![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 997
|
Quote:
"Get over it he cheated." Well, to start with, how do YOU know he cheated? I'm not saying this to insult you but there are a lot of people who know nothing about science and cannot take a skeptical point of view about the witch hunts that are going on right now re Lance, Tyler etc. If they cant get Lance, they'll get the next American. How do you explain an extortionist who called Phonak demanding a bribe and predicted that Perez and Hamilton would turn positive, BEFORE Athens and Vuelta tests? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 71
|
I thought the whole argument that seems to have been raging on these boards is that we all had to wait until the legal process had run it's proper course. That all the 'facts' of the defense would be presented during the appeal and then a judgement made accordingly.
Well - they were and their learned opinion was that he is guilty. Quite frankly having read some of the defenses put forward I'm not that surprised. What bemuses me is that it seems practically every other cycling fan is suddenly a medical expert, questioning the validity of every test going. So come on, accept it - all evidence points to the fact that he cheated. I can't decide whether I find the inference that there is something anti-american about this amusing or worrying. I seem to remember his team mate - who also amazingly managed to get busted for exactly the same thing - no co-incidence there then - getting his two year sentance pretty quickly. So I don't honestly see the witch hunt angle you suggest. People are on Lance's case because he keeps beating everyone - it breeds suspicion! I'm not one of them. At the same time when a rider fails a test I'm more inclined to believe the test. It seems that plenty of people on this board aren't prepared to believe the test no matter what. False positives are one thing but does it not strike you as nothing short of amazing that there are so many of them (if you are to believe the riders). Sorry - this all reads like an absolute rant but I've kept my mouth shut for a while now in order not to stir the 'believers'. I just find it amazing that they can't accept the process they were so insistant we all waited for. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WA State
Posts: 1,270
|
Though I really like Tyler and would like to have some hope that he wasn't cheating - I mean he's a really really tough guy and he's got my respect, I am having a hard time believing him these days with all of the evidence that there was not something going on. So, I have a theory to put forward, this is what I thought when the whole scandal first broke.
Tyler always maintains he wouldn't jeapordize himself or his wife by taking someone elses blood right? Well, Santiago Perez was caught for exactly the same thing wasn't he? What if they were storing their own blood to transfuse before races and they accidentally mixed up the bags? It would only not make you sick if you had compatible blood types, and I don't know if the two of them do, but that was my first I thought when I heard the news. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
Dude, you really need to get on to the UCI website and look at the banned substance list. There is nothing that we take on a daily basis that wouldn't give a positive result. You said that amateur cyclists don't use drugs! I know of pleanty of riders who would pop positive under UCI standards for substances like creatine and Hydroxicut (diuretics). And if they are not using some sort of diuretic, they are using some sort of weight gainer (also banned). The ONLY way to keep our sport clean is, if they get a positive test, they are done. No if's and's, or but's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 259
|
well Tylers part in the IMAX movie is being scrapped , but perhaps the X-Files creator will have him star in a new movie.Mulder , Scully , Tyler , Haven and the suits.
The truth is out there. <cue spooky music> |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 696
|
Quote:
You are now talking about "autologous" transfusions as opposed to "homologous" transfusions. The problem with "autologous" transfusions (using your own blood) is that it makes a serious dent in your training program. It takes about 6 weeks for your system to restore the blood that has been removed and that time frame seriously degrades training. A pro cyclist cannot afford that break. And, apparently, your stored blood deteriorates over time so it is not as if you could gather supplies during your off season. So, I don't agree that there was could have been a remote possibility of a mix up changing an autologous transfusion into a homologous transfusion. Furthermore, the blood infused must be of the same type or you are looking at serious medical problems with the recipients. It appears that when Phonak adopted blood packing there was no known test whereas EPO was detectable depending upon the product and the form of administration. WADA were aware there were methods of avoiding EPO detection and were working on solutions. Phonak would have been in a state of shock in June when they were informed that tests would be introduced for homologous blood packing. TH had been previously informed that as his high blood values in April 2004 had put him on the "hit list" for future random testing. Hence, I believe his retirement from the TdF with "back problems" at or about the time of introduction of this test is no coincidence.
__________________
VF "Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 696
|
Quote:
I know he cheated cos a properly constituted body (of Americans) found so which had no comparison with past events at Salem. The handing down of the decision was deferred as TH asked for a one month adjournment to introduce additional evidence. No additional evidence was introduced. Why did he not introduce expert analysis on his current blood to prove it had a perpetual mixed population through the "vanishing twin" theory? That would have been his trump card. TH should have sat quiet over the past 6 months but, and I expect on advice, he played a PR stunt to obtain the sympathy of the American public. It was very orchestrated. SaveTyler.org, Tugboat, his wife, revelations of extortion, Tyler's own written assertions, etc.. Quite unprecedented. I further believe the intent of this campaign was to put pressure on those Americans who would sit in judgment on him. US sporting drug tribunals have had an abysmal track record of bias, non disclosure and buck passing in the past. But here they knew there decision would be the subject of international review. But at least TH persuaded one of the three.
__________________
VF "Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
Let me take a "Flyer" stance for a while- Isn't ALL doping illegal??????? Whether it be blood doping, taking substances, or as you call it Easter Eggs? You constantly push the "everyones doping" theme on these threads and now you take the opportunity to gloat at the fall of a pro cyclist, the "Big Fish." What I don't understand about you is that you push anti doping but you don't look at the whole picture. Don't you think that the UCI is as much to blame as the fans? After all, it's their super-strict standards that you push as doping. A pro cyclist might as well die of a common cold because most of the drugs needed to cure it are, in some form, listed in the banned substances of the UCI. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 696
|
Quote:
Referring to this part of a previous post of mine. After reading the decision at: http://www.usantidoping.org/files/a...%20Hamilton.pdf TH did present an analysis of his current blood (histogram). This was done on 5 February 2005. There was no evidence of a mixed blood population consistent with a blood transfusion, being a chimera or having a "vanishing twin." His expert witness, Dr. Housman, also had conducted a previous analysis (histogram not presented as evidence) and conceded the results were normal. But they had argued in the proceedings that TH could be a chimera (only 100 known cases worldwide) or he had a vanishing twin which caused the false positive. These were the alternate defences put by TH. It appears to be an inept defence to put forward those alternatives that would rely on a permanent mixed population of blood when his current blood analyses proved the existence of no such mixed populations.
__________________
VF "Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,557
|
Quote:
I have to agree with Flyer on this one, that is a pretty weak defense... but more to the point, who says taking and doing these things really are harmful to your health? Yeah I mean I am sure in .x% of the population there are bound to be lethal side effects, but if it is so dangerous, why aren't they dropping like flies? Isn't it possible that it is more about cheating than risking the health of the riders? I mean seriously I have never seen data that showed that someone under a Dr's care (like Ferrari) with close attention is really at a SIGNIFICANTLY higher risk of health problems... this would tend to give some credence to the psyche of someone like Tyler who would not dope, if he truely believed it would harm him (which he did not). Anybody know for sure that with carefully controlled conditions what we are calling doping still has significant health risks? |
|
|
|
|