Doping In Athletics

[DirtyWorks]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Coe rumoured as a Conconi client?

The rumor came from a Race Radio tweet. No follow up, no answers to further questions, and nothing related since.

It may be true, but as it stands now, that rumor is fodder for the defenders, as it is so easy to shoot down.

Renato Canova stated it as fact in a Runner's World article. It's in "Renato speak" but he makes the association and clearly states it wasn't declared doping at the time. What PEDs Conconi was providing is not known. But, Conconi's lab is legendary for doping, so "one clean athlete" is not likely.

Go ahead and disagree with the assembled facts, the way Coe is acting he's clearly protecting dopers and doping.

In case it hasn't been posted, "EPO cheats out" Radcliffe doesn't want samples tested.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/athletics/33990503

I love her response, "The whole point is you go through your career, you look back and say, 'That was the best I could do,'" Yes, it was Paula. It was a good thing the dope worked really, really, really well.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Coe rumoured as a Conconi client?

The rumor came from a Race Radio tweet. No follow up, no answers to further questions, and nothing related since.

It may be true, but as it stands now, that rumor is fodder for the defenders, as it is so easy to shoot down.

Renato Canova stated it as fact in a Runner's World article. It's in "Renato speak" but he makes the association and clearly states it wasn't declared doping at the time.

What PEDs Conconi was providing is not known. But, Conconi's lab is legendary for doping, so "one clean athlete" is not likely.

I know the quote you're talking about. People read into the Renato speak "...the Italian Conconi, that won using is system" that since Coe was also a winner, he was then part of Conconi's system. But it is clear he is talking about Cova (Gold in 84), and Antibo (4th). In another quote, he makes it clear that Gabriella Dorio (Women's 1500m gold) is included as well.

The quote from http://www.runnersworld.com/rt-web-exclusive/renato-canova-speaks

“The problem is the mentality, no? In the historical moment it is very important to see what is doping, what is not doping, no? If you are allowed, you suppose it is about science. So we used it, but not all, because somebody refused in Italy. For example, Panetta, Stefano Mei, Bordin always refuse, every type of situation. But Cova, winning Olympics in 1984 and Antibo in 1984, they tried to do this…So, what happened after this? In ’85 was outlawed doping, and nobody used—finished…From ‘80-84, was the Italian Conconi, that won using this system. That was not doping at that time. But I want to tell, was that when Antibo finished using this, he improved a lot, for example…Cova finished his career, practically in ’86 because he had an injury. Maybe also losing some motivation because in ’82 he won European, in ’83 the World Championships, in ’84 won Olympics, in ’85 won both the European Cup 5 and 10. So after this, also his motivation was finished for Alberto Cova. But Antibo continued. For example, in 1988 he was 2nd in the Olympics.”

Follow up from http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3823157&page=17:

In any case, I want still to explain one thing :
We had in Italy some top athlete using the auto-transfusion when this practice was not doping (till 1985). These were Alberto Cova, Mariano Scartezzini (8'12" in steeple), Antibo only once before Olympic Games 1984, the twins Selvaggio, Fontanella (3'35" in 1500m). But,also if this was an organised project of Olympic Committee under the responsibility of Francesco Conconi, many athletes always refused to follow this system. I give you 4 top names that never wanted to use any type of support (exactly like now my Kenyans) : Francesco Panetta, Stefano Mei, Gelindo Bordin and Alessandro Lambruschini.
If possible, this is another fact (not only with African athletes) that gives me the motivation for not believing in the doping effects, in spite of all the pseudo-scientific researches, that NEVER involve the same athlete WITH and WITHOUT doping (the only way for knowing the reality). In Italy, there were Olympic Champions with auto-transfusion (Cova and Gabriella Dorio), and without anything (Gelindo Bordin), World Champions without anything (Francesco Panetta), athletes good with auto-transfusion but better after quitting this practice (Salvatore Antibo), and athletes very bad when used it and World and Olympic Champion when didn't use (Maurizio Damilano).

