Tyler's Book

[sittingbison]

English isn't my native speech, and it could be I got it wrong, but still... It seems to me that TH is not referring to the dope in that quote, but to something else (...not transparent with the riding side..., ...didn't just dope, ie. was doing something else besides doping), and I could not imagine what would that be, so I asked.

good pick up pandora.

It depends on context and inflection (which is picked up in speech but not so easily in writing):
1) "didn't just dope in 1996" meaning he did something else besides doping in 1996, which is what you picked up on
2) "didn't just dope in 1996" meaning he doped in other years as well

I haven't read the book yet, so cannot comment on the context of the quote. Anyone??

 

[Cloxxki]

good pick up pandora.

It depends on context and inflection (which is picked up in speech but not so easily in writing):
1) "didn't just dope in 1996" meaning he did something else besides doping in 1996, which is what you picked up on
2) "didn't just dope in 1996" meaning he doped in other years as well

I haven't read the book yet, so cannot comment on the context of the quote. Anyone??

Could it be about the graduality increase in his doping? It starterd with a ki...pill. He thought he wouldn't dope, and after that pill, he knew he was. Pedro gave it for his "health". And later in the book he says that if he were to be told how much of a doper he'd become, the decision to cancel the whole career would have been. Not so much when it all happens gradually. Which to me was a bit of a psychological breakthrough. This may not go for all dopers, but for the ones that consider themselves righteous people, non-cheaters, before they down that first red pill, it's a smooth ramp rather than a high threshold, and that makes sence. Also why "all" did it.

 

[hrotha]

He might even be referring to stuff like blood transfusions, which Riis didn't mention in his book. As in "he didn't just dope, he was at the front end of avant-garde doping". Who knows.

 

[fatandfast]

Tyler why didn't you out George, Vaughters, and Levi in your book? What did they do or not do that gave them a free pass?

 

[Sandeep]

Tyler why didn't you out George, Vaughters, and Levi in your book? What did they do or not do that gave them a free pass?

He does out George and Vaughters. I don't remember if he said anything about Levi.

 

[workingclasshero]

Tyler why didn't you out George, Vaughters, and Levi in your book? What did they do or not do that gave them a free pass?

you were clearly drunk at the time of reading the book. go re-read it. thanks.

 

[BYOP88]

Tyler why didn't you out George, Vaughters, and Levi in your book? What did they do or not do that gave them a free pass?

Because they're 'nice' people and Fraudstrong isn't, simples!

BTW congrats you have as many TdF wins as your hero/idol, chapeau.

 

[HergèJohnson]

I'd like to discuss Tyler's homologous blood transfusion positives. From reading his book it seems to me he doesn't/didn't really know how someone else's blood got into his system.
I've read that the Olympic and Vuelta samples were positive for DIFFERENT people's blood ie a different person's blood was mixed with Hamilton's on each occasion. Is this correct?
At the time I had assumed that somehow Hamilton and Perez' blood simply was accidentally switched, but even if that was the case, it would only account for one of Hamilton's positives if they were different populations each time.
I've also read conjecture that the foreign blood population was tiny which could be explained by Fuentes not cleaning the glycol mixer properly in the freezing process between clients. But I've also read that it was a full bag of someone else's blood. Can anyone confirm which is accurate?


Now reading USADA's Reasoned Decision, in Appendix L, Operation Puerto Overview pages 7-9 mention both Phonak riders, and Puerto Civil Investigation Memo pages 11-12 do too, and the investigators assume intentional homologous transfusions in both cases. But surely that makes no sense, you'd be bound to get caught.
Or do we assume Fuentes perhaps botches Hamilton and Perez's blood storage, and to cover his cokcup maybe give him someone else's blood that just happened to be lying around and conveniently matched his bloodtype? Twice? Or three times, counting Perez?

 

[Descender]

I'd like to discuss Tyler's homologous blood transfusion positives. From reading his book it seems to me he doesn't/didn't really know how someone else's blood got into his system.
I've read that the Olympic and Vuelta samples were positive for DIFFERENT people's blood ie a different person's blood was mixed with Hamilton's on each occasion. Is this correct?
At the time I had assumed that somehow Hamilton and Perez' blood simply was accidentally switched, but even if that was the case, it would only account for one of Hamilton's positives if they were different populations each time.
I've also read conjecture that the foreign blood population was tiny which could be explained by Fuentes not cleaning the glycol mixer properly in the freezing process between clients. But I've also read that it was a full bag of someone else's blood. Can anyone confirm which is accurate?


