Tyler Innocent?
- Thread starter bobke
- Start date
hombredesubaru said:
If you read recent LA Times comments on the case here:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimests/20050417/ts_latimes/hamiltonpresseshiscase
you will find the defence strategy was to place doubt on the testing by claiming that "mixed population" in the blood could have come not only by way of a transfusion but also by a twin who shared the womb during pregnancy.
As Tyler has no twin it is referred to as the "vanishing twin." In effect, they are saying a part of his defence that the testing could produce a false positive if the results indicated a mixed population of blood and that transfer happened during pregnancy from a twin. Conclusion - the testing is not reliable.
The article made a noteworthy comment about the warning given to Tyler about his blood testing results in April/May 2004:
However, a rider can be kept from starting a particular race if, according to a complex formula that factors in levels of both hemoglobin and reticulocytes, or immature blood cells, the reading tops 133. In cycling, such an index is called an "off score."
Last April 24, in testing before one of cycling's oldest classics, the Liege-Bastogne-Liege race in eastern Belgium, Hamilton's off score totaled 123.8. The mean score for UCI riders is around 90, Zorzoli said.
Five days later, in testing at the Tour de Romandie in Switzerland, Hamilton's off score was 132.9. His hematocrit level — the percentage of red blood cells in the system — read 49.7; the allowable limit is 50. His reticulocyte index measured a very low 0.22.
Hamilton said the numbers can't be viewed as gospel, contending that the testing machines are prone to varied readings. "The machines aren't absolute," he said.
For authorities, the combination of a high hematocrit level and low reticulocyte reading amounts to a red flag. The thinking goes this way: If immature cell readings are low — meaning few new red blood cells are in the works — a hematocrit reading cannot come out high unless there has been manipulation of some sort, like an infusion of blood.
In June, UCI officials sent Hamilton a letter saying he was going to be watched because his "blood values showed strong signs" of "a possible manipulation."
hombredesubaru said:
I would love nothing more than Tyler to be found clean and if so I hope he has kept fit. Phonak did go to the wall for him with a great deal of cost involved.
Of course science and medicine are exact and accurate ,for after the world is flat and leeches will cure almost any ailment
jhuskey said:
One cannot vouch for the accuracy of what the LA Times has, but if they published it, it must be true-- I mean the papers they have must be real or they would get sued. As to whether the info is true or not is up to a court.
I wonder who leaked it? I mean, if Tyler is found innocent, great. But if he is found innocent and someone has leaked that his hematocrit was 49.7 at a major race and his reticulocyte count low, it will be an empty victory. People will remain suspcisious.
On the other hand, if Phonak and Tyler had receieved warnings that he was being looked at, why would he risk it etc. I guess we will never know... only Tyler and Tuggy know the real truth.
hombredesubaru said:
I find some facts exposed by the LA Times perusal of court documents quite revealing:
In June, UCI officials sent Hamilton a letter saying he was going to be watched because his "blood values showed strong signs" of "a possible manipulation."
and ....
The test, which looks specifically for evidence of mixed populations, was put into use just last summer — midway through the Tour de France, just weeks before the start of the Olympics.
On the 19 July 2004, Tyler Hamilton abandoned the Tour de France from alleged back problems halfway through the 13th stage.
That's what I was thinking about the Protour teams all have full rosters. With that being said, if he's cleared what US team will he race for in the tour of GA? I wouldn't think he would want to race in the states for the rest of the year. Unless he could get short term contract.Virenque said:
Then again I don't know anything about these huge operations!
Actually because they attributed it to another source they can print anything they want. If Tyler is innocent and he sues they can show proof of the leak and print a retraction and they would be ok. Happens all of the time, just follow politics for a few weeks.hombredesubaru said:
To all: Go check out Tylers website, his latest entry is very interesting...that is if you are the type of person who looks at all sides before condeming someone.
House said:
I would say that Tyler's comments on his website validates the content of the LA Times article in respect the findings and warnings from testing during April 2004. So what is your point?