(Read the whole post if you want to get to some quackery)

Again, I'm not saying Coe did not dope. I doubt he relied on Conconi, given the resources he had in his camp. Maybe a single consultation, but probably got to the point to do it on his own. The reason I'm posting is that bringing up the rumor in a discussion of Coe is only ever just ammunition for the deniers, and so shouldn't be brought up until more information is known.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

Wasn't Coe rumoured as a Conconi client?

The rumor came from a Race Radio tweet. No follow up, no answers to further questions, and nothing related since.

It may be true, but as it stands now, that rumor is fodder for the defenders, as it is so easy to shoot down.

There were a couple of race radio rumours that didn't ever get followed up. That, the moncoutie one, and finally, the one I'm most interested in, the one about reedie being a close ally of hein verbruggen. Anyone know anything about that one?

 

[Zebadeedee]

A pointer perhaps; there is an obvious interest in blood physiology, evidenced in his father's co-authored, 1991 book 'Training Distance Runners'. Chapter 2 - Heart, Lung and Blood Dynamics - includes a notable research bibliography of its own, confirming the degree of interest. Curiously or not, no mention of blood doping occurs in the book.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

If you want to avoid micro twitches, forcing your face into a mask is one possible way of doing that

she sounded like froome

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

So Paula says they shouldn't have to release the data because we are too stupid to understand it and because it will help others beat the tests. That's bonkers.

 

[sniper]

Re:

If you want to avoid micro twitches, forcing your face into a mask is one possible way of doing that

this is an easy one for any half decent lie detector.
Many indicators.
- the answer itself ("absolutely" instead of "yes")
- the eye blinking
- not pausing after the confirmative answer but immediately following it up with deflective talk

 

[sniper]

by comparison, look how relaxed she is here, one year ago, when doping wasn't an issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCOryXWIV-I
completely different body language

 

[blackcat]

Re:

by comparison, look how relaxed she is here, one year ago, when doping wasn't an issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCOryXWIV-I
completely different body language

wow. where did she steal the new doping eyes from?

a grave robbery?

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

this is an easy one for any half decent lie detector.
Many indicators.
- the answer itself ("absolutely" instead of "yes")
- the eye blinking
- not pausing after the confirmative answer but immediately following it up with deflective talk

'

not plain speaking (like you said, speaking in convoluted or complicated answers)

I liked Armstrong's convoluted answering MO.

the rhetorical answer (why would I put myself in the situation of having to dope and put this in my body when I was on my deathbed at Indiana Boilermakers University ICU ontology ward, oh thats a bit of a pleonasm cos i said he was in the ICU deathbed then the ontology ward. Where the heck is ElizaB Betsy Andreu when you need her to answer.

 

[Cramps]

Re:

bump the detective work below on clues within the Times.

To that we can add:
The quality of her record-breaking performance
Her change in position on whether blood tests should be released, coming after the leak and retrospective testing catching many athletes who were missed in competition.
And if you like, her unconvincing presentation on the BBC interview. As I mentioned earlier, for me it is just not believable for a clean runner to ask herself the question, "do I regret running such a fast time?"

Bought the Times. Makes good reading. Identification of the athlete is gender neutral and script is designed to give no clues away. Dirty races are 2001 to date - 1500, 20km walk, 800 5,000 3k steeplechase, 10k 50k walk heptahlon/decathlon, marathon. So it was somebody in that set.

Useful quotes ".....three occasions in their career the athlete's test results were so "abnormal" that there was only a one in a thousand chance that they were natural. ....One of those scores was recorded just days before winning a major race.
"The athlete firmly states that they "never cheated" and supports calls for more money to be spend on stamping out blood-doping.
"The IAAF put a red mark agains the athlete's name, which experts say should have resulted in folllow-up tests. Several years later the athlete was investigated by the IAAF but it decided not to take any action.
" Was this athlete cheating or was there some explanation for the scores? At the meeting with The Sunday Times in a hotel lobby last week, the athlete swore on the lives of loved ones that they had never blood doped but they did not want their results to be published here in full."