Now reading USADA's Reasoned Decision, in Appendix L, Operation Puerto Overview pages 7-9 mention both Phonak riders, and Puerto Civil Investigation Memo pages 11-12 do too, and the investigators assume intentional homologous transfusions in both cases. But surely that makes no sense, you'd be bound to get caught.
Or do we assume Fuentes perhaps botches Hamilton and Perez's blood storage, and to cover his cokcup maybe give him someone else's blood that just happened to be lying around and conveniently matched his bloodtype? Twice? Or three times, counting Perez?

Isn't that like fatally dangerous?

 

[webvan]

Well, no, that's a homologous blood transfusion, the normal kind of transfusion when blood is needed to treat people who've lost blood.

Talking of transfusions, that failed one before the Pyrenees stage in 2004 is really scary, he's lucky he didn't die there. Doesn't look like it made him think twice about transfusions either...

 

[thehog]

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/12/why-hamilton-testified-against-armstrong/?hpt=ac_mid

Tyler on Anderson-Cooper - CNN.

 

[Berzin]

<object width="416" height="374" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="ep"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="movie" value="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2012/10/12/ac-tyler-hamilton-lance-armstrong-doping.cnn" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2012/10/12/ac-tyler-hamilton-lance-armstrong-doping.cnn" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="416" wmode="transparent" height="374"></embed></object>

 

[cathulu]

Tyler was pretty awesome on CNN. He looked very comfortable, at ease in his skin and his demeanor reflected the relief he said he got when he told the truth.

Lance's skin must be crawling.

 

[thehog]

Tyler was pretty awesome on CNN. He looked very comfortable, at ease in his skin and his demeanor reflected the relief he said he got when he told the truth.

Lance's skin must be crawling.

Creepy crawling.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Seen it earlier. Loved how Anderson says when he looks at him he sees him in a different light.

RR was also saying on twitter he is on Piers Morgan's show as well on Sunday but Piers Morgan is'nt on usually that day. He is on Mon - Fri.

Just watched the interview. I thought Tyler did well...
Thanx for the link hog.

Yes, I appreciated AC 's comment about looking at Armstrong in a different light...hope the snowball grows on that!

 

[Berzin]

Now would be a good time for Chris Horner to come clean about his doping.

If not, I believe someone will do it for him in the not-too-distant future.

 

[Descender]

Well, no, that's a homologous blood transfusion, the normal kind of transfusion when blood is needed to treat people who've lost blood.

Talking of transfusions, that failed one before the Pyrenees stage in 2004 is really scary, he's lucky he didn't die there. Doesn't look like it made him think twice about transfusions either...

Getting blood transfused from a different blood type as yours can make you really sick and may result in kidney failure and death.

 

[manafana]

crazy the blood doping **** ups that went on, no fear in some of these riders.

Will have to get reading this book.

 

[Cloxxki]

Now would be a good time for Chris Horner to come clean about his doping.

If not, I believe someone will do it for him in the not-too-distant future.

I volunteer. Who's else is in?

 

[webvan]

Getting blood transfused from a different blood type as yours can make you really sick and may result in kidney failure and death.

Really..that must be why they only transfuse compatible blood (and it can be different BTW) then...and that's what the original post was about. The problem with that is that it gets detected, hence Tyler's problem.

 

[rata de sentina]

you were clearly drunk at the time of reading the book. go re-read it. thanks.

Surely you don't think fatandfast read the book. Hard to read when you have your hands over your eyes.

 

[thehog]

I volunteer. Who's else is in?

Chris Horner is about to receive a 2 year sanction.

He gets nothing.

 

[Walkman]

Tyler was pretty awesome on CNN. He looked very comfortable, at ease in his skin and his demeanor reflected the relief he said he got when he told the truth.

Lance's skin must be crawling.

Anyone got a link to that interview?

 

[thehog]

Anyone got a link to that interview?

Go back about 15 posts. It's there. Lazy ****.

 

[Walkman]

Go back about 15 posts. It's there. Lazy ****.

Thanks hog, always a pleasure!