Tyler's Book

[the big ring]

It would be easier for Hamilton to remember details and emotions if he is brought back to a similar setting.

It could be coyle gets a stronger sence of his honesty, but more likely IMO is that it allows Coyle a better dramatic insight into what things were like. In that way he is better able to animate the story he is writing.

Most likely is Coyle gets to go on holiday to Europe and claim it as a business expense

 

[Raul Ramaya]

Another thought: I was struck by how there was hardly any moral struggle by Tyler - or Haven, for that matter. Sure, some token pangs of doubt were tossed in but sweet J**sus we are talking about bags of blood!! And the sad part is, if we are to believe Tyler, his stance was not unusual.

This book was really the nail in the coffin for me. I read Walsh's book and, of course, Kimmage, but this felt much darker and more potent. I think thats precisely because it is so berefit of soul. No struggle with the darkness, yes, but neither is there any joy for the ride. It is, in the final analysis, just business. The story nothing more than a long powerpoint filled with bizarre fact after bizarre fact. While reading, it is disarmingly palatable and it is easy to get caught up in the fun of connecting the dots with all the other rumors heard here in the Clinic and elsewhere. Finally, however, Tylers smooth narration fades away - leaving you painfully aware of the darkness.

Folks have been saying it here for awhile but it is only now I truly understand. There is no hope while people from that era are still involved in cycling. There is barely any hope if they were to be magically excised tomorrow. And Talansky is a fool.

 

[Bosco10]

Article in New York Daily News about the book. Kathy Lemond talks about it. One interesting point from the book is that Hamilton said Novitzky thought about quitting his job with the FDA when the case got dropped.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...ions-new-memoir-secret-race-article-1.1157153

Good article. But read the comment by "DLD" in the comments section. That must be Lance himself throwing a hissy fit.

BTW, I'm half way through reading The Secret Race. What a page turner it is! I'm starting to think Lance was Al Capone in a previous life.

 

[Kennf1]

Good article. But read the comment by "DLD" in the comments section. That must be Lance himself throwing a hissy fit.

BTW, I'm half way through reading The Secret Race. What a page turner it is! I'm starting to think Lance was Al Capone in a previous life.

In a strange way, I'd say there's a portion of Lance fans that will read this book and come away having even more respect for him. Kind of like Capone did.

 

[Bosco10]

In a strange way, I'd say there's a portion of Lance fans that will read this book and come away having even more respect for him. Kind of like Capone did.

I was thinking the same! There is a certain "meanyass" mystique which appeals mostly to the younger set, IMO.

 

[ElChingon]

Another thought: I was struck by how there was hardly any moral struggle by Tyler - or Haven, for that matter. Sure, some token pangs of doubt were tossed in but sweet J**sus we are talking about bags of blood!! And the sad part is, if we are to believe Tyler, his stance was not unusual.

This book was really the nail in the coffin for me. I read Walsh's book and, of course, Kimmage, but this felt much darker and more potent. I think thats precisely because it is so berefit of soul. No struggle with the darkness, yes, but neither is there any joy for the ride. It is, in the final analysis, just business. The story nothing more than a long powerpoint filled with bizarre fact after bizarre fact. While reading, it is disarmingly palatable and it is easy to get caught up in the fun of connecting the dots with all the other rumors heard here in the Clinic and elsewhere. Finally, however, Tylers smooth narration fades away - leaving you painfully aware of the darkness.

Folks have been saying it here for awhile but it is only now I truly understand. There is no hope while people from that era are still involved in cycling. There is barely any hope if they were to be magically excised tomorrow.

Funny you mention the Haven angle/moral struggle. There's a few sides to that. One, you have to admit that is one woman standing by her man no matter what the consequences, yea it didn't pan out in the long run but I like her style
Two, I have always wondered after reading about when the American wives rented an RV and followed the Tour (I'm sure its in the CN archives I forget which year) was it just for their fun or did they factor in on the doping as well? Any info on that in the book?

 

[Boeing]

I love how Tyler just kills Chris Carmichael.

 

[anesting]

In a strange way, I'd say there's a portion of Lance fans that will read this book and come away having even more respect for him. Kind of like Capone did.

