# Contador - 2 Year Ban



## Lick Skillet (Aug 21, 2011)

CAS Sanction Contador With Two Year Ban In Clenbuterol Case | Cyclingnews.com

So Lance skates again and Contador is busted..... I guess pistol boy should have become better friends with Lance to benefit from his connections.


----------



## pianopiano (Jun 4, 2005)

Lick Skillet said:


> CAS Sanction Contador With Two Year Ban In Clenbuterol Case | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> So Lance skates again and Contador is busted..... I guess pistol boy should have become better friends with Lance to benefit from his connections.


Yeah, I guess that there's only one sherrif in town.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

Very surprised, but think the ban was deserved.

I think the backdating of bans is ridiculous, though. He'll be eligible to race in six months.

Not sure why you conflated the investigation by the US Federal Government of Lance with Contador, though. Bizarre.


----------



## Gatorback (Jul 11, 2009)

jorgy said:


> I think the backdating of bans is ridiculous, though. He'll be eligible to race in six months.
> 
> .


They have to figure out a way to speed up the judicial process. Letting someone race for so long, and win the Giro, takes away from cycling big time. 

There isn't much you can do about Schleck becoming an after the fact winner of the 2010 Tour, but Scarponi as an after the fact winner of the 2011 Giro should never happen.

Maybe for a positive test, they should have an expedited process to confirm the testing was accurate and require the rider to be suspended if they are pursuing the "tainted food so I didn't intend anything" type of defense. If a rider is suspended for reasons other than a positive test, which is kind of like getting caught rend handed, maybe a different rule should apply to ensure an innocent rider is not held out of competition.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

Lick Skillet said:


> CAS Sanction Contador With Two Year Ban In Clenbuterol Case | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> So Lance skates again and Contador is busted..... I guess pistol boy should have become better friends with Lance to benefit from his connections.


Accomplishment unlocked: lose two GT titles in one ruling.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

2 years makes me think that the tainted meat defence did not impress CAS much.
The Spanish meat producing farmers must be happy with this verdict.

If I understand the ruling correctly CAS gives him 2 years, not 1, even as they put other foods contamination, not the beef or infusion, as the most probable reason for the positive. Tough sentence.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

he's only banned until august so he can go and win the Vuelta again.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

jorgy said:


> Very surprised, but think the ban was deserved.
> 
> I think the backdating of bans is ridiculous, though. He'll be eligible to race in six months.
> 
> Not sure why you conflated the investigation by the US Federal Government of Lance with Contador, though. Bizarre.


Agree fully on all accounts. But seriously just call it a six month rest.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Schleck much be sh*ting a brick right now. But it must feel like a slap in the face.. 

This should have been decided faster.. I agree that taking 18 months is way too long. How many race results need to be altered now!?


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Pleasantly surprised by this. He should be out of competition longer than 6 months, and he should have been suspended long, long ago, but at least the right decision was rendered. Eventually.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

kbwh said:


> 2 years makes me think that the tainted meat defence did not impress CAS much.
> The Spanish meat producing farmers must be happy with this verdict.


Apparently not:



> The Panel found that there were no established facts that would elevate the possibility of meat contamination to an event that could have occurred on a balance of probabilities. Unlike certain other countries, notably outside Europe, Spain is not known to have a contamination problem with clenbuterol in meat. Furthermore, no other cases of athletes having tested positive to clenbuterol allegedly in connection with the consumption of Spanish meat are known.


Contador: CAS To Rule On 2.4 Million Euro Fine Later | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Yes, I saw that and embellished my previous post.



> "The Panel concluded that both the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion scenario were, in theory, possible explanations for the adverse analytical findings, but were however equally unlikely. In the Panel’s opinion, on the basis of the evidence adduced, the presence of clenbuterol was more likely caused by the ingestion of a contaminated food supplement."


To give him two years on this basis they must mean he knew he was taking a contaminated food supplement?


----------



## Timbuctoo (Apr 23, 2009)

Weren't other cyclists aquited for the same thing? He's not my favourite cyclists but suspended or not it's not good for cycling. I just wonder why someone would want to take such a small amount of a muscle building drug which would increase muscle mass. How would this help his climbing, wrong drud I would think. I was looking forward to a Cadel Vs Contador battle this year, oh well not to be. Poor Andy Schleck well, not the best way to be crowned GT winner. I just think the whole thing sucks and I'm feeling a little indifferent about it.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Justice is served. But again, decision took way to long and really only a 6 month ban. Loses his Giro title too.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

My understanding of the rule is that Clenbuterol is a zero-tolerance substance and that the riders have ultimate responsibility for what goes into their bodies. Why are any athletes getting off with a contaminated food defense? Why is that defense even heard by CAS? 

