Monday’s Mailbag: The Hamilton decision
The Mailbag is a regular feature on VeloNews.com. If you have a comment, an opinion or observation regarding anything you have seen in cycling, in VeloNews magazine or on VeloNews.com, write to WebLetters@InsideInc.com. Please include your full name and home town. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.
Hamilton can follow Millar’s lead
Editor:
I am saddened for Tyler Hamilton and all those who continue to believe an innocent man was convicted of a crime. Science and the Court of Arbitration for Sport have determined what most non-Kool-Aid drinkers have suspected — that Hamilton was guilty of cheating. And like most cheaters, Hamilton wants to blame someone else or some scientific anomaly for a positive test result.
Like him or not, at least David Millar has accepted responsibility for his actions and wants to come back and compete as a clean rider. I want Tyler to come back and prove he can win as a clean rider. If he can, then he will prove he really is a champion; if not, then maybe this drug problem is more widespread then we want to believe. I hope not, because I believe cycling is the most grueling sport in the world and deserves more respect then it is getting.
Steve Duffy
Phoenix, Arizona
Who’s really to blame?
Editor:
I don’t really know who’s to blame for Tyler’s downfall, but someone(s) should be. Was Tyler’s cheating really just his own fault/responsibility? Are sponsors and teams responsible if they turn their backs, condone, support or push riders to do what they have to do to achieve results? Are the UCI and tour organizers to blame for making races too hard for an undoped rider to finish?
I don’t think there is a conspiracy against him — I trust the science that found his results, and don’t believe some of his stories or theories. But I also don’t blame him 100 percent, either. Keeping up with the cheats will always be a cat-and-mouse game, and it’s important to start by recognizing who the real cheats are, because it’s not just the riders.
Michael Anderson
New York City, New York
Heart leans one way, evidence the other
Editor:
Well, I read the CAS decision on Tyler Hamilton’s case, all 29 pages of it. There are several disturbing points made.
First, the lab at which he tested positive was not accredited to perform the test until more than a year after it declared him positive, and a month after his appeal was heard.
On the other side it also says neither side disputed that there were two blood types on the test results, only how it came to be.
I have to say after reading the entire ruling, I would have had to find him guilty as well. His arguments did not outweigh the evidence presented by WADA and the UCI.
While in my heart I will always want to believe Tyler’s (and Roberto’s) claims of innocence, in the CAS, with the evidence presented in the ruling, there was no way around finding him guilty.
Mark Bertram
Atlanta, Georgia
Let’s make tests indisputable
Editor:
I doubt that we will ever know for sure if Tyler did or didn’t blood dope; only he knows the truth. The bigger question we should be asking is how to make sure that doping tests are fair and indisputable. With an athlete’s career at stake there should be no room for questioning the validity of a test. I fully support catching and punishing cheats, but not at the expense of the innocent.
As stated in Hamilton’s defense there needs to be a clear and unbridgeable separation between the anti-doping enforcers and the testing labs. It is easy to see a conflict of interest in the current method.
With so much at stake this process needs to be lily-white. Then, if you’re caught, shame on you.
Dan Weitzel
Cleveland, Ohio
Trust the system, not Hamilton
Editor:
Please — unless you’re a scientist who has worked with the actual samples, spare us your opinions on the validity of the tests. At some point, we’ve got to trust the system, or it’s open season for any cheater with a good public relations crew.
I don’t want to hear what a nice guy Hamilton is. No one, to my knowledge, ever accused Lance Armstrong of being a nice guy, but Tex passed all his drug screenings. Hamilton stood to gain millions of dollars. Motive enough.
I hope he has the decency to shut up for the next year, unless it’s to come completely clean. I am tired of lying, cheating cyclists.
Gregory Thelen
Fort Collins, Colorado
Believe Tyler
Editor:
I know I’m not being rational, but I continue to believe Tyler Hamilton. He can’t prove that he didn’t do it. A number of people who are well-acquainted with the facts are certain that he did. One thing is for sure: Bike racing was more interesting with him on the road.
Mac Ehrhardt
Albert Lea, Minnesota
A disappointment for cycling
Editor:
I’ll never look at him the same way again. What a disappointment for cycling, and for U.S. cycling in particular. I hope he has the good sense to never compete again; that would be a disgrace on top of what has already been done. He needs to go away. If he doesn’t, it will show he has no regard for the beautiful sport of cycling and is only thinking of himself.
John R. Boyd
Bainbridge, Indiana
Cycling’s soap opera
Editor:
Finally, it is over. We have been relying on this test in the hospital for matters much more important than athletes in bicycle races. It is obvious that he had been manipulating his blood the entire year. You know what? So what? Bike racing is entertainment, and though these guys and girls can generate more power with one leg than I can at my max it is still just a spectacle to entertain us. I say keep testing and catching the people who dope so that we can read about it every day. It’s cycling’s soap opera.
Mike Valenti
Clinton, North Carolina
Forget Hamilton: Where’s my buyers guide?
Editor:
Please spare us the onslaught of self-proclaimed experts on the subject of Tyler’s doping. He’s guilty, get over it! Where’s my ‘06 VeloNews Buyers Guide with all of the new goodies?
Adam Hoyt
Shawnee, Kansas
Adam, we checked with our colleagues on the magazine side and they say the Buyers Guide should start hitting mailboxes starting Saturday. – Editor
And now, for something completely different
Editor:
Thank you for John Wilcockson’s article on the start of Team 7-Eleven. I was 12 years old in 1981 and grew up in Pewaukee, Wisconsin. I have recollections of driving by a house with two 7-Eleven vans with many bikes on top and always thought it curious that the local 7-Eleven would put so much money into sponsorship of a little bicycling club. Little did I know that this wasn’t the local 7-Eleven and was the start of something much bigger for cycling in the States.
Since my husband and I have come to love cycling and racing, I’ve often wondered about the history of 7-Eleven and have would love to read more of the team history and see more photos. Any chance you’ll be publishing more stories and photos of 7-Eleven?
Amy Maas
Edmonds, Washington
The Mailbag is a regular feature on VeloNews.com. If you have a comment, an opinion or observation regarding anything you have seen in cycling, in VeloNews magazine or on VeloNews.com, write to WebLetters@InsideInc.com. Please include your full name and home town. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.