**** Breaking News: Hamilton Tested Positive? ***

antoineg

My "problem", as you put it, is that EVERY TIME there is a report of either a positive test, or a firsthand report of doping, or some doping-related report from anyone, anywhere, people like you are ALWAYS quickly weighing in with various stock posts: "innocent until proven guilty." "Let's wait until all the facts are in." "Wait for the B test." "The tests are suspicious." "You can't take Person X at face value." And on and on and on.

It's no secret that you are a huge Hamilton fan, based on your posts here. So your postings really represent a biased, and frankly not very helpful, viewpoint to the discussion at hand, which has to do with:

a) what tests did he fail
b) what's the science behind the tests
c) how could you get false positives
d) what is his side of the story
e) what are the likely ramifications if he gets banned
f) what happens if UCI bans him but he gets cleared by IOC, or vice-versa
g) what are the ramifications for Phonak
h) what is his history w/regard to doping allegations
i) how does this relate to other doping allegations by or about other riders

etc.

You have what is known as a very low signal-to-noise ratio. It's frustrating to hear the same wind-up doll canned response on every doping thread.

ejglows

YOU are the one who started posting off topic by demoralizing another poster. You can have you own opinion, but dont press it on others. We say that some people see the glass half full, and then there are people like you who see the glass half empty.

I personally hope he gets his due process. All we need is another innocent man on death row. Due process is what the United States was founded on (cant claim it is still practiced) but, as an eternal optimist I hope we can allow the governing bodies to do their work before the public pronounces his guilt, or his innocence.


e

__________________
If you cant keep up, then you simply dont want to.

antoineg

Actually, Harry, up until yesterday I would have put good money that Hamilton would have been the LAST person to get caught as a doper. And he may still be clean for all I really know.

And you're mixing up the arguments. This thread is specifically about Hamilton and his reported failed tests, and not some large abstract argument about whether "success is de facto proof of doping.". Hamilton (reportedly) FAILED TWO DOPING TESTS. We're not exactly groping around in the dark here.

antoineg

Sometimes I think that everyone who starts a thread like "Rider X Reportedly Tests Positive" should start a second thread with a title of "Weigh in With Your Due Process Concerns About Rider X".

Of course I believe in due process, and if asked by a court of law to judge Hamilton's guilt or innocence I would of course declare "innocent" -- but that's not really the point of this thread, which is to find out more about, and analyze the potential consequences of, a reported failure of two doping tests by the Olympic gold medalist.

Don't try to squelch reasonable discussion just because you love the guy, or you really really REALLY believe in due process.

Saucy

Just a minute here. I don’t think any of us are saying Lance is somehow more guilty because if this development. We are referring to the arguments which happen to take place in the LA thread as they pertain to the entire peloton. That’s all.


I agree. I think that’s all any of us are trying to say.

TH was probably my favorite rider and I was disappointed to hear this. Having said that, I have zero sympathy for cheaters. As of today, the facts are that he has failed two tests. The full story will come out eventually but right now these are the facts, and I am basing my assessment on the evidence, which I know is of paramount importance for those of you who defend LA, right? Right?

I don’t spend too much time feeling sorry for cheaters in the peloton. Tyler and others have scored themselves some ill-gotten gains and have a very fine lifestyle because of it. Time for them to deal with the consequences.

Dick Pound is a ferocious little monkey isn't he? I love his attitude - no fear. Mr. Pound is on our side, the right side, let's not forget that.


Save your venom for the cheaters in the peloton. You’re right though, I do HATE cheaters. I’m weird that way.

gntlmn

I think a lot of people on this thread don't understand statistics and probability. Here's a quote from

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/200...features/doping

Although doping stories are ongoing and widely reported, Dr Mario Zorzoli pointed to the UCI's testing statistics from 2003. Of 5206 tests carried out worldwide, including 360 for EPO/NESP, 55 riders were sanctioned, which represents 1.05% of the sample size. In the 242 out of competition tests conducted by the World Anti-Doping Agency, only 1 rider was positive (0.41% of the sample size).