6 months sounds light on the surface but to keep a sure thing for the TdF win out of the TdF is still pretty stiff punishment, especially on a charge that so many others have walked out of.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

davidka said:


> My understanding of the rule is that Clenbuterol is a zero-tolerance substance and that the riders have ultimate responsibility for what goes into their bodies. Why are any athletes getting off with a contaminated food defense? Why is that defense even heard by CAS?
> 
> 6 months sounds light on the surface but to keep a sure thing for the TdF win out of the TdF is still pretty stiff punishment, especially on a charge that so many others have walked out of.


how many have walked out of it in a country not known to have problems with clenbuterol in the cattle? The cases I can remember where people walked are from mexico and china.


----------



## matchmaker (Aug 15, 2009)

Well, it's a hard sentence because it comes after such a long time of non-decision, but I think that it is the correct one.

I think Contador is a great rider. He always attacks and makes watching the Giro or the Tour fun, but if he doped than this is a deserved punishment.

Losing the 2010 TdF is also the right decision as even if he hadn't doped Contador got it mainly by taking profit from the chaingate incident. Sleck is really a deserved winner, it's a shame he should get it like this.

Conti will also miss the Tour this year. I wonder what Riis is gonna do now?


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

CAS was having to deal with a lot of probabilities. What is the probability that anyone would ingest clenbuteral from eating meat in Spain? What is the probability of the same thing in Asia? The probability in Spain is exceedingly low, the probability in much of Asia is fairly high. WADA have now warned athletes about countries with highly suspect food (for clenbuteral and other stuff) and once warned the athlete is again 100% responsible.


----------



## biobanker (Jun 11, 2009)

I dont get the math behind him being back racing in August.

That may be 2 years from the date of his test, but man, he has been racing like crazy and getting paid since then.

A ban is a ban. Not getting paid is part of it, but being out of competition is the bigger part. 

Perhaps we need another classification within the peloton? We can have the GC and the DC (Doping Class) where those who are working off their "bans" can stay fresh racing? 

Do they continue to test the dopers?

I wonder which class wins overall?


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

*Good ruling*

Fair sentence. I like the fact that it is still open to debate - maybe a transfusion, maybe bad meat. Regardless, Contador is responsible


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

*Andy Schleck - classy*

“I trust that the CAS judges took all things into consideration after reading a 4,000 page file. If now I am declared overall winner of the 2010 Tour de France it will not make me happy. I battled with Contador in that race and I lost. My goal is to win the Tour de France in a sportive way, being the best of all competitors, not in court. If I succeed this year, I will consider it as my first Tour victory.”


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

If we are looking at who to blame for the long period of delay 

The UCI tried to hide the positive, instructed to use the beef excuse, and delayed making the official notification until their coverup attempt was exposed. They then dragged their feet on if they were going to appeal to CAS alone or team with WADA. Luckily WADA got wise to their BS and filed on their own

The RFEC ignored the rules and the evidence and tried to let their favorite boy off. If they had done the right thing this would not have taken as long

Contador's legal team used the questionable tactic of flooding CAS with worthless garbage when the appeal was filed. This shocked WADA and forced the multiple delays in the process. 

In the end the sport is damaged but justice is done


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> Schleck much be sh*ting a brick right now. But it must feel like a slap in the face..
> 
> This should have been decided faster.. I agree that taking 18 months is way too long. How many race results need to be altered now!?


Probably not, as in most of these cases they're probably more inclined to the "there but for the grace of god go I" frame of mind.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Chainstay said:


> “I trust that the CAS judges took all things into consideration after reading a 4,000 page file. If now I am declared overall winner of the 2010 Tour de France it will not make me happy. I battled with Contador in that race and I lost. My goal is to win the Tour de France in a sportive way, being the best of all competitors, not in court. If I succeed this year, I will consider it as my first Tour victory.”


IOW, I'm not about to **** on the guy because it could have just as easily been me. Same old story these guys rarely give any indication they feel cheated because they weren't.


