Doping In Athletics

[More Strides than Rides]

Re:

Lord Muck above it all, the dirty dodger.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/aug/02/lord-coe-response-iaaf-mass-doping-claims-blood-counts-olympic-athletics

Bit of a dodgy one for this particular IAAF vice-president, all this blood doping. Must bring back all those memories. No wonder he feigns ignorance.

A "Robust Response" on the scale of FIFA's ethics commission on their own corruption... oh wait.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

I would be surprised if the experts saw suspicious values for Bolt and Farah. I forget who, but one doctor said that the difference between the 10,000 and 500,000 drug program isn't the quality of the dope, but the undetectability of the program.

Bolt and Farah have the money to spend on security, both in terms of federation protection, but also in terms of maintaining normal blood screenings, hormone profiles, and everything else related to finding doping.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Lord Muck above it all, the dirty dodger.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/aug/02/lord-coe-response-iaaf-mass-doping-claims-blood-counts-olympic-athletics

Bit of a dodgy one for this particular IAAF vice-president, all this blood doping. Must bring back all those memories. No wonder he feigns ignorance.

A "Robust Response" on the scale of FIFA's ethics commission on their own corruption... oh wait.

And don't forget Coe was chairman of the FIFA ethics committee. Remember his dismissive stuff in the past when presented with info on corruption at FIFA.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

Lord Muck above it all, the dirty dodger.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/aug/02/lord-coe-response-iaaf-mass-doping-claims-blood-counts-olympic-athletics

Bit of a dodgy one for this particular IAAF vice-president, all this blood doping. Must bring back all those memories. No wonder he feigns ignorance.

A "Robust Response" on the scale of FIFA's ethics commission on their own corruption... oh wait.

And don't forget Coe was chairman of the FIFA ethics committee. Remember his dismissive stuff in the past when presented with info on corruption at FIFA.

Yep. That's my point. Thanks for killing whatever humor I tried to bring to the table

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Lord Muck above it all, the dirty dodger.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/aug/02/lord-coe-response-iaaf-mass-doping-claims-blood-counts-olympic-athletics

Bit of a dodgy one for this particular IAAF vice-president, all this blood doping. Must bring back all those memories. No wonder he feigns ignorance.

A "Robust Response" on the scale of FIFA's ethics commission on their own corruption... oh wait.

And don't forget Coe was chairman of the FIFA ethics committee. Remember his dismissive stuff in the past when presented with info on corruption at FIFA.

Yep. That's my point. Thanks for killing whatever humor I tried to bring to the table

I'm like that.

I remember his response to the Panorama programme.

Panorama asked Lord Coe why the ethics committee was not looking into these issues.

He declined to answer or give any details of his job, referring all queries to Fifa itself, the body whose members he is supposed to be monitoring.

Fifa Ex-co members Jack Warner and Jerome Valcke have also declined to comment.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7056420.stm

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

The times may have displayed some of the info, but from what I saw, on 2 occasions they said that the fact that bolt and farahs values were not among the ones questioned by Ashenden, proved they are clean.

That is a straight up lie. Times again abusing it's power to push a agenda.

I have an old school view on doping. You don't win it by taking down the Simeonis while celebrating the cleanliness of the Armstrongs. To say that a negative tests proves the 2 most dominant and marketable people in the sport are clean is to push the old lie that doping doesn't really work. Only a bunch of foreigners you never heard of did it. They may have won medals but you never saw them anyway cos we were too busy showing usain bolt goof around to the camera (yes this did actually happen on the bbc, they would show bolt.clips instead of athletics finals).

That they say this about bolt when Jamaican anti doping has proven to be a sham and farah when his own coach is salzar, makes one sick.

I am going to cut them some slack. The wording is very precise. "Jessica Ennis Hill, Mo Farah and Usain Bolt have had no suspicious blood tests" And in the live interview the journalist said that the as a consequence of the blood tests of those athletes targeted, who had enormous off scale values, many passed the subsequent sanctionable, urine test and suggested one way around this was micro-dosing. So I don't think they are giving Mo a clean bill of health just saying that in the current crop of revelations he did not have off record scores that would have triggered targeting, or later as in for Mo in 2012, banning, which indicates either clean (not likely) or execution of a very accomplished doping program - knowing exactly how to defeat the tests.

I saw one bit say "Usain Bolt and Mo Farah emerge as clean"

 

[blackcat]

lol. makes them sound like they are salamander emerging from the water post the cretacious period or the first holocene

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re: Re:

This is really, really bad news for the IAAF. Their horrible covering up of all the blood tests is corruption on an immense scale. They did this to protect sponsors and money I'd imagine. Disgusting. What are the bets that the UK top endurance athlete is Mo?

It's not Mo, quote from the bbc report:

Stars such as Britain's Mo Farah and Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt recorded no abnormal results.

