Tyler Hamilton confessions/accusations

Page 25 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 25, 2010
434
0
0
Good for hamilton and while I think it took abit too long to go public...I appreciate it...I not only hope it helps bring down armstrong I hope Hamilton starts to heal abit..the guy has had a very rough ride...it must be hard to have your life destroyed, and Landis knows this as well, all the while watching another cheater become an american saint and not only be a sanctimonious a hole but to get rich as well doing it while sliming anyone who crosses him...Tyler, you did the right thing here and I hope that pays off for you personally...
 
Jul 28, 2010
2,274
0
0
Andynonomous said:

Thanks for the link.
I think these 2 paragraphs in the story sum up my beliefs quite well:
Allegations this serious from former teammates-turned-accusers, even discredited ones, cannot and should not be ignored.

Nor can they be left to cycling officials who don't have the stomach, the credibility or the muscle to lead the sport out of this mess.

Yet, to move on from the doped-up era that all three riders were part of, cycling needs to know the truth.

So do all the young cyclists who — like Armstrong, Landis and Hamilton — will go on to compete at the Tour de France.

So do we all.
 
Aug 19, 2009
612
0
0
WildspokeJoe said:
It's funny people are praising Hamilton for turning on Armstrong.

The ONLY reason why he confessed was because he was put before a grand jury.


There are NO heroes. Zero.

After Armstrong goes down, let's get Indurain.

I think people are happy because he's not trying to insult our intelligence anymore.

Like a lot of people I suspect, I viewed the claims of innocence by both Floyd and Tyler as protecting bigger interests - namely that of Armstrong et al.

If that ever was the case, it's nice to see that it isn't anymore.
 
Oct 25, 2010
434
0
0
Armstrong's ego is beyond the reasonable edge...I find it hilarious that his tactic is now to try to slime 60 minutes...it is one thing to coat other cyclists who tell the truth as outsiders who are jealous, trying to make cash, as liars...whatever...but good luck with the american public trying to slime 60 minutes for trying to bring fraud and deception into public view...if enron, wallstreet and other various robber barons couldnt destroy the stories by questioning 60 minutes' credibility I highly doubt lance will be able to do so...he must have taken a page out of his bike riding buddy Bush's book...now bush did actually slime 60 minutes for questioning his military service and it worked...but somehow, I think Armstrong has picked the wrong foe and is going to lose hard...
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
flicker said:
I see the irony. Is it proven that Eki fueled? Can you cite some information, please?

For those who know little about Eki.

He rode for USPS 97-98 then 00-05

In 06 he became assistant to Bruyneel. He is now a DS at the radiosmack.

I'd say he was clean :rolleyes:
 
jobiwan said:
Thanks for the link.
I think these 2 paragraphs in the story sum up my beliefs quite well:

I like these:

Every cent and all the hours that U.S. federal investigators and their European counterparts are expending on trying to untangle this bag of worms are well spent. Allegations this serious from former teammates-turned-accusers, even discredited ones, cannot and should not be ignored.

Nor can they be left to cycling officials who don't have the stomach, the credibility or the muscle to lead the sport out of this mess.

Ignore the complaints from Armstrong's camp that the feds are wasting millions. Maybe they are. Maybe, as Armstrong insists, the feds are chasing nothing but a pack of lies about bad things that did or did not happen a long time ago, a long way away in Europe.

Either way, it doesn't matter. You can't attach a dollar figure on the value of truth and justice. Someone needs to determine whether Hamilton and Landis are lying, and judicial authorities are the only ones who have the power to reach across borders for evidence, the clout and the needed determination to get to the bottom of this.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Benotti69 said:
For those who know little about Eki.

He rode for USPS 97-98 then 00-05

In 06 he became assistant to Bruyneel. He is now a DS at the radiosmack.

I'd say he was clean :rolleyes:
Plus, he was the pioneer of the Ekimullet.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Benotti69 said:
For those who know little about Eki.

He rode for USPS 97-98 then 00-05

In 06 he became assistant to Bruyneel. He is now a DS at the radiosmack.

I'd say he was clean :rolleyes:

Oh and you forgot to add that Eki hails from behind the Iron Curtain..... and he was a champion pro cyclist....

