Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Hamilton's autobiography *spoilers*

bipedalbipedal Posts: 466
edited November 2012 in Pro race
CN reporting that he's saying it was Mr 60% who introduced him to Dr Fuentes... I wonder if the Danish authorities will be pursuing that conspiracy?
«13456716

Posts

  • No_Ta_DoctorNo_Ta_Doctor Posts: 11,321
    Jörg Jaksche has said similar in the past, that Riis explained how to avoid detection.

    I think it's important not to let Lance hog the limelight here, I'd certainly like to see this followed up.
    “Road racing was over and the UCI had banned my riding positions on the track, so it was like ‘Jings, crivvens, help ma Boab, what do I do now? I know, I’ll go away and be depressed for 10 years’.”

    @DrHeadgear

    The Vikings are coming!
  • dortmunderdortmunder Posts: 101
    Is the book being published in the UK?
  • Does he explain what his twin tasted of? :wink:
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • dortmunder wrote:
    Is the book being published in the UK?


    Available to pre-order through all reliable online outlets now...
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    Greg66 wrote:
    Does he explain what his twin tasted of? :wink:

    :D:D:D
  • bipedalbipedal Posts: 466
    After all... it might help the Danish Federation regain some credibility:
    http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12750 ... itive.aspx
  • http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 61,011 Lives Here
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    Yup.

    Iain even posted some of his notes on what to take when.
  • Just because a person has been dishonest in the past, it does not follow that they will always be dishonest. Yes, they're previous dishonesty is an issue that should be taken into account, but it should be considered alongside the other "evidence" they present. For example, how compelling is the account they now describe?

    I'll look forward to reaching my own judgement on Hamilton's account when I have read it. I did find him compelling on the 60 mins programme.
  • edhornbyedhornby Posts: 1,780
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.
    and it turned out that Fuentes supplied lots of riders for T-Mobile, the team that you rode for when you won the tour and they nicknamed you 'mr 60%'
    "I get paid to make other people suffer on my wheel, how good is that"
    --Jens Voight
  • Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Just because a person has been dishonest in the past, it does not follow that they will always be dishonest. Yes, they're previous dishonesty is an issue that should be taken into account, but it should be considered alongside the other "evidence" they present. For example, how compelling is the account they now describe?

    I'll look forward to reaching my own judgement on Hamilton's account when I have read it. I did find him compelling on the 60 mins programme.

    I understand that, and agree with the first para (although independent corroborative evidence is what I'd look for). I just sense that Hamilton seems to have undergone something of an instant rehabilitation once he dobbed LA in.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • Greg66 wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.


    And I'm saying that Riis calim's in the linked article he doesn't know Fuentes and, consequently, he is either lying or, given that 3 of his team leaders have been collared for using the guy, not interested in what his riders do and therefore not competent to run a team
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • bipedalbipedal Posts: 466
    Greg66 wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.

    But what about Riis's credibility? By your logic it's as shot as Hamilton's, they both cheated to win and subsequently admitted it... as others have said though, Riis has pleaded ignorance of Fuentes on 3 independent occasions now and is starting to look like the unluckiest DS in the business, either that or he's lying through his teeth... and he has a lot to lose by admitting anything
  • bipedal wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.

    But what about Riis's credibility? By your logic it's as shot as Hamilton's, they both cheated to win and subsequently admitted it... as others have said though, Riis has pleaded ignorance of Fuentes on 3 independent occasions now and is starting to look like the unluckiest DS in the business, either that or he's lying through his teeth... and he has a lot to lose by admitting anything

    But on that narrow point, one of them must be lying and one must be telling the truth. Absent outside corroboration, one has to decide which one to believe. So, is it Mr. 60% or the twin eater?
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 61,011 Lives Here
    Greg66 wrote:
    bipedal wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.