Except, the controversy around non-testing was any testing done in Jamaica was to be sure Jamaican's never test positive when they leave the island. Is Bolt clean? Totally my opinion, but unlikely as we know the international elite field has numerous positives. He would be THE MOST AMAZING sprinter ever since he's beating dopers.

Check the IAAF's test frequency. It is pretty pitiful. An IAAF athlete can test non-suspicious pretty easily.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re:

I would be surprised if the experts saw suspicious values for Bolt and Farah. I forget who, but one doctor said that the difference between the 10,000 and 500,000 drug program isn't the quality of the dope, but the undetectability of the program.

Bolt and Farah have the money to spend on security, both in terms of federation protection, but also in terms of maintaining normal blood screenings, hormone profiles, and everything else related to finding doping.

I think that was angel "memo" heredia hernandez.

$500,000 means $100,000+ is going to important personnel at the IAAF.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

This is really, really bad news for the IAAF. Their horrible covering up of all the blood tests is corruption on an immense scale. They did this to protect sponsors and money I'd imagine. Disgusting. What are the bets that the UK top endurance athlete is Mo?

It's not Mo, quote from the bbc report:

Stars such as Britain's Mo Farah and Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt recorded no abnormal results.

Except, the controversy around non-testing was any testing done in Jamaica was to be sure Jamaican's never test positive when they leave the island. Is Bolt clean? Totally my opinion, but unlikely as we know the international elite field has numerous positives. He would be THE MOST AMAZING sprinter ever since he's beating dopers.

Check the IAAF's test frequency. It is pretty pitiful. An IAAF athlete can test non-suspicious pretty easily.

He's already the most amazing sprinter ever to the unsullied who think doping doesn't actually work and is just some cheap shortcut evil Commie Russians do because they are too lazy to train.

For who pay attention to doping products, news, studies etc, I would say the word "unlikely" is an understatement.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

He's already the most amazing sprinter ever to the unsullied who think doping doesn't actually work and is just some cheap shortcut evil Commie Russians do because they are too lazy to train.

For who pay attention to doping products, news, studies etc, I would say the word "unlikely" is an understatement.

He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever
He's already the most amazing sprinter ever

 

[blackcat]

i think i may start a new thread with an OP something like this.

how does one compete in professional sports where you can start at 10% performance improvement for doping, and then rise to over 20% on the most comprehensive doping.* the caveats are i) how do you measure this? re: the metric function, and ii) what about the neuro muscular and fine coordination movement ball sports

well, when one appraises all the timed events in the olympics in track&field and swimming and track cycling, and sees what a 5% difference makes let alone a 10% of a difference. Most of the podiums in these sports are differentiated by a fraction of 1%. Not 1%, but a fraction of a single percent.

Then overlay a sociology lens on the peloton, or on the American track&field team, and analyse how the norms are no different than any other sub-culture.

then study a psychology archetype of a professional sportsman, or sportswoman, and how their worldview and self-identity is constructed!

and then blackcat will channel Jan Ullrich the grand german polymath and say, if you cant add 2 and 2 together, I cant help you.

so... 33% have funny blood numbers. But another 66% manage their blood numbers successfully and stay beneath the threshold.

 

[JackRabbitSlims]

Nick Willis - its easy to spot the cheats!!

"I suppose from a legal standpoint you can't say you know who is (cheating)," he said.

"The way it works though is that the athletes hang out together the whole time for three days before races and it becomes the number one topic of conversation for all those who aren't participating in it (doping).

"It becomes obvious...the ones who don't want to be part of the conversation are the ones who have a lot of guilt surrounding themselves. It would become obvious if they did try to join in because they don't have the same passion (against doping) as the rest of us.

It becomes pretty clear who is sitting at which tables."


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11491256

 

[franic]

Re:

My guess is athletics is as dirty as cycling. IAAF not interested in finding doping. Be an end to World Records being broken and they cant have that!

If you want to have fun, read what Renato Canova - the best running coach in the World - had to say about the positivity of Rita Jeptoo.
http://www.letsrun.com/news/2014/11/renato-canova-one-top-distance-coaches-world-speaks-rita-jeptoo-doping-kenya/

He’s in full Brailsford mode.

 

[franic]

Re:

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.