Really all you had to say was, current friend, associate of Lance's....LOL

Haterz.....
 
pedaling squares said:
Plus, he was the pioneer of the Ekimullet.

ekimov.jpg
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Polyarmour said:
I hate to burst your bubble but the fact that Landis and Hamilton have told lies for years DOES affect their credibility. You don't send a man to prison based on the confessions of liars, even though you want to believe they're finally telling the truth. Maybe Novitsky has better evidence up his sleeve, maybe he doesn't. What is required is evidence that can't be explained away in any other fashion. Tyler's confession might be cathartic for Tyler but it doesn't mean much for Lance. Even if Tyler's account is believed I don't think he can prove what was in Lance's fridge 12 years ago or what Lance injected.

On another note I find it curious that the lynch mob is now elevating Tyler to the status of hero when in fact he is a cheating dog.

And for the record if they can prove Lance cheated he will be an even bigger cheating dog. But they need to prove it.

Once again, you show just how little you know. People are put away all the time based on the testimony of people who have lied before and have little to no credibility. You really love to show just how little you know or understand on a regular basis. Did you know that horses will stay in a barn that is on fire?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Polyarmour said:
Yes

Just want to see better evidence before he is burnt at the stake.

So, discussing our belief in his guilt online is now "burning at the stake." You fanboys are a hysterical lot.
 
May 25, 2009
332
0
0
Magic Spanner said:
Let's get some perspective here.

Armstrong's guilt is clear to all in cycling except the increasingly small minority who don't want to question and think for themselves.

The debate is now how best to proceed and how to deal with him once the truth is out.

The current investigation looks likely to come down against Armstrong. The likes of Vaughters, Leiphimer and Hincapie appear more uneasy as the story unravels. If, as expected, Armstrong continues to deny, deny, deny then he will have to take what he's given.

Personally I would like to see the world of cycling disown and ignore him. In my mind his crime is riding roughshod over the sport I love. Bullying and cheating his way up and lieing on his way down. Let's be rid of him and leave him to the GJ.

Damn well said.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Benotti69 said:
For those who know little about Eki.

He rode for USPS 97-98 then 00-05

In 06 he became assistant to Bruyneel. He is now a DS at the radiosmack.

I'd say he was clean :rolleyes:
all valid points plus the school/tradition he comes from. and thanks for addressing the message rather than attacking the messenger. it was not very difficult given eki's past and the reality.
 
Yet, for each step forward, cycling steps backward to its even dirtier past with each fresh allegation against Armstrong, the sport's most famous star. That is not fair for those riders who are racing clean, who help fund cycling's anti-doping program and who shouldn't be tarred with the suspicions that linger from the era of which Armstrong, Landis and Hamilton were part. Nor is it fair to Armstrong if the allegations aren't backed up with proof.

Didn't particularly agree with this bit though. How is outing dopers unfair to those who are really racing clean (if indeed they exist)?
 
Oct 25, 2010
434
0
0
The amazing thing, and this has been going on for so long, is that no matter what is said, the average american non cyclists not only defends armstrong but gets all huffy when he is questioned...they go right along with everything his legal team says...I put that next to Bonds...even before the evidence, most baseball fans agreed he was a cheater...show a photo of the year before steriods, and show the one after juicing...and with no court of law baseball fans slam the guy...and they were right...

But with armstrong, it is a different story...even today I have read many comments on blogs ect or the bigger venues...huffington post, daily beast..you name it...the average american joe goes right along with the sliming...or at least a few are now sophisticated enough to say "well, they all did it..." after saying for years the truth tellers are liars ect. They defend the guy no matter what, like the trolls here...like they need to believe no matter what...no matter what evidence or personal stories...

my only conclusion is people need a saint in the face of cancer and or death...or they need that big a## hollywood story and will fight to the death defending it...that is sad...talk about playing a vulnerable public like some sad politician. People just need to defend this guy no matter what...and those of us in the cycling community talking about evidence are like atheists arguing with fundamentalists...

One example...a read a guy today sliming Hamilton et all...they are cheaters ect...so we can't trust them...and saying no matter what the evidence, he would only believe a video tape of armstrong shooting up...fine, and then you realize, even if he saw that video, he would say to himself, I can't see epo written on the bottle ...must have been B12...
 
Benotti69 said:
For those who know little about Eki.

He rode for USPS 97-98 then 00-05

In 06 he became assistant to Bruyneel. He is now a DS at the radiosmack.

I'd say he was clean :rolleyes:

Thanks for answering for me, I didn't have the willpower to continue taking Flick seriously at that point.;)

BTW. The mullet is proof enough on it's own.