Tyler Innocent?

House

It was all over the reputed cycling news sources, just type in "phonak extortion" on google and you come up with all kinds of info. Not urban legend sorry.

VeloFlash

What then. An appeal by the losing party to CAS in Lausanne, Switzerland.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

limerickman

It is an intersting question that you pose - is a cheat, a cheat amongst cheats ?
This crystallises the issue for me and why I have very very serious difficulty in accepting any sporting performance as being genuine.

The lack of ethical and moral character concerning the cheating issue is clearly manifest both in cyclists, team management and the UCI.

I don't know what the answer is Meehs.
James F. though is right - you only have to look here at the way in which people will still try to exonerate TH's role (and you can swap TH's name for Pantani/Virenque/Zulle/anyone you care to name from the rogues gallery)

VeloFlash

It is notable that TH has been branded a "liar."

In one aspect this is an acceptable defence by TH to deny having his blood boosted by homologous means (technically not taking drugs). An admission of artificially boosting performance is taken as a breach of the anti doping laws and would have dispensed with the hearing relating to whether TH had blood boosted.

It is nearly unanimous that all athletes initially deny a breach of the code until they can have their "B" sample tested. It appears to be acceptable behaviour to lie when the consequences of admission are known.

However, TH ran an unprecedented PR exercise to sway public opinion and, in my view, to influence the panel. This is where he screwed up badly.

There were two essential questions for the panel to consider as set out in the decision.

1. Did Tyler Hamilton have a mixed population of blood in his Vuelta sample?

2. If so, has Tyler Hamilton advanced a reasonable explanation as to the presence of this mixed population of blood other than by way of blood transfusion?

The panel found for 1. yes for 2. no.

The dissenting member of the panel adduced from the evidence provided by Mrs. Haven Hamilton that through media reporting there was pressure placed on the panel by high ranking IOC and WADA officials to find TH in breach. He was tacitly calling for a dismissal of the breaches on this ground that he could not receive a fair hearing.

Strange he never referred to the numerous comments TH had made to the media protesting his innocence culminating in donation seeking through SaveTyler.org ran from the address of his charitable foundation.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

tcklyde

I have to disagree. The peloton will never clean up until the fans, the sponsors, the coaches, and the directors apply the moral opprobrium to doping and dopers that it deserves. Doping is cheating. "The everyone is doing it" excuse is just that: an excuse. And not one that can forgive the moral failing that an athelete sucumbs to when he or she decides to cheat.

Tyler cheated. And then he lied about it. I'm sure he's a nice guy on a lot of other fronts, but when it came to making a critical moral decision about his career, he made the wrong one.

I suppose I am not as pessimistic about the doping problem in the peloton as Flyer. I feel comfortable condeming the convicted and reluctant to throw stones at atheletes who have clean records. Perhaps this is naive. If it is, I do it because I love this sport and am eternally hopeful.

What Tyler's case shows, as with Hondo, and Millar and all the other tragedies, is that anger, vigilence, and incredibly strict doping controls are essential. Petacchi, Friere, and Armstrong have been whining about how much testing there is and the sport is fine, etc. Well, obviously it's not. Lifetime bans, offseason testing, and the outrage of fans are essential.

__________________
Harry

meehs

Yeah you can find references to what the Phonak team reported as a mysterious man wearing a big, black fake moustache threatening that the team will suffer the consequences of positive drug tests if they didn't pay him money. But there's not a bit of evidence to add any credibility to what sounds like a very fantastic story. Various media outlets did report on the story as it was relayed by the team. They did not report the story as fact to the best of my knowledge. As far as I know it's a rumor perpetrated by the Phonak team itself.

meehs

All I can say is I admire your optimism. I sincerely wish I could believe that the majority of the riders that have not been caught for using PED's are in fact clean.

hombredesubaru

Well here goes.

There has never been independent, peer reviewed study of the blood transfusion detection method to detect doping in sports. Yes, we all know that the techniques and tools have been used for years in other settings, but this is a different setting, different population, etc. This is one of the main objections the dissenting dude Campbell raised. And this objection is scientifically valid and very powerful. With sooo much riding on the results, UCI WADA and all need to fund the study to prove that it is reliable instead of just asserting that it is.