----------



## CheapTrek (Dec 23, 2011)

Chainstay said:


> “I trust that the CAS judges took all things into consideration after reading a 4,000 page file. If now I am declared overall winner of the 2010 Tour de France it will not make me happy. I battled with Contador in that race and I lost. My goal is to win the Tour de France in a sportive way, being the best of all competitors, not in court. If I succeed this year, I will consider it as my first Tour victory.”


Wow! A level of proper sportsmanship and mature perspective rarely seen in the world of professional athletes.


----------



## PaxRomana (Jan 16, 2012)

CheapTrek said:


> Wow! A level of proper sportsmanship and mature perspective rarely seen in the world of professional athletes.


Not really. Andy knows he did the same thing as Contador, just didn't get caught. 

A clean rider would be furious at busting his a$$ to have his efforts go to naught as a cheater wins it.


----------



## CheapTrek (Dec 23, 2011)

PaxRomana said:


> Not really. Andy knows he did the same thing as Contador, just didn't get caught.
> 
> A clean rider would be furious at busting his a$$ to have his efforts go to naught as a cheater wins it.


Isn't this a bit of conjecture on your part? You can have your opinion on it (and may be right) but without substantiation, it remains just that. Your opinion.


----------



## Cpk (Aug 1, 2009)

CheapTrek said:


> Wow! A level of proper sportsmanship and mature perspective rarely seen in the world of professional athletes.


Yep, very mature response period much less for someone 26. I probably would have had a much more sarcastic/smarmy response if I was in that position at 26. Hope he does it this year. And fingerbang got a self-inflicted fingerbang..oops.


----------



## wyomingclimber (Feb 26, 2004)

I wonder if Schleck would have said the same thing if they discovered a 50 watt motor in Contador's frame?

Most pro athletes I know would slit their own mothers' throats for a win at some regional race that no one's ever heard of. Nice to see that the top of the sport has adopted the "I'm okay, you're okay" attitude of peewee soccer.


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> If we are looking at who to blame for the long period of delay
> 
> The UCI tried to hide the positive, instructed to use the beef excuse, and delayed making the official notification until their coverup attempt was exposed. They then dragged their feet on if they were going to appeal to CAS alone or team with WADA. Luckily WADA got wise to their BS and filed on their own
> 
> ...


Exactly.... it was the UCI's fault. I wonder if they charged Conti the same $ as they did LA? Are all of the sports governing bodies full of sh** or just the ones that help to support your argument? I'm sure your facts are straight though as you had the entire investigation bugged.


----------



## Jett (Mar 21, 2004)

Gatorback said:


> They have to figure out a way to speed up the judicial process. Letting someone race for so long, and win the Giro, takes away from cycling big time.
> 
> There isn't much you can do about Schleck becoming an after the fact winner of the 2010 Tour, but Scarponi as an after the fact winner of the 2011 Giro should never happen.
> 
> Maybe for a positive test, they should have an expedited process to confirm the testing was accurate and require the rider to be suspended if they are pursuing the "tainted food so I didn't intend anything" type of defense. If a rider is suspended for reasons other than a positive test, which is kind of like getting caught rend handed, maybe a different rule should apply to ensure an innocent rider is not held out of competition.


The issue here wasn't about the test. No one is arguing that that test produced a false postive and Contador didn't have any clenbuterol in his system. Contador's defense was he tested positive because he ate contaminated meat. The delay was strickly procedural and not technical.


----------



## Jett (Mar 21, 2004)

Timbuctoo said:


> Weren't other cyclists aquited for the same thing? He's not my favourite cyclists but suspended or not it's not good for cycling. I just wonder why someone would want to take such a small amount of a muscle building drug which would increase muscle mass. How would this help his climbing, wrong drud I would think. I was looking forward to a Cadel Vs Contador battle this year, oh well not to be. Poor Andy Schleck well, not the best way to be crowned GT winner. I just think the whole thing sucks and I'm feeling a little indifferent about it.


There was more to Contador case then just the clenbuterol. They also found plasticizers, 
plastic residues from the plastic bags used to blood transfusion, in his system. The plasticizers suggest that Contador was also blood doping. The small amount of clenbuterol was most likely left over from the blood drawn earlier for the transfusion. The reason the courts only dealt with just the clenbuterol, and not the plasticizer, was that the test for the plasticizer has been official approved yet.

Also, clenbuterol not only helps build muscle, but it increase weight loss. As a climber coming off of the off season, Contador most likey wanted drop a few pounds quickly and build some lean muscle in the process and clenbuterol would be help in that. His big mistake was not waiting until the drug was full flushed from his system before he started to drawing blood for storage.