With the introduction of the new blood tests, it will be interesting to see whether these numbers vary.
end of quote

This hardly constitutes a rampant doping problem in the peloton. Come on, 1%? That's not satisfactory, by any means. 0% is desirable, but 1% is not exactly wildly spinning out of control drug enhancement. That's only as high as the annual death rate was in a certain high risk job I used to have. People on these drug threads really like to blow things out of proportion.

antoineg

Again, not to belabor the point too much, but what the heck does this have to do with this thread, which is titled "Breaking News: Hamilton Tested Positive?"?

As best as I can tell from published sources, the STATISTICS say that 1 out of 1, or 100%, of professional bicycle riders named "Tyler Hamilton" tested postive for analogous blood doping at the Olympics and at the Vuelta. The PROBABILITY that he failed at least his "A" samples appears to be 100%.

Saucy

Your study overlooks one important fact: the tests can not detect every available doping product. Just because someone does not test positive does not mean they are not doping. This appears to be less true now that blood doping and HGH are becoming detectable. But again, there are a multitude of other drugs out there for which there is no test. Hasn't this been outlined a million times by other posters?

For those of you who believe that only 1% of the peloton are doping (and I'm laughing even as I type that), I suggest you go to your bookstore and grab some TDF and cycling related books off the shelves. Learn about the history of the sport, look at all the scandals from 1998 and since, look at all the riders confessing their doping histories. Seriously 1% is downright laughable.

gntlmn

I agree that it does not look good for Tyler. I am not going to comment on that until all parties have had a chance to bring forth evidence, whether it's (1) sample B, (2) a doctor's testimony that indeed he did inject blood for some kind of cycling-legal surgery Tyler had, or (3) any kind of corroborating evidence by either party. False positives are possible. If it's the result of a surgical infusion, it would not be a false positive, but it may be dismissed because it was for surgery. I want to hear this one out. I am patient with that.

My response was a general one, that Tyler's actions are not a direct indication of any other riders actions wrt blood doping. There are many people on this thread who think that 1% positive means everyone dopes. Just go back and read some of the threads above, and you will see. There are many here who think the doping problem is spinning wildly out of control. Frankly, I am glad to see a test which can detect such a result as blood doping with injected blood. But if Tyler did this, I would be surprised if he would use someone else's blood. Why not just use his own? They cannot easily detect that, and that has been known for a while. So I think this may be a false positive. But if it turns out after all the tests and evidence come in that Tyler was doping, then I will be happy to see Ekimov win the Olympic Gold in his place. Eki's like the Everready battery. He just keeps on ticking.

Brunswick_kate

Yes, I understand your position now. It must be frustrating to have someone occasionally suggest that before a man is publicly labelled a cheat and a fraud that there should be some onus on demonstating that he is indeed guilty of that with which he has been accused. Rush to judgement is so much more fun and gives us all the opportunity to feel morally superior and smug over the rich and the famous.

Now, back to the issue at hand, all I know..and I suspect all you know as well in spite of your superior and condescending attitude, is that the samples of Tyler Hamilton's blood, taken on Aug 19 and Sept 18 2004 are reported to have shown a presence of a mixed red blood cell population. This mixed blood cell population is indicative but not proof of a recent blood transfusion from other person. From this, it has been speculated that Hamilton may have transfused blood for the purpose of enhancing his athletic performance.

What is also currently known is that Hamilton denies the allegation that he is cheat. His team, Phonak, are backing their star rider and claim to have some technical difficulties with either the test or the testing process.

In the meanwhile, the B sample results have not been analyzed or at least the results have not been released.

And yes, I am a Hamilton fan. The fact that I've enjoyed his career really doesn't have anything to do with my ingrained sense of fairness and the fact that I think everyone deserves the opportunity to defend themselves. I can also appreciate but have very little respect for the position that because an individual is in the public forum, that he or she somehow is not entitled to equitable consideration.

