Rebecca Johnstone HUGE PR for best collegiate 800 of the season!

Linda Staines - 2:07 - how old is she now? She must be in her forties??

Hilary, reading comprehension is an important thing in life. I don't believe anyone has said that Rebecca is on drugs. If I remember what the original poster on this subject said, it was simply that the Simon Fraser Women's program as a whole has some oddities that suggest drugs could very well be a factor. Rebecca is just one major example. I know I didn't say she was actually on drugs in my post. I said it was an interesting situation at Simon Fraser and there are questions that come up given the types of performances and "progression" we've seen.

However, whether she or they are on drugs or not, the defense on here seems to be "I am Canadian, They are Canadian, I know, have met or have seen Rebecca at some point in life, I think she trains hard and she is nice, therefore there is no possible way she or anyone at Simon Fraser is on drugs". I think that is a far more rediculous, naive and narrow-minded statement than pointing out that there are legitimate questions and issues that could strongly suggest drug usage there.

Newsflash: There are nice people who take performance enhancing drugs. There are Canadians who take performance enhancing drugs (Before the oversensitive Canadians get all freaked out, I am not saying ONLY Canadians take drugs, obviously people of all nations, races, creeds, colors and religions do as well). There are coaches who promote the use of performance enhancing drugs. There are very hard working athletes that use performance enhancing drugs (I would guess that the people who take performance enhancers would be some of the hardest workers there are). Is Rebecca one of them? Is Simon Fraser's women's team one of them? Who knows? There is circumstantial evidence that suggests it is very possible. What is wrong with bringing the subject up for discussion? If they are all clean, then it isn't going to matter. If they are taking drugs, then it should be examined. As someone said, they are obviously fast or this subject wouldn't even come up. If they are clean, then they should be able to weather a little Letsrun.com discussion that probably helps their program more than it hurts it.

My two and a half cents wrote:

Hilary, reading comprehension is an important thing in life. I don't believe anyone has said that Rebecca is on drugs.

From one of your earlier posts: "Drugs - sorry, how can you not think it."

Okay, so you didn't say Johnstone "is" on drugs, you said she "might" be -- how could anyone not think it? There's really not a lot of difference between those two statements, so I wouldn't get all huffy about "reading comprehension". If you're going to go around spreading baseless suggestions about people, at least stand behind your anonymous screen name instead of trying to weasel out.

Is it possible that someone nice takes drugs? Of course. Does that mean it's worth spreading drug "questions" everytime someone improves dramatically? I don't think so, but you obviously do. Once you've raised the idea, others with more knowledge -- people who have trained with the athlete in question, for instance -- weigh in with their opinions. You expect them not to? It's somehow okay for you to say "I think she's taking drugs," but not for someone to respond "I know her, and I'm pretty sure she's not"?

You've made your point -- she improved, so maybe she's on drugs. Do you have another point?

Very often we are surprised by those that are taking drugs. Often because they are the last people we would think would do it. Further, an individual doing it often times is very smart about it and hides it well because they know the repercussions and stigma that is associated with it.

How many of us know people or are people that have things about ourselves that nobody knows about and we take extreme measures to hide? I am not saying Rebecca or any other SFU gal is in this boat when it comes to drugs, but unless you are them (I don't care if you are married to them - how many spouses find out things later they never knew) unless you are them there is no way you can know with 100% certainty.

One person comes to mind (speaking of older women running 2:07) is Regina Jacobs. I had a lot of respect for a woman who I thought was just outworking everyone else. Getting smarter, etc... then to find out she had been cheating all along. How many people came to her defense before it became public knowledge and how many since? Huh? Huh?

I do think it is odd that SFU always seems to have those 2, 3, 4 gals that show dramatic improvement over time and are in world class territory when it comes to times. There are a lot, and I mean a LOT of 2:15 or so HS gals out there that go on to college. Many of them go to D1 schools with a great competitive environment, but we don't see the numbers in this group from all these universities add up to the numbers we see from one "small" naia school.

On another point. Some drugs that will help performance are not anabolic steroids. Rebecca and others "COULD" be taking EPO, blood doping, etc... that would have absolutely no effects on their beauty.

hold the phone wrote:

My two and a half cents wrote:

Hilary, reading comprehension is an important thing in life. I don't believe anyone has said that Rebecca is on drugs.

From one of your earlier posts: "Drugs - sorry, how can you not think it."

Sorry, that wasn't my quote.

And I didn't say people shouldn't be defending Simon Fraser or Rebecca. I said that the argument that "you've met her and think she is nice therefore she absolutely cannot be on drugs" is rediculous. Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension as well. Reacting with emotion instead of thought will do that to you.

CaNAdiAnz are so sensitive! It must be low self esteem!

Hahahahaha!

I have addressed EVERY aspect of this accusation (and don't try to weasel out of it-it is an accusation)) and you have come back with NOTHING more substantial than "They COULD be on drugs", "the tests are beatable", "the girls have improved TOO much", etc. etc.. NOTHING which couldn't apply to ANY other successful collegiate program.

In short, you are making anonymous accusations toward a program and an athlete that has had ABSOLUTELY NO HINT OF FOUL PLAY. Other than, in your mind, the fact that success in running competition is prima facie evidence for drug use. I frankly belive that even you don't believe your own bull$h*t, but see an opportunity to bescmirch an achievement without any consequence to yourself. This frankly disgusts me.

Take you anonymous smear tactics elsewhere. In a sport with plenty of coaches, programs and athletes with actual drug test failures, suspicious activity and associations, SFU's runners and Brit Townsend are as above suspicion as ANY other program out there today. Unless you have concrete evidence to the contrary and are willing to post your identity, keep your foul, jealous delusions to yourself.