----------



## bike981 (Sep 14, 2010)

Cpk said:


> Yep, very mature response period much less for someone 26. I probably would have had a much more sarcastic/smarmy response if I was in that position at 26. Hope he does it this year. And fingerbang got a self-inflicted fingerbang..oops.


There's little benefit and lots of potential backlash in giving a sarcastic/smarmy response, at least in public. He surely recognized that this outcome could be coming, and probably was coached on the best way to respond in public. My guess is that Schleck has a different take if you know him well and ask him in private.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

Cpk said:


> Yep, very mature response period much less for someone 26. I probably would have had a much more sarcastic/smarmy response if I was in that position at 26. Hope he does it this year. And fingerbang got a self-inflicted fingerbang..oops.


Credit to Andy Schleck for his classy reply, but to be fair he (and everybody else) had more than plenty of time to think things through ....


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

Jett said:


> There was more to Contador case then just the clenbuterol. They also found plasticizers,
> plastic residues from the plastic bags used to blood transfusion, in his system. The plasticizers suggest that Contador was also blood doping. The small amount of clenbuterol was most likely left over from the blood drawn earlier for the transfusion. The reason the courts only dealt with just the clenbuterol, and not the plasticizer, was that the test for the plasticizer has been official approved yet.
> 
> Also, clenbuterol not only helps build muscle, but it increase weight loss. As a climber coming off of the off season, Contador most likey wanted drop a few pounds quickly and build some lean muscle in the process and clenbuterol would be help in that. His big mistake was not waiting until the drug was full flushed from his system before he started to drawing blood for storage.


that's not accurate - the CAS ruling contains a long section regarding the probability of the transfusion scenario, including the plasticizer results. Since he was not being charged with performing a blood transfusion, this was admissible as secondary evidence to the question of what scenario was most likely to have caused the positive clen result. The transfusion scenario was seen as unlikely, though that conclusion depends on which expert's testimony is believed.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Lick Skillet said:


> CAS Sanction Contador With Two Year Ban In Clenbuterol Case | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> So Lance skates again and Contador is busted..... I guess pistol boy should have become better friends with Lance to benefit from his connections.


will Contador retire as he promised? He said if he is given any suspension he will retire.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

He did so. But he also pulled it. A long time ago.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

PaxRomana said:


> Not really. Andy knows he did the same thing as Contador, just didn't get caught.
> 
> A clean rider would be furious at busting his a$$ to have his efforts go to naught as a cheater wins it.


Gotta agree here. Which Schleck was proven to have sent money to Dr. Fuentes? I think it was Frank but what Frank does, Andy does... He said he thought it was for training plans... yes, you pay thousands of euros to a gynecologists for training plans.  Nothing proves Andy is/was doping but 1+1 usually =2. He's not mad because he knows he's not any cleaner than Alberto was IMO. The omerta still lives, shut up, just say some general comment when asked about another rider doping...

So, we can add to the illustrous list of big names that have tested positive right after they left the Johan/Lance teams...

About the plasticizers, weren't these just rumors?

I think the decision is pretty fair, accidentally or not, there was dope in Alberto's system, he deserves a ban... Sure it took way too long, it showed the UCI are still corrupt, that spanish feds still wont punish their athletes, but I still see Alberto as the 2010 Tour and 2011 Giro winner though. Andy a Tour winner? Please! Scarponi a Giro winner? Come on, the guy worked with Fuentes, got popped, came back then is suddenly much better...


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I'm always glad to see an institution actually apply it's rules, even to a star athlete. That's a good thing. A few more of those and the culture might actually start to change.

I agree that AS' mild reply comes off as sounding like he's glad his results didn't come up positive, too.


----------



## Jett (Mar 21, 2004)

stevesbike said:


> that's not accurate - the CAS ruling contains a long section regarding the probability of the transfusion scenario, including the plasticizer results. Since he was not being charged with performing a blood transfusion, this was admissible as secondary evidence to the question of what scenario was most likely to have caused the positive clen result. The transfusion scenario was seen as unlikely, though that conclusion depends on which expert's testimony is believed.


Thanks for the update. I guess I was misinformed.