__________________
Insanity has its price -- Please have exact change.

antoineg

It's ironic that you write about feeling smug and morally superior. You obviously feel more "morally superior" than all of us plebians who actually are interested in the problem of doping in sport, and follow up stories of reported positives with additional information and analysis. You, with all your high-and-mighty talk about "due process" and "waiting until the facts come in" and on and on.

No, it's frustrating that you go at predictable intervals anytime a doping topic comes up, or in fact a topic that seems to bring down your personal idols.

Like I said, very low signal-to-noise ratio.

The funny (and sad) thing is that IF (if!) Tyler is found guilty, and suspended, you'll still bang the drum and go on as if nothing ever happened, and that your other cycling idols are God's gift to the cycling fan, and that they could NEVER do any wrong. You ARE biased, you just don't want to admit it.

Saucy

Kate, I think you bring up some valid points and you are certainly entitled to your opinion about the certainty of the evidence. It probably is too soon to say for certain that TH is "guilty", but you can be sure that UCI covered their asses with this one before they went public with it.

I should point out that when it comes to condescending attitudes and flaming about the issue of doping, this behavior has been demonstrated par excellence by the "LA is not doping" brigade towards those of us "hate-filled" posters who believe there is a doping problem in cycling. We are in the minority and have taken our beatings on many threads here.

I agree everyone is entitled to their opinion about whether evidence is convincing enough, but this consideration should be applied to those of us on the other side of the argument as well. What you may see as "hate-filled" and "jumping to conclusions", to others is simply a assessment based on the available facts. IMO, there is no such thing as having "all the facts". Nonetheless I agree that right now, more information is needed to determine conclusively. I am still giving TH a small small shred of benefit of the doubt.

Saucy

antoineg, why are you picking on Kate so much? You should be saving your strength for Beastt when he inevitably chimes in on the subject.

Brunswick_kate

Saucy, honest to God, I'm going to make a new year's resolution to never, ever, ever, ever again enter another doping in sport discussion; however, it's but September and I'm not quite sick enough of beating my head against the brick wall...

In spite of the ad hominem attacks of my critics, I'm neither as naive or as stupid as some would like to believe. Do I think that some athletes take performance enhancing drugs? Yes, I do. Do I think some athletes cheat on their taxes? Yes, I do. Do I think some beat their wives? Yes, I do. Lied? Kicked the dog? Have spoken an ill-advised word in anger? Committed adultery or taken the Lord's name in vain? Yes, I think that probably some athlete somewhere is guilty of one or more the above mentioned offences.

But this is not a theoretical discussion of the broad topic of doping in sport or doping in professional cycling. This is an allegation against one man that will destroy his professional life, his reputation and have huge impact on his personal relationships. Doesn't anyone get the fact that this is a very serious allegation??

Saucy, even you'll have to admit that the "evidence" of Lance Armstrong's doping was specious at best. AT least in this instance, there is some clinical evidence supporting the allegations against Hamilton. Now, there are a few minor details that really ought, in my opinion, to be determined before a man's reputation is torn to shreds. I really fail to understand why there seems to be this urge and compulsion to destroy a man's reputation and his livelihood without giving him a fair opportunity to defend himself. What is so wrong about demanding that serious allegations of this nature be dealt with in a rational and considered approach?

Tell me Saucy, do you want to be treated with fairness? Do you expect justice for yourself? For your family? When someone attacks your reputation and your stature in your community and your work place, is it unreasonable for you to want to defend yourself?

It's what I want. It's how I want to be treated. I'm willing to give Tyler Hamilton, or Lance Armstrong or Viatcheslav Ekimov or Stuart O'Grady or Ma Kettle, or Josephine the Palmolive Lady an opportunity to defend him or herself against slurs on their character and reputation.

__________________
Insanity has its price -- Please have exact change.