Kennf1 has raised the crucial point. Why is Hamilton's book so fascinating? Because it depicts Lance as the ultimate embodiment of the champion bike racer. Isn't the Armstrong ethos exactly what we are supposed to admire in a bike racer? What makes an exceptional rider? He wins the race, no matter the weather, the parcours, the quality of the field, the problems and pain encountered along the way, or what he has to do to win. A grand-tour winner is the guy who cannot be stopped from winning. Hamilton acknowledges the same attitude in the subtitle of his book: "winning at all costs." No one could stop Lance during his storied career, not David Anthes, Bobby Julich, Moreno Argentin, the ASO, the UCI, the FBI, or the UFO. Lance touched on that truth in recent remarks, saying "I won those races." He may have been supercharged, but he won the race of the superchargers. He was the best bike racer on those days -- unfortunately for the Christophe Bassons of the world. That's not a defense of Lance, but one of the fascinating aspects of the Lances and the Tylers. We love watching what they do, and we hate 'em for what they do to do it.

The book is also fascinating because it is the first real tell-all book by someone at the top of the game. (Millar: pffffffff. Parkin: minor leaguer, but a good writer. Kimmage: Ronan Pensec's third helper, and he loved the wine around Grenoble too much. Kelly: the silence. Voet: the soigneur.) As the first real tell all, the Hamilton book gives confirmation to many theories. It does not reveal what we didn't know. It confirms what readers of The Clinic knew must be true. It's the story behind the facts recorded at a website like dopeology.org. And this confirming function points to something important about the book. It tries to tell a truthful story, or at least a part of it, just as contributors here have spent thousands of posts trying to do. If you love something, you try to talk about it honestly, tell the real story. (A good example of that can also be found at http://goo.gl/OZm7B)

A confession: I'm a hater. Contributors to this message board know the rumors, the unbelievable results, the allegations, the evidence, the articles, and the books. You also know the silly denials, vague statements, and no comments. I know all that too. And I resent Lance, and resented Tyler, for getting away with it and continuing the lying. I hate the lying, because it's so obviously lies. The chimeric twin defense... even Tyler admits they were just piling on stupid attacks in an attempt to make something stick. (Not quite pro wrestling, but not far away.) But there's a lot of liars lying out there.

Why do I really resent Lance? Because he cheated and lied? (I would expect nothing less from a winner at that level--and a bike racer, no less)! Because he made the sport a bigger lie than it had been? Or maybe because he's the ultimate winner? Because he forced me to admire him? Because I couldn't even have handled laundering his chamois? Or maybe because he forced me to see that bike racing is completely different from what I want it to be? I don't have an answer to those questions.

Kennf1 raised a good point, and in doing so he brought out one of the main qualities in Tyler Hamilton's book. What the public has seen of Lance's career is incredible, a singular story of physical achievement. Hamilton's book tells an unflattering story, which shows that Lance's public story is mostly lies. In that, Hamilton's book at the least makes the story we tell about pro cycling more truthful. He challenges people who love cycling to talk about the sport honestly.

 

[the big ring]

LauraLyn has a brother.

Tyler's book is fascinating because the truth (Tours were won with a doping conspiracy) is stranger than fiction (Tours were won by a bike rider).

 

[Bosco10]

LauraLyn has a brother.

lol.. Maybe like Tyler's "vanishing evil twin".

 

[Anonymous]

Tyler is on Hardtalk on the BBC News channel tonight 00.30 to 01.00 UK and Ireland time. Brief video from the interview.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9750759.stm

The programme is available to view in full via BBC iPlayer (may be geo-restricted) here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01mml99/HARDtalk_Tyler_Hamilton_Former_professional_cyclist/

 

[Robert21]

Kennf1 has raised the crucial point. Why is Hamilton's book so fascinating? Because it depicts Lance as the ultimate embodiment of the champion bike racer. Isn't the Armstrong ethos exactly what we are supposed to admire in a bike racer?

Question is, who is encouraging us to think that the ruthless, individualistic, 'Dog eat dog', 'To the winner the spoils' values embodied by people like Armstrong are laudable?

