Log in:  

Register

Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

02 Dec 2015 15:09

blackcat wrote:HOG that sounds like the MGTHAB more glorious than hookers and blow dude, who now contributes to the Cyslismas tumblr

@ Dear Wiggo? you reckon? thats MGTHAB?

I think Paula owes Clinic reparations and copyright commissions for the term Machine Calibration Error (MCE).

we are responsible for that. huzzah!


The issue is already complex. Most wouldn’t have the attention span to go through the detail like that post referenced. The headline “Radcliffe cleared of doping” is enough. Similar to the Armstrong/Vjerujem/UCI report the headline “Cleared” is enough, the devil was in the detail.

The similarities are striking though. A compliant governing body with no real interest in investigating means the athlete never has to worry that it will go any further. As Radcliffe ran alone and without teammates like Armstrong, she is in the clear for the rest of her natural life. No one is going to spill the beans on her. I can't see where the 'leak' will come from.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,466
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

02 Dec 2015 16:31

thehog wrote:
blackcat wrote:HOG that sounds like the MGTHAB more glorious than hookers and blow dude, who now contributes to the Cyslismas tumblr

@ Dear Wiggo? you reckon? thats MGTHAB?

I think Paula owes Clinic reparations and copyright commissions for the term Machine Calibration Error (MCE).

we are responsible for that. huzzah!


The issue is already complex. Most wouldn’t have the attention span to go through the detail like that post referenced. The headline “Radcliffe cleared of doping” is enough. Similar to the Armstrong/Vjerujem/UCI report the headline “Cleared” is enough, the devil was in the detail.

The similarities are striking though. A compliant governing body with no real interest in investigating means the athlete never has to worry that it will go any further. As Radcliffe ran alone and without teammates like Armstrong, she is in the clear for the rest of her natural life. No one is going to spill the beans on her. I can't see where the 'leak' will come from.


I hear what your saying. Some have alluded that the second WADA report, which includes the IAAF complacency of suspicious samples, could implicate Paula formally.

I don't think that will happen, as WADA has no authority to act/sanction (just like USADA didn't in LA), and I doubt they will step anywhere farther than "The IAAF should have followed up." I don't think they will discuss Paula as a separate issue. Alternatively, the corruption case could spill some beans, but unlikely enough to satisfy the legal burden to land in a sanction or loss of results.

That being said. I don't think Paula is stable enough personally/emotionally. Not like Lance who was dependent on his own knowing he didn't do anything wrong/level playing field/would have won anyway, Paula appears dependent on what the public thinks of her. Maybe I'm reading too much into her latest comments about being scared of dying while people thought she was a cheat, maybe there is a chance she will crack. She is already changing her story and slipping on inconsistencies. Long shot though... probably not...
More Strides than Rides
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,159
Joined: 15 Mar 2011 23:52

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

02 Dec 2015 16:44

If Radcliffe was sponsored by Royal Mail there might be a Qui Tam case to come! :p

The database leak in the first instance was a toe in the water. If the remaining data finds its way into the public domain then maybe there might be a push to know more. But to be honest most Brits are not going to understand "Hgb%" from "abv" - alcohol volume in beer! Nor do they care. A scoreline in football is a lot easier to understand than what might constitute blood doping.

What got Lance in the end was Tygart's somewhat made up but consistent affidavits from several former riders released into the public domain at the same time. That's not going to happen here.

I agree she is a loose cannon but a lot of people simply don't care if she doped or not. Or they won't understand what exactly is blood doping therefore she is cleans.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,466
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

04 Dec 2015 23:27

thehog wrote:If Radcliffe was sponsored by Royal Mail there might be a Qui Tam case to come! :p

The database leak in the first instance was a toe in the water. If the remaining data finds its way into the public domain then maybe there might be a push to know more. But to be honest most Brits are not going to understand "Hgb%" from "abv" - alcohol volume in beer! Nor do they care. A scoreline in football is a lot easier to understand than what might constitute blood doping.

What got Lance in the end was Tygart's somewhat made up but consistent affidavits from several former riders released into the public domain at the same time. That's not going to happen here.

I agree she is a loose cannon but a lot of people simply don't care if she doped or not. Or they won't understand what exactly is blood doping therefore she is cleans.


hoggie no no no this is not true but belongs in another thread. You're confusing newer members of the clinic as usual :rolleyes:
User avatar mewmewmew13
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,284
Joined: 09 Aug 2010 22:20
Location: co

15 Mar 2016 19:15

some very interesting reading wrt Paula's "running economy" :)

third post from the top:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6881090&page=51

not sure how new these arguments are, but they're new to me and it paints a pretty compelling picture, also wrt IAAF's complicity.
sniper
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,578
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 23:36

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

06 Feb 2018 14:16

Paula Radcliffe going full retard on Twitter railing against Ross Tucker for not releasing her data. Apparently if she did it would compromise the ABP?? :confused:

Paula Radcliffe: My off scores are in the public domain! Releasing the rest of the data might have protected my reputation but at the cost of undermining and weakening the ABP. I am not prepared to facilitate cheats evading punishment.


Ross Tucker: If only all athletes embraced half-transparency while aggressively threatening lawsuits about their own results, while calling for full transparency and punishment in others. What courageous altruism, taking the hit to her reputation like this. All for the good of the system.


https://twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/960430328430161920

Paula Radcliffe: It is academic myopia for any scientist to focus on questions at the expense of balanced analysis and conclusions. It sounds more like cyber noise and self-promotion than science.


