D*** Pound interview in VeloNews . . .

[BumbleBeeDave]

Anybody else read it? Very interesting . . . apparently Tyler is guilty even before his "fair hearing."

BBDave . . . grinding his axe--as usual! ;)

[oracle]

how about having that auto-censor adjusted? **** pound may be a ****, but we should at least be able to use his real name, given the frequency with which it appears in discussions here.

grazi,
oracle

[Bruce K]

Dave, buddy...

At the rate you're grinding that axe you'll soon have nothing left!

It was a very good interview, fairly enlightening. Your letter to Velonews has been published and you make good points.

We need to remember that this is not a US court, but a sanctioning body doing what it sees fit to enhance and/or protect it's image and integrity. If they succeed good for them, if they fail too bad for the sport, but in the end they get to make their own rules, fair or not.

Despite the unions and everything else, even pro sports in the US are not always fair. They are not always smart either, witness baseball's steriod problem, basketball's image problem, and hockey's got no problem...they've got no season.

To some degree it is unfortunate that US athletes can run to the US court system as back-up whether they are innocent or guilty under the ruling of their sanctioning bodies.

It is almost January, let's wait and see what comes out of all this Tyler stuff when the hearings are held.

Until then it's all just posturing by the parties and speculation on our part.

BK

[BumbleBeeDave]

Leave The Sheriff alone! I self-censored! . . . ;)

Bruce, regardless of due process requirements or not, prejudicial statements about guilt or innocence by the prosecuting parties are out of line. :no:

BBDave

[oracle]

**** tracy
**** clark
**** cavett
**** york
tricky ****
**** cheney
**** martin
moby ****
**** grayson
**** vitale

[toaster]

After reading the interview at Velonews and seeing how **** Pound is the ultimate policeman regarding sport doping, I wonder if **** Pound ever cheats on his taxes, his wife, his expense account, or anything for that matter.

Someday most athletes will be using genetic doping and will improve human performance artificially and there will be no test to prove to what extent such means have been used and **** Pound's usefullness will be a non-issue.

[Len J]

Anybody else read it? Very interesting . . . apparently Tyler is guilty even before his "fair hearing."

BBDave . . . grinding his axe--as usual! ;)

your reactions appear (to me) to be disproportinate to the subject.

You seem to think that no one reading the articles can make up their own mind. I could make the same exact assertions you are making about this article, about Tyler's interviews. At the end of the day, Tyler is subject to rules and process.......it may not seem fair, but Tyler accepted the process when he accepted his licence, and the money that came with it.

Let's see what happens in the spring. I, for one, don't mind these articles....I can read them and make up my own mind.

Len

[CJH]

Great point Len J!

[BumbleBeeDave]

Read them, make up your mind, and we talk about it here if you like. That's why I started the thread.

I just think that prejudicial statements like those made by Pound have the effect of convicting the rider--whether Tyler or others--in the public conscience, in effect depriving the accused of the "due process" the governing bodies say they are giving.

BBDave

[Len J]

Read them, make up your mind, and we talk about it here if you like. That's why I started the thread.

I just think that prejudicial statements like those made by Pound have the effect of convicting the rider--whether Tyler or others--in the public conscience, in effect depriving the accused of the "due process" the governing bodies say they are giving.

BBDave

How is this any different than what Tyler does in the press?

Len

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . are, in effect, court, judge, and jury is this proceeding.

It's analogous to the judge declaring the defendant guilty before the trial even convenes. Regardless of whether it's strictly legal, it's low class, bad form, and unfair in an arena where UCI and WADA are also making public declarations about giving the rider a "fair" trial.

BBDave

[saab2000]

I had tried to avoid commenting here, but I must.

This is not a trial like we might imagine. Tyler is assumed to be guilty because he tested positive. OJ was assumed to be guilty because his DNA matched.

Now there might be a fault with the testing protocols. Tyler might have some very unique blood type. But unless something big happens here, Tyler is toast.

If there were some other sort of infraction, bad behavior or some other sort of violation, one might expect a "trial by jury". But that is not how it works in sports, especially when it comes to testing for banned substances or banned procedures, as is the case with TH.

