Days before winning what? Dammit I can only see the preview!! Anyone subscribe?
They really expect outside to pay on that site?
This newspaper is not naming the athlete because the source who leaked the doping data requested that athletes who had never been banned for cheating should be kept anonymous.
On three occasions during their career the athlete’s test results were so “abnormal” that there was only a one in a thousand chance that they were natural.
Is all you need to know.
From 2012
Paula Radcliffe has vowed to lead a worldwide campaign to pressurise the World Anti-Doping Agency into applying tougher bans on drug cheats.
Radcliffe has hit out at WADA after the Court of Arbitration for Sport yesterday ruled that the British Olympic Association's lifetime ban for drugs cheats was unenforceable under their code.
That has paved the way for the likes of sprinter Dwain Chambers and cyclist David Millar to compete at this summer's Olympics in London.
It is a scenario women's marathon world record holder Radcliffe is not comfortable with and, after claiming WADA is failing to listen to athletes, called on them to make their concerns heard.
"This isn't about Dwain Chambers; it's a far wider issue. It's about a bigger deterrent being in place," she told the Daily Express.
"If WADA is not listening to the world's athletes then we have to make them. Athletes have a voice. We can put pressure on WADA to make this tougher.
"I've always had a loud voice against the cheats and if we all do that we can make a difference. I will make a stand.
"I would like to think we could do it across the world. If all the athletes logged on to a campaign and signed their name to it, I'm sure we could do it."
It is already widely known that she is the athlete in question
It's not her. It's someone with a very good pedigree over the much shorter distances.........think about it.
Kelly Holmes? I wouldn't be surprised if it was her.
Paula's only grey zone is pacing.
A 1 in 1000 chance that their blood values are natural? We are talking about 1 in 1,000,000 sorts of athletes, right? And these 1:1,000,000 sorts of athletes are presumable doing everything possible that is legal, such as intermittent hypoxia at over 20,000' and all sorts of craziness like that.
I'm not saying they are clean, but a 1:1000 chance is not nearly extreme enough to ruin someone's reputation.
When confronted with the evidence the lady
is alleged to have said to the Sunday times
"If you print this i'll do what Lance Armstrong did to you ,except you won't get your money back"
A 40% change in blood markers is not normal even with altitude and dehydration taken in combination.
Sellerdore wrote:
It's not her. It's someone with a very good pedigree over the much shorter distances.........think about it.
400m? Someone who received a ban for reasons other than a positive drug test?
Can these unusual blood values occur naturally as a result of training and freakish talent?
I always thought it amazing that Kelly Holmes was able to do the 1500m and 800m double at the age of 34, but stranger things have happened.
Indeed. wrote:
When confronted with the evidence the lady
is alleged to have said to the Sunday times
"If you print this i'll do what Lance Armstrong did to you ,except you won't get your money back"
BS.
The only suspicious thing about Paula is her ridiculously fast times.
The runner in question is of course Christine Ohuruogo.
1 in a 1000, that's it? wrote:
A 1 in 1000 chance that their blood values are natural? We are talking about 1 in 1,000,000 sorts of athletes, right? And these 1:1,000,000 sorts of athletes are presumable doing everything possible that is legal, such as intermittent hypoxia at over 20,000' and all sorts of craziness like that.
I'm not saying they are clean, but a 1:1000 chance is not nearly extreme enough to ruin someone's reputation.
My thoughts exactly. I just wasn't going to take the time to try to explain that to the LRC mob.
From the article
"You print it and I sue you [and] you won't be getting any money back in future like Lance Armstrong - I promise you that."
"Last week the athlete said their score had been elevated because it had been taken when they were dehydrated after winning a race in summer temperatures."
Dehydrated after a 400?
All probabilities are based on a model, which may be wrong. And more importantly, the process of collecting and analyzing data is far from perfect. Contamination, switching of samples, erroneous analyzing etc. are very likely to produce outliers.
You need die hard proof before you can start pointing the finger.
If you're a doper or ex doper what is a better way to get people off your trail than by taking a strong stand against doping. It blows my mind when people think Paula is above suspicion. She has run 2 min faster than any other women in the marathon, and many of those are under strong suspicion of doping. Someone being that much better than the next best person in a highly competed in event is statistically mind blowing. That is the equivalent of a guy in the current marathoning scene running 2:01 flat.
No it isn't
Men's Marathon is much more competitive than womens
Also she was paced
Radcliffe's time is probably more in the 2:03/04 range for a man.
That also is a suspect area.
But suspicion isn't proof.
I mean 3:50 for the 1500 is suspect, but, again, suspicion isn't proof.
One thing for certain, though, drugs are killing the sport.
Indeed. wrote:
No it isn't
Men's Marathon is much more competitive than womens
Also she was paced
^this
Ingrid Kristiansen's marathon WR from 85 stood for 13 years. Paula's isn't even that old yet. Women's marathon is extremely shallow.