Since the judgement was sent down (finally) on Alberto Contador's clenbuterol case, quite a few stories have emerged detailing commentators' views on the matter.  The other day the Pez Cycling news website featured a comment article with which I pretty much agree (The Contador Case: What's Missing)

In the welter of knee jerk reactions to judge/condemn Contador and/or criticize the UCI, the real issues of this situation are being missed [...]

The author does, I think make valid points about whether Contador's guilt has been established beyond reasonable doubt, and adds to this the oddly variable sanctions following clenbuterol positives that have  been applied to athletes in a variety of sports (see for example this case of youth footballers in Mexico).I would add my often-stated position that any system where a positive result can be returned for any level level of a proscribed substance, even where the level is below the sensitivity required of a testing lab must necessarily be unfair as whether a sample comes up positive becomes a lottery depending on which lab the sample was sent to for analysis.  This is an issue that will return again and again.

Cyclingnews.com today reports that yet again Alberto Contador has had a delay in the announcement by CAS of a verdict in his astonishingly long-running doping affair (Contador Verdict Expected Today | Cyclingnews.com). I cannot believe the ineptitude of all concerned in handling this case, and I'm surprised Contador can maintain his equanimity.My own view is that the regulatory structures around clenbuterol testing are such that for individuals with vanishingly small amounts of clenbuterol in their system, guilt or innocence becomes something of a lottery, depending on which testing lab the sample were sent to - any clenbuterol is enough for guilt, even where the amount found is lower than the sensitivity required of a testing lab.In the mean time, all those blood-doping athletes who were customers of Dr Fuentes (and for one reason or another escaped immediate action) carry on regardless.Update: The announcement is on the CAS web page. Apparently the decision will be handed down on 6th February.  Maybe.  Or maybe not.  The CAS announcement concludes:

A confirmation as to the date and time of the publication of the decision will be given by the CAS at the end of this week.

In reponse to the latest crawling from a Student Union over the recent Jesus and Mo fracas, and indeed the recent example of intimidation at an event featuring a dicussion of sharia law and women's rights:

Velonews reports that CAS is to delay the announcement on their verdict on Jan Ullrich's involvement in the Operacion Puerto blood doping ring. (CAS to delay Ullrich verdict)

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) notified the 1997 Tour de France winner yesterday that it has extended the deadline for its final ruling until February 10, 2012.

Road.cc reports that Alberto Contador clenbuterol case decision delayed till the end of January.  This is insane.  How long will it take to resolve this situation?  And will a decision that has been delayed for so long really be justice?For some time now I've been concerned about how clenbuterol levels are set for testing labs, and how this could end up be a lottery depending on which testing lab samples are sent to.I have posted several times on the Contador case.

Way back in late November, Apple announced that some first generation iPod Nano models had defective batteries that represented a hazard, and that they had instituted a replacement programme. Visiting the website revealed that mine was one of those to be replaced. My Nano hadn't really been used much since I got an iPod Touch (now replaced with a Cowon X7), but I requested the return package, and in due course posted the iPod off to Apple.Much discussion ensued as to what the device would be replaced with.  Some web sources implied Apple were replacing the defective units with refurbished first generation devices, other that the replacement units would be more recent models.My replacement was delivered yesterday, and I can confirm that Apple have replaced my 1st gen 2Gb Nano (left) with a 6th gen 8Gb Nano (right).I've not really kept up with the evolution of iPods, and frankly I'm astonished by this little device.  And it is little.  At first sight it seems little bigger than the sync cable plug.  Despite its size, it still has a battery capable of [up to] 24h music playback (according to Apple) and an accelerometer so tracks can be changed by shaking it.  It has a number of apps installed including a clock, meaning it can be used as a watch if it's clipped to a strap.  It has a radio, which uses the headphone cable as an aerial.  There's no navigation dial, but the touch screen is pretty intuitive and easy to use (in fact after years of iPod Touch and iPad use, I don't find the iPod classic control dial particularly easy).All in all, I'm rather pleased.  Even though this is another device that uses iTunes.Update: I was curious as to how Apple managed to shoehorn all this stuff inside such a small case. iFixit has an interesting iPod Nano 6th Generation Teardown.