----------



## JohnnyG (Nov 22, 2011)

Dan Gerous said:


> Gotta agree here. Which Schleck was proven to have sent money to Dr. Fuentes? I think it was Frank but what Frank does, Andy does... He said he thought it was for training plans... yes, you pay thousands of euros to a gynecologists for training plans.  Nothing proves Andy is/was doping but 1+1 usually =2. He's not mad because he knows he's not any cleaner than Alberto was IMO. The omerta still lives, shut up, just say some general comment when asked about another rider doping...
> 
> So, we can add to the illustrous list of big names that have tested positive right after they left the Johan/Lance teams...
> 
> ...


I agree 100% Well put !!! :thumbsup:


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

the plasticizers were not a rumor. The report is available on CAS's website - the plasticizer levels were extremely high, 'consistent with a transfusion, and were among the highest levels recorded at the lab. Ashenden also reported Contador's blood values were not normal.


----------



## Rokh On (Oct 30, 2011)

SicBith said:


> Exactly.... it was the UCI's fault. I wonder if they charged Conti the same $ as they did LA? Are all of the sports governing bodies full of sh** or just the ones that help to support your argument? I'm sure your facts are straight though as you had the entire investigation bugged.


While you may or may not agree with everything he has to say the bottom line is politics were huge in this outcome. Was justice really served? Really? If this truely was a non political, justice serving outcome, should it have taken 2 yrs?

What about his UCI comments? Everyone has been telling me it's ZERO TOLERANCE. Great, then why did the UCI even open the door? They issued the statement about levels not the WADA. Why would the UCI say anything? 

What about the lastest delay? Just my worthless perception but it looks to me like all the parties got together and came up with the best acceptable outcome to appease everyone involved. 

Justice or Politics? I guess we all have our own opinions.


----------



## Kai Winters (Aug 23, 2009)

I'm shocked, Shocked I say ! ! !
I really expected Contador to be cleared. I figured that the powers that be were just waiting for the drama to die down and fade away then clear him blaming some unknown cattle rancher for juicing his beef...hehehe...juicing his beef...hehehe.

Contador is a "dirty doper" and deserves the penalty passed down. If he wants to retire I say we can't miss you if you're not gone...

Whether Chance Legstrong is also a dirty doper or not is certainly up for years of discussion BUT there seems to be no evidence to support his alleged doping therefore he is not a dirty doper.

Justice has been served.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

Kai Winters said:


> I'm shocked, Shocked I say ! ! !
> I really expected Contador to be cleared. I figured that the powers that be were just waiting for the drama to die down and fade away then clear him blaming some unknown cattle rancher for juicing his beef...hehehe...juicing his beef...hehehe.
> 
> Contador is a "dirty doper" and deserves the penalty passed down. If he wants to retire I say we can't miss you if you're not gone...
> ...


actually the report says the most plausible cause of the positive was unintentional ingestion of an over-the-counter supplement. Not really the stuff of a 'dirty doper'


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

On Contador's side of things, I feel bad about the Giro title being stripped from him. He won that thing under scrutiny, but it was a given risk he took. The fact his race wins over the past season got stripped seems fair enough to keep backdated arrangement. The whole case was really iffy. Quite frankly no one could prove anything about Contador's intent either way, so on the basis of tolerance I expected something to be done. 

Am a bit bitter that LA was let off the hook when there was arguably more at stake. Meh. 

Noted the Schleck response and comments on VN seem to think he's full of it. I mean if I were him, yeah I'd be mad, but fact of the matter is I'd much prefer winning knowing I whooped the **** out of the opponent during the actual race. So yeah, I'd believe Andy, and give him credit for his respect.


----------



## trobriand (Apr 2, 2009)

What a farce. I was for him being sanctioned, but drawing this out so much was really unfair to Contador and every 2nd place finisher since Aug. 2010.


----------



## Chainstay (Mar 13, 2004)

Not really so unfair considering AC's lawyers, with their mountains of documents and phony defence, were a big part of the reason this took so long.

I hope his legal bills are significant.

The money the CAS, UCI and WADA wasted on this case could have gone to improved testing.


----------



## Gatorback (Jul 11, 2009)

Jett said:


> The issue here wasn't about the test. No one is arguing that that test produced a false postive and Contador didn't have any clenbuterol in his system. Contador's defense was he tested positive because he ate contaminated meat. The delay was strickly procedural and not technical.


Then he should not have been racing for the last 18 months, it is as simple as that. The numerous procedural delays should not be allowed--this is not just about Contador. He has been racing for a year and a half and affecting many other cyclists during that time. 

Justice delayed often means justice denied. And in this case that is true for many other cyclists. How many podiums has Contador had in that 18 months? Who are the riders denied podium spots? And how might those podium spots have affected their careers and contracts? It is a friggin' mess and a joke. 