I feel bad for Tyler, but as I see it he played with fire and got burned.

Whatever the role of this Mr. Pound, I think TH has very little chance of exoneration, and then probably only on a technicality.

This ain't Matlock here and a jury trial is not how this stuff works. Tyler was assumed innocent until he proved himself guilty by testing postive.

Just my $.02

[oracle]

the tyler apologists need to get over it. he's got three positives for the same infraction: two at the oly's and another at the vuelta. if you think that's a coincidence, pm me for some secret lottery numbers that i'd be happy to sell for cheap.

oracle

[bags27]

BBD, I feel for you: I bet most of us do. If 6 months ago, someone asked contributors to this site which professional rider they most "believe in", I'm sure TH would have won, hands down. But just as all others who test positive, he's considered guilty, and the burden of proof now rests on him...especially with all the other Phonax garbage coming to light.

The Nor' easter put me on my trainer today, and the first Spinerval tape--the demo one--has a very young TH in the pact...so shy and unaccomplished at that point that I think he's the only rider that "Coach Troy" doesn't interview between sets. So sad to think that he eventually triumphed but then fell...like a Greek tragedy.

[BumbleBeeDave]

I think I have moved past the part about apologizing for Tyler. I think there is indeed a good chance that he did it. What has me annoyed here--and I guess maybe I did not make it clear enough--is that people like Mr. Pound are talking out of both sides of their mouths, speaking at once about giving accused athletes “fair hearings” but then making declarations about how assured they are about guilt.

Sooner or later, this kind of treatment of the athletes involved in the sport is going to have a detrimental effect--possibly over time as much of a bad effect as the doping itself. Riders who want to make a decent career for themselves are going to look at what is involved in being a pro and decide it’s just not worth it. I mean, look at things now . . . look at all the hurdles any athlete must jump over just to get on ANY kind of pro team. Dangerous working conditions. Low pay. Miniscule chance of major success. Having to report your whereabouts to the drug “vampires” so they can confront you at any time to make you pee in a cup or now I guess draw some blood, too. Lack of respect from so many people who already assume they all dope . . .

Now we have conditions being set up where if they test positive for anything they are automatically guilty in the eyes of the UCI and WADA. The statements of these governing bodies about “fair hearings” are being proven to be nothing more than cynical hypocrisy. Pound makes statements declaring that the athletes are responsible for what goes into their bodies--period. So to be 100% sure of not ingesting anything that might result in an inadvertant positive, the athlete would have to--well, what WOULD they have to do? You can’t analyze everything you eat and drink. Every meal? Every jar of Gatorade? Every protein bar you pick up at GNC? Scott Moninger still had sealed containers of the supplements he was taking--LEGAL supplements--and could prove beyond a doubt that they were the reason he tested positive. Did it do him any good? No.

What is getting me here is the disquieting resemblance this is taking on to the McCarthy era here in the US, when simply to be accused of being a “pinko communist” meant you were automatically guilty and your life was ruined. The same thing is happening here, with the UCI and WADA seemingly consciously trying to set up an atmosphere where as soon as you are accused, BANG you are guilty. There are no extenuating circumstances, EVER. This is turning me off to the sport as much as the doping itself is.

TH might have the resources to follow this thing through. But it is likely to cost him most of his personal wealth built up through years of hard work and ruin his well-deserved reputation for honesty and courage. But what recourse does a rider on a second or third division team have? Guess it’s back to working sporting goods at the local Decathalon store. Why on earth would any sane individual want to be a pro cyclist? I sure wouldn’t.

BBDave

[Big Dan]

BBD, are you a lawyer?? if not you should be one. Some people just don't care anymore. Did anyone mention that Lance was named "something" of the year?? People have lost some of the interest, maybe in July it will come back. For now...Tyler hasn't proved anything like he said he would... :confused:

[vaxn8r]

Oracle has it right. TH tested positive multiple times....3 to be exact and could have been a 4th if the sample wasn't frozen. That automatically makes him guilty by the rules set up by the UCI. A hearing is set to appeal that verdict.

If he wasn't found guilty, then what's the point of the hearing?

