Drugs in other sports and the media.

1179180182184185194

Posts

  • Not loudly enough this time, which is good.
  • ProssPross Posts: 21,577
    Dorset Boy wrote:
    Sir Mo might be sitting a little uncomfortably this morning....

    Not so sure, I don't think it's coincidence he quit back in 2017. Whether he was involved or not it looks like he was keen to distance himself from what he knew might be coming.

    The biggest concern for me was the efforts they were apparently going to in order to establish how much testosterone they could get away with using without triggering a positive. That's more than 'just' doping an athlete.

    Nike really not doing themselves or their sponsored athletes any favours though by actively backing Salazar's defence. It makes it look like he was doing the whole thing with their backing!
  • Pross wrote:
    Dorset Boy wrote:
    Sir Mo might be sitting a little uncomfortably this morning....

    Not so sure, I don't think it's coincidence he quit back in 2017. Whether he was involved or not it looks like he was keen to distance himself from what he knew might be coming.

    The biggest concern for me was the efforts they were apparently going to in order to establish how much testosterone they could get away with using without triggering a positive. That's more than 'just' doping an athlete.

    Nike really not doing themselves or their sponsored athletes any favours though by actively backing Salazar's defence. It makes it look like he was doing the whole thing with their backing!

    Theres no smoke without fire
  • larkimlarkim Posts: 2,259
    Pross wrote:
    The biggest concern for me was the efforts they were apparently going to in order to establish how much testosterone they could get away with using without triggering a positive. That's more than 'just' doping an athlete.
    But if you read the outcome, there's no finding at all that that's what they were doing. The story hasn't changed since the ProPublica / Panorama expose and the subsequent rebuttals from Salazar. The testosterone cream thing was to rule out potential sabotage, and if you read the documentation in the report it is fairly clear that that's what all the evidence points to, including comments (by the panel) that you wouldn't be doing a cream + 1 hour test if you were trying to get performance enhancements etc.

    I'm a serial Mo defender, and a bit of an NOP denier, so feel free to take what I write with a pinch of salt - but read the outcome document (133 pages of it!) and I think you'll get a different impression, certainly of that testosterone issue.
    2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
    2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #3s)
    2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
    2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
    2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
    2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)
  • larkimlarkim Posts: 2,259

    Theres no smoke without fire
    I've got some josticks at home that disprove that. And when I grilled some sausages at the weekend I also got smoke. So there very often is smoke without fire :-)
    2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
    2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #3s)
    2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
    2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
    2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
    2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)
  • r0bhr0bh Posts: 1,407
    larkim wrote:
    I'm a serial Mo defender, and a bit of an NOP denier, so feel free to take what I write with a pinch of salt - but read the outcome document (133 pages of it!) and I think you'll get a different impression, certainly of that testosterone issue.

    Yeah, if you have a look at the reasoned decision it is pretty weak stuff really :?

    This is the closing paragraph:

    The Panel notes that the Respondent does not appear to have been motivated by any bad intention to commit the violations the Panel found. In fact, the Panel was struck by the amount of care generally taken by Respondent to ensure that whatever new technique or method or substance he was going to try was lawful under the World Anti-Doping Code, with USADA’s witness characterizing him as the coach they heard from the most with respect to trying to ensure that he was complying with his obligations. The Panel has taken pains to note that Respondent made unintentional mistakes that violated the rules, apparently motivated by his desire to provide the very best results and training for athletes under his care. Unfortunately, that desire clouded his judgment in some instances, when his usual focus on the rules appears to have lapsed. The Panel is required to apply the relevant law, the World Anti-Doping Code and its positive law enactments in the rules of international sports federations, in discharging its duty, and here that required the Panel to find the violations it did.
  • larkim wrote:

    Theres no smoke without fire
    I've got some josticks at home that disprove that. And when I grilled some sausages at the weekend I also got smoke. So there very often is smoke without fire :-)

    Imagine lighting a cigarette from an 'old school' car cigarette lighter ... quite literally loads of smoke with zero fire. :mrgreen:
  • carbonclem wrote:
    larkim wrote:

    Theres no smoke without fire
    I've got some josticks at home that disprove that. And when I grilled some sausages at the weekend I also got smoke. So there very often is smoke without fire :-)

    Imagine lighting a cigarette from an 'old school' car cigarette lighter ... quite literally loads of smoke with zero fire. :mrgreen:


    Ahhh the smell of smouldering Marlborough lites, the smell is with me now
  • Can't help but feel that if this had been a cycling coach busted who had worked with Froome/Wiggo, Dan Roan's erection would be visible from Jupiter.
  • amrushtonamrushton Posts: 609
    Salazar to appeal the decision.
  • Can't help but feel that if this had been a cycling coach busted who had worked with Froome/Wiggo, Dan Roan's erection would be visible from Jupiter.
    Dan Roans erection isn't visible from Dan Roan
  • sherersherer Posts: 2,352
    r0bh wrote:
    larkim wrote:
    I'm a serial Mo defender, and a bit of an NOP denier, so feel free to take what I write with a pinch of salt - but read the outcome document (133 pages of it!) and I think you'll get a different impression, certainly of that testosterone issue.

    Yeah, if you have a look at the reasoned decision it is pretty weak stuff really :?

