My post to TylerHamilton.com...

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Tyler and Haven,

I really really want to believe that you are innocent. My faith in bike
racing as a sport will be seriously harmed if you were doping. (And I used
to be a bike racer.) Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately, by 3 different labs. Store a B and C sample for each test, as
backup proof. Volunteer to be subjected to video monitoring 24-hours a day
for 30 days, then retake the same tests. You could do this at some nice
hotel somewhere while you relax. (Purpose is to make sure you are not
re-doping to get the same results.) Sure this would be a pain, but it is
better than having your career be over...

Chuck C
Bedford, MA USA
Oct 4, 2004 at 3:15 PM

Chuck,

I agree. I only hope that Tyler is doing something like this but
under legal advice perhaps has to shut up for now. Oddly, sometimes
the best legal strategy to prove one's innocence may not be the
obvious one to us. But I would think that he will get good advice.

My understanding is that he does not access to the data from the
Olympic and Vuelta tests, the detailed, hard numbers. So he probably
doesnt want to give them anything "for free" until he is sure they
cant use THAT against him as well.

We'll see.

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't? he's
better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

this is like rick riley asking sammy sosa to submit to voluntary
testing a few years ago. sammy didn't handle the question too well,
but he should simply have said he'd be thrilled to be tested if
everyone else is as well. even if the chance of a false or inadvertent
positive is small that is a totally unnecessary risk to take.

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't? he's
better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

this is like rick riley asking sammy sosa to submit to voluntary
testing a few years ago. sammy didn't handle the question too well,
but he should simply have said he'd be thrilled to be tested if
everyone else is as well. even if the chance of a false or inadvertent
positive is small that is a totally unnecessary risk to take.

Wasn't the story that Sammy had boasted, "You can test me anytime, anywhere" and Riley called him
on it?

Kirby.

Kirby Krieger said:

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't? he's
better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

this is like rick riley asking sammy sosa to submit to voluntary
testing a few years ago. sammy didn't handle the question too well,
but he should simply have said he'd be thrilled to be tested if
everyone else is as well. even if the chance of a false or inadvertent
positive is small that is a totally unnecessary risk to take.

Wasn't the story that Sammy had boasted, "You can test me anytime, anywhere" and Riley called him
on it?

Kirby.

Yep.

No, not really a ridiculous suggestion. I am assuming that the UCI will ban
Tyler for 2 years from bike racing. So he is cooked, finished, done. He has
nothing to lose by volunteering for more tests.

Chuck

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

Testing and rather than 24 hour monitoring (he'd probably want some privacy
in the bathroom - which would effectively derail the monitoring idea) why
not take a polygraph? I know they can be beat, but generally not by your
average guy on the street. If you come through a polygraph AND testing, I'd
say at the very least you were clean, or you didn't know you were being
given the juice.

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

No, not really a ridiculous suggestion. I am assuming that the UCI will

ban

Quoted message said:

Tyler for 2 years from bike racing. So he is cooked, finished, done. He

has

Quoted message said:

nothing to lose by volunteering for more tests.

Chuck

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?

Three out of four tests returned positive and the fourth was mishandled.
There is no question in my mind that it too would have been positive.
However, apparently the science behind the tests hasn't been proven well.
Blood testing laboratories accept testing procedures after they've been
tested on thousands of samples containing a significant number of known
positives, known negatives and unknowns. The testing behind this test had, I
think, 83 samples all of which were known to be positive and one of those
came back negative.

That means there's absolutely no proof of what might cause false positives.
While the science behind the testing can suggest what a rate of false
positives might be, there is almost always a gap (and sometimes a LARGE gap)
between science and practice.

Furthermore, while unusual there's certainly a significant number of cases
in medical histories in which a person had more than one blood population.

At this point it would probably require a great deal of testing to
demonstrate that Tyler had a medical condition.

And because WADA isn't explaining their testing procedures there's
absolutely no way of demonstrating that their procedures might not be 100%
accurate.

I see no other thing that Tyler can do except develop a case against WADA
and that will reqiure months if not years. Luckily, Tyler is now rich enough
to be able to afford the up-front costs and then he can recoup 10 times as
much from the UCI and WADA for destroying his career.