Ross Tucker: Paula, the questions are the fundamental foundation of science. It’s literally what we do - question, obtain facts, build models. I’ve asked, I’m ready for the model, all i need are those facts you have.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,466
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

06 Feb 2018 17:47

Luckily Paula "EPO Cheats Out" hasn't changed her mind about athletes being transparent with their ABP data

Even more luckily Seb Coe didn't parachute Paula into a key position on the IAAF's athlete's commission

And even even more more luckily Paula's 15yr old marathon WR hasn't been beaten by hundreds of Russians, Kenyans and Ethiopians who've had a free pass to dope to the max

Phew!
Wiggo's Package
Member
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 07 Mar 2017 14:27

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

08 Feb 2018 03:54

The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.
User avatar durianrider
Member
 
Posts: 761
Joined: 14 Mar 2010 06:54
Location: byron bay, NYC, Bangkok, Radelaide, Sydney, Sunshine Coast.

09 Feb 2018 22:20

Radcliffe is another sporting sociopath with narcissitic overtones.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,456
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

09 Feb 2018 22:24

durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.
Parker
Member
 
Posts: 1,624
Joined: 04 Mar 2011 01:20

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

09 Feb 2018 22:30

Parker wrote:
durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.


Wtf :confused:
User avatar Blanco
Member
 
Posts: 1,186
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 19:33
Location: Serbia

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

09 Feb 2018 22:36

Blanco wrote:
Parker wrote:
durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.


Wtf :confused:

It used to be that in some (most even) major marathons, the elite men and elite women would start together. This gave the opportunity to have men pacemaking the women - all perfectly legal. Radcliffe did this in London in 2003. She wasn't the only one to do it. Runners trying to get qualifying times did it too. Then a couple of years later major races had to send the women off earlier. But for some reason the IAAF (pre-Coe BTW) thought Radcliffe's time should stand despite challenges against it.

So unlike Boardman she gets to keep her record gained with advantages no longer available to others.
Parker
Member
 
Posts: 1,624
Joined: 04 Mar 2011 01:20

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

10 Feb 2018 09:37

Parker wrote:
Blanco wrote:
Parker wrote:
durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.


Wtf :confused:

It used to be that in some (most even) major marathons, the elite men and elite women would start together. This gave the opportunity to have men pacemaking the women - all perfectly legal. Radcliffe did this in London in 2003. She wasn't the only one to do it. Runners trying to get qualifying times did it too. Then a couple of years later major races had to send the women off earlier. But for some reason the IAAF (pre-Coe BTW) thought Radcliffe's time should stand despite challenges against it.

So unlike Boardman she gets to keep her record gained with advantages no longer available to others.


.....is there a consensus on what the difference equates to i.e. 3 mins?
gillan1969
Member
 
Posts: 1,454
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 12:25

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

10 Feb 2018 19:35

gillan1969 wrote:
Parker wrote:
Blanco wrote:
Parker wrote:
durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.


Wtf :confused:

It used to be that in some (most even) major marathons, the elite men and elite women would start together. This gave the opportunity to have men pacemaking the women - all perfectly legal. Radcliffe did this in London in 2003. She wasn't the only one to do it. Runners trying to get qualifying times did it too. Then a couple of years later major races had to send the women off earlier. But for some reason the IAAF (pre-Coe BTW) thought Radcliffe's time should stand despite challenges against it.

So unlike Boardman she gets to keep her record gained with advantages no longer available to others.


.....is there a consensus on what the difference equates to i.e. 3 mins?

Nope- bit of a red herring when it comes to Paula's record IMO as everyone else had that "advantage" at the time too and they got nowhere near it.
Its useful to use it as an excuse .
noddy69
Member
 
Posts: 608
Joined: 04 Oct 2011 07:37

Re: Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

10 Feb 2018 20:50

Parker wrote:
Blanco wrote:
Parker wrote:
durianrider wrote:The reason nobody has broken the 15 year marathon WR is that Paula just had these NASA designed shoe laces that were banned by the IAAF after that race.

Joking aside, the main reason is women can't get pacemaking from men any more as they're not allowed to race together at elite level. It's the athletics equivalent of Boardman's superman hour record.

Her women only record has been beaten. Many, including me, consider that the true world record.


Wtf :confused:

It used to be that in some (most even) major marathons, the elite men and elite women would start together. This gave the opportunity to have men pacemaking the women - all perfectly legal. Radcliffe did this in London in 2003. She wasn't the only one to do it. Runners trying to get qualifying times did it too. Then a couple of years later major races had to send the women off earlier. But for some reason the IAAF (pre-Coe BTW) thought Radcliffe's time should stand despite challenges against it.

So unlike Boardman she gets to keep her record gained with advantages no longer available to others.


Do you actually believe paula was clean lol
User avatar The Hitch
Veteran
 
Posts: 28,896
Joined: 14 Jun 2010 10:58
Location: London.

11 Feb 2018 08:14

Sadly yes. Pink fluffy unicorns in the sky.
User avatar Random Direction
Member
 
Posts: 486
Joined: 13 May 2011 06:17
Location: North and West

Previous

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

Back to top