    This is the closing paragraph:

    The Panel notes that the Respondent does not appear to have been motivated by any bad intention to commit the violations the Panel found. In fact, the Panel was struck by the amount of care generally taken by Respondent to ensure that whatever new technique or method or substance he was going to try was lawful under the World Anti-Doping Code, with USADA’s witness characterizing him as the coach they heard from the most with respect to trying to ensure that he was complying with his obligations. The Panel has taken pains to note that Respondent made unintentional mistakes that violated the rules, apparently motivated by his desire to provide the very best results and training for athletes under his care. Unfortunately, that desire clouded his judgment in some instances, when his usual focus on the rules appears to have lapsed. The Panel is required to apply the relevant law, the World Anti-Doping Code and its positive law enactments in the rules of international sports federations, in discharging its duty, and here that required the Panel to find the violations it did.

    Not sure i'll get the time to read the whole report. Im reading this as saying he broke the rules, but none of that was intentional and didnt try and dope athletes.

    That seems at odds with what I read on BBC and the Panorama documentary
  • amrushton wrote:
    Salazar to appeal the decision.
    he has to, or Nike will sue his arris off for all the money they give him.
    By the time it's all done and dusted he will have retired and stashed what money he has somewher warm hurricane drenched.
  • bompingtonbompington Posts: 6,983
    Is this one of those "Capone done for tax evasion" cases, as in, we're sure he's guilty of big stuff but we can't prove it so we'll find something else we can get him on? Because, as far as I can understand, what he's been done for seems pretty small beer for a 4 year ban.
  • sherersherer Posts: 2,352
    amrushton wrote:
    Salazar to appeal the decision.
    he has to, or Nike will sue his arris off for all the money they give him.
    By the time it's all done and dusted he will have retired and stashed what money he has somewher warm hurricane drenched.


    Then release a tell all book, that Nike will probably pay to not have it published
  • Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds
  • r0bhr0bh Posts: 1,407
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)
  • r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.
    and then the next thing you know
  • shinyhelmutshinyhelmut Posts: 1,339
    As did Kara Goucher if I recall correctly.
  • bflkbflk Posts: 240
    Definitely a time to avoid LetsTroll.com. Site really is a cesspit.
  • bflk wrote:
    Definitely a time to avoid LetsTroll.com. Site really is a cesspit.

    Eh?
  • shinyhelmutshinyhelmut Posts: 1,339
    Letsrun forum = the clinic for athletics “fans”
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 22,770
    r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.
    From her interview

    Alberto Salazar has never coached you, but you did go to him for some medical help. Can you tell us what it was?

    In 2005, I started having worse symptoms of exercise-induced asthma. I had gone to an allergy and asthma doctor on my own, and I got tested after the season was over in 2004 and didn't fail the asthma test. The environmental triggers [like pollen] weren't there. [The doctor] was like, sorry, you don't have asthma, you can't get a prescription.

    Alberto set up an appointment in Portland, during allergy season, with a doctor who had seen many other runners. He had a specific protocol ... you would go to the local track and run around the track, work yourself up to having an asthma attack and then run down the street, up 12 flights of stairs to the office and they would be waiting to test you. So that's what I did and I failed the test, and the doctor prescribed Advair for during the racing season when pollen counts were the highest, and albuterol, which is a rescue inhaler.


    She said she had exercise induced asthma, but didn't fail the test so a doctor told her to exercise to induce the asthma instead. Seems sensible to me. This was back in 2005. I think understanding of EIA has improved a lot since then.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • bflkbflk Posts: 240
    Letsrun forum = the clinic for athletics “fans”

    I'd say LR is worse but I haven't spent so much time at TC.
  • r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.

    My point is that the doping expert is convinced that asthma medication is performance enhancing
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 22,770
    r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.

    My point is that the doping expert is convinced that asthma medication is performance enhancing
    It is if you have asthma, like Fleshman did. It stops asthma attacks.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95 wrote:
    r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.

    My point is that the doping expert is convinced that asthma medication is performance enhancing
    It is if you have asthma, like Fleshman did. It stops asthma attacks.

    so you are still perfectly happy with the number of pro athletes who have asthma?
  • gsk82gsk82 Posts: 2,392
    RichN95 wrote:
    r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.

    My point is that the doping expert is convinced that asthma medication is performance enhancing
    It is if you have asthma, like Fleshman did. It stops asthma attacks.

    so you are still perfectly happy with the number of pro athletes who have asthma?

    I reckon that if the general population wasnt so lazy, you'd find a lot more people had asthma.
    "Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago
  • RichN95 wrote:
    r0bh wrote:
    Interesting that he taught his athletes how to fail an asthma test and so get access to the relevant meds

    Where do you get that? It's not in the reasoned decision. There is no mention of asthma at all as far as I can see (search)

    Lauren Fleshman has detailed it in interviews.

    My point is that the doping expert is convinced that asthma medication is performance enhancing
    It is if you have asthma, like Fleshman did. It stops asthma attacks.
    But the doping expert wanted her to take it all year, when she only had issues at the height of pollen season.
    and then the next thing you know
  • Letsrun forum = the clinic for athletics “fans”

    aghhhh that's the ways to days of lost productivity. I'll stay here :)






    maybe a little look
Sign In or Register to comment.