What ever happened to the Tyler hearings?
- Thread starter bobke
- Start date
They (CAS) are still deliberating and will hand down a finding in the next week or two....... this is in addition to Tyler trying to find his long lost brother separated at birth.....hombredesubaru said:
hombredesubaru said:
Last I heard was on Sept 13. CAS stated that the arbitration was adjourned, to be resumed at a later (unspecified) date for the presentation of additional evidence and closing arguments.
He'll have to show a lot stronger evidence than he did at the original hearing to prevail. Based on what was said at the first hearing, his defence just didn't look very strong, and he couldn't back up the chimera/vanishing twin claim with any hard evidence. Subsequent blood tests were negative. The fact that two people on the same team were listed as positive by the test doesn't look good.
It's a shame. I didn't want to believe it, but so far he hasn't come up with anything that refutes the test, or offers a logical explanation for the results.
If you recall, Phonak had established a 5 member panel of experts to investigate the tests and results.patch70 said:
In a statement published on the company's website, Phonak said it had decided to convene a panel of experts “in order to achieve clarity as to the medical... reliability of these new blood testing tools”.
Perez was relying on the panel's findings to formulate a defence. If the panel had provided a finding then it was not in the defence interests of Perez. He chose not to defend the case. Also he requested a B sample test but failed to be present through himself or an agent at that testing.
You may note that the "expert(s)" in the Hamilton case was also not this esteemed Phonak panel but a person, Dr Housman, who rang Hamilton's father and offered his services. Sounds like a defence in disarray.
By claiming to be a chimera or having a vanishing twin, Hamilton has conceded the mixed blood population detected by the test is correct. For his defence that tests just prior to the Hearing showed no trace of a mixed population, Hamilton relied on an unproven and isolated hypothesis that chimeric persons blood values fluctuate (Van Dijk et Al 'Blood Group Chimerism in Human Multiple Births' 1996). Hardly comforting and proven so.
The second string to his bow does not complement this chimeric defence but contradicts. He claims the test, which found his mixed blood population (chimeric), is fatally flawed.
Like another famous rider Hamilton is screaming conspiracy.
There was a conspiracy to have the Perez decision out before his Hearing. The Perez Hearing was advanced and conducted without Perez's knowledge. Baloney. As Perez offered no defence the Hearing could have been held earlier as the diary dates of his defence team need not be considered.
There was an extortion attempt by a person who knew the Olympic and Vuelta doping results before they were announced. This suggests an inside job. No, a Swiss Court found the extortionist's first approach to Phonak occurred after the release of the Vuelta results. But Hamilton still carries this false story on his websites of the extortionist making an approach on Aug 25, 2004.
Come on, I liked the guy as much as everyone else (although I could give a cr@p about his dog dieing - and that being used as a reason not to dope), and was mightily impressed when he rode away from the group in the tour with a hairline fracture in his arm, but... he has been caught. From everything we have seen in terms of evidence He Is A Doper.
That is it. No twin brothers, no anti-US rider conspiracy.
And now, to make matters worse, he is pulling a Virenque. How long before he just admits and waits out his suspension. He has enough talent to come back to racing, not as a GT winner (but that was always blown out of proportion, if for no other reason than his... lack of bike handling skills).
That is it. No twin brothers, no anti-US rider conspiracy.
And now, to make matters worse, he is pulling a Virenque. How long before he just admits and waits out his suspension. He has enough talent to come back to racing, not as a GT winner (but that was always blown out of proportion, if for no other reason than his... lack of bike handling skills).
[size=-1]Tyler Hamilton's fight to clear his name will enter its final round in January, nearly a year-and-a-half after he was found positive for injecting donor blood at the Vuelta a España.[/size]
[size=-1]The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) announced on Monday it would listen to closing arguments on January 10 in Denver. A final decision will be made at the end of the panel's deliberations, which may last a few weeks.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton has asked the CAS, world sport's top tribunal, to overturn a two-year ban imposed last year.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton tested positive for illicit blood transfusions during the Tour of Spain last September just weeks after winning an Olympic gold medal in Athens and the US anti-doping agency handed down a two-year suspension in April.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton had also tested positive for blood doping after winning gold at Athens but the B sample for that test was destroyed when it was frozen.[/size]
[size=-1]And the International Olympic Committee ruled it could not strip Hamilton of his medal without a B sample as a back-up test.[/size]
[size=-1]Blood doping is a banned means of enhancing endurance by increasing the amount of oxygen-carrying red blood cells using one's own blood or that of a donor of the same group.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton has argued that the test used to determine blood doping had yet to be proven in an anti-doping context, and was unreliable.[/size]
[size=-1]The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) announced on Monday it would listen to closing arguments on January 10 in Denver. A final decision will be made at the end of the panel's deliberations, which may last a few weeks.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton has asked the CAS, world sport's top tribunal, to overturn a two-year ban imposed last year.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton tested positive for illicit blood transfusions during the Tour of Spain last September just weeks after winning an Olympic gold medal in Athens and the US anti-doping agency handed down a two-year suspension in April.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton had also tested positive for blood doping after winning gold at Athens but the B sample for that test was destroyed when it was frozen.[/size]
[size=-1]And the International Olympic Committee ruled it could not strip Hamilton of his medal without a B sample as a back-up test.[/size]
[size=-1]Blood doping is a banned means of enhancing endurance by increasing the amount of oxygen-carrying red blood cells using one's own blood or that of a donor of the same group.[/size]
[size=-1]Hamilton has argued that the test used to determine blood doping had yet to be proven in an anti-doping context, and was unreliable.[/size]
whiteboytrash said:They (CAS) are still deliberating and will hand down a finding in the next week or two....... this is in addition to Tyler trying to find his long lost brother separated at birth.....