I would argue that such beliefs are encouraged largely because they help to validate similar 'values' in the wider world. In this sense Armstrong is both one of the '1%', with a huge sense of entitlement to every cent he has scammed, and a promoter of the 'Full spectrum dominance' approach to conflict. He's the perfect propagandist for 'The American way' and even social Darwinism.

Thing is, there are other values that can be promoted through sport, other than the shallow 'Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing'. For example, think back to de Coubertin's motto "The important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle, the essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well". Also think back to the history of cycling where the motif of 'suffering and survival' was of more significance than who stood on the podium. (Christopher S. Thompson's cultural history of the Tour de France has some good analysis of this point). How about all the prizes that used to be given out to the 'most affable', 'unlucky', 'combatative' or 'elegant' rider, or the one-time status of the 'lantern rouge'? How about all the legends of the Tour focusing on an individual's sacrifice for others, as embodied in the famous photo 'The sacrifice of René Vietto'? How about the way Raymond Poulidor became the most loved cyclist in France ever, mainly because he never won the Tour or wore the yellow jersey?

The best analysis I have read of modern sport comes from the French philosopher Robert Redeker, in his 2002 book Le sport contre les peuples (Sport against the people). In this book Redeker looks at the way sport has come to do little more than promote the destructive 'winner takes all' ideology of capitalism, encouraging people to accept corruption and cheating as normal and acceptable, and displacing political discourse in favour of the unthinking following of sport and the consumption of brands. In Redeker's view the 'supporter' has become a substitute for the 'citizen', with the influence of sport even becoming a new form of totalitarianism.

Unfortunately this book is not available in an English translation, but its arguments are well made. The Armstrong case may have revealed the moral and literal corruption underpinning modern cycling, but that corruption simply reflects that which exists in sport and the wider world in general, and we would do well to reject both Armstrong and the 'values' that he represents.

To my mind trying to win is still important, but only because this guarantees that you will strive to get the best out of yourself, and if you 'cheat' to win, you are ultimately cheating on yourself.

 

[ToreBear]

Most likely is Coyle gets to go on holiday to Europe and claim it as a business expense

Or Coyle needed to get away from his wife

Another thought: I was struck by how there was hardly any moral struggle by Tyler - or Haven, for that matter. Sure, some token pangs of doubt were tossed in but sweet J**sus we are talking about bags of blood!! And the sad part is, if we are to believe Tyler, his stance was not unusual.

This book was really the nail in the coffin for me. I read Walsh's book and, of course, Kimmage, but this felt much darker and more potent. I think thats precisely because it is so berefit of soul. No struggle with the darkness, yes, but neither is there any joy for the ride. It is, in the final analysis, just business. The story nothing more than a long powerpoint filled with bizarre fact after bizarre fact. While reading, it is disarmingly palatable and it is easy to get caught up in the fun of connecting the dots with all the other rumors heard here in the Clinic and elsewhere. Finally, however, Tylers smooth narration fades away - leaving you painfully aware of the darkness.

Folks have been saying it here for awhile but it is only now I truly understand. There is no hope while people from that era are still involved in cycling. There is barely any hope if they were to be magically excised tomorrow. And Talansky is a fool.

My impression is that the Morals went out the window when he first started to dope. After that it was all rationalization. "Everyone does it" "The UCI are in on it" etc. Weather he has come to the realization that he personally might have kept someone from being a pro because he took a spot on a team, or that he cheated someone who had struggled to compete clean from a victory, we do not know.

Still in the pages allotted I would much prefer the sordid details instead of a story of personal moral questions.

And this is what I got. I would have liked more details, perhaps more info about those who always rode with bread and water. But of course, a doper is not going to look for none dopers, that might create moral dilemmas and doubt.

 

[python]

Two, I have always wondered after reading about when the American wives rented an RV and followed the Tour (I'm sure its in the CN archives I forget which year) was it just for their fun or did they factor in on the doping as well? Any info on that in the book?

i dont recall the book talking specifically about wives following their riders in rvs but tyler DID mention several times the crucial roles of wives/gf play in facilitating doping...he even went as far as to state the bachelors were in a distinct disadvantage.

he described several roles haven fulfilled. he also said when he got popped for dhea he regretted haven was not there to warn him of the vampires approach.

she acted as a look out (for vampires), as a driver (to blood transfusion sites), as a travel agent (arranging trips to fuentes), as a go-between...in one word, she was indispensable to his doping game. why did she do it ?

perhaps out of love for the man. but i'd also venture to note that her own life style and the day-to-day being have become totally dependent on tyler's doping-enhanced income. tyler even said toward the end of their marriage they became sort of doping business partners.

then he went to contrast betsy to other wifes and described frankies dilemma.

