Yes i hope so to, i am sick and tired of the i don't know how this could happen and the test is inaccurate kind of stories! Can't hear it anymore.limerickman said:
Hamilton verdict.
- Thread starter Eldrack
- Start date
- Status
Like European riders never get caught for doping, and never challenge the result when they do?
Pop quiz - what famous Spanish rider is challenging the results of his positive tests by appealing to the CAS? What famous French rider denied, denied, denied until proof was thrust under his nose in black and white, and then still weaseled back into the TDF on a minor technicality? There's a moral and ethical standard well worth living up to.
Let's leave nationalism out of this - a doper is a maggot, no matter where they come from. And no one country holds the moral high ground here.
Pop quiz - what famous Spanish rider is challenging the results of his positive tests by appealing to the CAS? What famous French rider denied, denied, denied until proof was thrust under his nose in black and white, and then still weaseled back into the TDF on a minor technicality? There's a moral and ethical standard well worth living up to.
Let's leave nationalism out of this - a doper is a maggot, no matter where they come from. And no one country holds the moral high ground here.
whiteboytrash said:
They do!steve said:
Thats the part Hamilton didnt get to explain, alien abduction.
Can we move on girls?
or at least take bets on what team if any Hamilton will ride for.
Not Phoney-ak I guess
Not Disco obviously
I mean he's a good rider but who wants the baggage?
What about Kelme? They have a clean bill of health regarding doping, just ask Jesus Manzano. I reckon any Continental Division team would consider him a bargain especially if they sought a Tour or Giro wildcard. His signing is guaranteed to garner heaps of press so any team that believes any publicity is good publicitity might consider signing him. Maybe he accidentally mixed some of Iban Mayo's blood in his last transfusion, making him eligible to ride for Euskatel?
He can use Heras and Perez as character references to join Kemle as they are both former riders of the good team....rocko said:What about Kelme? They have a clean bill of health regarding doping, just ask Jesus Manzano. I reckon any Continental Division team would consider him a bargain especially if they sought a Tour or Giro wildcard. His signing is guaranteed to garner heaps of press so any team that believes any publicity is good publicitity might consider signing him. Maybe he accidentally mixed some of Iban Mayo's blood in his last transfusion, making him eligible to ride for Euskatel?
"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown in to the sea"bobke said:
Interesting analyses of the whole thing: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2006/hamilton_appeal
And do you know, www.believetyler.org is down, you get error 404 if you try. Now I wonder why that is?
And do you know, www.believetyler.org is down, you get error 404 if you try. Now I wonder why that is?
Since Hamilton was being warned by the UCI repeatedly, his statement on his website below is a bit misleading:
"As blood testing is a fact of life for a professional cyclist, it is critical that tests are reliable and proven. On that note, I have been tested over 50 times throughout my career and this [the Olympics test] is the first time I have ever even been questioned--so again this is new and beyond upsetting to me."
http://www.tylerhamilton.com/novdec2004227.html
Maybe Hamilton was using "questioned" in the sense of officially inquired into with the potential for real sanctions, but it is a contorted use of the term if his repeated warnings by the UCI did not count as being "questioned" on potential blood testing. Hamilton might argue that the UCI didn't "question" him, but they sure did warn him.
Even more misleading on the part of Hamilton is his statement that the Olympics blood test result was "new" to him. How can a positive test be "new" to him if the UCI had been warning him they were going to implement this specific type of test and had previously told him he had tested positive on unofficial run of the test?
"As blood testing is a fact of life for a professional cyclist, it is critical that tests are reliable and proven. On that note, I have been tested over 50 times throughout my career and this [the Olympics test] is the first time I have ever even been questioned--so again this is new and beyond upsetting to me."
http://www.tylerhamilton.com/novdec2004227.html
Maybe Hamilton was using "questioned" in the sense of officially inquired into with the potential for real sanctions, but it is a contorted use of the term if his repeated warnings by the UCI did not count as being "questioned" on potential blood testing. Hamilton might argue that the UCI didn't "question" him, but they sure did warn him.
Even more misleading on the part of Hamilton is his statement that the Olympics blood test result was "new" to him. How can a positive test be "new" to him if the UCI had been warning him they were going to implement this specific type of test and had previously told him he had tested positive on unofficial run of the test?
musette said:Since Hamilton was being warned by the UCI repeatedly, his statement on his website below is a bit misleading:
"As blood testing is a fact of life for a professional cyclist, it is critical that tests are reliable and proven. On that note, I have been tested over 50 times throughout my career and this [the Olympics test] is the first time I have ever even been questioned--so again this is new and beyond upsetting to me."
http://www.tylerhamilton.com/novdec2004227.html
Maybe Hamilton was using "questioned" in the sense of officially inquired into with the potential for real sanctions, but it is a contorted use of the term if his repeated warnings by the UCI did not count as being "questioned" on potential blood testing. Hamilton might argue that the UCI didn't "question" him, but they sure did warn him.
Even more misleading on the part of Hamilton is his statement that the Olympics blood test result was "new" to him. How can a positive test be "new" to him if the UCI had been warning him they were going to implement this specific type of test and had previously told him he had tested positive on unofficial run of the test?
Yes it is weird.
He is maintaining certain stances that I think will make it difficult for folks to take him back on a team.
For instance:
1. He was REALLY innocent but hey--he will keep having to undergo tests and may turn up positive again as a false positive so he will bring bad PR to the team.
2. He was really guiltyin the past and all his new tests will be negative proving the past points and his teammates and managers will not want to associate with him anyway since he is not confessing, particularly if he comes back and it is clear that his performance is on an entirely new and much lower level. The Mayo phenomenon as we call it here forward.
As I think about it, unless he was really innocent and comes back and performs at a high level showing everyone he was not doping, he wont come back. But how will he undergo the tests???
But on the other hand he did Mt Washington in fantastic form this summer--no doping controls of course--but he was on great form and similar to where he had been before if not better.
**** Pound has spies? Finds out the banned coach is in Italy and then sends Italian police to roust the X country skieers out of bed 10 PM and keep them up all night, needless to say they lost today. But they were blood doping in Salt Lake but still.. **** Pound is coming off like Chief Inspector Dreyfus in the Pink PantherMJtje said:Yeah he's really innocent..........
WADA chairman **** Pound said he wasn't surprised by the Austrians' protest.
"On the other hand they've been playing with fire in having an association with this guy," he said.
Pound also defended the decision to conduct the raid and tests in the late-night hours.
"If you happen to be concerned about microdoses of EPO, that's the time to find it," he said.
- Status