The story on Cyclingnews.com today is devastating. Something was clearly fishy with Hamilton's blood and doping is the only reasonable explanation.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/hamilton_appeal
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/hamilton_appeal
Sure looks that way. The story today does contribute one interesting tidbit - the test used to nail Hamilton and Santi Perez had not been subjected to a false positive study before it was put into use. A bit disconcerting, but by no means a condemnation. There appear to be enough secondar indications, especially the prior warnings, to back up the assertion. What was Hamilton thinking? That he could beat the system?
This does give one reason to pause and think - just what are the rules governing doping tests? The blood doping detection methods are interesting to read about, but with the EPO test looking a bit marginal after several false positives, and even WADA's own experts questioning it two years ago... who certifies doping tests as being valid, and what rules and oversight do they operate under?
If the cyclists are to be held in suspicion until proven otherwise, the tests and those administering them should be able to pass similar scrutiny.
This does give one reason to pause and think - just what are the rules governing doping tests? The blood doping detection methods are interesting to read about, but with the EPO test looking a bit marginal after several false positives, and even WADA's own experts questioning it two years ago... who certifies doping tests as being valid, and what rules and oversight do they operate under?
If the cyclists are to be held in suspicion until proven otherwise, the tests and those administering them should be able to pass similar scrutiny.
The fact that Santi Perez has pleaded 'no contest' to his doping ban gives you a fair idea into the 'truth' behind the results..... Hamilton can try but this one test that will be very hard to disprove. DNA is DNA.
If he does get off it will be a ‘technicality’ and not the fact the test is incorrect result. What he is trying to say is that there hasn’t been a long enough period to research the ‘possibility’ of false positives for the test. He is not arguing the result of the test (he has agreed it was positive). Walk into any hospital or speak to any local GP and they have been performing this test of patients for years. Like I said DNA is DNA. There is not much more anyone can say. This is unless his twin brother from birth re-appears along with Elvis and James Dean.
If he does get off it will be a ‘technicality’ and not the fact the test is incorrect result. What he is trying to say is that there hasn’t been a long enough period to research the ‘possibility’ of false positives for the test. He is not arguing the result of the test (he has agreed it was positive). Walk into any hospital or speak to any local GP and they have been performing this test of patients for years. Like I said DNA is DNA. There is not much more anyone can say. This is unless his twin brother from birth re-appears along with Elvis and James Dean.
JohnO said:
Though I hate to disagree with you, the protocol(1) UCI/WADA uses isn't DNA based but uses antigen/antibodies(2).whiteboytrash said:
A DNA based test for homologous blood doping does apparently excist, though I havn't been able to find papers on this, apart from the reference made in (3)
Btw. the actual Nelson-paper on the protocol is attached, if anyone wants to read it for themselves.
References:
(1)http://www.medicalhosting.org/archives/FMPro?-db=backissues.fp5&-format=details.html&-lay=show&-op=cn&Authors=Nelson%20Popp%20Sharpe&-max=20&-recid=37489&-find=
(2)http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/imagepages/9069.htm
(3)http://www.cyclingnews.com/letters/?id=2004/oct01letters#The
Yes, they should have a 'nice guy' test done with every dope test. If you fail the dope test but pass as a 'nice guy' you should get let off.hombredesubaru said:
(Features checked on the 'nice guy' test include:
- owns dog?
- speaks English as a first language?
- cries when dog dies?
- displays humility when interviewed?)
JohnO said:
If Tyler was warned after the Tour of Romandie that his parameters were close to the limit etc etc...what are we to conclude.
There are really only two possibilities.
He was doping and not only was he doping but being reckless, stupid, and out of control.
Or that he was not doping and there was no way for him to control or explain the weird lab results.
I mean, Tyler is many things, but of the pro peloton I think he is one of the very few to have graduated from university. He is not flat out stupid. His judgement to have gone on and doped AFTER bigtime warnings to him and the team would defy all logic.
It’s a well established fact that university graduates don’t use drugs or do anything stupid….. I love how when it comes to Tyler people throw logic out the window because he is a (supposed) nice guy….
hombredesubaru said:
No, the point seems to be that it is not of of sheer ignorance that Tyler would continue doping, i.e. have warnings and not know from a factual basis or scientific basis that the gig was up.whiteboytrash said:
But rather that to contiue doping in tha face of the warnings would have been beyond stupid and almost insane judgment, so that it seems even LESS likely not more likely that he in fact did dope.
What warning's ? He was target tested after Athens... he knew nothing. He thought he got away with it in Athens and got pinned at the Vuelta. When you dope all your life you don't see it as doping but 'preparation'. He thought he was doing what he has always been doing.
bobke said:
bobke said:
Once again, fans tell us not to believe science b/c their hero is just too cool to have doped.
Tyler's haematocrit level of 49.7 percent wasn't reckless for a doper -- it was perfect. Nearly as high as possible without hitting the limit. Just what he would want.
Tyler turned three positives for blood doping and throughout the year showed, on multiple occasions, strong evidence of blood tampering. I honestly can't believe that people are still defending him at this point. Is there any evidence of doping that you would accept? Of course there isn't.
