Afternoon all,
I have just finished Tyler Hamilton's book and i must say it was a great read. It raised a lot of questions about doping by the pro riders in the 90's and 2000's. To me it looks like the UCI in a way allowed it to go on - they did their testing and made sure that the hematocrit levels remained below 50 (if you don't know what this is read the book); this, to me, left the door open to riders to ensure their levels were close to that level without a query as to why is would be so close. I almost think that this encouraged doping - dope until you reached the UCI level and you would be ok. Is almost legalises doping - to their standard point, in my view.
I don't agree with doping, but as Mr Hamilton made clear, you HAD TO dope to be in the top places during that time - so doping made for a level playing field for the riders concerned - which appears to be just about all of them. There is a story today on Eurosport about Michael Boogerd, the three-times Dutch champion, was fifth in the 1998 Tour de France, won the Amstel Gold in 1999, claimed two stage wins on the Tour de France and was the eighth rider of the now defunct Rababank team to admit to doping, from 1997 until 2007.
The view of Lance Armstrong portrayed in the book is at variance to the interview he did with Oprah - where he seems like a nice guy who is sorry for what he has done. Mr Hamilton's describes him in a very different light, and, personally, even from even 20% of the description - he is not a nice guy at all. Mr Hamiliton was LA's friend, neighbour and co-worker (employee might be closer) and he was treated badly by LA, imagine what someone who was on his ****list would expect.
All in all a very interesting book, and a thought provoking one - especially the end where some admissions were made about doping by various riders and LA's constant and vehement denials of any wrongdoing.
Worth a read for those who haven't read it yet. Any suggestions for my next book would be appreciated.
HAve a good and safe weekend all,
Richard
I have just finished Tyler Hamilton's book and i must say it was a great read. It raised a lot of questions about doping by the pro riders in the 90's and 2000's. To me it looks like the UCI in a way allowed it to go on - they did their testing and made sure that the hematocrit levels remained below 50 (if you don't know what this is read the book); this, to me, left the door open to riders to ensure their levels were close to that level without a query as to why is would be so close. I almost think that this encouraged doping - dope until you reached the UCI level and you would be ok. Is almost legalises doping - to their standard point, in my view.
I don't agree with doping, but as Mr Hamilton made clear, you HAD TO dope to be in the top places during that time - so doping made for a level playing field for the riders concerned - which appears to be just about all of them. There is a story today on Eurosport about Michael Boogerd, the three-times Dutch champion, was fifth in the 1998 Tour de France, won the Amstel Gold in 1999, claimed two stage wins on the Tour de France and was the eighth rider of the now defunct Rababank team to admit to doping, from 1997 until 2007.
The view of Lance Armstrong portrayed in the book is at variance to the interview he did with Oprah - where he seems like a nice guy who is sorry for what he has done. Mr Hamilton's describes him in a very different light, and, personally, even from even 20% of the description - he is not a nice guy at all. Mr Hamiliton was LA's friend, neighbour and co-worker (employee might be closer) and he was treated badly by LA, imagine what someone who was on his ****list would expect.
All in all a very interesting book, and a thought provoking one - especially the end where some admissions were made about doping by various riders and LA's constant and vehement denials of any wrongdoing.
Worth a read for those who haven't read it yet. Any suggestions for my next book would be appreciated.
HAve a good and safe weekend all,
Richard