    But what about Riis's credibility? By your logic it's as shot as Hamilton's, they both cheated to win and subsequently admitted it... as others have said though, Riis has pleaded ignorance of Fuentes on 3 independent occasions now and is starting to look like the unluckiest DS in the business, either that or he's lying through his teeth... and he has a lot to lose by admitting anything

    But on that narrow point, one of them must be lying and one must be telling the truth. Absent outside corroboration, one has to decide which one to believe. So, is it Mr. 60% or the twin eater?

    The circumstances in and around CSC with the 3 team leaders being liked to Fuentes should surely sway it in favour of Hamilton?
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 61,011 Lives Here
    Also, a man of Riis' means, you'd think he'd sue Hamilton for libel if it was false.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,887
    Also, a man of Riis' means, you'd think he'd sue Hamilton for libel if it was false.
    Has he got much money though? I get the impression that he has a lot invested in his team and doesn't have a great deal of cash.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • ratsbeyfusratsbeyfus Posts: 2,841


    I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

    @ratsbey
  • Re: the last anecdote in that preview... wouldn't you just find a new job?
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • bipedalbipedal Posts: 466
    Greg66 wrote:
    bipedal wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    Greg66 wrote:
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riis-i-do-not-know-fuentes

    So you know nothing of this man, although I can believe you never met him clean hands and all that, but 3 of your team leaders down the years have been collared as clients of his.

    Either you're lying or you're incompetent.

    Flipside: when did Hamilton acquire credibility?

    Hamilton doesn't need credibility, his involvement with Fuentes is a matter of record. As is Basso's, as is F. Schleck's.

    His (Hamilton's) involvement may be a matter of record, but the point of the article was that Hamilton says that it came about via an introduction from Riis, which Riis denies. Unless that fact - Riis introduced Hamilton to Fuentes - is a matter of record, then I'd say Hamilton does need credibility.

    But what about Riis's credibility? By your logic it's as shot as Hamilton's, they both cheated to win and subsequently admitted it... as others have said though, Riis has pleaded ignorance of Fuentes on 3 independent occasions now and is starting to look like the unluckiest DS in the business, either that or he's lying through his teeth... and he has a lot to lose by admitting anything

    But on that narrow point, one of them must be lying and one must be telling the truth. Absent outside corroboration, one has to decide which one to believe. So, is it Mr. 60% or the twin eater?

    Who has the greater motivation to lie? I'd suggest it's the guy who runs a successful top-tier cycling team with multimillion euro sponsorship deals to keep hold of...
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 61,011 Lives Here
    This is a guy who wrode to a top 5 place in the Tour riding most of it with a broken collarbone - so painful that he ground his teeth down.


    I don't think qutting is something that readily enters Hamilton's mind.
  • We can go round and round in circles on this forever. IIRC Riis dodged questions about doping when a rider, and confessed after he retired, when he was a DS. Hamilton trotted out some right ol' cobblers when he tested positive, denied it, and spent something close to $1m defending the lie before coming clean. And has tmore than one positive test.

    I'm afraid I regard Hamilton as fatally damaged goods. The news that he has a book out just as The USADA moves on LA makes me think "ker-ching - cashing in time".

    Everyone has a view on these players. Not everyone's will be the same.


    PS: the collarbone bone and tooth thing is impressive. It sort of underlines what a bunch of nutter GT pro riders are to my mind. A reckon a few more would carry on riding with a broken bone if they could. They're all shades of bonkers in the 'ead.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Riis introduced Hamilton to Cecchini. Cecchini probably used Fuentes as his ops man. The chances of Riis not knowing him are awfully slim
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • ratsbeyfusratsbeyfus Posts: 2,841


    I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

    @ratsbey
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    I shouldn't be surprised, but it never fails to amaze me how ghetto blood doping is. Storing it in your fridge, using dead blood and having the phone ready in case something goes wrong. And that's with paying a lot of money for help.

    Horrible business.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • ratsbeyfusratsbeyfus Posts: 2,841
    iainf72 wrote:
    I shouldn't be surprised, but it never fails to amaze me how ghetto blood doping is.

    Don't forget the Rolexs as well.


    I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

    @ratsbey
Sign In or Register to comment.