Drugs in other sports and the media.
Comments
-
It's so clear when people don't read the stuff they re talking about isnt it...
+1Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.0 -
Radcliffe's defence seems simply to say she's innocent over and over again with the occasional suggestion that no one is capable of understanding the results of a blood test. That kind of defence wouldn't do in cycling or skiing or any other sport really so why does she think that's good enough? The woman is a fraud.
As DDraver said, it doesn't look like you actually read the statement.
She says that quite a lot of people can understand the results, and have done, repeatedly, without finding anything wrong. She says that the results can't be understood without context, and that the context of tests is enshrined in the bio passport. She says that those that have pointed out suspicious values have done so without knowing the context, i.e. on the basis of incomplete data.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.0
-
is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.
Yup.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699663#p19699663]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.
Yup.
Where you and Joel and a couple of others been the main contributors...
Amazing really this forum - tons of you just love to discuss the drugs. The amount of pages on this thread tells it's own story.Contador is the Greatest0 -
partly true Frenchie, but some go overboard re the drugstuff... looking for things that in some case just aren't there!0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699663#p19699663]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.
Yup.
Where you and Joel and a couple of others been the main contributors...
Amazing really this forum - tons of you just love to discuss the drugs. The amount of pages on this thread tells it's own story.
Do stop trying to be bitchy, it doesnt work0 -
These tests were before the bio passport came along.
I think the guys above are talking about her interviews as well as this statement, she has been on TV several times in the last few days.
Given the lack of 'context' and if clean nothing to lose, maybe she should release all her data so that the context can be clarified. That's all her data from let's say 2000-present day. Then perhaps ask Ashenden or similar to analyse it alongside the altitude training and the actual timing of the tests with regard to dehydration/proximity to races/location etc.
It appears that she is simply saying 'no one understands the context', 'only some of the data has been looked at', 'it's stolen so give it back' and 'please, I hope it just goes away'. It won't, unless she does something then she will be tainted. Rightly or wrongly.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699680#p19699680]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699663#p19699663]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.
Yup.
Where you and Joel and a couple of others been the main contributors...
Amazing really this forum - tons of you just love to discuss the drugs. The amount of pages on this thread tells it's own story.
Do stop trying to be bitchy, it doesnt work
Why not frenchie, it's an integral part of modern sport and performance. As has always been the case.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699680#p19699680]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19699663#p19699663]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:is it me or is this thread just a bit farcical.
Yup.
Where you and Joel and a couple of others been the main contributors...
Amazing really this forum - tons of you just love to discuss the drugs. The amount of pages on this thread tells it's own story.
Do stop trying to be bitchy, it doesnt work
Touched a nerve clearly.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.0 -
partly true Frenchie, but some go overboard re the drugstuff... looking for things that in some case just aren't there!
I don't mention anyone except when there has been some smoke.
Putting the Paula story into context, if this person was not Paula and was a Russian, for example, no doubt the thinking of many here would be a little different. Or am I wrong?0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
partly true Frenchie, but some go overboard re the drugstuff... looking for things that in some case just aren't there!
I don't mention anyone except when there has been some smoke.
Putting the Paula story into context, if this person was not Paula and was a Russian, for example, no doubt the thinking of many here would be a little different. Or am I wrong?
When's the last time you heard a Russian speak out against doping?
Look at the history of positive tests for Russian athletes.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...
I haven't mate. 100% I have not read anything about Paula on Twitter for a couple of days. Not a bean.0 -
partly true Frenchie, but some go overboard re the drugstuff... looking for things that in some case just aren't there!
I don't mention anyone except when there has been some smoke.
Putting the Paula story into context, if this person was not Paula and was a Russian, for example, no doubt the thinking of many here would be a little different. Or am I wrong?
When's the last time you heard a Russian speak out against doping?
Look at the history of positive tests for Russian athletes.
That wasn't my point. My point was:
1) A world record 3 minutes better than anyone has ever run
2) At a time when blood doping was prevalent in many sports (Puerto shows this as do recollections of seeing other famous sportspeople in Madrid from Hamilton and others)
3) Suspicious blood values highlighted in a report
If that person with the above knowledge had been johnny foreigner then it would be a done deal.0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...
I haven't mate. 100% I have not read anything about Paula on Twitter for a couple of days. Not a bean.
Well then youre reading a second had source of, what is likley to be, a second hand source
I don't find that very convincingWe're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
partly true Frenchie, but some go overboard re the drugstuff... looking for things that in some case just aren't there!
I don't mention anyone except when there has been some smoke.
Putting the Paula story into context, if this person was not Paula and was a Russian, for example, no doubt the thinking of many here would be a little different. Or am I wrong?
When's the last time you heard a Russian speak out against doping?
Look at the history of positive tests for Russian athletes.
That wasn't my point. My point was:
1) A world record 3 minutes better than anyone has ever run
2) At a time when blood doping was prevalent in many sports (Puerto shows this as do recollections of seeing other famous sportspeople in Madrid from Hamilton and others)
3) Suspicious blood values highlighted in a report
If that person with the above knowledge had been johnny foreigner then it would be a done deal.
But being Russian would have been another flag. Not proof of guilt, but cause for greater concern than if the athlete had been British. So it would be different if she was Russian.
Can someone please explain to me what is suspicious about her blood values? I have seen no actual scientific discussion on this.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Can Boxing trust USADA?
http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada
A quality, and disturbing, read.0 -
hasn't he data from Paula already been looked at by the authorities anyway ? They've already said it was clean and no case to answer.
Surely they would have far more information that a graph that has been released on the internet.