If you had been following Tyler's website he originally stated that when he was informed that he had failed the test for "homologous" blood doping he had to look up the dictionary as he was unaware what "homologous' meant and that method of performance enhancement existed.
He has now removed that reference from his website. No doubt when it became known that he and the whole team had received warnings of readings that suspected possible blood manipulations months before. And 3 members of the team failed blood boosting tests (1 EPO, 2 blood boosting).
TH's only defence is that the test could produce a false positive. He has not produced evidence that his test was a false positive only that it is possible that a twin, which he is not, could have a mixed population of blood through pregnancy. UCI/WADA refute this claim.
if he is announced as innocent then the UCI and the WADA will appeal for sure.
Let's be honest about this the american sports bodies don't exactly have a great reputation on this whole issue.
With the ethical charter as it is I'm not sure that many pro teams would do anything until the appeal is decided - could be wrong but it does seem to restrict them. For instance no Pro Tour team can sign a rider for two years after a ban.
Saying that it is well known that the Phonak owner is a big fan.
Let's be honest about this the american sports bodies don't exactly have a great reputation on this whole issue.
With the ethical charter as it is I'm not sure that many pro teams would do anything until the appeal is decided - could be wrong but it does seem to restrict them. For instance no Pro Tour team can sign a rider for two years after a ban.
Saying that it is well known that the Phonak owner is a big fan.
Well there it is. Two year suspension. He had a fair hearing and apparently got to suggest all sorts of things that high priced lawyers could come up with.
I know Tyler is said to be a nice guy, but doping is cheating and I have no more interest in listening to his sad and lame denials.
I know Tyler is said to be a nice guy, but doping is cheating and I have no more interest in listening to his sad and lame denials.
Still, David Millar is my pick for world class denial and addicted in-your-face liar.
Calling Philippe Gaumont a 'nutter' then keeping his Eprex & spent syringes in his French residence for the Paris Police to find.
At least Tyler Hamilton hid away in Girona, Spain---so as to allow the doping mystery to last longer.
Hopefully, Tyler will go public with yet more lame explanations so that we the sporting fans can witness the truth about drug addiction and performance success. Lying and doping do go hand in hand!
btw: The AAA (Arbitration Panel) voted 2 to 1, with one member, Christopher Campbell dissenting.
These things are political in nature as well.
Calling Philippe Gaumont a 'nutter' then keeping his Eprex & spent syringes in his French residence for the Paris Police to find.
At least Tyler Hamilton hid away in Girona, Spain---so as to allow the doping mystery to last longer.
Hopefully, Tyler will go public with yet more lame explanations so that we the sporting fans can witness the truth about drug addiction and performance success. Lying and doping do go hand in hand!
btw: The AAA (Arbitration Panel) voted 2 to 1, with one member, Christopher Campbell dissenting.
These things are political in nature as well.
tcklyde said:
Well that's the way the cookie crumbles. What I don't understand is that the 2 years starts yesterday on April 17. Why not from the time of the initial positive. He hasn't raced since then. Seems to me this way it works out to 2.5 years....
L
L
His career is over.No ifs or buts.tcklyde said:
I hope Tyler one day faces upto what he has done and helps future riders from making the same mistakes he did.
If he can do that sooner rather than later , he can still prove he is a class man.All this says to me is that doping is more prevelent in the peloton than ANYONE can imagine.
I'll bet the film producer for the CSC 2003 documentary is pretty ****** off now
that his leading actor has been banned for doping.
All the film reel, for nothing.
On a more serious note, TH was always going to be in a tough spot.
Santiago Perez accepted his fate and got on with it.
Defence based on twins sounded like grasping at straws to me.
that his leading actor has been banned for doping.
All the film reel, for nothing.
On a more serious note, TH was always going to be in a tough spot.
Santiago Perez accepted his fate and got on with it.
Defence based on twins sounded like grasping at straws to me.
Similar threads