"You print it and I sue you [and] you won't be getting any money back in future like Lance Armstrong - I promise you that."

"Last week the athlete said their score had been elevated because it had been taken when they were dehydrated after winning a race in summer temperatures. "I would have been targeted afterwards. And they didn't come back to me becasue there isn't anythign to show." the athlete said.
"The files show that nine other athletese were also tested after teh same event, yet the British Athelte recorded the highest off-score by some way.
"The experts consulted by the Sunday Times say that dehydration may have a small effect on blodd values, but the British athlete's off-score was 40% higher on the day of the race than in a test taken two days before the race.
"Such a rise in the concentration of red blood cells could have been achieved by an illicit blood transfusion, but this is only a suspicion and certainly not proven by the results.
"one of our experts queried whether the result could be instrument error, but there were 29 other tests with the same device that were at normal levels.
"A second high test several years later did spark an investigation by the IAAF. The British athlete said that 12 experts from the IAAF had viewed the data o these tests and 11 had concluded that the results were consistent with an athlete training at altitude.
"The Sunday times has not seen the 12 experts' assessments, but other experts we have spoken to say that altitude training has only a limited effect on an athlete's blood scores."

There is also a para that states that "Before 2009 the IAAF would not ban any athlete for high blood scores alone and used the only as a guid to whether an athlete should be targeted for urine testing..."

So I think our athlete was active up to 2009. So we have those races and a window 2001 to 2009. And an event in which the field is so large that a total of 10 athletes in that same event which the Brit won were tested. And we have a blind eye turned first and years later a record of a red having been flagged and investigated by the IAAF and dismissed.

Next step all the runners and riders.

However - What was it that Brit director of the IAAF said about the previous leak of PRs data - we did investigate it and there was nothing and it should have stayed in the IAAF safe in Monaco where it belonged. Then he went out and took more snaps of PR with kittens and children (- ok no kittens or children but what other retired athlete who lives in Monaco gets their picture for running a half marathon in Monaco on the International Governing body's web site taken by a director who also lives in Monaco. Protection ! ) and posted them up on the IAAF website.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Then he went out and took more snaps of PR with kittens and children (- ok no kittens or children but what other retired athlete who lives in Monaco gets their picture for running a half marathon in Monaco on the International Governing body's web site taken by a director who also lives in Monaco. Protection ! ) and posted them up on the IAAF website.

quite a genius post this is. it is some blackcat level wildean drollery if i may say so myself /third person.

<cat emoji>

pussy emoji also

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

bump the detective work below on clues within the Times.

To that we can add:
The quality of her record-breaking performance
Her change in position on whether blood tests should be released, coming after the leak and retrospective testing catching many athletes who were missed in competition.
And if you like, her unconvincing presentation on the BBC interview. As I mentioned earlier, for me it is just not believable for a clean runner to ask herself the question, "do I regret running such a fast time?"

all you need to know are the crazy eyes. the crazy eyes.

she stole some eyes from a grave.

#graverobber

 

[poupou]

The worse is comming with a lot of kenyan and ethyopian female marathon athletes caught for doping, her position will get more uncomfortable.

 

[Lyon]

With everyone around you caught for drugs you would have to be a Froome-level talent to pull off what Radcliffe did.

 

[Cramps]

Re: Re:

all you need to know are the crazy eyes. the crazy eyes.

 

[Chipist]

Froome doesn't need to dope to win, you see his crazy adaptive physiology allowed him to not only obtain a British passport, but also his physiology adapted to become British, so his is now like Paula's and the rest of us brits which is why he can win clean.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re:

The worse is comming with a lot of kenyan and ethyopian female marathon athletes caught for doping, her position will get more uncomfortable.

This is true. ~3 min ahead now, what will that be like in 5 years if other peoples PRs get erased ?

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

Re: Re:

The worse is comming with a lot of kenyan and ethyopian female marathon athletes caught for doping, her position will get more uncomfortable.

This is true. ~3 min ahead now, what will that be like in 5 years if other peoples PRs get erased ?

