I watched the 60 Minutes interview tonight, and I'm totally won over by Tyler.
Well, except for the part where he reiterated his long-running story that he didn't dope before/at the 2004 Olympics, and that he left the sport on 2008 after his second bust (for herbal supplements for depression) because he didn't want to injure the reputation of the sport. His big confession was that just like Floyd, sure, he took dope here and there, but he never got caught for the dope he was actually doing. He just got caught on a fluke mistake in '08, and God knows what was behind that 2004 bust. This story is completely consistent with his earlier denials, except for the admission that he did do some doping but was never caught for that...
Other than that tiny fly in the ointment, he was totally credible.
Holy shit.
Of course I'm not being serious. If this the knight in shining armor that's going to save us from Lance, then we've become stupider and more naive than we were in 2001 when we thought there was no doping after Festina.
On a strictly personal level, I'd respect him a lot more if he'd actually come clean and move on but given his allegations coupled with the continuance of his self-serving (and frankly sort of laughable) rationalizations and denials, it's tough to take him seriously.
One of the benefits of being an asshole with an opinion and a blog is sometimes you get interesting feedback in email, and I've had some enlightening discussions offline with guys who have been popped for doping. The guys who have gotten popped and moved on, or done things that aren't in their immediate best interest, I've got no major problems with. I get their perspective, and although I don't forget I can forgive them what they did - granted none of them cost me any money so I have no skin in the game. But I see it as morally different.
In contrast, a guy like Tyler who is still telling the same old lies but (Now! New and Improved!) with 50% more Lance allegations, rubs me the wrong way. He doesn't appear to be coming clean about anything except for that vague admission that he did some dope once. Can we call that Floyd defense the Lancaster Loop or something, like the Immelman Turn, and just be done with it? Tyler is a guy who won't even admit to having been caught doping, who is making allegations against a guy the haters love to hate, and the serious flaws in his story in order to more deeply believe the allegations he is making against Lance. It's like we're all Agent Mulder now. The rush to embrace Tyler *screams* confirmation bias, and one has to wonder what will happen if Tyler drops some other shoe - news about an immunity deal, a book deal, or some other wheeze that benefits him.
Tyler gets double bonus points for his allegations of a massive UCI conspiracy to hide Lance dope test positives. I want to believe the UCI and Dick Pound and the Swiss federation and anti-doping authorities can be bought off for $25k... That *soooo* fits into my mildly xenophobic outlook and dislike of unaccountable international organizations. I want to believe, really. But the allegation just isn't that credible. If there is some coverup going on at UCI (and WADA, and the Swiss federation and their national anti-doping agency, and in France (and their anti-doping agency, see e.g. the $100k donation), it would be damned hard to hide. I suspect the actual truth is something simpler, and not being spoken anywhere I can hear it right now.
At the same time people I ordinarily respect and think of as somewhat rational are getting orgasmic over the Tyler and that just creeps me out; this includes one guy who is crowing and doing victory laps after being voluble three weeks ago in his criticism of the rubes who spontaneously celebrated Osama bin Laden's death.
It's getting so that it's hard to be an honest Lance Ambivaleteer these days. The baying hounds are rabid enough that I almost reflexively want to kick some of the haters in the shins and defend Lance until I hear *credible* testimony. Tyler Hamilton is only the latest example. The moralizing alone is painful to listen to, and reminiscent of the Clinton-hunters of the late '90's. Or the Bush-haters or the Obama-haters, for whom no act is without sinister motives. The latest one going around is that Lance stood up his cancer charity as a pre-emptive strike against future possible doping charges. I guess it's possible, and maybe it's possible he gave himself cancer in order to win a jury's sympathy vote at some point 20 years in the future. If you listen close, you can hear somebody whacking Occam's razor on a leather strop... I strongly suspect we will look back on this some years from now and be a little ashamed of ourselves for acting this way.
In the meantime -
Oh, what a damned mess these people - Lance, Tyler, Pound, the UCI, Nowitzky and everybody - are making of pro cycling. Some folks are cheering and thinking that Tyler is the guy who is going to burn down pro cycling, and then some pure, new version of pro cycling will spring up out of the ashes.
Somehow, I don't think that's going to happen. I suspect that what will happen, is that everybody will get soot on their faces, and then sort of keep going on more or less as before.
