Tyler Hamilton Diary
I threw forward my arm, and said ? "It?s a mistake. Take another sample".
in the program. We traded multiple emails and faxes regarding this subject in the days after our meeting.
So for me, nothing had really changed. I planned to follow up with the hematology specialist in Boston during the off season, and started the Tour de France two weeks later as planned.
Issues with the Blood Transfusion Test: The primary issues we raised about this test during my hearing were:
1. Experts for both sides testified that flow cytometry, the test methodology used for this test, can not prove a blood transfusion has taken place.
2. If the minimum threshold stated in the sole peer review for the test were applied to my test results from the Olympic Games and the Vuelta Espana, both tests would have been declared negative.
3. There was no false positive study conducted during the validation of this test.
4. The ?visual criteria? used to determined the results of this test boils down to an ?I know it when I see it? evaluation - which when applied in other doping tests, has been considered an unacceptable level of detection that cannot stand alone in determining someone has tested positive. Arbitration panels have stated in previous cases that quantifiable criteria must confirm ?visual? criteria. In my case there was no quantifiable criteria used.
Issues with My Results: Of the number of unanswered issues regarding my test results the most concerning are:
The fact the my Olympic A sample was originally declared negative and there was no B sample test result to substantiate changing it to positive.
The antigens declared positive for ?mixed populations? in Athens and the Vuelta are not the same.
Santi Perez: When Santi was declared guilty on the day my hearing started - it took two key arguments off the table in my defense. We could no longer contend my case was the first blood transfusion case. Nor could we state that the test had not yet been validated through a judicial process.
Santi Perez tested positive in the off-season but not during the Vuelta where he provided multiple blood samples. And, his judicial hearing was held without him being present. He plans to appeal his case to CAS, the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
The Extortionist: My case is made even more confounding with the added component of someone threatening the Phonak team with inside knowledge about Santi and I being positive before either of us were declared so. Issues and coincidences that cannot be ignored are:
1. On August 25, the extortionist sent his first message stating he knew I would be announced as ?positive? at the Olympics. According to the IOC, that conclusion was not made until between September 10 and 16.
2. Out of all the Olympic athletes in Athens, and professional cyclists competing in 2004, the extortionist correctly ?guessed? that Santi and I would test positive
3. The extortionist accepted a monetary bribe ?to keep an additional rider clean? and ?the Phonak team clean in 2005? on November 3, 2004 . At that time he stated he needed 9 days