Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
jsquire
Salazar responds 8/20/2013 5:14AM Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
via a Simon Hart story in The Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/10253393/Alberto-Salazar-takes-a-swipe-at-rumour-mongers-who-put-Mo-Farahs-sudden-run-of-success-down-to-doping.html

I'm staying out of the whole are-they-doping argument. But there are three things I find very interesting.

1) Salazar felt threatened enough by the goings-on here to respond in this very public way
2) No mention of thyroid medication at all
3) This may be the funniest thing I've read in weeks: "a company of such global stature [Nike] would simply not tolerate any threat to its reputation".
poiuy
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 5:26AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
"We know were never going to test positive for anything. No way in the world."

This is a similar quote to Froome after winning the TdF. It makes me think that they are working in a 'grey' area that they know is technically legal but probably shouldn't be
345dfg
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 5:31AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Salazar should understand that the reason people are suspicious about great performances is because we have seen dozens and dozens of athletes getting caught cheating!

So much cheating has been going on through the years, he should be happy that anybody still follows the sport.

Perhaps he could speak a little bit about what went on in Athletics West, the next time he's interviewed?
stuff, eh
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 5:58AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I like the quotes about how Farah got fast. "He hardly did any stuff and he was still fast, so is it surprising that when we do this stuff, he is where he is?"
345dfg
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 6:09AM - in reply to Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I got deleted too, and I just want to say that people are cynical these days because of all the cheaters that have been caught. We know that there are stuff going on, that's just facts.

Salazar mentions the hard workouts that Mo does, but we all know that it is not difficult to train hard, it is recovery that's difficult.
just sayin
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 6:25AM - in reply to Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
"a company of such global stature [Nike] would simply not tolerate any threat to its reputation"


HAHAHAHAH......

thats why they held on to armstrong for as long as they did huh


phil knight said he may even hook up again


lol
Realistic view of it
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 6:51AM - in reply to just sayin Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Without required user registration this board will become more and more just a platform for one party to attack and start rumors about another party they dislike or have a problem with or feel competition from, because they can do it with anonymity.

This message board drags down the sport. Very little good or positive is discussed here any more, just criticism and running down people you have a beef with.

But they will not change the format, and not for any ideological reason as stated numerous times, but simply because they get more visits to the site this way and thus more advertisement revenues. It is a gossip and TMZ message board, not to promote the sport but to gossip and get as many visitors as possible.
Ohmyohmy
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:01AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
This is a glimpse into salazara mind set.

He's a psychopath who has convinced himself they are doing nothing wrong.

Just look at the comment on his athletes not taking supplements besides iron and beta alanine. There's public knowledge of his athletes having taken much more. I've talked to current OP athletes who scknowledge taking much more than that. It's all legal supplements they talk about. But the point is that he has to lie to make it sound like they are squeaky clean.

It's sad.
WhatYo
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:15AM - in reply to Ohmyohmy Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I believe Salazar and I'm one of the most skeptical people in the world when it comes to drugs. I think the extent of their shadiness is likely with the thyroid meds... outside of that, doubt there is anything going on. And, as I recall, the thyroid meds were specifically looked at by WADA and specifically cleared. So no problem there despite how much people want to make it into a big deal.

HOWEVER, unfortunately, Salazar can't win this argument. Nike and Lance were synonymous with one another. Remember his last tours, post retirement? I said, "no way he is doping. He's already won 5 tours, is older, has retired, his focus is on his charity and he has gotten away with doping for so long despite intense focus on him, why risk getting caught now? He 100% has to be clean post-retirement because why sully his reputation after barely escaping going down so many times?"

It didn't make sense. It made no sense for lance, for Livestrong, for Nike. Yet he did it.

It shows that when it comes to competing at the highest levels, rationale thought goes out the window. It goes so far out the window the person knows its not rationale, will tell someone directly to their face, "what I am doing makes no sense because I have everything to lose and nearly nothing to gain", and understand that to be 100% the case, but will do it anyway. I think its probably some sort of problem in the same vein as an addiction problem.

Not saying this is Alberto. I don't think it is. But, the point is, he will never be able to convince anyone after the lies from so many.

