Dude, do believe calling someone an illiterate is a personal attack?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think women get YOUR jokes or there are just no women on these forums?
> 
> You're very sensitive to ahh, women's issues, btw.


Only speaking the truth. You can't quote ANYTHING right.


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> Only speaking the truth. You can't quote ANYTHING right.


*Regarding Contador's positive test.*




robdamanii said:


> Not sure if I'm disappointed or not. More likely, just sick of him, and enjoying the news right now.


Enjoying the news of someone's downfall?

That's a good definition for "hater," isn't it?:crazy: :nono:


----------



## robdamanii

blackjack said:


> *Regarding Contador's positive test.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoying the news of someone's downfall?
> 
> That's a good definition for "hater," isn't it?:crazy: :nono:


You never gloat when you're right? Wait that's not Christian of you is it?


----------



## blackjack

robdamanii said:


> You never gloat when you're right? Wait that's not Christian of you is it?


One doesn't have to be a Christian to realize it's not good to get off on someone's misery.

You chill with lostchild.....:idea:


----------

