Tyler in long BBC interview

David George said:

I don't know if anyone caught this but there was a 30 minute interview
with Tyler on the BBC TV program extra time. Initially the experienced
BBC interviewer had Tyler squirming like a snake on a hot poker but
little by little Tyler made his defense and came over quite well. Bobby
Julich has obviously burned his boats with Tyler (must want that silver
medal quite bad). As an initial sceptic of Tyler's I would now say that
it is a new test for cycling so lets give the guy a chance to defend
himself in January.

If anyone in Ontario gets BBC World on digital cable or satellite,
Extra Time is repeated again this afternoon at 12:30 EST, and possibly
later this week as well.

J. Spaceman

Jason Spaceman said:

Quoted message said:

I don't know if anyone caught this but there was a 30 minute interview
with Tyler on the BBC TV program extra time. ...

Quoted message said:

If anyone in Ontario gets BBC World on digital cable or satellite,
Extra Time is repeated again this afternoon at 12:30 EST, and possibly
later this week as well.

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this? I'll contact the BBC,
too. But it'd be a while before they could get an NTSC dub to me, I
think.

All I can find on their site is this short text story:

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4044831.stm>

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Jim

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

It's on in 10 minutes, I'll record it and put it online.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Thanks tons Ewoud! Let me know if you ISP bills start piling up. I'd
be glad to help out.

Jim

Jim Feeley said:

Let me know if you ISP bills start piling up. I'd
be glad to help out.

Wow great, but there are no bills.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Ewoud Dronkert <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Thanks for saving the BBC / Tyler interview.
Also, I had never seen six day racing. It looks like a lot of fun.

Howard

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Thanks very much for recording and hosting this. It played just fine on my
system, w/BSplayer.

While I'm not a psychologist or expert in analyzing testimony, I'd have to
say after viewing this that I believe Tyler is being truthful.

About the only substantive comment that came out is that he requested a DNA
test to confirm that this is his sample on more than one occasion and
according to him, it was not done. Seems like a simple thing to do and the
right thing to do. If WADA was sure it was his sample they'd be willing to
do that - they should be trying to help the cyclists. The authorities
should not follow this more intrusive testing and spying protocol with
irresponsible comments and resistant attitude. Even the cyclists found
guilty are not criminals, nor deserving of this attitude. Questionable and
incompletely proven assertions should allow the cyclists to retain an
'innocent until proven' status.

I hope, when he is proven innocent (heh, or not guilty) that he sues the
pants off all these officials that are running their mouths.

Uh, back to the interview, I found nothing in his replies, posture, or body
language that could even be remotely found suspicious or deceptive, again
in my inexpert opinion.

I was a little surprised that the interviewer didn't ask at least one
leading question, such as 'Tyler, is there any possible explanation of
these results, such as an innocent transfusion following surgery or
something that might have caused these findings'. Most of the other
cyclists that have been later found guilty have offered some kind of lame
excuse, such as contaminated vitamins or something. Of course his team
would probably have advised him not to comment on such questions. To his
credit he was not at all evasive, nor did he decline to answer any question
put to him except for any highly technical medical comments.

I'd also have to say that if, in the highly unlikely chance (imo) that he
is not being truthful, he's dug such a huge hole with comments about family
and honesty and truthfulness, that he'll likely never be able to show his
face in public, let alone race again. IOW, he seems to completely believe
his comments as truthful, internally.

-B

Thank you very much for making this available. AFAIC, there is really
nothing new from this. Several things struck me about what Tyler said, and
didn't say.

1. He refused to comment on what the alleged inconsistencies are in the test
and/or testing procedure.
2. It's nice to know that he isn't a woman and that he isn't preggers, but
he never directly answered whether or not he accepts the scientific basis of
the test. Claiming that the woman's pregnancy situation now uses another
test, may or may not be true and is irrelevant to the validity of science
that has been the basis of testing used in clinical settings for many years.
3. It appears that Tyler may have misrepresented what happened regarding the
frozen Athens sample. Tyler claimed that there was no mistake in freezing
it as the first test was deemed negative. IIRC, the first test was
mistakenly labeled as negative when it should have been labeled suspicious
and was quickly deemed suspicious. Also, IIRC, the procedure with the new
test was not followed as the B sample should have been refrigerated--not
frozen. This has nothing to do with the positive A&B samples at the Vuelta
for which he is charged with doping.
4. Tyler used the words truth and truthful many, many times. I had the
feeling that this was the mantra that his lawyer gave him. There comes a
point where too much sounds like guilt.
5. No reasonable response as to Perez. Subjectively, I had the impression
that he was squirming on that question.
6.. While Tyler claimed that the press has been making false reports, it
appears from this that the press reports have in fact been quite accurate.
Nowhere does Tyler show the falsity of any reporting, other than to claim
the truth of his innocence. I don't recall any news outlet proclaiming
Tyler guilty as charged.

