Tyler's Book

[Elagabalus]

To dismiss all the detailed evidence Hamilton has given on the grounds that he's been an alcoholic is purely a lazy ad hominem copied from LA and not worth a minutes consideration. If you laid out all eachof them had to say on the matter of Riis' history it would be quite clear who was the more credible IMO.

Breschel knows where his bread is buttered. He's just repeating what Bjarne said the other day to the Danish Press.

http://www.sporten.dk/cykling/riis-sponsor-hamilton-er-alkoholiker

Atta-boy, Matti! Don't rock the boat ...

 

[trailrunner]

Who cares if Hamilton had a drinking problem? He admitted that he suffered from depression, so it's not like it would be a surprise. But this really has little to do with doping and more with trying to discredit his character.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

He has more credibility than Hamilton that for sure

You're forgetting Dan Coyle. There is no reason to doubt him. I trust Hamilton's book because of Coyle, not Hamiliton.

 

[jyhjyh]

Breschel knows where his bread is buttered. He's just repeating what Bjarne said the other day to the Danish Press.

http://www.sporten.dk/cykling/riis-sponsor-hamilton-er-alkoholiker

Atta-boy, Matti! Don't rock the boat ...

Have you read the article you are linking to?

It's Oleg Tinkov who is talking - not Riis.
Riis has wisely chosen to ignore the book.

 

[jyhjyh]

You're forgetting Dan Coyle. There is no reason to doubt him. I trust Hamilton's book because of Coyle, not Hamiliton.

Coyle only wrote what Hamilton chose to tell him.
If Hamilton lied, then Coyle wrote lies - simple as that

 

[workingclasshero]

Coyle only wrote what Hamilton chose to tell him.
If Hamilton lied, then Coyle wrote lies - simple as that

ducks sake.
you haven't read the book, have ya?

 

[thehog]

Coyle only wrote what Hamilton chose to tell him.
If Hamilton lied, then Coyle wrote lies - simple as that

Well no. Coyle only included detail that he could be corroborated with another source.

Nice try.

 

[VeloCity]

Coyle only wrote what Hamilton chose to tell him.

er, no, he didn't.

 

[Kennf1]

Well no. Coyle only included detail that he could be corroborated with another source.

Nice try.

And he apparently left out some VERY interesting stuff because it couldn't be verified.

 

[frenchfry]

Coyle only wrote what Hamilton chose to tell him.
If Hamilton lied, then Coyle wrote lies - simple as that

Or maybe Hamilton told the truth and Coyle lied which would mean we ended up with a lie.

Or maybe Hamilton lied, then Coyle lied and the 2 lies cancelled out and we ended up with the truth.

The possiblities are endless. The best thing to do is to refer to Lancey-poo's press releases - for sure that is the truth. Unless they are lies.

 

[webvan]

And he apparently left out some VERY interesting stuff because it couldn't be verified.

1. Source ?

2. Like what ?

 

[frenchfry]

1. Source ?

2. Like what ?

Source - like maybe this was stated in the book.

Like if we knew what then it wouldn't have been left out of the book.

 

[webvan]

I just finished the book and don't recall any such wording that would have been unprofessional anyway...so on which page exactly is there a reference to "VERY interesting stuff that was left out because it couldn't be verified." ?

 

[Don Quixote]

The book won't differ from his testimony. If his testimony was considered suspect he'd have been charged.

 

[TubularBills]

Seems the bigger story is that sponsors like Oleg Tinkov supporting team owners and directors like Bjarn Riis with riders like Matti Breschell indicate that the sport will never be clean.

Anti-doping needs to be top down and bottom up simultaneously, with zero tolerance.

It seems that even catching big fish and with riders confessing there is no change i.e. business as usual.

My suspicion is that they (teams and riders) are still receiving selective protection from UCI, so have nothing to fear... seems obvious that these guys don't feel the least bit threatened.

No threat, no change.

 

[frenchfry]

I just finished the book and don't recall any such wording that would have been unprofessional anyway...so on which page exactly is there a reference to "VERY interesting stuff that was left out because it couldn't be verified." ?