[shinomaster]

Oracle is right. You can't say **** on the phorum...

[Len J]

I hear you and,believe it or not I see merit in what you say. Unfortunatly, in looking at Tyler's circumstances, you are missing the context, the point in time that the sport finds itself in. Illegal doping has threatened to ruin the sport....for several years, cycling has been plagued by what we all suspected, but they couldn't prove...that was that performances were tained by performance enhancing drugs. The sport, in the guise of the organizers and the UCI, decided that they had to strike back. They have consequently, tried to swing the pendulem back in the other direction by ensuring that they are doing everything possible to show the world that they are serious about routing illegal performance enhancements out of the sport. In doing this they can't afford (especially with a high profile American) to even give the impression of not being tough on illegal activities. That is the truth of the situitation, does it suck, probably, but in order to get the sport back to the "middle" they have to overreact.

Tyler picked the wrong time to get in trouble.

Call they whatever you want, but they believe that they are protecting the sport.

Len

[BumbleBeeDave]

<<They have consequently, tried to swing the pendulem back in the other direction by ensuring that they are doing everything possible to show the world that they are serious about routing illegal performance enhancements out of the sport.>>

I agree. I just think they are dangerously close to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It would just make me feel a lot better if Pound were just a teensy bit less holier than thou. He seems so convinced of his rightiousness that he sees nothing else. That’s dangerous in any context.

Tyler did indeed pick a very bad time to get in trouble. But sooner or later some enterprising sports agent will get the riders organized--and if the UCI thinks they have troubles NOW, well . . . :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, Big Dan, if you don’t care any more, then why are you reading this thread, eh? ;) Make no mistake. Tyler is on trial for his professional life, and he is doing exactly what he should do and what he has repeatedly said he will do--keep his mouth shut until the hearing. It’s a shame Mr. pound doesn’t seem to have the same amount of self-discipline . . .

BBDave

[Big Dan]

BBD feel bad for you, so much effort...the house of cards is half way down...

Live$trong..brother.......... :D

[Len J]

<<They have consequently, tried to swing the pendulem back in the other direction by ensuring that they are doing everything possible to show the world that they are serious about routing illegal performance enhancements out of the sport.>>

I agree. I just think they are dangerously close to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It would just make me feel a lot better if Pound were just a teensy bit less holier than thou. He seems so convinced of his rightiousness that he sees nothing else. That’s dangerous in any context.

Tyler did indeed pick a very bad time to get in trouble. But sooner or later some enterprising sports agent will get the riders organized--and if the UCI thinks they have troubles NOW, well . . . :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, Big Dan, if you don’t care any more, then why are you reading this thread, eh? ;) Make no mistake. Tyler is on trial for his professional life, and he is doing exactly what he should do and what he has repeatedly said he will do--keep his mouth shut until the hearing. It’s a shame Mr. pound doesn’t seem to have the same amount of self-discipline . . .

BBDave

They are stuck in a no win situitation. If they are agressive, they risk organizing the riders....if they are passive, people don't trust the results of the sport.

It's easy to Monday morning quarterback....it's different when you have to choose between two bad alternatives.

Len

[BumbleBeeDave]

My house of cards has fallen and it can’t get up! :crap:

I need to go to bed . . .

BBD

[Elefantino]

the tyler apologists need to get over it. he's got three positives for the same infraction: two at the oly's and another at the vuelta. if you think that's a coincidence, pm me for some secret lottery numbers that i'd be happy to sell for cheap.

oracle

Yep. Well said. And this from a Tyler fan.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . is proving he's chemeric. That's the only valid reason I've seen that could explain all three positives.

BBDave

[BBB]

[QUOTE=BumbleBeeDave]Read them, make up your mind, and we talk about it here if you like. That's why I started the thread.


I have yet to see the offending interview, so I cannot comment directly on what was said.

However, this thread does raise a few interesting points.

First off, the process itself. As I understand there are in effect two "Hamilton" cases. One involves the appeal by the Russian and the Australian Olympic committees against the decision of the IOC regarding Hamilton's gold medal. This appeal will be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sports. This is an arbitral body independent of the parties and 'due process' will be followed.