What about Paula Radcliffe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Radcliffe

She stopped in 2009 (even though she tried a comeback in 2011 and moreover from the same Wikipedia page:

Radcliffe has frequently made high-profile condemnations of the use of performance-enhancing drugs in athletics. Radcliffe and team-mate Hayley Tullett caused controversy when in the heats of the 5,000 metres at the 2001 the World Athletics Championships in Edmonton; when they held up a sign protesting against the reinstatement of Russian athlete Olga Yegorova after Yegorova had tested positive for the banned substance EPO. The sign was made by Radcliffe's husband and read'EPO Cheats Out.' It was eventually taken off them by the stadium officials, but not before it was streamed around the world. After Radcliffe and Tullett's initial protest, team mates Kathy Butler and Hayley Yelling - who both missed out on a place in the final - protested alongside coaches Mark Rowland and Alan Storey, wearing Radcliffe masks and holding up banners with mocking slogans including one which read 'Free Paula. Radcliffe vowed to continue her fight against drugs in sport after her high profile actions in Edmonton. Since the 1999 European Cup, Radcliffe wears a red ribbon when competing to show her support for blood testing as a method of catching drugs cheats.

Radcliffe has advocated a system where first time offenders are banned for four years and any future offense for life. However she felt that in cases like that of Christine Ohuruogu, who missed three out-of-competition drugs tests, that she should be allowed to compete in the Olympics, as the BOA does not allow anyone who has served a doping ban to compete. However, when Ohuruogu admitted to not trying to get to the tests, Radcliffe expressed her disappointment and hoped that it was a lesson learned. When Marion Jones admitted to steroid use, Radcliffe stated that it was good for the sport that Jones was caught and that they had to keep testing and that people being caught is a big deterrent to would-be cheats.

Reflecting upon the scepticism created by incidents of doping, she said "You have to accept the situation...it would be great if we could win the battle against doping and have testing that was 100 per-cent reliable, but I don't think that will happen in my competitive career." She has previously asked for the results of a blood test taken at the London Marathon to be made public, saying that she had "absolutely no objection to my test being released".

 

[blackcat]

this is why we ate Paula.

cos she is such a hypocrite in the mode of Millar and Armstrong.

We dont hate you for doping Paula, we hate you for such egregious hypocrisy

 

[Freddythefrog]

Re: Nick Willis - its easy to spot the cheats!!

"I suppose from a legal standpoint you can't say you know who is (cheating)," he said.

"The way it works though is that the athletes hang out together the whole time for three days before races and it becomes the number one topic of conversation for all those who aren't participating in it (doping).

"It becomes obvious...the ones who don't want to be part of the conversation are the ones who have a lot of guilt surrounding themselves. It would become obvious if they did try to join in because they don't have the same passion (against doping) as the rest of us.
It becomes pretty clear who is sitting at which tables."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11491256

Great account. And what happens when you are at a table at a non-multisport event and the rest all go quiet when you bring up ideas for busting the doping cheats ? Being branded a non-team player will be one of the better things that might happen.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Nick Willis - its easy to spot the cheats!!

"I suppose from a legal standpoint you can't say you know who is (cheating)," he said.

"The way it works though is that the athletes hang out together the whole time for three days before races and it becomes the number one topic of conversation for all those who aren't participating in it (doping).

"It becomes obvious...the ones who don't want to be part of the conversation are the ones who have a lot of guilt surrounding themselves. It would become obvious if they did try to join in because they don't have the same passion (against doping) as the rest of us.
It becomes pretty clear who is sitting at which tables."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11491256

Great account. And what happens when you are at a table at a non-multisport event and the rest all go quiet when you bring up ideas for busting the doping cheats ? Being branded a non-team player will be one of the better things that might happen.

didnt the kiwi come second in the Olympic 1500metre final? A silver medalist?

this is like making the final of the 100m sprint. NOT NORMAL. This silver medal, imo, not possible. Tho you look at his body, and he does not look as hormonal as the other endurance runners, his arms look more like the 1980s runners. Some of the new runners, even tho they are just as skinny, their arms and shoulders are shaped like greyhounds, separation of their shoulders, and shape in their arms. The kiwi did not have that. But I cant believe he did not have some O2 vectors and some recovery stuff like hgh testo and cortisone.

so I dont believe him. Like how they qualify doping in cycling, if it does not show up, it aint doping. And "recovery therapy".

sounds a little like a Paula Radcliffe limited hangout propaganda.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

He was bronze and then bumped to silver when silver got popped.

Point still stand though.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

He was bronze and then bumped to silver when silver got popped.

Point still stand though.

this is the media trope.The Australian(Murdoch's broadsheet newspaper) just contacted the race walker from Australia in the 50km, i dont think he was a podium finisher, but the Russian who won or was on the podium, was later busted from London Olympics.

So the media will endeavour to find a domestic athlete, who has competed against a busted athlete, and then get some quotes, then some banal lines of platitude on our courageous home athlete who has been cheated by a dirty foreigner who does not speak english

 

[franic]

Re: Re:

He was bronze and then bumped to silver when silver got popped.

Point still stand though.

this is the media trope. The Australian just contacted the race walker from Australia in the 50km, i dont think he was a podium finisher, but the Russian who won or was on the podium, was later busted from London Olympics.