 

[Benotti69]

Or maybe because he's the ultimate winner?

Wrong he is the ultimate loser. he doped, cheated and lied to win. That is the losers route.

Because he forced me to admire him?

That says more about you then it does about a cheating doper like Armstrong.

You chose to like the manner of his achievement even though it was obvious to fans that something was wrong in 1999. I think the problem in this case is not the doper.

 

[trailrunner]

LauraLyn has a brother.

The robot has cloned itself.

 

[LauraLyn]

LauraLyn has a brother. . . .

Tyler's book is fascinating because the truth (Tours were won with a doping conspiracy) is stranger than fiction (Tours were won by a bike rider).

The robot has cloned itself.

Thank you, big boy. You get today's prize for being the first one to stand up for me and say something true about me. Really appreciated to have you sticking up for me.

Trailrunner, just a small piece of advice for the next girl you hit on: Girls don't like boys who don't know much about human biology. You know, cloning isn't all that hard to understand. If you get even that wrong, we might worry . . . well, it won't come to that with you, I'm sure.

You both seem to testify that both truth and fiction can exceed some people's understanding. This is perhaps why Lance got as far as he did, and why he might be there longer than he should.

"Tyler Hamilton and the vampires: It sounds like a prep school Goth band, or a profitable teenage fiction franchise. But it's a true story, as real and as grim as a large-gauge hypodermic needle, or a federal grand jury subpoena." today's New York Daily News, served with coffee

 

[Prodigy4299]

The episode of BBC Hard featuring the interview with Tyler is now available on their website as an audio podcast download. Sorry, but was unable to copy / paste the link.

 

[irongrl]

LauraLyn has a brother.

Tyler's book is fascinating because the truth (Tours were won with a doping conspiracy) is stranger than fiction (Tours were won by a bike rider).

lol.. Maybe like Tyler's "vanishing evil twin".

The robot has cloned itself.

Thank you, big boy. You get today's prize for being the first one to stand up for me and say something true about me. Really appreciated to have you sticking up for me.

Trailrunner, just a small piece of advice for the next girl you hit on: Girls don't like boys who don't know much about human biology. You know, cloning isn't all that hard to understand. If you get even that wrong, we might worry . . . well, it won't come to that with you, I'm sure.

You both seem to testify that both truth and fiction can exceed some people's understanding. This is perhaps why Lance got as far as he did, and why he might be there longer than he should.

This is getting way too weird. I think Trailrunner is right.

 

[LauraLyn]

This is getting way too weird. I think Trailrunner is right.

Indeed, truly weird!

"clon·ing (klnng) n. The transplantation of a nucleus from a somatic cell into an ovum, which then develops into an embryo."

Difficult?

Is there possibly a nice way to say to a person: Look, you just don't understand? Is silliness infectious? Was Lance's PR department right about the general level of the fan's intelligence? I certainly hope not.

 

[the big ring]

This is getting way too weird. I think Trailrunner is right.

Wow it wasn't till TexPat said mechanised shill that I truly believed - but that is actually a robot posting to this forum.

I am impressed. LauraLyn, you truly are approaching Turing-level capability. Completely outstanding.

I wonder if moderators would let us create a stickied thread to catch these auto-posters?

Skynet is just around the corner.

 

[the big ring]

LauraLyn has a nice family.

Tyler's book is very colourful.

 

[LauraLyn]

LauraLyn has a nice family.

Tyler's book is very colourful.

Thanks, friend. Two truths. One more than the other.

 

[the big ring]

Thanks, friend. Two truths. One more than the other.

LauraLyn do you think Skynet will have an impact on Tyler's book sales?

 

[trailrunner]

LauraLyn do you think Skynet will have an impact on Tyler's book sales?

Too funny!!!!!