Tyler Hamilton's heavy doping program revealed

wow. I've given Lance some benefit of the doubt, but THIS.....if it is true, and not hearsay (not just allegations, but hard evidence from the Doctors own records), this is truly big and damning. Hopefully (but doubtfully), it will be so solid that will convince Tyle to admit to everything, and others too.

Will the whoooole truth come out finally?

Then general strategy in these situations, for legal and/or public relations purposes, is to deny for as long as possible. I can't imagine that strategy will change even if these latest allegations have merit.

I agree. And what's interesting is that the accused athlete/legal/PR people deny and deny, and meanwhile the clock is ticking until the end of their suspension. So it ends up looking like they were only suspended/guilty for a short period of time before they can start racing again. I mean, Tyler Hamilton's last appeal ended not that long ago, and I believe he's eligible to race this fall. So he only has to live for a short time as a guilty man - for the first year and several months he was still innocent until proven guilty, and fighting the good fight.

The other aspect is that IF this is all true, it should point out that "good guys" can still take performance enhancing drugs. I briefly met Tyler Hamilton, and he seemed like a nice enough guy. Everything I've ever heard about him (other than the, uh, suspension as a drug cheat) is that he's a great guy, one of the nicest guys in the sport. People have a hard time reconciling this concept, and see the "drug cheat" and "good guy" as mutually exclusive personalities. They're not.

does hamilton still live/living in marblehead mass? the women of marlbehead should tar n feather him carried in a cart.

He's still in/around Boulder as far as I know.

i saw his vanishing twin last nite walking out of a gay club. im gay too.

TGeldean wrote:

The other aspect is that IF this is all true, it should point out that "good guys" can still take performance enhancing drugs. I briefly met Tyler Hamilton, and he seemed like a nice enough guy. Everything I've ever heard about him (other than the, uh, suspension as a drug cheat) is that he's a great guy, one of the nicest guys in the sport. People have a hard time reconciling this concept, and see the "drug cheat" and "good guy" as mutually exclusive personalities. They're not.

As much as cheating disgusts me, I totally agree with your statement. Ive not met Tyler personally but everyone in Boulder that I know, who have met him, had the same reaction as you. My cycling friends tell me that in Europe its not the "moral issue" that it is in America. Apparently a lot of people view it as part of the sport. This has not been the impression Ive had from European newspapers, but from the friends of mine who have raced in Europe, thats what Ive heard. I think in the culture that they race in (Europe) its marginally accepted and therefore, there isnt a line between "Moral people" and "Unmoral people" when it comes to who is doping and who isn't. It seems to be in direct contrast with American track and field, where it almost seems like you would have to be lacking a conscience to cheat because of the moral standard that is placed on purity in sports. Just my two cents.

On a side note, Tim, any FF guys doing the BRR meet 3k on the 6th???

You're kidding, right? Because you think hes a "good guy" he should be forgiven for cheating?

Every drug cheat takes away the pureness of a sport, until at the end no one believes anything any more. This is much the case in cycling..its now a GIVEN that pretty much all bikers at that level take something to make it thru the season. Europeans dont care, much just like Americans dont care that thier baseball heroes are all druggies. It means they are resigned to the fact and have given up on cleaning it up. Sadly however, any kind of exploit in these sports now means nothing.

OK now that you've read all this about Hamilton, I want to ask the Lance cheerleaders..do you STILL think he's clean?

Get a clue.

If that were true why do countries like Italy have such tough anti-doping laws? Here they never go after the athlete, just the supplier. Over there it sounds like they will be just as rough on the athlete. Or am I reading this wrong? I'm not trying to bust your chops here, just trying to get some insight.

This is TH's response, carried on

www.dailypeloton.com

:

By Staff

Date: 6/26/2006

Tyler Hamilton

From Tyler Hamilton

Boulder, Colorado June 26, 2006

I was very upset to read the accusations against me and to see my name associated with the "Operacion Puerto" investigation in Spain. I have not been treated by Dr. Fuentes. I have not done what the article alleges. In addition, I have never been contacted by authorities in Spain regarding these allegations. Therefore, it is impossible to comment on a situation I have no knowledge of.

Did you actually read my post? Explain to me where I say Tyler Hamilton should be forgiven? Quite the opposite. He's a drug cheat. I felt he was guilty from the start, and I've been frustrated by the outpouring of support for him - especially in the Boulder area. I think it's deplorable that a large amount of people give athletes the benefit of the doubt not only when they test positive, but even after they're found to be guilty and punished. So these people think all athletes are "clean" unless proven otherwise, and then when the facts are shoved in their face, they refuse to trust them. If one doesn't believe the convicted drug cheats used drugs, then how can one believe anyone is using them?

My point about Hamilton is that he seems to genuinely be a good guy, albeit one that uses/used performance enhancing drugs. So don't be fooled by the "good guy" image. I've met a number of genuinely nice elite runners over the years, and yet I would be a fool to not think that some of them could be users.