Too bad the host didn't ask him about the Prentis Steffen allegations in
L.A. Confidential. All in all, lots of smoke and mirrors and not terribly
well done.

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

Quoted message said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Ewoud Dronkert said:

It's on in 10 minutes, I'll record it and put it online.

*** Thank you for doing that.

---
k e i t h a l e x a n d e r
http://www.nootrope.net
http://www.modernamerican.com
aim: nootrope9 carbonfiber

- - e n d t r a n s m i s s i o n - -

B. Lafferty said:

Thank you very much for making this available. AFAIC, there is really
nothing new from this. Several things struck me about what Tyler said, and
didn't say.

1. He refused to comment on what the alleged inconsistencies are in the test
and/or testing procedure.

True, but he did comment on some inconsistencies, I believe. My impression
was that to do so in the specific case would be too complex for the
interviewer or the casual viewer to follow, stating that he's not a
scientist, etc.

Quoted message said:

2. It's nice to know that he isn't a woman and that he isn't preggers, but
he never directly answered whether or not he accepts the scientific basis of
the test. Claiming that the woman's pregnancy situation now uses another
test, may or may not be true and is irrelevant to the validity of science
that has been the basis of testing used in clinical settings for many years.

Yes, I had forgotten this comment. It was silly, though not especially
foolish for him to make this weak 'joke', 'I'm not pregnant'. Would his
lawyer have coached him to say this kind of thing?

Quoted message said:

3. It appears that Tyler may have misrepresented what happened regarding the
frozen Athens sample. Tyler claimed that there was no mistake in freezing
it as the first test was deemed negative. IIRC, the first test was
mistakenly labeled as negative when it should have been labeled suspicious
and was quickly deemed suspicious. Also, IIRC, the procedure with the new
test was not followed as the B sample should have been refrigerated--not
frozen. This has nothing to do with the positive A&B samples at the Vuelta
for which he is charged with doping.

He did claim this, saying two viewings of the sample were negative and it
wasn't until 28 days later that a third viewing was done of a test that was
supposedly 'black and white', iirc. IOW, for a clear cut test, why the
repeat opinions on the validity?

Quoted message said:

4. Tyler used the words truth and truthful many, many times. I had the
feeling that this was the mantra that his lawyer gave him. There comes a
point where too much sounds like guilt.

I agree, but didn't quite get to the point where it sounded like guilt, in
my subjective opinion. I see your point, though. In addition the 'righteous
indignation' seemed to be missing. He didn't say some things I might have
said, such as 'I've never, ever received a transfusion of anyone's blood,
nor of any blood, and I'd be willing to take a lie detector test on this',
or some such thing. I'd be tearing up and pounding the desk, and would be
more shaken up. However, it has been some time since the initial
allegations, and the emotions might have abated. Uh, I noticed he did
mention 'truth' more than saying exculpatory things, such as "I've never
doped, never taking performance enhancing things, yadda, yadda"...IOW, I'd
be saying everything I could think of that was true to bolster my claim of
innocence and purity. He did say Phonak was a 'clean team', heh, but then
the astute interviewer mentioned the EPO incident, making TH sound a bit
foolish.

Quoted message said:

5. No reasonable response as to Perez. Subjectively, I had the impression
that he was squirming on that question.

Ah-h, not so much here with the squirming, he didn't say much, but what
would you expect him to say? I'd have to look it over again for any signs
of lack of comfort on this.

Quoted message said:

6.. While Tyler claimed that the press has been making false reports, it
appears from this that the press reports have in fact been quite accurate.
Nowhere does Tyler show the falsity of any reporting, other than to claim
the truth of his innocence. I don't recall any news outlet proclaiming
Tyler guilty as charged.

