Talk:Tyler Hamilton

Rumour

I heard a rumour that the transfusion-doping claims were also cast into doubt because Hamilton is chimeral. Is there any truth to that? --ASL 05:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

From the looks of the quick search I just did, Hamilton is saying that chimerism is a possibility, not that he actually is. I'm a bit confused. --ASL 05:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

reversion of 13.03.06 contribution by unregistered user 71.37.161.250

Hamilton openly and frequently used the idea of "chimerism" in his defense. Here are a few example citations:

Court for Arbitration in Sport, CAS 2005/A/884, Tyler Hamilton v/USADA & UCI (http://www.tas-cas.org then Case Law, then Tyler Hamilton, Part I, page 18, item 59) "In the Appellant’s appeal brief, a number of alternate submissions were made suggesting other possible causes for a second red blood cell population in the sample taken from the Appellant such as chimerism.”

New York Times, May 10, 2005, Cheating, or an Early Mingling of the Blood?, (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/10/health/10bloo.html?ex=1142398800&en=bee5d80489509af3&ei=5070 -free registration required) “Last month, when the champion American cyclist Tyler Hamilton was accused of blood doping, or transfusing himself with another person's blood to increase his oxygen-carrying red cells, he offered a surprising defense: the small amount of different blood found mixed in with his own must have come from a ‘vanishing twin.’”

Cycling News, April 19, 2005, The Hamilton Decision, (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/hamilton_decision) “Working under the assumption that Hamilton did in fact have a mixed RBC population in his body on September 11, 2004, the next part of his defence focused on other causes of said population. Both disease and bone marrow transplant were "ruled out as having a zero probability", leaving Hamilton to argue that he had a 'vanishing twin', that transferred some of its RBCs to Hamilton while he was in the womb, but disappeared in the first trimester of pregnancy; or that he is a human chimera, with a natural mixed RBC population.”

BitQuirky 00:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The "Demised Twin" statement is inaccurate, Tyler does not claim this, see his website

His website is, umm, perhaps not the most reliable source of information. The only other possible reasons for his "chimerism" would be hematopoietic disease or bone marrow transplantation. They were discussed in his CAS brief and ruled out for obvious reasons. Here is the link to the CAS decision again: http://www.tas-cas.org, then "Case Law", then "Tyler Hamilton."

BitQuirky 16:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Even if he doesn't claim chymerism now, he has in the past and is of note in his story, and should therefore be included in his page. Floydd landis claims not to have ever taken drugs, but the story of his failed test is still on his page, Rose West claims not to be a mass-murderer, but it is still on her page Superruss 15:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hamilton is eligible for two-year Pro Tour suspension

Apparently the fourth paragraph of the "Doping and Suspension" section is incorrect. According to comments published on the VeloNews website <http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/10201.0.html>, UCI president Pat McQuaid says that although Hamilton's positive test occurred in 2004, his sanction was finalized in 2005, and the additional two-year suspension from the Pro Tour is applicable. It is unclear to me whether he'll be banned from riding in Pro Tour events altogether (since non-Pro Tour teams can sometimes compete in Pro Tour events) or whether he'll be permitted to ride in Pro Tour events on a non-Pro Tour team. Does anybody know anything?

Although McQuaid ostensibly speaks for the UCI, his statement is open to interpretation and challenge. The most common practice has been to date the suspension from the date of the first positive sample. A 'speedy trial' doctrine would seem to apply.

BitQuirky 14:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's an informed opinion: <http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/10793.0.html>.

BitQuirky 13:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that Hamilton did not graduate from the University of Colorado. I'm not calling him a liar, I'm not sure if he ever said that he did. I can't provide a publicly accessible source, but I have access to the list of graduates and he never received a degree. The "rumor" in the article is correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.254.180 (talk) 13:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts on revision/cleaning up needed

just wonder what peoples thoughts are on this page getting cleaned up a bit. The various dopings sections seem unnesessary lengthy and in depth and the overall weight of the page is that of a doper (which he was) and pays very little attention to his cycling career. Certainly sections like the Puerto section are largely repeats of what is already in the puerto section and this could be much smaller with additional reference to the Operacion Puerto Page. Even the section afterwards is titled "after the ban" rather than "return to cycling" which seems the more common title on wiki. The entire article seems to be 90% doping allegations which although accurate are rather long winded and theres very little summing up of his actual career and racing. Dimspace (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree, the cycling portion of this page can be bumped up, but when compared to other cyclists (like George Hincapie), it's actually a relatively high level of detail about his cycling career. "After the ban" is inflamatory; it should be changed to "Return to Cycling" for sure. Using the Operacion Puerto page to add detail about Tyler seems out of balance, as that page contains just one paragraph about Hamilton. I will strongly disagree that this page is "90% doping allegations": 1) it's maybe 60%, and 2) these are not allegations, these are the results of positive tests that Hamilton has confirmed. Finally, the book that he is releasing in Sept. 2012 with Daniel Coyle is all about doping, and if anything will likely require additional detail to be added to the doping side of this entry. Adding additional cycling details is absolutely great and welcome; bumping up the percentage of his cycling content by eliminating facts about his doping past seems to be out of bounds.Stlamanda (talk) 10:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Now, more than two years after the USADA report: I came to this article from the one about Levi Leipheimer. This article is about doping, Levi's is about raceing. Levi and Tyler raced at a high level for a long time, and they both doped for most of that time. It would be good if the articles could better convey both aspects; raceing and doping. A thouroug revision/cleaning up seems like a good idea to me. --178.232.6.241 (talk) 14:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

They aren't even remotely comparable. -- 68.111.35.169 (talk) 05:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)