[email hidden] (Amit) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

How do you suggest he refute the validity of the tests?

Quoted message said:

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

How do you think these tests could be false positives? The technology
used to determine the present or absence of minor blood types is
decades old with extensive validation in medical applications.

Quoted message said:

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't?

He will not be able to race for up to two years.

Quoted message said:

he's better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

How would he do this without providing additional samples? The test
has been conducted in medical applications for decades.

Quoted message said:

this is like rick riley asking sammy sosa to submit to voluntary
testing a few years ago. sammy didn't handle the question too well,
but he should simply have said he'd be thrilled to be tested if
everyone else is as well. even if the chance of a false or inadvertent
positive is small that is a totally unnecessary risk to take.

False or inadvertent possitives do not apply unless Tyler can
demonstrate atypical blood characteristics...meaning, he must provide
additional samples. This is not a case like Navigator's Davidenko,
HealthNet's Moninger, T-Mobile's Neben, and Navigator's Baldwin (plus
many more) who all had inadvertent claims (all were sanctioned).
Regardless of the validity of their claims, you cannot inadvertently
have different blood characteristics.

"Me" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Testing and rather than 24 hour monitoring (he'd probably want some privacy
in the bathroom - which would effectively derail the monitoring idea) why
not take a polygraph? I know they can be beat, but generally not by your
average guy on the street. If you come through a polygraph AND testing, I'd
say at the very least you were clean, or you didn't know you were being
given the juice.

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

No, not really a ridiculous suggestion. I am assuming that the UCI will

ban

Quoted message said:

Tyler for 2 years from bike racing. So he is cooked, finished, done. He

has

Quoted message said:

nothing to lose by volunteering for more tests.

Chuck

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

Unless Tyler can demonstrate that he has atypical blood, he will serve
a sentence. Some athletes have tried to demonstrate, with evidence,
that they inadvertently took a banned substance which resulted in a
positive test only to be sanctioned anyway. They could not prove that
they did not take the substance on purpose. Blood doping is not
similar. You cannot mistakenly get different minor blood-types.

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Amit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?

Three out of four tests returned positive and the fourth was mishandled.
There is no question in my mind that it too would have been positive.
However, apparently the science behind the tests hasn't been proven well.

from what i understand the technology isn't new, using it to test for
blood doping is the new application.

Quoted message said:

there is almost always a gap (and sometimes a LARGE gap)
between science and practice.

oh, please. if anyone knows if there's shortcomings in the science
it's the scientists to developed the tests, not bike race watching
schmoes.

it seems to me that like myself you only have a vague idea of how this
testing works. i imagine that there would be a way to tell a
difference between someone with naturally mixed minor blood types and
someone who is doped.

[email hidden] (L. Seer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Amit) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

How do you suggest he refute the validity of the tests?

lawyer and experts who back your claim and they duke it out in court

any test or procedure isn't 100% infallible, this can be exploited.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

How do you think these tests could be false positives? The technology
used to determine the present or absence of minor blood types is
decades old with extensive validation in medical applications.

i agree totally, i'm just saying suppose they are false positive
(which is what he's implying), what should his logical approach be ?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't?

He will not be able to race for up to two years.

yes, this doesn't help him. most likely there isn't something weird
with his blood anyways.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he's better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

How would he do this without providing additional samples? The test
has been conducted in medical applications for decades.

he can still explot weaknesses in the test itself or in the testing
protocol

for example someone who had a high hct. got off because he was able to
show that the blood wasn't collected properly. it doesn't mean the
result was wrong, but the result can get thrown out.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

even if the chance of a false or inadvertent
positive is small that is a totally unnecessary risk to take.

False or inadvertent possitives do not apply unless Tyler can
demonstrate atypical blood characteristics...meaning, he must provide
additional samples. ... you cannot inadvertently
have different blood characteristics.

true, i meant in general with regards to testing for doping, not only
blood doping.

Amit said:

it seems to me that like myself you only have a vague idea of how this
testing works. i imagine that there would be a way to tell a
difference between someone with naturally mixed minor blood types and
someone who is doped.