Too bad the host didn't ask him about the Prentis Steffen allegations in
L.A. Confidential. All in all, lots of smoke and mirrors and not terribly
well done.

Can you elaborate on that for those of us new to this?

Again, I'm not disagreeing strongly with anything you said, just trying to
add some comments, perhaps serving as the somewhat informed average public
cycling fan. Hope you don't mind.

Good post.

-B

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

On 11/29/2004 12:25 PM, in article
[email hidden], "Ewoud Dronkert"

Quoted message said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Ha! That I can actually play, easily.

Dunno how easy it is to burn to VCD, but it's a start.

Ewoud ... Believe me ... I absolutely appreciate what you're doing ...

--
Steven L. Sheffield
stevens at veloworks dot com
veloworks at worldnet dot ay tea tee dot net
bellum pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est
ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea eye tee why you ti ay aitch
aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you
double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [foreword] slash

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

1. He refused to comment on what the alleged inconsistencies are in the
test
and/or testing procedure.

True, but he did comment on some inconsistencies, I believe. My impression
was that to do so in the specific case would be too complex for the
interviewer or the casual viewer to follow, stating that he's not a
scientist, etc.

This is what Tyler wrote on his web site, "Moreover, comparing my "test
results" from Athens to "test results" from Spain reveal serious
inconsistencies, which could mean that 1) the test itself is invalid; 2) the
test method was not followed; or 3) that one of the samples is not my
blood."

I don't recall Tyler stating what those inconcictencies are as related to
the above.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

2. It's nice to know that he isn't a woman and that he isn't preggers, but
he never directly answered whether or not he accepts the scientific basis
of
the test. Claiming that the woman's pregnancy situation now uses another
test, may or may not be true and is irrelevant to the validity of science
that has been the basis of testing used in clinical settings for many
years.

Yes, I had forgotten this comment. It was silly, though not especially
foolish for him to make this weak 'joke', 'I'm not pregnant'. Would his
lawyer have coached him to say this kind of thing?

I think it was a spontaneous joke and not a bad one at that. However, he
was quite vague as to whether or not the underlying science of the test is
invalid, in his opinion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

3. It appears that Tyler may have misrepresented what happened regarding
the
frozen Athens sample. Tyler claimed that there was no mistake in freezing
it as the first test was deemed negative. IIRC, the first test was
mistakenly labeled as negative when it should have been labeled suspicious
and was quickly deemed suspicious. Also, IIRC, the procedure with the new
test was not followed as the B sample should have been refrigerated--not
frozen. This has nothing to do with the positive A&B samples at the
Vuelta
for which he is charged with doping.

He did claim this, saying two viewings of the sample were negative and it
wasn't until 28 days later that a third viewing was done of a test that
was
supposedly 'black and white', iirc. IOW, for a clear cut test, why the
repeat opinions on the validity?

This, and all of the Athens stuff is really, AFAICS, irrelevant. He has a
positive and a confirming positive from the Vuelta to deal with.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

4. Tyler used the words truth and truthful many, many times. I had the
feeling that this was the mantra that his lawyer gave him. There comes a
point where too much sounds like guilt.

I agree, but didn't quite get to the point where it sounded like guilt, in
my subjective opinion. I see your point, though. In addition the
'righteous
indignation' seemed to be missing. He didn't say some things I might have
said, such as 'I've never, ever received a transfusion of anyone's blood,
nor of any blood, and I'd be willing to take a lie detector test on this',
or some such thing. I'd be tearing up and pounding the desk, and would be
more shaken up. However, it has been some time since the initial
allegations, and the emotions might have abated. Uh, I noticed he did
mention 'truth' more than saying exculpatory things, such as "I've never
doped, never taking performance enhancing things, yadda, yadda"...IOW, I'd
be saying everything I could think of that was true to bolster my claim of
innocence and purity. He did say Phonak was a 'clean team', heh, but then
the astute interviewer mentioned the EPO incident, making TH sound a bit
foolish.