If you're ARod, after everything, or Ryan Braun, don't you thank your lucky stars that you got off scott free and then make sure you never dope again? Would make sense, right?
redux
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:17AM - in reply to Ohmyohmy Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
So what are the legal supplements?
Logical Question
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:22AM - in reply to redux Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
If a 5k/10k guy runs 3:28 clean, what's he going to run with a focus on the 1500m, and the combination of drugs? 3:22? What's Rupp's 3:49 indoor mile worth as an outdoor 1500m if he was clean and went dirty? 3:25?
Hardloper
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:30AM - in reply to Logical Question Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Logical Question wrote:
What's Rupp's 3:49 indoor mile worth as an outdoor 1500m if he was clean and went dirty? 3:25?
3:49 is a pretty generous way of saying 3:50.92.

PS - indoor miles are just as fast as outdoor ones if not faster sometimes, for many reasons.
toro
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:34AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
He basically comments that a lot of accusations come from jealous athletes.
People that run crappy or people making excuses for not being as good.

But comments come from fans who are not even competing. That's not jealousy.
Fans see a continuous pattern of athletes that do well in all events and sports and a good portion of them eventually turn up with a positive test.
Even more damning are the athletes that never turn up positive but you find out they were able to beat the system like Lance Armstrong and Marion Jones.

You just take the logical conclusion that if someone is a top performing athlete, then there is a high likelyhood that they are using some sort of PED, and very well may know how to beat testing.

So if Salazar has athletes often performing at a high level, it's only natural to assume something is up.
Personally, I don't call him out because I don't know, but I won't defend him as clean, either.

My former college coach, John Cook, has athletes doing pretty well.
I trained with him for 8 years, collegiately and post-collegiately. I didn't see him do anything suspect then and feel he likely doesn't now.
But I understand when people do think he may be involved in this stuff.
Accusations come with the territory of winning major medals.

People will talk. That's life.
I love that this message board let's people talk.
I hate the deletions and censorship.
obummer
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:36AM - in reply to WhatYo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

WhatYo wrote:

I believe Salazar and I'm one of the most skeptical people in the world when it comes to drugs.

HOWEVER, unfortunately, Salazar can't win this argument. Nike and Lance were synonymous with one another. Remember his last tours, post retirement? I said, "no way he is doping. He's already won 5 tours, is older, has retired, his focus is on his charity and he has gotten away with doping for so long despite intense focus on him, why risk getting caught now? He 100% has to be clean post-retirement because why sully his reputation after barely escaping going down so many times?"


you clearly aren't even remotely close to being one of the most skeptical people in the world about drugs so why are claiming something that is so wrong?

yes, salazar can win the argument. which of his athletes has set aside blood for future testing? did lance armstrong, bonds, sosa, arod, marion jones or tyson gay do that? if someone wants to eliminate any doping questions, then either set aside blood, like PR has done, or enter an outside more rigorous testing program like phelps was a part of. until that happens, i don't want to hear a single word about a world champion on the track and how clean the person is.
Nutella1
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:37AM - in reply to poiuy Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

poiuy wrote:

"We know were never going to test positive for anything. No way in the world."



Lance Armstrong said this at Oprah.
He also had a building named after him at Nike.
He also argued that he trained harder than anyone else.

I am not arguing that Mo is dirty, I am just saying that these may not be the best reasons I've ever heard.
WhatYo
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:49AM - in reply to Nutella1 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Nutella,

You said it better than I did. Not saying anyone is dirty, but given past history, its very difficult to use his arguments as a reason for cleanliness. Only because many sociopaths have made the same arguments despite being dirty as hell.
gus fring
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:50AM - in reply to Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

A Duck wrote:

mo doped would prob be a 3-24 guy!


Mo doped is a 3:28 guy!

You're welcome for fixing your error.
Dr. Know
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 7:53AM - in reply to redux Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

redux wrote:

So what are the legal supplements?


Micro-doses of testosterone for one. The rules allow a 4:1 T/E ratio when the average is 1.15/1.

Albuterol and synthetic thyroid if you have a doctor who will write a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE).
Xfit_guy_the_real_one_1
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 8:00AM - in reply to redux Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

redux wrote:

So what are the legal supplements?


Read the text: Vitamin D. I have been saying this for a long time already. You simply can't get enough sun with a regular 9-5 job and even runners typically train outside early am and pm but not between 11-2 when you can get vit d from the sun.
longjack
RE: Salazar responds 8/20/2013 8:03AM - in reply to jsquire Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
iron, vitamin d and an amino acid??? you have got to be kidding.
Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |