Paula Radcliffe Speaks out

[armchairclimber]

Re:

I don't understand the world we live in.

How can someone at the taxpayer funded bbc write "she is clean", as a fact, when they have no idea whether that is true or not, and not be immediately fired and banned from journalism the next day.

It's opinion, as is most stuff published by the BBC. I won't go into why that kind of stuff passes editorial control/fact checking ... whole other subject. Suffice to say, funding and complacency are at the heart of it.

Anyway, with the full knowledge that I'm opening myself up to all kinds of "++++edited by mods++++" bollocks here, I post this as info, with no context or "opinion" attached. It might have been posted before ... no idea. Anyway, it's just data.

http://www.thepowerof10.info/athletes/profile.aspx?athleteid=1341

 

[London Hibs]

Re: Re:

The article was going to identify her as the person with dodgy blood values. That's all. If she has nothing to hide and is really anti doping, she lets that out and proves it. The backdoor threats route while faking a nice personality for the cameras, is what the Armstrongs of this world do

Like I said, mud sticks and dodgy blood values isn't a small thing in an article about people doping and abusing the system. Not saying it was right, I don't think it was in the end, but I'm sure lots of clean athletes would go the same route to protect themselves and their image which is a huge part of how they make their money.

Since when does mud stick? Maurice Greene is well known to have purchased drugs and got let off on a technicality but no one mentions him among doped past cheats. We all know Lewis doped and he was guesst of honour at the Olympics. Linford was just interviewed by channel 4. Millar is releasing books telling people about how cycling is. Roche and Kelly are tv presenters and their colleagues continue to refer to their results as examples of clean cycling from pre Armstrong. I'm yet to meet a single football fan who is actually aware guardiola failed a test.

The attitude in the UK is - if 12 jurors haven't convicted you, you are clean and anyone who says otherwise is bitter.

Paula is out there lecturing people what they should do to prove they are clean. She claims
to be anti doping.

If your theory - that she's merely scared of some bad rep were true, she would not be out there today demanding others take lie detector tests. Its cramesque hypocrisy pure and simple.
Claiming to be transparent and demanding it of others, when the camera lights are on her. Cheating her way out of doing exactly that when it's her turn. Paula is making it very clear why she threatened the times, and it ain't this imaginary "clean athlete fear of being labelled a doper"

Sorry, late reply.

John Leslie is the name that springs to mind in another line of work but it's an impossible question as I can't think of anyone who was widely, publicly accused of doping. It's quite possible many people have brought similar actions that never got reported, people have been denied jobs because of rumours or innuendo and we don't know about it.

I know of people who have lost jobs through accusations of things they didn't do. I also know of a couple of people who have been "black-listed" due to these things, but the list is very small.

And that's not my theory, I think Paula doped and she's covering herself. I answered your question in the general sense about why a clean athlete would do such a thing, not specifically Paula.

I know John personally and what was reported in the press was wrong.

He's doing OK now back in Edinburgh, but it fuxored his TV career.

 

[Archibald]

Re:

Ouch!

In the space of 12 months, Radcliffe transformed herself from also-ran to how-did-she-run-that?

Her achievements barely seem believable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/special_events/sports_personality_2002/2546793.stm

ay carrumba! Where have I heard this before...

The jibes came despite Radcliffe asking to be tested before and after every race and actually being tested more often than any other British athlete.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

I know John personally and what was reported in the press was wrong.

He's doing OK now back in Edinburgh, but it fuxored his TV career.

That's why I used him as an example. I think it's very widely known now that what he was accused of and what was reported was lies.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Ouch!

In the space of 12 months, Radcliffe transformed herself from also-ran to how-did-she-run-that?

Her achievements barely seem believable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/special_events/sports_personality_2002/2546793.stm

Cool story. They say she's clean, and transformed from an also ran to best in the world by running faster...

In her first national race, as a schoolgirl, she finished 299th. So how did she become the world's best distance runner?

In the main, through unbelievable hard work and a unshakeable belief that it would come right if she kept at it.

Radcliffe, unlike some of her rivals, is clean. But her high-profile stance against drugs has won her as many enemies as admirers.

I know that if the same article was to be written today that would not use the line "Her achievements barely seem believable". It would be all about 'hard work, determination, trainer harder than others more dedicated etc '

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Paula Radcliffe lives in a huge house made completely of glass.