As she stated in her release, she had higher values after altitude training, something a lot of cyclists do for the same reason.
It's at the point now where she cant win. If she was clean how can she prove that ? She never tested positive and unless IAAF wants to retest her old samples she cant really do any more0 -
hasn't he data from Paula already been looked at by the authorities anyway ? They've already said it was clean and no case to answer.
Surely they would have far more information that a graph that has been released on the internet.
As she stated in her release, she had higher values after altitude training, something a lot of cyclists do for the same reason.
It's at the point now where she cant win. If she was clean how can she prove that ? She never tested positive and unless IAAF wants to retest her old samples she cant really do any more
Ah but the IAAF cannot be trusted. The only thing that can be relied upon is personal belief/faith... and damned if humanity come into it... it's like we are back in Salem 300 years ago. And if not that at least a bad episode of Catch 22...0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...
I haven't mate. 100% I have not read anything about Paula on Twitter for a couple of days. Not a bean.
Well then youre reading a second had source of, what is likley to be, a second hand source
I don't find that very convincing
Nope, I do have the ability to think for myself. Not read anything or anyone suggesting what I have suggested. Not one thing. I haven't been on Twitter for 2 days, and there was nothing written on Velorooms suggesting this.
EDIT: And I don't frequent The Other Place as they are all nutters0 -
hasn't he data from Paula already been looked at by the authorities anyway ? They've already said it was clean and no case to answer.
Surely they would have far more information that a graph that has been released on the internet.
As she stated in her release, she had higher values after altitude training, something a lot of cyclists do for the same reason.
It's at the point now where she cant win. If she was clean how can she prove that ? She never tested positive and unless IAAF wants to retest her old samples she cant really do any more
Ah but the IAAF cannot be trusted. The only thing that can be relied upon is personal belief/faith... and damned if humanity come into it... it's like we are back in Salem 300 years ago. And if not that at least a bad episode of Catch 22...
The list that she was on was an IAAF compiled list of athletes who had recorded suspicious blood values. But by all accounts had done very little with. She was the only Brit on there.
Here is the original expose.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11282513/Top-British-athletics-star-accused-of-doping-by-German-documentary.html0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...
I haven't mate. 100% I have not read anything about Paula on Twitter for a couple of days. Not a bean.
Well then youre reading a second had source of, what is likley to be, a second hand source
I don't find that very convincing
Nope, I do have the ability to think for myself. Not read anything or anyone suggesting what I have suggested. Not one thing. I haven't been on Twitter for 2 days, and there was nothing written on Velorooms suggesting this.
EDIT: And I don't frequent The Other Place as they are all nutters
Well then let me say gently that you tend not to bring that to the screenWe're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Had a good twitter again this morning then Joel?
Why Ashendon in particular?
It's not because he's the guy most likely to say there's something dodgy is it?
Not been on Twitter for a couple of days fella. I wasn't thinking Ashendon in particular, hence why I wrote 'or similar'. i.e. someone who is respected, who perhaps doesn't have an ulterior motive, someone who knows his onions and can give an informed, unbiased opinion.
And that's Michel Ashendon is it? You have a funny definition of unbiased
Oh, and again your posts don't suggest the bit about twitter is really true I'm afraid...
I haven't mate. 100% I have not read anything about Paula on Twitter for a couple of days. Not a bean.
Well then youre reading a second had source of, what is likley to be, a second hand source
I don't find that very convincing
Nope, I do have the ability to think for myself. Not read anything or anyone suggesting what I have suggested. Not one thing. I haven't been on Twitter for 2 days, and there was nothing written on Velorooms suggesting this.
EDIT: And I don't frequent The Other Place as they are all nutters
Well then let me say gently that you tend not to bring that to the screen
Well you will have to take my word for it dd. I don't really use Twitter, 95% of my Twitter usage is to find out who is in the break before TV coverage starts. When I do see Vayerism et al it generally annoys me as they often have nothing of note to base their views on.0 -
The views I suggested this morning were based on a couple of interviews I had seen on Sky Sports News last night. If Paula is so keen to clear her name so that her kids don't see 'doper' when they Google her name, then there is now only one way to do it. Full transparency, exactly the opposite of her interview a couple of weeks ago.
If there is another way of doing it then let me know. I can't see one.
EDIT: There is currently a red flag by her name and no amount of saying 'I've never doped' will change that. Lance put paid to that, Gatlin too, and the rest of those who imbibed substances without knowing/by accident/through contaminated aniseed balls at the Tuck Shop.0 -
http://news.sky.com/story/1550226/blood-tests-that-cleared-paula-radcliffe
Well. Ashenden and Parisotto.0 -
Sigh.... I'll try again.There is currently a red flag by her name and no amount of saying 'I've never doped' will change that.
If by red flag you mean "she's on a list of suspicious BPs", then yes, there has to be suspicion. So she has cited evidence that the suspicious BP can, and should, be explained by entirely innocent things - dehydration, training at altitude, etc*.
Then the defence has outlined its case: it is now up to the prosecution to offer some evidence to try and demolish that case.
I've not heard any such evidence yet: only "well that's the kind of thing that LA said".
If, on the other hand, by "red flag" you mean "I've now leapt to the conclusion that she is a doper and therefore it is cognitively impossible for me ever to change my mind" then there's not a lot of point discussing it.
*thankfully she didn't offer "I went on a drinking binge" as one of the factors.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19700027#p19700027]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1550226/blood-tests-that-cleared-paula-radcliffe
Well. Ashenden and Parisotto.
Didn't Lance drip feed blood tests?0
