The Secret Race

[GrumpyOldGuy]

A great book but you have to ask yourself this- Would Tyler have been so forth coming if he was never caught? Nothing makes a man more honest that being exposed. It's one thing to come clean if you were never exposed but your little angle convince you to tall all. Totally different if you do it after the fact. One is honesty, the other sensation. Tyler, Armstrong? The same thing just different stakes. And I'm not talking about personalities i.e. the one is an a-hole and the other not, I'm talking about the doping issue.

 

Hmm, interesting take on it Muddy. I got the feeling initially TH came across as a little evangelical, but after I finished the book and thought about it a bit, I think he would have told all eventually, even if he was never caught, I think, unlike Lance, he is not a very strong personality and would have never been able to keep it from his family and friends. Also, unlike Lance he didnt have the massive support structures in high places who covered his back and worked for him, so I think sooner or later he would have caved.........probably sooner.

[Mr Legs]

Hmm, interesting take on it Muddy. I got the feeling initially TH came across as a little evangelical, but after I finished the book and thought about it a bit, I think he would have told all eventually, even if he was never caught, I think, unlike Lance, he is not a very strong personality and would have never been able to keep it from his family and friends. Also, unlike Lance he didnt have the massive support structures in high places who covered his back and worked for him, so I think sooner or later he would have caved.........probably sooner.

 

I think that he gives a honest account, but disagree with Grumps, Hamilton would not have been so forthcoming had he never been caught.

[Garfield2010]

Can we close this thread please. I will not allow this LA bashing to continue. He didnt dope. He never tested positive. In fact, he survived cancer. LA is a true legend of the sport.

[javadude]

Tyler admits that had he not been subpoenaed to stand before a grand jury he probably would have kept his silence. The fear of being sentenced for perjury was what it took for him to break his silence, and not some desire to do good.

[eddy]

Can we close this thread please. I will not allow this LA bashing to continue. He didnt dope. He never tested positive. In fact, he survived cancer. LA is a true legend of the sport.

 

Serious question, without any sarcasm or irony intended.

 

Did you forget to add the winking smily to your post, or is that an honestly held view ?

[Garfield2010]

Serious question, without any sarcasm or irony intended.

 

Did you forget to add the winking smily to your post, or is that an honestly held view ?

 

Honestly. He has never tested positive. End of story. Why are there tests in the first place if we place no value on them. Everyone has these theories yet none of you know anything about this topic. I guess you also all read and believed the book "Positively False"?

 

Julius M has more integrity than Tyler Hamilton

[Guest Omega Man]

I'm gonna download the book from Piratebay. Only seems fair.

[Joe Low]

Can we close this thread please. I will not allow this LA bashing to continue. He didnt dope. He never tested positive. In fact, he survived cancer. LA is a true legend of the sport.

There's a lot more to being guilty than publicly being announced as testing positive.

 

But maybe you are yanking our chains.

[eddy]

 

 

Honestly.

 

Ok.

[Tubehunter]

Garf please don't catch eddy with the double p1ss take dude!

[Garfield2010]

Serious question, without any sarcasm or irony intended.

 

Did you forget to add the winking smily to your post, or is that an honestly held view ?

[Zook]

Honestly. He has never tested positive. End of story. Why are there tests in the first place if we place no value on them. Everyone has these theories yet none of you know anything about this topic. I guess you also all read and believed the book "Positively False"?

 

Julius M has more integrity than Tyler Hamilton

 

Not the end of any story.

1. Hamilton and others go into great lengths to explain why it was so easy to dope and get away with it.
   
2. The actual writer wasn't Tyler. Every fact would have been checked before his co-author put his name to it.
   
3. Many, many people were mentioned. No sane person would do that unless they wanted to spend the rest of their life in lawsuits.
   
4. Armstrong is known for strong-arming those who go after him, legally and otherwise. Hamilton'd have to be nuts to set himself up for that storm as well.
   
5. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ARMSTRONG. The guys doing the investigations are not doing it mainly to go after a rider who has finished his career. They're primarily interested in stopping the systematic enabling of doping, which has many current industry participants involved.
   