And the pile of rocks at her feet is growing smaller by the tweet.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

I know John personally and what was reported in the press was wrong.

He's doing OK now back in Edinburgh, but it fuxored his TV career.

That's why I used him as an example. I think it's very widely known now that what he was accused of and what was reported was lies.

The difference being:
1. Paula is not dependent on the activity for income any longer
2. the claims are / were not lies -- her blood was fubared. Regardless, libel laws remain in force regardless, ya know?

I think the analogy is not conducive to proving or even supporting a point.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re:

One of the dirty laundry trails people follow with Paula is Leonid Shvetsov. He is often pointed to as a prime EPO pusher, based in Albuquerque (Where Paula trained). No bans or sanctions, despite banned athletes like Hellebuyck providing information after his sanction. No connections directly to Paula, but that's often the rumor.

I was bummed that he wasn't named in the report. He's gotten away with egregious doping, for so long. Now he coaches several athletes, and they aren't named either. He's not a national coach, I guess more interested in personal coaching, with his own program available. I was hoping that the report would put pressure on him, to spill some beans. (And as a reminder, he hasn't been sanctioned or anything, the Andreas Kloden of marathons. He has no incentive to talk about what he's done, unless the ceiling is brought down on him. Which it isn't...)

His name isn't popping up because he likely follows the golden rule, giving gold to those who can enforce the rules.

Again with the New Mexico locale. Who/what was there to easily supply EPO/peds such that people would come from all over the world? If you ask me, that's a stone left unturned.

Apparently Paula went twitterering silent for many days when the IAAF corruption store re-blew up. An apparent rare anomaly last seen when one of Seppelt's stories very early in the year broke. That woman is in deep with the IAAF, Coe has said as much.

As of November 21, 2015, it looks like the Russians have a deal so they will keep quiet about Western "never testing positive" in exchange for a quick 3-month reshuffle of Russian sports administrators. Paula's athletic reputation is still intact despite blood scores stating the opposite.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

One of the dirty laundry trails people follow with Paula is Leonid Shvetsov. He is often pointed to as a prime EPO pusher, based in Albuquerque (Where Paula trained). No bans or sanctions, despite banned athletes like Hellebuyck providing information after his sanction. No connections directly to Paula, but that's often the rumor.

I was bummed that he wasn't named in the report. He's gotten away with egregious doping, for so long. Now he coaches several athletes, and they aren't named either. He's not a national coach, I guess more interested in personal coaching, with his own program available. I was hoping that the report would put pressure on him, to spill some beans. (And as a reminder, he hasn't been sanctioned or anything, the Andreas Kloden of marathons. He has no incentive to talk about what he's done, unless the ceiling is brought down on him. Which it isn't...)

His name isn't popping up because he likely follows the golden rule, giving gold to those who can enforce the rules.

Again with the New Mexico locale. Who/what was there to easily supply EPO/peds such that people would come from all over the world? If you ask me, that's a stone left unturned.

Apparently Paula went twitterering silent for many days when the IAAF corruption store re-blew up. An apparent rare anomaly last seen when one of Seppelt's stories very early in the year broke. That woman is in deep with the IAAF, Coe has said as much.

As of November 21, 2015, it looks like the Russians have a deal so they will keep quiet about Western "never testing positive" in exchange for a quick 3-month reshuffle of Russian sports administrators. Paula's athletic reputation is still intact despite blood scores stating the opposite.

Extremely good summary and 100% agree. Getting the Russians back after a quixk JV-off-season-ban was key. Paula can now go back to feigning shock and the extent of Russian doping taking medals away from clean Brits.

Bottom line is she needs Russia more than thinks. They get to be the bad guy.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

I know John personally and what was reported in the press was wrong.

He's doing OK now back in Edinburgh, but it fuxored his TV career.

That's why I used him as an example. I think it's very widely known now that what he was accused of and what was reported was lies.

The difference being:
1. Paula is not dependent on the activity for income any longer

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

Armstrong will still have 50million squirreled away in the Caymans.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

Armstrong will still have 50million squirreled away in the Caymans.

Is it accessible? How much is Radcliffe worth? And how much of that would be at risk?

I would guess she still requires an income and does not have enough to live off, I wouldn't know though.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Is it accessible? How much is Radcliffe worth? And how much of that would be at risk?