New Scientist has an article about the procedure this week. It looks as
if Tyler used blood doping and was badly advised that no tests could
catch him.

Hope this link helps:-

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996456

David Off said:

New Scientist has an article about the procedure this week. It looks as
if Tyler used blood doping and was badly advised that no tests could
catch him.

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996456

Oh yeah, that's completely convincing: the guy who developed the test says
it's infallible.

--
Trends and bias in election polls:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/pollbias.html

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Tyler and Haven,
Volunteer to be subjected to video monitoring 24-hours a day
for 30 days, , then retake the same tests. You could do this at some nice
hotel somewhere while you relax.

You a nutcase. A nice hotel ? Maybe he should go in a cage and let
people fire bananas an' nuts at him and have the video hooked up to
the Internet.

Quoted message said:

Tyler and Haven,

I really really want to believe that you are innocent.

It's hopeless. He's the second counterfeit from Massachutes, in the
news.

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

David Off said:

New Scientist has an article about the procedure this week. It looks as
if Tyler used blood doping and was badly advised that no tests could
catch him.

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996456

Oh yeah, that's completely convincing: the guy who developed the test says
it's infallible.

As opposed to an argument from a well known doping apologist like
yourself - very convincing !

mr60percent said:

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Oh yeah, that's completely convincing: the guy who developed the test
says it's infallible.

As opposed to an argument from a well known doping apologist like
yourself - very convincing !

Oh come on now. I'm not that well-known. There are people who come to rbr
most Tuesdays and they've never met me.

--
Trends and bias in election polls:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/pollbias.html

[email hidden] (Amit) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (L. Seer) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Amit) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Chuck Connell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

> Having said that, I'd like you to prove your innocence
> more aggressively. Volunteer to take another set of blood tests
> immediately

this is a ridiculous suggestion. if he comes up with a deal with the
governing body whereby he has to submit ot another round of tests,
fine, but no one in their right mind would or should ever agree to
voluntary testing.

How do you suggest he refute the validity of the tests?

lawyer and experts who back your claim and they duke it out in court

any test or procedure isn't 100% infallible, this can be exploited.

You are right. Duking it out is court is possible, but I haven't
heard of this medical technology ever being disputed in a malpractice
setting. If it isn't reliable, it certainly wouldn't have been relied
upon here. I guess Tyler did say he'll burn every last euro at least
trying.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

if the results are in fact false positives, and hamilton does what you
suggest and the second round of tests comes back negative then what ?
he just [censored] himself.

How do you think these tests could be false positives? The technology
used to determine the present or absence of minor blood types is
decades old with extensive validation in medical applications.

i agree totally, i'm just saying suppose they are false positive
(which is what he's implying), what should his logical approach be ?

How could there be false positives? Gees, that would suck if you are
someone who for medical reasons needs periodic transfusions, and you
life depends on antigen determination. Tyler's logical approach would
be to demeonstrate that he always has different minor blood types
present. Of course, if he cannot demonstate this, it might be wise to
save his Euros and not blow them on a costly, low probability court
challenge.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you're assuming that hamilton's argument might be along the lines that
there's something weird about his blood, what if there isn't?

He will not be able to race for up to two years.

yes, this doesn't help him. most likely there isn't something weird
with his blood anyways.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

he's better off trying to show there are problems with the test or how it
was done.

How would he do this without providing additional samples? The test
has been conducted in medical applications for decades.

he can still explot weaknesses in the test itself or in the testing
protocol

for example someone who had a high hct. got off because he was able to
show that the blood wasn't collected properly. it doesn't mean the
result was wrong, but the result can get thrown out.

High hct only gives someone a 2-week vacation. Who is this person who
got off?

IMO, Tyler is going to struggle with this unless he can demonstrate he
always has these particular minor blood types present.

Robert Chung said:

David Off said:

New Scientist has an article about the procedure this week. It looks as
if Tyler used blood doping and was badly advised that no tests could
catch him.

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996456

Oh yeah, that's completely convincing: the guy who developed the test says
it's infallible.

Well NS contacted a number of other scientists who also said that the
procedure works. Of course it could be a global egghead conspiracy.