The second case arises out of the positive test at the Vuelta. I am not sure of the process in this case, but I assume that Hamilton will be given some form of disciplinary hearing by the United States Anti-Doping Agency. Presumably any negative outcome from Hamilton's point of view (ie a ban) will be the subject of an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which as I say above, is an arbitral body independent of the parties.

I have no idea how the USADA procedures work, but the body having overall judicial control is an independent body and it can safely be assumed that due process will be followed, irrespective of the views or opinions of people like **** Pound. And as someone else pointed out, Hamiton himself accepted the process when he signed up.

Second, is WADA actually a party to either proceeding? I am not sure that it is, though I stand to be corrected.

And even if they are a party to either proceeding, surely they are entitled to their opinion? Certainly Tyler Hamilton has expressed his opinion. What is the difference between the two? Various other people have also had their say, including numerous "internet jockeys" (to coin a recent phrase on this forum).

In my opinion, what would be a cause for concern regarding and what would impact on due process would be if the trier of fact in either case came out and expressed a pre-determined point of view. No doubt if this happens, the army of lawyers working for Tyler Hamilton will react very quickly.

However, comments by someone in **** Pound's capacity have to be seen in their context. Lets face it athletes, be it in cycling or in other sports, cheat. People like **** Pound have the job of trying to make sport clean. Its generally accepted that the athletes (or their chemists) are one step ahead of the testers. Look at the Festina debacle in the 98 Tour. Not one positive test, yet the riders admitted their guilt (or eventually admitted their guilt in one case). This must be very frustrating to bodies such as WADA. So when an athlete and a reasonably high profile athlete such as Tyler Hamilton gets 'caught' then it is not hard to understand why fairly pointed views are expressed. This is really a cyclical problem, for as long as athletes cheat and are given assistance to cheat, there are going to be frustrated administrators who will shout from the roof tops when someone is caught.

Finally, in my view, I think Hamilton not being given access to data to enable the prepartion of his case or the apparent pre-judgment by the UCI on the Phonak team as a whole is far more problematic than any comments made by **** Pound. What are the UCI going to do if Hamilton (and Perez) gets off?

Hamilton's case is very interesting and its outcome will have a direct bearing not only on Tyler himself, but his team mates (or former team mates as the case may be), the testing regime and in the short term, the structure of professional cycling in 2005.

Certainly trial by media is unfortunate and I understand the concerns expressed, but then again, so are drug cheats.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Fair commentary . . . thanks!

I would be far more comfortable if this process went directly to the CAS, since I believe you are correct that it’s an independent body and is far more likely to be fair-minded.

What is ridiculous is that the rider--any rider, not just Hamilton--has to spend so much time and money simply to GET a fair and presumably impartial hearing. As I am understanding it, the deck is stacked enormously against the rider in the process that UCI and WADA have set up--and the prejudicial statements from people like Pound only make it worse.

If I am remembering correctly, the hearing Hamilton will get will be with USA Cycling (USCF? Are they the same thing?) But USA Cycling/USCF is obviously dependent on the UCI to sanction any races here in the US that might end up on the Pro Tour. That means big money. No matter what protestations you hear from UCI about “fair hearings,” the fact remains that the UCI will take a very dim view of USCF letting off a rider in one of these hearings. So USCF has a conflict of interest, as does WADA because they set up the whole regimen of drug testing and obviously have a vested interest in seeing as many “guilty” verdicts as possible.

I have a problem with that, despite the obvious importance of their goal of eliminating cheating. Perhaps it’s just because I have been brought up in a society where the lip service is paid so much to “innocent until proven guilty.” The UCI and WADA, as personified by D*ck Pound, declare they want to be fair to the riders, but then make prejudicial statements like those by Pound and refuse to even make information about the tests available so the riders can defend themselves--and I’m not talking about detailed information about the test that would be useful to athletes trying to circumvent it. I’m talking about simply specific numbers about the riders own personal results, because as I understand it this is the type of personal and vital info the UCI is refusing to let Hamilton have.