If you have a true positive, and can't reasonably dispute it, you should not race unless and until you demonstrate innocence through a truly neutral judicial process. This whole idea of letting the home country decide the fate of one of its own international riders seems a little suspect to me. For a domestic rider, having the home country decide makes perfect sense. For a Pro Tour international rider? No way.


----------



## BGEPizza (Sep 28, 2009)

Salsa_Lover said:


> he's only banned until august so he can go and win the Vuelta again.


Can he ride the Vuelta if his team has no Pro license? Sounds like that may be a possibility.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

BGEPizza said:


> Can he ride the Vuelta if his team has no Pro license? Sounds like that may be a possibility.


Being Spanish, I'm sure Saxo would be given a wildcard by the Vuelta organizers...


----------



## Ridin'Sorra (Sep 7, 2004)

Ventruck said:


> On Contador's side of things, I feel bad about the Giro title being stripped from him. He won that thing under scrutiny, but it was a given risk he took.


Yup... he most probably raced that one clean (or as clean as grand tour cyclists are these days) and he won't be properly recognized for the copious amounts of whoop-arse he gave to the entire field in the Giro 2011.

If he doped, he has the ban deserved. I'm happy that a doper got caught.

However, it really pisses me off how the whole things was handled by the CAS, the UCI, the Spanish Federation, etc. They're all a joke.

I guess only solution would be to ban a rider indefinitely as soon as something as a false positive comes up and not release him for racing and not start a proper off time until the veredict is reached. In that way, everybody would hurry up to get things straight.

Kind of "you're guilty and treated as such until proved otherwise".

I'm aware that it may affect to riders that are probably clean and they rather admit doping instead of wasting time in arbritation.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*personally, it should be*

a two year ban from your last race. He decided to continue racing while the hearing proceeded

that is like a criminal, who was out on bail getting his sentence commuted for 'time served' while the lengthy trial went on


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Not happy:
www.albertocontadornotebook.info - Alberto Contador Fans Notebook


----------



## bnoojin (Mar 24, 2002)

*ludicrous,*

how long this dragged on. I'm pleased they finally sanctioned him but the commuted sentence and voided results are ridiculous.
void his 2010 Tour results since he tested positive in that race, but since the "rules" allowed him to continue racing, the other results should stand. It's too frustrating and insulting to the other riders he competed against. I have to agree with Giro organizers-he didn't test positive in their race and was allowed by governing body to compete at that time-why should the Giro be smeared by this retroactive voiding?
Just start his 2 year sentence yesterday. It's not like they're gonna go back and make reparations to all the riders that got shafted by the now voided results. What a farce. AC got off easy, he'll be back in August... pfffft.


----------



## TerminatorX91 (Mar 27, 2011)

biobanker said:


> I dont get the math behind him being back racing in August.
> 
> That may be 2 years from the date of his test, but man, he has been racing like crazy and getting paid since then.
> 
> ...



I agree. If he can do the 2012 Vuelta then, it seems to me, calling it a 2 year ban is absurd.


----------



## fatcitywicked (Oct 19, 2004)

I don't know all the tecnical aspects of the ruling, but according to cyclingnews, CAS could not say with certainty that Contador had clenbuterol in his system from blood doping. Out of all the possible sources of clenbuterol the highest probability was from contaminated supplements he took on a regular basis, with blood doping and tainted meat being as likely or unlikely the source of clenbuterol.
Clenbuterol is a banned substance, there is no threshold, and without an adequate explanation a 2 year ban is appropriate. Since the CAS could not determine whether he took clenbuterol with the expressed purpose of doping and improving his performance, in my eyes Contador is only guilty of being careless with what he was ingesting.


----------



## FlandersFields (Jul 16, 2010)

One name. Riis.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Well. Contador was with Martinelli (Astana) at the time of the positive test.


----------



## FlandersFields (Jul 16, 2010)

Ok. Fail. Needed to get my facts straight. But I somehow consider Riis, Bruyneel and Lefevre the axe of evil.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Oh, that can of DS worms...
Lefevre was not so much an "EPO" DS, as long as there was Mapei at least. Martinelli was Pantani's DS at Mercatone Uno. Riis had Basso and earlier Hamilton, yeah, and Bruyneel...
Not many narrow path DSes around. Most of them play by the rules they have behind the omerta, sadly.