So the media will endeavour to find a domestic athlete, who has competed against a busted athlete, and then get some quotes, then some banal lines of platitude on our courageous home athlete who has been cheated by a dirty foreigner who does not speak english

I don’t know whether it is actually possible to have a WC/OG podium without doping. Alex Schwazer, who’s now working with the antidoping guru Sandro Donati and is extremely tough with Schwazer in terms of being sincere about his doping experience, always claimed that he won 50k race walk in Beijing 2008 clean.
Maybe he’s just doing an Armstrong, but I tend to trust Sandro Donati.

 

[franic]

Re:

this is why we ate Paula.

cos she is such a hypocrite in the mode of Millar and Armstrong.

We dont hate you for doping Paula, we hate you for such egregious hypocrisy

Maybe it’s not Paula. At least this is what they are claiming on LetsRun.org (probably a BS):
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6667588

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

this is why we ate Paula.

cos she is such a hypocrite in the mode of Millar and Armstrong.

We dont hate you for doping Paula, we hate you for such egregious hypocrisy

Maybe it’s not Paula. At least this is what they are claiming on LetsRun.org (probably a BS):
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6667588

would not put it past paula to get some psyops communications firm to do the "leak" which is just false. she has alot of interests to protect. She prolly earns 200k gbp from her "name". if that goes, that is worth a million GBP in real terms if the asset was lost.

 

[Nederick]

Re: Nick Willis - its easy to spot the cheats!!

"I suppose from a legal standpoint you can't say you know who is (cheating)," he said.

"The way it works though is that the athletes hang out together the whole time for three days before races and it becomes the number one topic of conversation for all those who aren't participating in it (doping).

"It becomes obvious...the ones who don't want to be part of the conversation are the ones who have a lot of guilt surrounding themselves. It would become obvious if they did try to join in because they don't have the same passion (against doping) as the rest of us.
It becomes pretty clear who is sitting at which tables."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11491256

Great account. And what happens when you are at a table at a non-multisport event and the rest all go quiet when you bring up ideas for busting the doping cheats ? Being branded a non-team player will be one of the better things that might happen.

didnt the kiwi come second in the Olympic 1500metre final? A silver medalist?

this is like making the final of the 100m sprint. NOT NORMAL. This silver medal, imo, not possible. Tho you look at his body, and he does not look as hormonal as the other endurance runners, his arms look more like the 1980s runners. Some of the new runners, even tho they are just as skinny, their arms and shoulders are shaped like greyhounds, separation of their shoulders, and shape in their arms. The kiwi did not have that. But I cant believe he did not have some O2 vectors and some recovery stuff like hgh testo and cortisone.

so I dont believe him. Like how they qualify doping in cycling, if it does not show up, it aint doping. And "recovery therapy".

sounds a little like a Paula Radcliffe limited hangout propaganda.

watch that final on youtube. Compare Willis at the finish line to the dude crossing the line first. And it was hardly an eyebrow raising time, or even the finishing splits.
(disclaimer, yes I'm kiwi. No I certainly don't buy into the kiwis wouldn't dope because of our culture thing. Although he even qualifies that statement. Hey, we had Liza Hunter Galvan popped for EPO after the 2008 Olympics after dragging her governing body through the courts to have her non selection for those Olympics overturned so we sure are capable of playing the dirty game down here.)

 

[Freddythefrog]

Re: Nick Willis - its easy to spot the cheats!!

didnt the kiwi come second in the Olympic 1500metre final? A silver medalist?

this is like making the final of the 100m sprint. NOT NORMAL. This silver medal, imo, not possible. Tho you look at his body, and he does not look as hormonal as the other endurance runners, his arms look more like the 1980s runners. Some of the new runners, even tho they are just as skinny, their arms and shoulders are shaped like greyhounds, separation of their shoulders, and shape in their arms. The kiwi did not have that. But I cant believe he did not have some O2 vectors and some recovery stuff like hgh testo and cortisone.

so I dont believe him. Like how they qualify doping in cycling, if it does not show up, it aint doping. And "recovery therapy".

sounds a little like a Paula Radcliffe limited hangout propaganda.

Anything run in lanes or done alone - jumping throwing just has to be impossible. Any of the longer distance running events are going to be near impossible because the drafting effect when running is so small. However the 800 in particular and the 1500 to a lesser extent are great events with nouce playing a huge part in the outcomes - dependent on the race itself and the recent history and relative performance capabilities of the contestants. also it is possible for "favourites" to go out in the semis due to mistakes and accidents so the final might well be less one or two of the best dopers. So not saying a clean runner has an even chance by a long way but in the 800 and 1500 is there a possibility that a clean runner can take a third ? I would say some chance, particularly if they have a kick.

That being said I have no idea how the semis or the final panned out or whether the guy has a kick. Easily conceivable is that the story is BS, but I tend to think that this is not a line of argument a doper would take, there are several others that are way more attractive.