It could have been stated in an interview when Coyle explained the process of verifying the information Hamilton gave him.

 

[sittingbison]

Coyle has said in numerous interviews that he had to leave many of the stories out because they could not be verified

 

[webvan]

Must have been really dodgy stuff (or he was trying to drum up interest) because, he didn't leave out the serious accusation of Armstrong getting "preferential" treatment when they started transfusing at USPS (Hamilton and Livingston sharing a room, Dopestrong alone) and no one corroborated that since Livingston refused to talk to him. Same for the story about Ullrich also getting a bad BB in 2004, just hearsay.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book but these are not transcripts under oath, it was designed for a pleasant read and some aspects are a bit conveniently skimmed over. It seems Hamilton was very much brainwashed by Dopestrong's "whatever you're doing the other ****ers are doing more" and you sense he still clings on to that somehow as an "excuse" for ruining his life (even though when you're finished with the book he almost seems content, right...) and "feeling sorry for Lance" (that was already his tack on "60 minutes"). Again, why not mention Livingston's story about Ullrich racing the 2001 tour with an HR of 42 when they were both at TM?

 

[D-Queued]

Must have been really dodgy stuff (or he was trying to drum up interest) because, he didn't leave out the serious accusation of Armstrong getting "preferential" treatment when they started transfusing at USPS (Hamilton and Livingston sharing a room, Dopestrong alone) and no one corroborated that since Livingston refused to talk to him. Same for the story about Ullrich also getting a bad BB in 2004, just hearsay.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book but these are not transcripts under oath, it was designed for a pleasant read and some aspects are a bit conveniently skimmed over. It seems Hamilton was very much brainwashed by Dopestrong's "whatever you're doing the other ****ers are doing more" and you sense he still clings on to that somehow as an "excuse" for ruining his life (even though when you're finished with the book he almost seems content, right...) and "feeling sorry for Lance" (that was already his tack on "60 minutes"). Again, why not mention Livingston's story about Ullrich racing the 2001 tour with an HR of 42 when they were both at TM?

Can you say, "sequel"?

Dave.

 

[VeloCity]

Must have been really dodgy stuff (or he was trying to drum up interest) because, he didn't leave out the serious accusation of Armstrong getting "preferential" treatment when they started transfusing at USPS (Hamilton and Livingston sharing a room, Dopestrong alone) and no one corroborated that since Livingston refused to talk to him.

How do you know no one else corroborated it? I doubt it was only Hamilton and Livingston who knew about Armstrong's preferential treatment.

 

[webvan]

Been reading too fast ? Separate rooms, who could corroborate that ?

What leaves a bit to be desired is that we get footnotes on some stuff, how did he select them? It gives the impression the rest was taken at face value and/or deemed plausible.

 

[Don Quixote]

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book but these are not transcripts under oath..

Are you suggesting that the essence of his book content differs from his testimony?

He'd be very foolish indeed if it is.

In fact have you read his testimony?

 

[webvan]

Hum...[TEN CHARACTERS]

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book but these are not transcripts under oath, it was designed for a pleasant read and some aspects are a bit conveniently skimmed over

 

[airstream]

Why are we astonished? The system is entirely based on doping and rotten. Sometimes I feel like this sport lives on doping. Doping money creates not only what we see on the road, but all undercover institutes of bribery and protection racket too. Cycling is oriented to work as a business project and that's it. Apparently, it's model of any politics and politics was always known as the dirtiest area of human activity.

You're right. No changes. Everything happens as Tyler described - everyone plays by rules to save its job.

 

[VeloCity]

Been reading too fast ? Separate rooms, who could corroborate that ?

Someone had to give Armstrong the transfusion. Someone had to bring in the blood bags. Someone had to get rid of the stuff. Etc etc etc. It wasn't just Armstrong sitting in a room all by himself giving himself a transfusion, nor was Coyle restricted to just riders for corroboration. Who knows who Coyle talked to.