Hamilton banned for 2 years
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
A
Andy Coggan
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.usantidoping.org/files/active/arbitration_rulings/AAA_CAS Decision - Hamilton.pdf
After reading the proceedings, I whole-heartedly agree with the arbitrator
who dissented.
Andy Coggan
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.usantidoping.org/files/active/arbitration_rulings/AAA_CAS Decision - Hamilton.pdf
After reading the proceedings, I whole-heartedly agree with the arbitrator
who dissented.
Andy Coggan
C
Please elaborate on your specific objections. Personally, I thought the
discussion around the quantitative nature of the test, the lower limits
of detection, and the data on which the lower levels was determined
were suspect.
discussion around the quantitative nature of the test, the lower limits
of detection, and the data on which the lower levels was determined
were suspect.
S
Scott
Guest
I'd have to say, it looks to have failed the 'smell' test.
Considering the "I'll know it when I see it" standard of pass/fail, I'm
surprised they even bothered to hear the case, much less rule against
Tyler.
When you consider that they'd been in contact w/Tyler all summer and
had warned him of blood irregularities, it seems so unlikely that he'd
actually flaunt it by going ahead w/ monthly 100cc booster transfusions
(as one expert alleged it looked like he must have done).
Looks like he got screwed.
Considering the "I'll know it when I see it" standard of pass/fail, I'm
surprised they even bothered to hear the case, much less rule against
Tyler.
When you consider that they'd been in contact w/Tyler all summer and
had warned him of blood irregularities, it seems so unlikely that he'd
actually flaunt it by going ahead w/ monthly 100cc booster transfusions
(as one expert alleged it looked like he must have done).
Looks like he got screwed.
C
CyclePro
Guest
"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'd have to say, it looks to have failed the 'smell' test.
>
> Considering the "I'll know it when I see it" standard of pass/fail, I'm
> surprised they even bothered to hear the case, much less rule against
> Tyler.
>
> When you consider that they'd been in contact w/Tyler all summer and
> had warned him of blood irregularities, it seems so unlikely that he'd
> actually flaunt it by going ahead w/ monthly 100cc booster transfusions
> (as one expert alleged it looked like he must have done).
Unless he was doing autologous along with Santi and they got the bags mixed
up.
news:[email protected]...
> I'd have to say, it looks to have failed the 'smell' test.
>
> Considering the "I'll know it when I see it" standard of pass/fail, I'm
> surprised they even bothered to hear the case, much less rule against
> Tyler.
>
> When you consider that they'd been in contact w/Tyler all summer and
> had warned him of blood irregularities, it seems so unlikely that he'd
> actually flaunt it by going ahead w/ monthly 100cc booster transfusions
> (as one expert alleged it looked like he must have done).
Unless he was doing autologous along with Santi and they got the bags mixed
up.
K
The following statement on page 8 seems objectionable:
"There is no risk of a false positive and no need to do so called
validation studies."
[email protected] wrote:
> Please elaborate on your specific objections. Personally, I thought
the
> discussion around the quantitative nature of the test, the lower
limits
> of detection, and the data on which the lower levels was determined
> were suspect.
"There is no risk of a false positive and no need to do so called
validation studies."
[email protected] wrote:
> Please elaborate on your specific objections. Personally, I thought
the
> discussion around the quantitative nature of the test, the lower
limits
> of detection, and the data on which the lower levels was determined
> were suspect.
C
CyclePro
Guest
"MagillaGorilla" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>WRONG. The parties agreed that the test confirmed that RBC's camed from
>mixed populations of RBC,s but disagreed on >the source of that population.
Not quite. The claim that he was/is a chimera admits to a human source for
the mixed RBC population.
>b. His own blood tests before and after the Vuelta showed an absence of
>homologous transfusion.
>CORRECT. This could be interpreted as proof that the UCI/WADA test can
>yield a false positive.
No. It's about identification above "noise" level.
>c. The claim that he is a chimera fell apart when it became clear how few
>human chimeras there are (1 chimera out of millions of Red Cross blood
>donor
>blood typing).
>CORRECT but MISLEADING. Tyler has no idea why he tested positive. His
>experts and legal team told him that his best >bet was to go for the
>chimera argument. But the dissenting opinion by Chris Campbell clearly
>shows that Campbell did not >limit his opposition to USADA's case by the
>chimera argument.
Tyler knows exactly why he tested positive. Catagorize Campbell's decision
any way you like.
>d. Claiming to be an on again, off again chimera was so far fetched as to
>be
>ludicrous.
>Tyler and his counsel made a mistake in that they should not have felt
>obligated to explain why the test yields a false >positive. In using the
>chimera argument, they painted themselves into a corner. However
>arbitrator Campbell did the right >thing by not limiting his dissent to
>that explanation. All the chimera defense proves is Hamilton's defense
>appears to have >made a strategic mistake in trying to explain something
>they cannot explain. This does not mean the test is valid.
A mistake--no. Jacobs did a very good job of erecting smoke and mirrors.
Hats off to him for getting one arbitrator to bite. Now it's on to
Switzerland. Does Tyler know how to yodel?
news:[email protected]...
>WRONG. The parties agreed that the test confirmed that RBC's camed from
>mixed populations of RBC,s but disagreed on >the source of that population.
Not quite. The claim that he was/is a chimera admits to a human source for
the mixed RBC population.
>b. His own blood tests before and after the Vuelta showed an absence of
>homologous transfusion.
>CORRECT. This could be interpreted as proof that the UCI/WADA test can
>yield a false positive.
No. It's about identification above "noise" level.
>c. The claim that he is a chimera fell apart when it became clear how few
>human chimeras there are (1 chimera out of millions of Red Cross blood
>donor
>blood typing).
>CORRECT but MISLEADING. Tyler has no idea why he tested positive. His
>experts and legal team told him that his best >bet was to go for the
>chimera argument. But the dissenting opinion by Chris Campbell clearly
>shows that Campbell did not >limit his opposition to USADA's case by the
>chimera argument.
Tyler knows exactly why he tested positive. Catagorize Campbell's decision
any way you like.
>d. Claiming to be an on again, off again chimera was so far fetched as to
>be
>ludicrous.
>Tyler and his counsel made a mistake in that they should not have felt
>obligated to explain why the test yields a false >positive. In using the
>chimera argument, they painted themselves into a corner. However
>arbitrator Campbell did the right >thing by not limiting his dissent to
>that explanation. All the chimera defense proves is Hamilton's defense
>appears to have >made a strategic mistake in trying to explain something
>they cannot explain. This does not mean the test is valid.
A mistake--no. Jacobs did a very good job of erecting smoke and mirrors.
Hats off to him for getting one arbitrator to bite. Now it's on to
Switzerland. Does Tyler know how to yodel?
A
Alex Rodriguez
Guest
In article <N%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
http://www.usantidoping.org/files/active/arbitration_rulings/AAA_CAS Decision
%20-%20Hamilton.pdf
>
>After reading the proceedings, I whole-heartedly agree with the arbitrator
>who dissented.
Me three.
------------
Alex
[email protected] says...
>
>
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
http://www.usantidoping.org/files/active/arbitration_rulings/AAA_CAS Decision
%20-%20Hamilton.pdf
>
>After reading the proceedings, I whole-heartedly agree with the arbitrator
>who dissented.
Me three.
------------
Alex
Similar threads
- Carmella the Roach Killer
- Road Cycling
- Carmella the Roach Killer
- Road Cycling
- Robert Chung
- Road Cycling
- Cracker
- Road Cycling