TOT 50: The FBS LBS Ride
The Only Dope Here Is Aiming the Camera
The Only Dope Here Is Aiming the Camera
12 comments:
tyler is totally creepy.
in all sense of the word.
25K to buy off the uci is a joke.
the idea that the foundation had anything to do with a doping defense is shit too.
I think lance is an evil dick, but he's not satan himself.
I have to admit, I'm just kind of ignoring all of it now.
I'd also say, Armstrong is losing the watercooler battle. A couple years ago people at the office might ask if I thought Armstrong doped, last week someone asked me if he was the barry bonds of cycling.- yeah pretty much...
fwiw- the guy who sat behind me at the ballgame last week told me that Obama's birth certificate was a total fake. It's been proved on the fox news.
god bless the haters.
respect
fm
I understand that folks are pissed, ranting, waiting for the "I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore" Network moment.
Quite frankly they take dope, they don't take dope - I really don't care. I'm too busy worried about my personal racing & training to care about some pro BS that has little impact on my day to day life.
Glad to see someone else finds Tyler not quite credible (which, of course, doesn't mean Lance is pure-as-the-driven-snow ...)
Some bloggers (Jim Gourley, e.g.) find it convincing that Tyler must be telling the truth because he got "immunity".
Hello? Tyler got immunity on the condition that he bring down Lance. The truth has nothing to do with it. No way Tyler gets immunity and then says "Nope. Never saw Lance do a damn thing with EPO." That's not the deal. If he did that, the prosecutors say "Andreu says otherwise, therefore you're a liar, therefore the immunity's off, therefore you go to jail." Same result as if he didn't testify at all.
Anon 6:42: a lot of people believe what happens in the movies is how life oughtta work. Paddy Chayevsky was good, but he wasn't God.
Anon 7:15: I don't know if Hamilton got immunity here. I know that if he testified in front of the Grand Jury he got *transactional immunity*, that means he was compelled to tell the truth (5th Amendment doesn't apply in the Grand Jury room) but anything self-incriminating can't be used against him. As to whether he has immunity from prosecution, that isn't clear to me; moreover it shouldn't be clear to Tyler, because such immunity isn't really set-in-stone unless it's part of a plea agreement.
Just curious, but was anyone else watching Tyler's body language? Any body language experts care to comment? Kind of creeped me out.
And investigating baseball and Barry Bonds? Why not pro football? Not like there's any steroid use going on there. We've got rampant political corruption on both sides of the aisle but Novitsky would rather investigate athletes. Why? Keep our eyes off what is really going on. Sigh.
Now it's time for me to shut up and ride.
If American's are willing to spend 25% of their income on entertainment....sports figures and politicians will continue to entertain us.
"Just curious, but was anyone else watching Tyler's body language? Any body language experts care to comment? Kind of creeped me out"
There's a blog called "Eyes for Lies" which promises an analysis later this week.
I just watched the interview and wonder--why say anything to 60 minutes unless there is something in it for you (by the way, TH is working on a book...)
My opinion is that Lance and many other top riders in the peloton were and still are very sophisticated dopers. I think the reality is that the doping edge gets smaller and smaller as testing becomes more and more sophisticated--insert Alberto Contador here. Or maybe TOO sophisticated--insert Alberto Contador here. Who knows? New "boutique" doping products will be engineered and then tests devised to test for them.
All of that being said--Hamilton is totally non-credible. I don't believe him at all, and we are to just take 60 minutes' word about George Hincapie's testimony? I need more than that.
Jeff Nowistky has what appears to be a personal vendetta against suspected cheating athletes and then finds some federal justification to make a case to bring them down. I'm not sure why--perhaps he didn't make his high school football team--and I agree with Lance that I'm not sure this is the best use of federal funds.
It will be interesting whether or not the grand jury finds enough evidence to make a further circus of this. Part of me hopes so, so I can eat popcorn, lean ahead in my seat, and watch the debacle. The other part just wishes it would just go away.
Lovers gonna love?
Or something like that.
I don't think you need to give Hamilton, Landis, et al. much personal respect to nonetheless put the stories together (you know, along with the overwhelming context of the time we're talking about). Nail 'em down, check the details, no? Far better than going on about buddy fucking.
Speaking of, I note a distinct lack of Hincapie testimony mention.