As for the people who refuse to believe that Lance Armstrong used drugs, they simply have their heads in the sand and are overwhelmed by the positive stories associated with Lance Armstrong. "What is he on - he's on his bikes for 6 hours a day!" "There's no way he would have taken drugs after going through what he did with cancer!" "He does so much for cancer research - how dare you say he used drugs!" Again, these things are not mutually exclusive from possible drug use. People need to take their heads out of the sand and use rational thought to look at these situations objectively.

on the same day that good ole Rush is caught with drugs again!

Isn't it amazing that Lance Armstrong was clean and he was able to beat hordes of those filthy drug cheats?!

jsquire wrote:

If that were true why do countries like Italy have such tough anti-doping laws? Here they never go after the athlete, just the supplier. Over there it sounds like they will be just as rough on the athlete. Or am I reading this wrong? I'm not trying to bust your chops here, just trying to get some insight.

I dont neccessarily think that the general attitude of the public toward the morality of doping is directly connected to the governing bodies regulation of it. To use a non-running example, I dont think many people in America think of underage drinking as a moral issue, yet its heavily cracked down on (as much as the cops are capable of.) There they arent really connected much at all.

My point is that we (americans) look at Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Marion Jones and Tyler Hamilton and we think they dont know right from wrong and that they are evil people and along the same lines we look at Lance and think because he does good things for cancer patients that he therefore does know right from wrong and thus would never cheat. From what I have heard the attitude in Europe is quite the contrary. Its not about right and wrong, but about levelling the playing field and thats it.

I'm not directing this post at anyone in particular... but The thing is you can make a very compelling argument that morally doping isn't wrong. Who do you harm by doping? The only damage you are doing is to yourself and it you do it relatively safely through trained doctors you even minimize that risk. Obviously you indirectly harm your competitors, but not if everyone else does it. If I'm Hamilton and I know everybody on my team dopes, and I know at least 80% of the rest of the teams are doping, and probably more like 95-100% then what's stopping me? If nobody gets hurt by it but you and nearly everyone else is doing it, and you have no chance of being successful without using... well, how badly do you want to win? What are you willing to do? If you knew running 100 miles a week could possible take 10 years off your life but you also knew it would make you 5% faster then how many of you would still do it? Whatever it takes, right? Of course doping is illegal while running 100 mile weeks isn't so that example doesn't hold up too well.

How many of you have cheated on a test and justified it to yourselves? I'd bet my life more than half of you, and guess what it's basically the same thing. When you use sparknotes, look over on someone else's test, write answers on your hands, tell other people from the next section what will be on the test, etc - then you are gaining an edge on your "competitors." You're breaking the rules to gain an advantage just like dopers.

Obviously that doesn't mean we should just ignore doping and I think people like Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, Hamilton, etc should face severe consequences. But it is an interesting moral argument and maybe not as black and white as we would like it to be.

LouSiffer wrote:

on the same day that good ole Rush is caught with drugs again!

Oh my God, Rush caught with Viagra! You are such a scum.

Why does Viagra even require a prescription?

Anyone who has read about cycling any amount already knew that this went on. For those of you too dense to get it on your own it was all laid bare during the Festina Scandal in 1998. The riders were all questioned by judges and six of them all admitted doping (and the extent of it) and Richard Virenque pretended that he didn't take part. This was 8 years ago, so those of you who are surprised are either 15 years old or havn't been paying attention.

They don't go after distance runners with the same ferocity because there is so much less money in the sport and only the track circuit is in Europe. The worlds best dist. runners live outside of Europe (officially). But those of you who don't get it have to understand that the exact same things go on in all sports, including running.

The only thing that is different than 10 years ago is that there is more re-infusion blood doping going on (including homologous blood transfusions) because EPO is easier to catch now.

Why did Hamilton win L-B-L? Romandie? The Olympic Time Trial? Do you really think that he could beat riders that WERE DOPING? No, it's impossible.

It's the same in running. Several at or near National or World records have been busted for EPO. Do you think that they are the only ones using it?

I think there is an argument to be made for opening it up for using any drug. However, many of the drugs that are used can be life or health threatening so what is created is a system where in order to compete competitors have to take unhealthy drugs.

Also, if the sport has set rules to provide a level playing field then everyone who wants to race in that league has to abide by those rules.

In a sport such as running, where records play such an important role, you are cheating someone even if you are just doing the same drugs your contemporaries are using. You're cheating the athletes who came before you and set records without the benefit of the drugs you are using. You are also putting future competitors in the position where they will have to do drugs at least as powerful or be faced with the criticism that they arent't working hard enough or don't have the right attitude, otherwise they would be running as fast as so and so did.

Which is not to take away from the point that "nice people" cheat all the time.