Cyclingnews.com reports Valv. (Piti) is back in the pro peloton after serving his ban for involvement in the Fuentes Affair (Valverde: I Didn’t Do Anything Wrong | Cyclingnews.com).  But professing innocence.  Interesting given the match between his DNA and the DNA in the Valv. (Piti) blood bags recovered during Operacion Puerto.

A blood sample taken on the rest day of the 2008 Tour de France in Italy would ultimately prove to be Valverde’s undoing, albeit after a lengthy legal process. In 2009, the Italian Olympic Committee banned Valverde from competition in Italy after matching his DNA to blood bags seized in Operacion Puerto. On May 31, 2010, CAS finally upheld appeals from the UCI and WADA to have his ban extended worldwide, four years after Fuentes was first arrested.

 New Year's Day turned out to be surprisingly warm, which came as something of a relief to me, just emerging from a major cold that had laid me low from taking any exercise since the middle of December.  The cyclists who congregated outside the NBRC clubroom as notified via the club website seemed to me to be rather crocked on the whole - many had been suffering from colds, and Lindz had had a rather nasty prang involving a pedestrian and significant muscular damage to his leg.  Also of note was the complete lack of timekeepers and pushers-off.  Shortly after 9.30, we decided they must have gone straight to the start area of the event, so we all pushed off down there.Fortunately, we did have a start team (Tony and Bryan), and we all signed on.  We were warned about a diesel spill at the first roundabout; in actual fact something appeared to have travelled the entire course slopping diesel all over the place (the smell of diesel was strong, even in the strong wind) and most riders took the event quite gingerly.It had been so long since my last time trial (which I think may have been the Duo Normand back in September) that I quite forgot to check my gears before starting: I therefore ended up starting in the small ring, and then wasting significant time trying to persuade the chain up onto the big ring after I'd started.  We had a significant head wind on the outward section, even after turning onto the dual carriageway section, where there was enough crosswind to make my front H3 rather twitchy at times.  Fortunately, things got a bit easier once round the turn.  I had been nervously eyeing up my HR, and occasionally felt it prudent to ease back when it reached higher levels.Back off the dual carriageway, and I tried to take maximal advantage of the descent (somewhat thwarted by the road diesel) with the tail wind.  I crossed the line in 24:37, which I felt was quite good given the conditions and my recent bout of ill-health.  It was also enough to take the win.  Just in case, I had taken note of Team Grumpy rules #1 ("Remember to make your excuses before the race, not after. Otherwise it will just sound pathetic". - specifically noting the first ride with the Pro Disc wheel and my recent illness)  and #5 ("Never train or race with a bad cough - it will destroy your entire season." - if I'd still had that racking cough, I would certainly not have raced).Results are at the NBRC website. 

Frankly, I have little interest in the overblown spectacle that the modern Olympics has become.  I will of course try and watch the cycling events on the TV, but otherwise it leaves me rather cold.  Over at road.cc, I see the headline Ninety-two-year-old who helped bring women's cycling to Olympics to carry London 2012 torch.  An interesting headline, so I popped over to read the article.  It turns out that the 92-year old is none other than Eileen Gray.  Oddly, the article is written as though the author hadn't heard of Eileen Gray before!  Indeed, I noticed the omission of her name from the article title, which relegated her to the description "ninety-two-year-old".For what it's worth, I'm delighted at this news.  Gray was particularly important in the development of international women's cycling, and this is a deserved honour.  Here's an interview at the British Cycling website.  

New Statesman - Richard Dawkins to guest-edit the New Statesman Christmas issue

In a 100-page special issue, the evolutionary biologist and bestselling author Richard Dawkins brings together some of the world's leading scientists, thinkers and writers.