estimated at 50 picograms — a nearly undetectable amount. Contador has claimed that the drug came from eating tainted filet mignon on the day before the failed test.

But that might not matter.

The key here is the World Anti-Doping Code, which governs all doping cases in professional cycling. One of the code’s major tenets is the concept of strict liability — that an athlete is responsible for everything that enters his body, no matter how or when.

To quote the Code:

2.1.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an antidoping violation under Article 2.1.

A comment on this section goes on to state that an athlete is responsible “whenever a Prohibited Substance is found in an Athlete’s Sample,” no matter if it’s intentional or unintentional.

Contador has been found with a banned drug in his system. Under the WADA code, he is guilty of an anti-doping violation, no matter how the drug got there. It could be from tainted meat — and under WADA’s code, that doesn’t matter.

The comment on section 2.1.1 of the Code outlines where the case will go from here:

If the positive Sample came from an In-Competition test, then the results of that Competition are automatically invalidated (Article 9 (Automatic Disqualification of Individual Results)). However, the Athlete then has the possibility to avoid or reduce sanctions if the Athlete can demonstrate that he or she was not at fault or significant fault (Article 10.5 (Elimination or Reduction of Period of Ineligibility Based on Exceptional Circumstances)) or in certain circumstances did not intend to enhance his or her sport performance (Article 10.4 (Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substances under Specific Circumstances)).

Contador’s positive was from an In-Competition test on July 21, the Tour’s second rest day in Pau. Under the WADA code, unless the results of the test are overturned — and Contador has not disputed the presence of clenbuterol in his system, only the source — he will be stripped of his 2010 Tour de France title.

Where Contador’s argument about tainted meat would come into play is in what potential sanctions he would face. The standard punishment for a first doping offense under the WADA code is a two-year ban from competition. If Contador can establish — and the burden of proof is on him, not WADA or cycling officials — that the clenbuterol entered his system through no fault or significant fault or negligence of his own, the ban could be reduced or eliminated altogether.

But that’s not as easy as it sounds. An American swimmer named Jessica Hardy tested positive for clenbuterol in 2008 in the run-up to the Summer Olympics in Beijing. Hardy argued that the clenbuterol came from tainted nutritional supplements that she had taken, and scientists were able to test the remainder of the pills because Hardy still had the box. The supplements were tainted, and anti-doping authorities agreed that Hardy had not taken the clenbuterol intentionally. Instead of a two-year ban, Hardy was banned from competition for one year.

Alberto Contador has won most of his races by dominating his competitors on huge mountain passes. Surmounting the strict rules of the WADA code will be the Spaniard’s most difficult climb of all.

Photo: AP/Andres Kudacki

Follow us on Twitter at @markmcc and @wiredplaybook and on Facebook.

See Also:

• France Pledges Full Cooperation in Armstrong Doping Probe
• Cycling Champ Admits Doping, Accuses Others
• Wired 15.01: The Doping Excuses Hall of Fame
• Athletes Beware, Scientists Hot on Gene Doping Trail

Authors: Mark McClusky

to know more click here