I havent read all the posts but for the accusations about the sfu girls and drugs you have to be kidding me! I guarantee they are not. I would bet my life on it.

As for the differences in performance with the men, it comes down to the recruiting...most highschool boys are dumb enough to automatically think that you HAVE go to DIV1 to run fast...girls are smarter...it's true. If you look at their team, their men's team doesn't have the numbers of their women's team and their entire men's team are walkons but both teams have had equally big improvements over the years (Rebecca has had the one exceptional improvement).

So I switched coaches about 16 months ago. I moved to who I truly believe is a BETTER coach. Now, to get everything straight, I was definitely training at a very lack-luster level with my original coach. Anyways, in one year I dropped my 3000m PR 40 seconds, and my 1500m PR 15. I now run 4:01.26 and 8:44.68; you do the math to figure out where I was before. The point is, I'm not on drugs (in fact, I was injured for about 3 months under my new coach when I broke my toe). It sounds to ME like in the past few years, Rebecca has become a much more devoted and serious athlete, and she is seeing all this improvement because of it. It's like the old theory; you only get out what you put in. I guess Rebecca is just putting a lot more in these days.

Oh, and one other point. To think that ANY Canadian University has the funds to BUY DRUGS for 5 different athletes is completely proposterous. Hell, they don't even have enough money to offer a single Track and Field athlete a full scholarship.

[quote]Rapid Progression This wrote:

Anyways, in one year I dropped my 3000m PR 40 seconds, and my 1500m PR 15. I now run 4:01.26 and 8:44.68;

Actually to have the same rate of improvement as Rebecca you would have had to have bettered your time by approximately 11%, so you would have had to go from 4:16 in the 1500 to 3:48 (28 seconds) and your 3000 would have had to go from 9:24 to 8:22(62 seconds).

So you did not have the same dramatic improvements as she did. The fact that you state you were hurt... can explain most everything for you.

Rebecca was NOT hurt with teh 2:15's and 2:16s she was running, did NOT change coaches, yet almost DOUBLED the rate of improvement you had and you had legitimate reasons for improvement.

To quote another great philosopher "HERE'S YOUR SIGN."

I was injured 3 months after joining with my new coach. The fact of the matter is that she buckled down and started working harder. There are people in this world with so much NATURAL talent, that if they really make a huge push, the improvement comes with ease. Also, Rebecca is a RACER. If you look at the improvement of her 800m time, you will see that she was stuck around 2:05 for a very long time. Then she jumps to 2:01 and people start shitting themselves. The fact is, when she went 2:01, SHE HAD PEOPLE TO RACE! Go ahead and throw out drug accusations all you want, it's things like that which have completely ruined the legitimacy of elite, or even semi-elite, level running in North America.

Rebecca did change coaches (to Brit/SFU) and she had health and injuries troubles until university

Rebecca was not a Valley Royal as a high schooler and did not train with Brit

I think that is a far more rediculous, naive and narrow-minded statement than pointing out that there are legitimate questions and issues that could strongly suggest drug usage there.

strongly suggest drug usage at SFU? get a life! Improvement and running fast are the only things I can see that would give anyone a reason to speculate drug use. The girls at SFU are talented and train well, plain and simple.

"My two and a half cents" you have suggested drug use and then people defend Rebecca and you pretend like you aren't saying anything. You're an idiot.

Rapid Progression This wrote:

Oh, and one other point. To think that ANY Canadian University has the funds to BUY DRUGS for 5 different athletes is completely proposterous. Hell, they don't even have enough money to offer a single Track and Field athlete a full scholarship.

Thank you. If anyone just came and looked at our school and the campus, you would see we barely have enough $$$ to keep that operation running, nevermind forking over cash for drugs for our women runners.

one lap of the track wrote:

Linda Staines - 2:07 - how old is she now? She must be in her forties??

42

I'm not saying for sure that they are on drugs for sure, just that they are improving way more than I ever did (1% in the same time period), and so the logical explanation is that they are cheating in some way. Just because they are "nice" people doesn't mean that they don't have access to clandestine drug use. I think it is naive to look the other way, especially since I never was able to achieve even a fraction of their success, despite dabbling a bit in the performance-enhancers myself.

My two and a half cents wrote:

I'm not saying for sure that they are on drugs for sure, just that they are improving way more than I ever did (1% in the same time period), and so the logical explanation is that they are cheating in some way. Just because they are "nice" people doesn't mean that they don't have access to clandestine drug use. I think it is naive to look the other way, especially since I never was able to achieve even a fraction of their success, despite dabbling a bit in the performance-enhancers myself.

Not that I care, since this is an anonymous board, but the above post wasn't me.

My two and a half cents wrote:

Not that I care, since this is an anonymous board, but the above post wasn't me.

Not that I care about anything, especially the reputation of athletes who are far more successful than I will ever be, but the above post was by me.

SFU Guy wrote:

Rapid Progression This wrote:

Oh, and one other point. To think that ANY Canadian University has the funds to BUY DRUGS for 5 different athletes is completely proposterous. Hell, they don't even have enough money to offer a single Track and Field athlete a full scholarship.

Thank you. If anyone just came and looked at our school and the campus, you would see we barely have enough $$$ to keep that operation running, nevermind forking over cash for drugs for our women runners.

You've got to be kidding me! What a lode of crap! SFU has better resources and funding than any other NAIA school! And SFU and UBC have student populations the size of large DI schools. What are they doing in the NAIA anyway?