The other problem is the outrageous claim that no false positives do or can exist. Simply outrageous and not in keeping with standard scientific protocol. Tyler's MIT expert made mincemeat out of the guys who developed this thing, but no one cared except the dissenter.

Third, the guys defending the test have a vested interest in terms of money and reputation in seeing this thing work and be used, (and Tyler not win) apart from their obviously "altruistic" motivation to rid the world of dangerous people like Tyler. Any published dollar amount on what these guys have made on the test and its use?

If Tyler were to win, it would be a huge embarassment for Dick Pound, the scientists, and their whole approach. They would have to admit that mistakes were made in terms of not validating the test protocol etc and then every athlete who came along would tie them up in endless litigation--even if wrongful. This is why Tyler has to go down, to save the system.

Why was Tyler's test initially called negative at Athens and then later reversed by a panel--composed of these guys who developed the test? Can anyone explain why a special panel was convened? And why they violated the rules of anti-doping testing that all samples are tested blindly without knowledge of who the sample belonged to? A pretty major problem I think.

And if the test is so accurate and bloody black and white (which is also one of Tyler's assertions that it isnt) why was there disagreement between the first and second reading of the result? It leaves the impression that there is a grey area of subjectivity in reading the test, which violated the anti-doping procedures code.

I downloaded the arbitration committees findings and have to say that there are compelling facts on BOTH sides, but Tyler openly submitted repeat testing showing no mixed RBC population in February 2005 so the guy is being transparent about the whole thing. He is saying he doesnt know how or why. But it is important for folks to realize that sometimes there are false positives in labs and the sample could have been mishandled or other factors involved.

As for public opinion, Tyler has lost if Phil Liggett declares him guilty. So I guess it's over.

House

In other words you didn't really research it and it doesn't really say what you want it to say so you will just disregard it. Sounds very much like another poster on these forums who turns everything into his crusade. Whatever dude.

meehs

What? Read the reports for yourself! No I didn't research it but I do remember reading about the "mysterious extortionist with the large, fake, black moustache" that allegedy threatened the Phonak riders with positive tests if they didn't pay him. LOL! I remember thinking that it sounded ridiculous to me. Especially since no one bothered to mention it until after two Phonak riders tested positive. The only thing ever reported was the story told by the riders. No one ever reported the story as fact. It's not whether it says what I want it to say. It is what it is. I think maybe you should go reread the stories for yourself.

House

If we are doing the "no research, just what I remember" then I recall an article on either velonews or cyclingnews that mentioned the reporter being shown the text messages and number from this person. But I am sure that won't float in your world.

meehs

Dude, relax. I'm not trying to persecute anyone here. You're obiously just calling it the way you remember it too. I'm saying that the story sounded more than a bit fishy to me. I mean seriously, don't you think it's a bit odd that it didn't get reported until after Hamilton and Perez got busted? Why didn't they mention the mysterious extortionist before the positives came-out? And as far as showing a reporter a text message and a number; I could show a reporter a text message and a number from a "extortionist" too (sure it might be my mom). Believe me, I honetly wish that Tyler were innocent. I'm just not naive enough to buy it.

House

My point was never about buying it, but about the fact that you asked for sources, then when provided with them you didn't like them and now you don't like my memory compared to yours. You are acting like a certain obsessed poster who trys to turn everything into what supports his ideas no matter what. By the way I am relaxed, you are the one who got a little itchy there! Oh well.

meehs

And my point was that the only "source" that can actually be sited for the story is the Phonak team itself. VeloNews and the rest just reported the story as it was relayed to them. With the original source being Phonak. Not very credible in my opinion.

It's not that I "didn't like" the sources you provided or that I don't like how you remember it vs. how I remember it. It's just that the only "source" (if you want to call it that) that can be sited is no more credible now than it was when the story came out. I'm 100% itch-free my friend.

Edit: Let me add that I could be wrong about this as I am just going on how I remember it. If someone can provide some info that adds some real credibility to the extortion angle I'd be more than interested in hearing it.