LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web sites)) said on Thursday.
American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a statement that the result of the B, or second, test was "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
Hamilton faced losing his gold medal if his B test at the Olympics had been positive.
The 33-year-old was suspended on Wednesday by his Phonak team. Hamilton has been told he gave a positive test after winning a time trial during this month's Tour of Spain.
LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web sites)) said on Thursday.
American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a statement that the result of the B, or second, test was "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
I wonder if the Tyler Hamilton Foundation will run a full page ad in Velonews:
"Congratulations Tyler on a non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells!"
His punishment will be that Haven will make him keep the Gold on the mantle. Imagine having to look at that day in and day out if you are him.
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
<Musashi> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Olympic Champion Hamilton in the Clear - IOC LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web sites)) said on Thursday. American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a statement that the result of the B, or second, test was "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
"Alex Rodriguez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
No, the B test was inconclusive because there "weren't enough intact red blood cells" to do the test. This is not the same as a negative test - it means that they don't know because they couldn't perform the test properly. The A test was positive, but according to the rules you need both A+B to be positive (pun intended) to be positive. Like in the Vuelta.
"Alex Rodriguez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
<Musashi> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Olympic Champion Hamilton in the Clear - IOC LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web sites)) said on Thursday. American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a statement that the result of the B, or second, test was "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:58:04 -0400, Alex Rodriguez <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
<Musashi> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Olympic Champion Hamilton in the Clear - IOC LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web sites)) said on Thursday. American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a statement that the result of the B, or second, test was "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
Not negative. They mistakenly froze the B sample, which destroyed it, so no second test was run.
CLIPPED FROM YAHOO SPORTS: Though Hamilton was cleared of any Olympic doping violation, a similar backup blood test came back positive from the Spanish Vuelta, his Swiss racing team Phonak said. That test was conducted Sept. 11.
In article <[email hidden]>, jeff@cyclingnews-punt-com says...
Quoted message said:
"Alex Rodriguez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
No, the B test was inconclusive because there "weren't enough intact red blood cells" to do the test. This is not the same as a negative test - it means that they don't know because they couldn't perform the test properly. The A test was positive, but according to the rules you need both A+B to be positive (pun intended) to be positive. Like in the Vuelta.
If it wasn't positive, it is negative. Pretty straight forward. Doesn't matter why it wasn't positive. I think it is pretty stupid for WADA, or who ever did the test, to post reasons why a sample was negative. It implies that the person being tested got off on a technicality and that they really are guilty. -------------- Alex
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
"Alex Rodriguez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
<Musashi> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Olympic Champion Hamilton in the Clear - IOC > LONDON (Reuters) - Olympic time trial champion Tyler Hamilton has been > cleared of any doping offence at the Athens Olympics, the > International Olympic Committee (news - web sites) (IOC (news - web > sites)) said on Thursday. > American Hamilton had been told he gave a positive A, or first, test > for a blood transfusion in Athens on August 18 but the IOC said in a > statement that the result of the B, or second, test was > "non-conclusive because of a lack of enough intact red blood cells."
He got off because they could not perform the B test?
No, his guilt could not be proven because the B test was negative.
2 postive, one inconclusive, no negatives.
Inconclusive = not positive = negative. ------------ Alex
Two sets of tests. The ones from the olympics (2 of them) were tests A and B. A was positive. If A is positive they check B to see if it was right. B sample was degenerated.
The other positive was from another set of tests. I haven't heard if there is a B for that or not.
Two sets of tests. The ones from the olympics (2 of them) were tests A and B. A was positive. If A is positive they check B to see if it was right. B sample was degenerated.
The other positive was from another set of tests. I haven't heard if there is a B for that or not.
Positive. No surprise. If you come up positive on two or three (Romandie?) separate occasions, the test was no fluke.
His only defense is, as it was, that the test is an invalid indicator of doping in his case.