----------



## AJL (Jul 9, 2009)

FlandersFields said:


> But I somehow consider Riis, Bruyneel and Lefevre the _axis_ of evil.


FIFY  Or maybe you were right the first time...


----------



## Frankinnj (Feb 8, 2009)

Lick Skillet said:


> CAS Sanction Contador With Two Year Ban In Clenbuterol Case | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> So Lance skates again and Contador is busted..... I guess pistol boy should have become better friends with Lance to benefit from his connections.


Seriously? One tested positive, the other never did.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Frankinnj said:


> Seriously? One tested positive, the other never did.


Seriously? 

Start here


> Armstrong's testosterone-epitestosterone ratio was reported to be higher than normal on three occasions between 1993 and 1996........reluctance from USOC officials to sanction athletes using performance-enhancing drugs


Sports Illustrated*reports*new information on Lance Armstrong - More Sports - SI.com

Then here


> "Corticoid traces in tests on Lance Armstrong after Stage 1"


www.cyclingnews.presents ...



> "So there is no doubt in my mind he (Lance Armstrong) took EPO during the '99 Tour."


Michael Ashenden | NY Velocity - New York bike racing culture, news and events

Tour de Suisse
Report: Swiss Lab chief told feds Lance Armstrong test 'consistent with EPO use' - ESPN


----------



## Veloflash (Apr 21, 2002)

Frankinnj said:


> Seriously? One tested positive, the other never did.


The one that tested positive has no known financial leverage over the sports peak bodies that can decide whether an athlete is to be tested (World Triathlon Corp.) or can reject/hide lab positives. (UCI up to and including 2004 before WADA accountability).

The one that never did (test positive) was tested positive on two occasions (1999 & 2001)and those results were not disclosed as positives. If the upcoming USADA investigation can set aside the statute of limitations these results, in retrospect, can become quantitative analysis positives to support non quantitive analysis positives (direct eye witness evidence, circumstantial evidence, etc.)


----------



## Axe (Sep 21, 2004)

:thumbsup:

Could not happen to a better man.


----------



## Axe (Sep 21, 2004)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Seriously?


Seriously.

Absolutely seriously.

Long list of junk means exactly nothing.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Axe said:


> Seriously.
> 
> Absolutely seriously.
> 
> Long list of junk means exactly nothing.


Good thing USADA does not share your view


----------



## Soundtallica (Sep 24, 2011)

Screw Contador. I never liked him even before the Armstrong conflict. He always seemed like an arrogant piece of crap who only cares about himself. In interviews, he shows no respect or thanks for his rivals and team, respectively. I always thought that there was no way he could climb like that without aid (he looks stronger and more robotic than Armstrong), and lo and behold I'm right. Words cannot describe how OVERJOYED I am that ContaDORK's doping, egotistical, cheating ass got caught and that he's been suspended.

Now Andy Schleck and Cadel, those are classy non dopers who are the bright spots for the sport. Despite their obvious ability to keep up with dopers like ContaDORK, they don't look superhuman all the time. I look forward to an epic battle between them this year.


----------



## Veloflash (Apr 21, 2002)

Soundtallica said:


> Screw Contador. I never liked him even before the Armstrong conflict. He always seemed like an arrogant piece of crap who only cares about himself. In interviews, he shows no respect or thanks for his rivals and team, respectively. I always thought that there was no way he could climb like that without aid (he looks stronger and more robotic than Armstrong), and lo and behold I'm right. Words cannot describe how OVERJOYED I am that ContaDORK's doping, egotistical, cheating ass got caught and that he's been suspended.
> 
> Now Andy Schleck and Cadel, those are classy non dopers who are the bright spots for the sport. Despite their obvious ability to keep up with dopers like ContaDORK, they don't look superhuman all the time. I look forward to an epic battle between them this year.


So you believe Contador has a Type A personality?

Arrogant, self interested, disrespectful, ungracious, uncaring etc. 

Sounds very similar character traits to a bike racer from Plano, Texas who you must similarly abhor.


----------



## Soundtallica (Sep 24, 2011)

Veloflash said:


> So you believe Contador has a Type A personality?
> 
> Arrogant, self interested, disrespectful, ungracious, uncaring etc.
> 
> Sounds very similar character traits to a bike racer from Plano, Texas who you must similarly abhor.