And speaking of some more, one of the things that I have a hard time wrapping my head around is going after Landis and Hamilton and Andreu for being self-serving liars, all without even touching on the possibility that the biggest self-serving liar has been hiding behind cancer survivors and a trail of broken teammates. Yet it's the pathos of Floyd and Tyler that get the focus? It's like going on about how awful those little people attacking Leona Helmsley are. Oi.
~
Jim, I'd totally love to have argued about this in person - were you at the Rosslyn BTWD fest in a Coppi kit? I though that might be you, but got distracted before I could come introduce myself.
On your points, MB -
>>Lovers gonna love?
Look, I'm Lance-neutral, but I'm also a contrarian so if everybody is ranting about Lance I'm going to look at that and pick it apart. I'm okay if Lance gets taken down but I'm not okay if his legit work and the LAF get taken down by the increasingly popular US habit of public witch hunt. Arthur Anderson is a great example - they got taken down politically and legally in the Enron scandal, and it took 6 years for the Supreme Court to exonerate them. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of dollars of wealth, thousands of careers and a productive economic entity were destroyed in what was ultimately determined by the court to have been a national and governmental temper tantrum.
>>>Nail 'em down, check the details, no?
That's exactly my point. Floyd's allegations are temporally impossible, and Tyler's allegations amount to (I still deny doping at the times my doping was detected) + (lance told me he took EPO and there was doping on the team) + (???????) = Lance ran a bribery scheme and did some other stuff. The contingent facts not in evidence are what stick in my craw with Tyler - that, and his insistence he wasn't doping at the Olympics or Vuelta, or caught with masking agents in his blood in 2008.
As for Hincapie - he's been publicly silent, so there isn't a lot of fact to go on there. Would I love to see him come clean about everything? Sure. Can I condemn him for not doing so? Only mildly. Why do I think he's better than Tyler and Floyd? Because he wasn't (caught + lying about it for 6 years) and he isn't asking us to believe some ludicrous tale about why he's guilty and everybody else is in either a pro-doping or anti-Floyd/Tyler/George conspiracy. There are shades of right and wrong, and in my mind he's a lesser shade of wrong than many in this drama. So's Andreau. And I didn't raise Andreau because he hasn't been in the news much recently, that's all. True, Lance sorta hides behind the LAF, but it's raised $400 million for cancer research, and I know a number of people who have gotten access to better treatment and support as a direct result of LAF outreach, so as disgusting, venal, self-serving conspiratorial shams to cover up enormous conspiracies go it's a pretty darn good quality one. I'm not so sure the charity is run that well or that it's very efficient on the expenses : benefits ratio (and this may cause them trouble) but I know for a fact it's done a lot of tangible good.
>>>Yet it's the pathos of Floyd and Tyler that get the focus? It's like going on about how awful those little people attacking Leona Helmsley are.
I'm ranting about Tyler (and to a lesser extent about Floyd) because (1) they made asses of themselves and the millions of fans who bought their lies about their failed doping tests; (2) people I otherwise think are smart are going on about these guys like they're the Pope and the Dalai Lama, placing their unalloyed faith in two guys who betrayed us the last time they asked us to BELIEVE; and, (3) it's topical.
>>>BTWD fest...
Didn't do that one MB, did Annapolis instead since I had the day off (irony alert there of doing BTWD on a day off). I would loved to have met you. Perhaps another BTWD...
Why hate on the andreus?
From my perspective they have been the most
Honest, and lost the most. The spoke out first
And frankly have stayed the course these years.
Seriously they probably rightfully so feel
Vindicated right now...
Just curious...
Respect
Fm
I don't get that either Marc. They seem to represent the other standup guy path here - tell the truth as they see know it, and sticking to their story, not name calling. I think they come out of this looking the best. Hincapie - mostly silent, not denying but not saying he's clean either(probably doped to the gills from '88 to when the sport decided to change its ethos and take doping enforcement seriously) seems to be taking the other standup path. Doping but then truth telling by one, not lying by the other (not as great of an approach by Hincapie but still better than most in this drama). Lance (almost certainly doping & lying but not caught) and Floyd/Tyler (doping, caught, lying, but asking that we believe their allegations about Lance & others) also populate that disappointing moral spectrum...
Post a Comment