His comments about testing in the sport and testing him are off the mark.
WADA or the UCI has stated that they were looking for him, at least at the
Vuelta, because his out of competition blood tests were in some manner
suspicious. The standard scenario now is that the teams deny any organized
doping, like Festina, but turn a blind eye, at least, toward the doping that
their riders do--as long as there are results and they don't get caught.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

5. No reasonable response as to Perez. Subjectively, I had the
impression
that he was squirming on that question.

Ah-h, not so much here with the squirming, he didn't say much, but what
would you expect him to say? I'd have to look it over again for any signs
of lack of comfort on this.

Not much he can say. We all know that it potentially hurts his case with
pr.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

6.. While Tyler claimed that the press has been making false reports, it
appears from this that the press reports have in fact been quite accurate.
Nowhere does Tyler show the falsity of any reporting, other than to claim
the truth of his innocence. I don't recall any news outlet proclaiming
Tyler guilty as charged.

Too bad the host didn't ask him about the Prentis Steffen allegations in
L.A. Confidential. All in all, lots of smoke and mirrors and not terribly
well done.

Can you elaborate on that for those of us new to this?

We all read the reports in the press. I haven't seen anything that Tyler
has pointed to that is factually false. The Prentis Steffen allegations
were discussed here back in August. Google his name and you should get lots
to read.

Quoted message said:

Again, I'm not disagreeing strongly with anything you said, just trying to
add some comments, perhaps serving as the somewhat informed average public
cycling fan. Hope you don't mind.

Good post.

Thanks. I think Bobby J. expressed it very well. I don't know haow he's
going to get out of this one. If he can prove that the test is not viable,
that will be an excellent ending for him, the UCI and WADA. The truth shall
set them free. Well, maybe.

quote='Jim Feeley'Jason Spaceman said:

Quoted message said:

I don't know if anyone caught this but there was a 30 minute interview
with Tyler on the BBC TV program extra time. ...

Quoted message said:

If anyone in Ontario gets BBC World on digital cable or satellite,
Extra Time is repeated again this afternoon at 12:30 EST, and possibly
later this week as well.

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this? I'll contact the BBC,
too. But it'd be a while before they could get an NTSC dub to me, I
think.

All I can find on their site is this short text story:

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4044831.stm>

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Jim[/QUOTE]
BBC webcasts.
Also SW radio and some NPR stations will pick up BBC broadcasts for 1-2 hours a day.

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

Quoted message said:

I don't know if anyone caught this but there was a 30 minute interview
with Tyler on the BBC TV program extra time. Initially the experienced
BBC interviewer had Tyler squirming like a snake on a hot poker but
little by little Tyler made his defense and came over quite well. Bobby
Julich has obviously burned his boats with Tyler (must want that silver
medal quite bad). As an initial sceptic of Tyler's I would now say that
it is a new test for cycling so lets give the guy a chance to defend
himself in January.

If Tyler really is innocent then Perez must be doping. That'd be too great
a coincidence!!!!

Quoted message said:

About the only substantive comment that came out is that he requested a

DNA

Quoted message said:

test to confirm that this is his sample on more than one occasion and
according to him, it was not done. Seems like a simple thing to do and the
right thing to do. If WADA was sure it was his sample they'd be willing to
do that - they should be trying to help the cyclists. The authorities
should not follow this more intrusive testing and spying protocol with
irresponsible comments and resistant attitude. Even the cyclists found
guilty are not criminals, nor deserving of this attitude. Questionable and
incompletely proven assertions should allow the cyclists to retain an
'innocent until proven' status.

Couldn't DNA testing be used to determine if another's blood was in your
veins? Everyone trusts DNA testing, right?

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Hmmm. 360MB of downloads later, neither my Windows Media Player 10 nor
my Winamp 5 installations can decode the video. Very odd.

Stewart Fleming said:

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jim Feeley said:

Any idea how someone in the USA could see this?

Download from http://www.phys.uu.nl/~dronkert/tmp/
Just to [censored] Sheffield off, it's in WMedia9 format.

Hmmm. 360MB of downloads later, neither my Windows Media Player 10 nor
my Winamp 5 installations can decode the video. Very odd.

Get Media Player Classic. It will play anything. You might also try
BSplayer, and/or your DVD player. The files play fine on all of those on my
system.

-B

Pih said:

If Tyler really is innocent then Perez must be doping. That'd be too great
a coincidence!!!!

Actually, if Hamilton really is innocent then the test is flawed and it
would be more likely that Perez is innocent too.

--
Firefox Web Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/