Pound is making it obvious that he thinks as long as they catch some cheats to prove they are doing their bit to police the sport, they don’t really care if they also ruin the careers of some innocent people in the process. The hypocrisy is what is so infuriating.

But then, maybe I should just go for a ride and forget about it, because it looks like Hamilton is toast no matter what kind of defense he gathers or what I think about it . . . :crap: But then, it would be such a hoot to have him show up at the hearing and trot out half the staff of the Mayo clinics to testify that he’s chemeric . . .

BBDave

[BBB]

I think it is probably a challenge for any sporting body or federation to set up a process that is truly independent. I understand the concerns in respect of the UCI/USA Cycling, moreso given the UCI's treatment of the Phonak team in advance of the outcome of the Hamilton/Perez hearings. However, I would have thought that USA Cycling would tread pretty carefully when it came to conducting the hearing. Hamilton's case has generated considerable publicity and the last thing a sporting federation would want is allegations of bias or worse. That's not to say it couldn't happen. Look at the past problems involving the selection of host cities for the Summer and Winter Olympics for example.

I think in this particular case Tyler Hamilton has probably been a little unlucky (though some may disagree with the word 'unlucky' in the circumstances) in that he was the first rider to be caught using a new test, he was caught at the Olympics and in an event that he won, the testing protocol was flawed in that a second sample was frozen, he was caught again in the Vuelta and so forth. Consequently, Hamilton has seemingly had to spend money on mounting a defence that seeks to invalidate a new testing procedure, the later which may be contrary to official attempts to eradicate cheating as well as fight a PR war. Granted there should be a presumption in favour of a fair hearing, but given the factors involved, I think it was probably inevitable he had the cards stacked against him and that the process would and will cost a lot of money.

Agreed that there should be a presumption of innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately it does not always happen. In this particular case, three out of four positive tests have not helped Tyler Hamilton's cause.

However, with professional cycling, fans (and the media) seem to be fairly cynical when it comes to the topic of drugs in sport. I think most of us assume that a percentage of professional cyclists use some method of illegal performance enhancement. The difficultly with such cynicism is that it tars everyone with the same brush and discounts the achievements of those who do ride clean. In Tyler Hamilton's case, he may well be innocent, however in the face of the evidence currently available, most people will probably assume he is guilty. This problem is also compounded by the cyclists themselves. There is seemingly a culture of silence in professional racing. Most attempts to speak out are meet with derision or denial. See for example the reaction to Paul Kimmage and his book on professional cycling, Bassons in the 99 Tour or various others. A culture of silence can only increase suspicion.

I realise that this has strayed a little from the Hamilton case, but this case is reflective of the wider problem of drugs in cycling. Cynical fans, cynical officials and a group of people determined to keep the lid on the problem. In these circumstances, it is hardly suprising that Tyler Hamilton faces an uphill battle. To get back to the point, perhaps WADA or like organisations should develop a protocol when dealing with 'live' cases such that reputations are not dragged through the mud in an attempt to crack down on cheating.

No doubt we will all see what transpires in the upcoming months.

[Steve800]

**** tracy
**** clark
**** cavett
**** york
tricky ****
**** cheney
**** martin
moby ****
**** grayson
**** vitale

dick, I didn't show you guys this......... ;)

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . neat trick!

And YOU certainly seem excited about it, judging by your avatar! ;)

BBDave

[BumbleBeeDave]

I think you’ve pretty well covered it. I admire Tyler and sympathize with Tyler, but when you get to the bottom line reality, he IS going to have to come up with some sort of Hollywood courtroom moment to be able to explain it. I pray he will, but my practical side tells me he’s toast.

BBDave

[BBB]

That and some pretty compelling medical evidence.

[shinomaster]

It just occured to me that this guys name was **** Pound!! Not Richard Pound, or Quarter Pound, or Half Pound or ***** Pound or **** Pounder. Wow what cruel parents! Could have been worse I suppose..... His last name could have been Head, or Ball, or Lover, or Face, or Infection, or even worse, Small.
I'm so glad my name is so simple..
:banana:
:banana:
:banana:
:banana:
:banana:
:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

[oracle]

how very true.