Lance isn't my favorite cyclist, that's a toss-up between Cancellara, Schleck, and Cadel. And while he does show those same traits, he shows them to a much lesser degree than ContaDORK. The only match for him in terms of snobbishness is Cavendish. Also Lance has done far more than ContaDORK outside of cycling, such as popularizing cycling, supporting cancer research, etc.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Veloflash said:


> So you believe Contador has a Type A personality?


I won't think there are many athletes who aren't Type A personalities.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Soundtallica said:


> Lance isn't my favorite cyclist, that's a toss-up between Cancellara, Schleck, and Cadel. And while he does show those same traits, he shows them to a much lesser degree than ContaDORK. The only match for him in terms of snobbishness is Cavendish. Also Lance has done far more than ContaDORK outside of cycling, such as popularizing cycling, supporting cancer research, etc.


Lance only made cycling popular-ish in the US. Given the percentage of Europeans in the peloton, I'd say it's already plenty popular there.

Contadork? Seriously? That kind of jab would suggest someone who reads and you can see their lips moving.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Soundtallica said:


> Screw Contador. I never liked him even before the Armstrong conflict. He always seemed like an arrogant piece of crap who only cares about himself. In interviews, he shows no respect or thanks for his rivals and team, respectively. I always thought that there was no way he could climb like that without aid (he looks stronger and more robotic than Armstrong), and lo and behold I'm right. Words cannot describe how OVERJOYED I am that ContaDORK's doping, egotistical, cheating ass got caught and that he's been suspended.
> 
> Now Andy Schleck and Cadel, those are classy non dopers who are the bright spots for the sport. Despite their obvious ability to keep up with dopers like ContaDORK, they don't look superhuman all the time. I look forward to an epic battle between them this year.


Nice. Do you have a link for these interviews? Are you a native Spanish speaker?

I have several friends who worked closely with Contador for years. They have always said he was thoughtful, humble, and classy. I do not agree with AC's silly attempt to get out of his positive but I doubt he would have fought so hard if he was not given clear indication from the UCI that it would be dropped. 

Does it bother you that Frank Schelck worked with Fuentes? Cadel worked with Ferrari? That Cadel is a complete weirdo?


----------



## nedbraden (Jun 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Good thing USADA does not share your view


WADA also has info you are not privy too. You, on the other hand, have info that does not include any actual positive results.

(FYI- I do think Armstrong doped, I just don't believe in stating things that are actually false)


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Soundtallica said:


> Lance isn't my favorite cyclist, that's a toss-up between Cancellara, Schleck, and Cadel. And while he does show those same traits, he shows them to a much lesser degree than ContaDORK. The only match for him in terms of snobbishness is Cavendish. Also Lance has done far more than ContaDORK outside of cycling, such as popularizing cycling, *supporting cancer research*, etc.


Hahaha, good one. :thumbsup:

How much did Livestrong give to Cancer Research last year? 
Lance Armstrong and Livestrong | Lance Armstrong | OutsideOnline.com

$0


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Jesus Christ on a bike. Here we go again with the Lance hunters barging in on the discussion.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

robdamanii said:


> Jesus Christ on a bike. Here we go again with the Lance hunters barging in on the discussion.


You should write about that in your next Livestrong.com story :thumbsup:

Have to agree with you though, it seems like eventually every thread has some troll babbling about "cancer research" and "done a lot of good"


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You should write about that in your next Livestrong.com story :thumbsup:
> 
> Have to agree with you though, it seems like eventually every thread has some troll babbling about "cancer research" and "done a lot of good"


How 'bout you get his posts deleted (again).  I'm surprised you didn't have half of us banned yet.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

spade2you said:


> How 'bout you get his posts deleted (again).  I'm surprised you didn't have half of us banned yet.


Well, I suppose I can't blame him. When you have such irrational pathological hatred towards LA, it's hard to fathom that other people can believe that he's guilty of doping but don't share the same irrational hatred. Amazing that people can accept that he was dirty, but really don't give a crap about the guy anymore, right?

Silly zealots...always being zealous...


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> How 'bout you get his posts deleted (again).  I'm surprised you didn't have half of us banned yet.


Really?

It is my fault that he and his stalker buddies are unable to discuss the topic and instead toss insults?  Most would agree their obsession with me is a bit strange.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I'd care if it meant handing it to a clean rider, which is obviously not the case.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Really?
> 
> It is my fault that he and his stalker buddies are unable to discuss the topic and instead toss insults?  Most would agree their obsession with me is a bit strange.


You're no different. Zealots are zealots.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> You're no different. Zealots are zealots.


More insults. Nice.


----------