Basically what happened with Armstrong after Puerto, but it still took years for him to fall

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Froome and Radcliffe do have crazy adaptive physiology. No one has adapted to PEDs the way they have. Donkey to racehorse is common, but they went from paper airplane to fighter jet.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Froome and Radcliffe do have crazy adaptive physiology. No one has adapted to PEDs the way they have. Donkey to racehorse is common, but they went from paper airplane to fighter jet.

#rocketfuel

 

[adamfo]

Re:

Froome doesn't need to dope to win, you see his crazy adaptive physiology allowed him to not only obtain a British passport, but also his physiology adapted to become British, so his is now like Paula's and the rest of us brits which is why he can win clean.

Froome was eligible for a British passport from birth due to a British Father.

As for reading body language here are the clues from the case of a very poor liar. One that anyone trained to spot it or deals with it on a daily basis, for example an insurance assessor or detective, could pick up easily.

1) Closed end question 'have you ever taken EPO Lance'
Armstrong would look straight into the interviewers eyes and without blinking say 'no'. Then he would consciously hold his gaze. The tell though was he would then close both eyes for longer than normal blocking out or erasing the untruth.

2)Sometimes he would touch his ear or put his hand over his mouth after telling an untruth or not being sure of something.

3) Asked about something in the past he would often look to his right and upwards. Normally someone trying to remember something looks to the left and or down. Looking right is looking to the future or imagining something new or making something up. This is less clear cut though than point 1.

4) Eyebrow movement. This one is harder to spot. You need to watch a video to spot slight raises in the highbrows after telling untruths.

The curious thing Armstrong never released all the body language tells he was sending out for all to see.

 

[scapewalker]

This might be off topic but skip to around 2:00 in this video.
" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY "
I had the greatest laugh ever

 

[armchairclimber]

Well, I watched this expecting the worst. Frankly, there's naff all in that interview that bothers me. I would prefer that she did let her blood results into the public domain, but I absolutely understand why she doesn't. She is right...they won't prove anything either way and she will never in a million years convince this tiny constituency in here that she ran 3 minutes faster than anyone else clean (despite the fact that she was effectively paced to that time). All this bobbins about her eyes....she has always had a frickin weird manner. Always.

If Jo Pavey and Mo release their BP data, is anyone here seriously going to do a sudden about turn and say "Oh yeah, I believe in them now"? It's a pointless exercise. What would impress me more would be for these athletes to hand their long term data over to someone like Ashenden...privately...and to allow him to make an assessment.

 

[The Carrot]

Re:

Well, I watched this expecting the worst. Frankly, there's naff all in that interview that bothers me. I would prefer that she did let her blood results into the public domain, but I absolutely understand why she doesn't. She is right...they won't prove anything either way and she will never in a million years convince this tiny constituency in here that she ran 3 minutes faster than anyone else clean (despite the fact that she was effectively paced to that time). All this bobbins about her eyes....she has always had a frickin weird manner. Always.

If Jo Pavey and Mo release their BP data, is anyone here seriously going to do a sudden about turn and say "Oh yeah, I believe in them now"? It's a pointless exercise. What would impress me more would be for these athletes to hand their long term data over to someone like Ashenden...privately...and to allow him to make an assessment.

It's not the interview per se it's the latest in a long line of comedy gold from this pantomime:

1. Prominent British Athlete with Dodgy blood values earlier in the year.
2. Seven London marathon victories in 12 years 'under doping suspicion'.
3. The super injunction (an action which I think Jeremy Clarkson described as a very expensive way of letting the world know what you've done wrong.)
4. Going 'off the grid' until Seb Coe gets elected, therefore ensuring her protection.
5. Changing her view on releasing blood values/tests.
6. Now this comedy interview which essentially says those were her dodgy blood values everyone was talking about.


Master Criminals this lot, so she deserves all the over analysis coming her way, dodgy eyes and all. Thing is though, they may have made a mistake protecting her as she has never been that popular since her failure at the Olympics, dumping in the street etc.