You know, there are three kinds of people in this discussion. 1 Those who always thought that Armstrong was guilty. 2 Those who always thought he was innocent but are open to the judicial process and balance of proof. 3 Those who will never believe anything except his innocence, despite any proof or judicial processes.

 

For the sake of the middle group, the proof must come out, either way. Maybe the USADA got 11 people to lie and their other 'proof' is nothing. Maybe the UCI is complicit in protecting certain riders, and Bruyneel, Ferrari etc enabled doping. Those would be far more important than any one individual doping, because that's systematic.

 

I do think it's cleaner. Hamilton (or the co-author) writes that the top-placed Alpe d'Huez TT rider in 2011 would have come 40th in 2004. That is a sign that things are being cleaned up. I've said it before - you have to be a fool to dope now, because they will get better at checking bloods from previous races, and you will be nailed. You can't fight the future improvements in science, no matter how good your doctor is.

 

(It is possible Garfield got me. Whatever )

Edited October 8, 2012 by Zook

[davetapson]

I've never doubted that LA doped - how can you beat all the other self confessed dopers without doping?

 

From what I've heard he's pretty disagreeable and in all likelihood a sociopath.

 

That said, the one argument that no one is mentioning (and the one with the most relevance to me) is - 'So ok, everyone was doping (because they were) and LA won 7 TdF's against the lot of them - that is some achievement.'

 

It's a pity that his personal behaviour (lies, deception, aggressiveness and general a-holeness) is going to blow his achievements out of the water.

 

Personally I think he's a bit of a xxxx.

[Garfield2010]

Not the end of any story.

1. Hamilton and others go into great lengths to explain why it was so easy to dope and get away with it.
   
2. The actual writer wasn't Tyler. Every fact would have been checked before his co-author put his name to it.
   
3. Many, many people were mentioned. No sane person would do that unless they wanted to spend the rest of their life in lawsuits.
   
4. Armstrong is known for strong-arming those who go after him, legally and otherwise. Hamilton'd have to be nuts to set himself up for that storm as well.
   
5. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ARMSTRONG. The guys doing the investigations are not doing it mainly to go after a rider who has finished his career. They're primarily interested in stopping the systematic enabling of doping, which has many current industry participants involved.
   

You know, there are three kinds of people in this discussion. 1 Those who always thought that Armstrong was guilty. 2 Those who always thought he was innocent but are open to the judicial process and balance of proof. 3 Those who will never believe anything except his innocence, despite any proof or judicial processes.

 

For the sake of the middle group, the proof must come out, either way. Maybe the USADA got 11 people to lie and their other 'proof' is nothing. Maybe the UCI is complicit in protecting certain riders, and Bruyneel, Ferrari etc enabled doping. Those would be far more important than any one individual doping, because that's systematic.

 

I do think it's cleaner. Hamilton (or the co-author) writes that the top-placed Alpe d'Huez TT rider in 2011 would have come 40th in 2004. That is a sign that things are being cleaned up. I've said it before - you have to be a fool to dope now, because they will get better at checking bloods from previous races, and you will be nailed. You can't fight the future improvements in science, no matter how good your doctor is.

 

(It is possible Garfield got me. Whatever )

 

Hahaha!! Dude, I have been anti Lance since 8 years back when I read the book Bad Blood.

[Zook]

Hahaha!! Dude, I have been anti Lance since 8 years back when I read the book Bad Blood.

 

Silence. I kill you.

[davetapson]

An interesting thing that came out of Hamilton's book was that the doping doctors (except probably Ferrari) tended to be crap doctors, including being disorganised. One of Hamilton's issues (or the the main issue) was that he was caught with somebody else's blood in him.

 

How bad is this, on a number of levels?

1. Blood reactions

2. HIV / hepatitis transfer - and who knows what else

3. and athletes being caught with other people's blood in them...

 

The doc had some clown who was half demented at the time managing the blood bags... I mean, seriously, wtf?