Another proof point for tyler

This **** happens ALL the time.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4624307.stm

"Rik Van Diesel" wrote in message
oups.com...
This **** happens ALL the time.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4624307.stm


film at six: twins peak.
e-RICHIE

Maybe Tyler will try pulling out a fetus during the next trial.

"Nothing up my sleeve here, but looking in my abdomen...HO, HO, look it
that UCI, it's my twin!"

Maybe it'll explain why he crashes so much too; the fetus is throwing
off his center of gravity.

CH

Rik Van Diesel wrote:
This **** happens ALL the time.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4624307.stm


You know what I don't understand is this:
If Hamilton's argument is his missing twin, why not agree to be locked
up for , say 6 months. He doesn't **** without some neutral third party
knowing about it. No chance for any injections of anything.

Then, he submits to the blood test again. If he really is a chimera
like he says he is, then he should test positive again. Right?

6 months. Not necessarily really locked up. But with his shadow going
everywhere he goes. Hell, I'll do it for 50K. I'll even go out on
rides with Tyler if he keeps it under 25 or so.

I was also pondering the Linford Christie case, and pure thought
led me to believe that what was considered physically impossible
in 1996 (a response time of less than 1/10 of a second), might
now be. In particular, it seemed to me at the time that Christie
obviously did not anticipate. I was proved correct:

http://www.nserc.ca/news/stories/040806_e.htm

-ilan

Rik Van Diesel a =E9crit :
This **** happens ALL the time.
=20
=20
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4624307.stm

Good read.

RVD

John, the problem is that Tyler tested negative. He showed just enough
activity that the testing facility put a 'negative but funny' tag on
the results and the originator of the test - who we can all agree isn't
exactly a neutral party - changed the negative to positive. He said
that he didn't have any numerical standards but that he knew a positive
when he saw it.

I assume what he meant was that SOME activity combined with a
hematocrit right on the line (Tyler apparently had a 49.8% hematocrit)
was enough to convince him that Tyler was a true positive. Despite the
fact that he was the ONLY positive in the entire Olympics and later the
World Championships.

Without a false positives study the findings are almost preposterous.
His high hematocrit might be because he lives and trains at high
altitude and the Phonak doctors always water him down with saline
solution before races so that there's no questions about his high
hematocrit.

Remember that some significant part of the population has 'unnaturally
high' hematocrit (over 50%) naturally so that isn't some far fetched
idea and Phonak would be unlikely to admit to using IV's to correct
high hematocrit since it would make them look like they were
cooperating with doping.

In the latest Cyclingnews Perez makes a pretty bitter comment that
implies that he and Tyler have been mistreated by the UCI and Phonak
because of the testing which he ALSO claims is false.

Of course Brian would say that they're guilty regardless but who cares
what he thinks?

Tyler tested positive at the Olympics and at the Vuelta.

Tyler got tested again in November 04 and once more (I think) in Feb
05. The latter two were negative....

Is it just a coincidence that he only tests positive in competition?
Makes the vanishing twin seem extremely unlikely.

Rik Van Diesel wrote:
This **** happens ALL the time.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4624307.stm


Oh, that's nothing. They found an entire EPO factory in my left
testicle. Which only makes Lance's victories seem all the more remarkable.

"Patricio Carlos" wrote in message
oups.com...
Tyler tested positive at the Olympics and at the Vuelta.

Tyler got tested again in November 04 and once more (I think) in Feb
05. The latter two were negative....

Is it just a coincidence that he only tests positive in competition?
Makes the vanishing twin seem extremely unlikely.

Since there is no standard you don't know if his "negative" was any
different from his "positive".