I would guess she still requires an income and does not have enough to live off, I wouldn't know though.

i am sure that if she divested all her assets and sought an annuity from Lloyds or Barclays, she prolly would be able to give them ~3million GBP and earn 100k on the capital. But she would have to sell her home.

I dont think she will be out on her bum not being able to afford the rent or have an overseas holiday each year on that annuity.

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

Armstrong will still have 50million squirreled away in the Caymans.

I agree but I think he has much, much more hiding in places that can't be found or touched. He's had years to move money into safe hidey holes all over the world.

Of course, we're assuming Lance is smart. He's been called many things through the years but smart isn't a word that's usually thrown around...

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

Armstrong will still have 50million squirreled away in the Caymans.

Is it accessible? How much is Radcliffe worth? And how much of that would be at risk?

I would guess she still requires an income and does not have enough to live off, I wouldn't know though.

This gives you an idea.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/fameandfortune/5246677/Paula-Radcliffe-Fame-and-Fortune.html

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Sorry, can't agree with that at all. Paula's whole livelihood depends on her record as a "clean" athlete. If it comes out she was doping then that's her done and dusted. At best she'll get a mea culpa autobiography no-one will buy.

Armstrong will still have 50million squirreled away in the Caymans.

I agree but I think he has much, much more hiding in places that can't be found or touched. He's had years to move money into safe hidey holes all over the world.

Of course, we're assuming Lance is smart. He's been called many things through the years but smart isn't a word that's usually thrown around...

Weisel and Gorski are bankers... ofcourse he has the best guys doing it...

I think actually Gorski was at UBS Warburg, remember about 2010, Warburgs had that massive case with the IRS about anonymous accnts in Switzerland for tax avoidance?

Lance will have his money safely inside some anon accts thanks to Gorski.

 

[Winterfold]

Phew - she's cleans

http://news.sky.com/story/1595624/radcliffe-cleared-of-unfounded-doping-claims

I hope she has the receipt

 

[thehog]

Re:

Phew - she's cleans

http://news.sky.com/story/1595624/radcliffe-cleared-of-unfounded-doping-claims

I hope she has the receipt

That is good news! I'm glad the reputable body of the IAAF with Lord Coe at the helm cleared Radcliffe. We can all sleep easy that they left no stone unturned in their endeavours to find the truth.

Those urine tests are always show up blood doping

Now lets go get some Ruskies!

The IAAF backs Radcliffe, dismissing the case against each test in turn, stressing that on each occasion she was target-tested by the IAAF and returned negative urine samples.

 

[The Carrot]

Nuff said

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Re:

Nuff said

Context:

 

[thehog]

The Vjerujem Strikes Back - Eposide II, Prequel, Redux.

 

[Brullnux]

Re:

Phew - she's cleans

http://news.sky.com/story/1595624/radcliffe-cleared-of-unfounded-doping-claims

I hope she has the receipt

Hundreds of athletes accused... One defended.

Who is that one? Paula Radcliffe: good friend of the leader of the IAAF Lord Coe. Yeah, cronyism is definitely not a problem.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Phew - she's cleans

http://news.sky.com/story/1595624/radcliffe-cleared-of-unfounded-doping-claims

I hope she has the receipt

Hundreds of athletes accused... One defended.

Who is that one? Paula Radcliffe: good friend of the leader of the IAAF Lord Coe. Yeah, cronyism is definitely not a problem.

I prefer Rebekkah Brooks. no i really do. I think that is how you spell her name.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

Nuff said

UK sports star promotes UK race with UK former Olympian shocker ....

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

Phew - she's cleans

http://news.sky.com/story/1595624/radcliffe-cleared-of-unfounded-doping-claims

I hope she has the receipt

That is good news! I'm glad the reputable body of the IAAF with Lord Coe at the helm cleared Radcliffe. We can all sleep easy that they left no stone unturned in their endeavours to find the truth.

Those urine tests are always show up blood doping

Now lets go get some Ruskies!

The IAAF backs Radcliffe, dismissing the case against each test in turn, stressing that on each occasion she was target-tested by the IAAF and returned negative urine samples.

I think it depends on when the assessment of Paula was started / requested as to whether it looks dodgy or not. But, hey ho, *** can keep on with the rhetoric if you like without context.