Sometimes you realize that your sport's hero is just a guy with faults of his own.

As someone who writes about cycling for a living, I have gotten to know some riders quite well. You're often in the same hotels and restaurants between stages, bumping into each other in the hallways or in line to get breakfast. These same pros are brought out on product junkets by their sponsors and you again rub shoulders with them. The more you run into them, the more you get to know how they are as "normal" people. Some guys you like better than others - it's only natural. Much like you might enjoy going to lunch with a certain co-worker, but not another.

The familiar riders that I've interviewed included Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, and Danilo Di Luca. The topic of doping came up each time and they all firmly denied the charges. Of course those riders later admitted to the truth or it became obvious to me that they're guilty. As a journalist it doesn't look good when you don't report the truth. The whole purpose of being a journalist is to discover the truth and I didn't get to the truth in those interviews. However, I don't hold it against any of them. In fact I consider Floyd Landis a friend and communicate with him frequently about normal stuff you might do with any of your friends. I haven't spoken to Hamilton since the Amgen Tour of California in 2009, but he seemed like a good guy.

When I interviewed Joe Papp for the online video show TourChats, I had never spoken to him prior to that interview. I had been in the court room during Floyd Landis' doping hearing in 2007 and heard him talk about his own doping experience. Since that time he has been cooperating with authorities to catch athletes he'd sold performance enhancing drugs to. And to be clear - if he didn't, Papp was facing a long sentence in federal prison - not a place for a skinny cyclist. As I researched Papp I read some hatred that I would only aim at serial killers. Papp also disclosed that he had received e-mails hoping that all types of horrible things would happen to him. While I have been lied to over the years by athletes, I could never imagine wishing that kind of violence on someone. So what makes someone take the time to write an e-mail or blog about his hatred for a person who in his own words was just ‘filling a need that was there'?

Cycling is often described by writers far better than me as a sport driven by passion. Unlike many sports, you don't train with a bunch of teammates. Often training is made up of solo rides during which the only human interaction might be someone yelling from a moving vehicle to get off the road. In contrast to other sports, who even have spectators when they train, it can be a lonely endeavor. For those who have made the long term commitment to this sport, passion runs deep and those who have sullied that reputation are targets for hate. Riders like Papp, Landis, Hamilton and even Lance Armstrong have had targets painted on their backs. And thanks to the Internet, people can anonymously snipe away at these riders.

If you're a Papp hater there is no way I'm going to convince you otherwise. However, after interviewing him I saw a guy who has paid a massive price for his crimes, both from a physical, mental and financial point of view. It will take many years to get himself out of where he is now - under house arrest with two and a half years probation to follow. And I'm hoping, in the same way that I hope for anyone else that is in trouble, that he's able to pull his nose up out of this dive. I want to take a moment to be clear - while the above riders may have tarnished your ideal vision of the sport, it's time to put it in perspective. I was going to write that people should save that type of hate for the mass killers in the world - but I'm not even sure that is healthy. Hate like that festers inside and only does harm to yourself. By all means you should be disappointed in the riders and their actions. But as you know by reading the news, life isn't fair and many of our heroes can disappoint us - some with more serious flaws than others. However, the stories about lost jobs and starving children deserve far more of our attention.

The reason I went into this rather long jag about lying and being lied to is Velonation reported that Alberto Contador is employing the use of a lie detector for his defense to show that he didn't intentionally dope with clenbuterol. In addition to the lie detector Team Contador has hired a host of experts in hematology, anti-doping experts and according to Velonation, a police officer who will testify about the origin of the mystery meat that Pistolero is blaming for his positive result.

As someone who has taken a lie detector test I can tell you that the name can be a bit misleading. This machine measures slight changes in the subject's blood pressure. A deviation from a base line score indicates stress which might mean the person is being less than honest. Failing a lie detector will not get you hired at a job, but as evidence in a court of law it's a bit more tricky. It's an interesting move by the defense to introduce the results from a lie detector as evidence to his truthfulness. For a person to pass a lie detector test they have to believe their statement - it doesn't matter if it's true or not - they just need to believe it. Has Contador repeated his tainted meat story so often that it has become believable to him? I would wager that's what has happened. And as I continue to read the article there won't be a verdict until January! While we get angry at Contador keep in mind that he's part of the system that is the UCI and as I've said in the past there needs to be reform from the top down. And I'm not lying about that.