Taoufik Makhloufi Disqualified from 1500m for "not providing a bona fide effort" in the 800m

Unless there is something odd at play, this is pure incompetence by Algerian Athletics. How do they not withdraw him?

SkeptiKAL wrote:

Again, just a theory ... but if he DNFs in the 800, at least he can claim the "it was a stupid rule" defence and we might accept that and believe that he's clean ...

... if he DNFs in the 1,500, then there's little doubt at all that he was trying to avoid the testers and we'd be convinced that he's dirty ...

seems as if he was left with the worst of two options ...

No, that makes no sense. His plan is to get DQ'd from the 800m, and also be thrown out of the 1500m? When was the last time that happened?

Ybhbhihnihn wrote:

If he was, then an 800 would not phase him (remember Ramzi)...

Not sure that's good logic. Being a drug cheat will make you better, sure, but not necessarily so good that you can win a 1500 while competing in the 8. He'll still take every advantage he can get to win one event.

113 wrote:

rules are rules wrote:

Wasn't he going to run in the 1500 finals? Why would he be worried about drug tests now if still planning to run the 1500?

He obviously didn't want to expend the energy of running the 800 to save himself for the 1500. These little petty rules are out of control.

I see nothing petty about these rules. Makhloufi entered the race and declared an entry. If you're going to take up a lane, you have to try (or at least pretend to try). The IOC doesn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars to stage the Olympics to watch people make a mockery of the sport. I feel the same way about the badminton players. It's not overly onerous to expect athletes in the biggest athletic event in the world to show up and give an effort.

Agreed on all points, HOWEVER, as with the badminton players giving the ole college effort and playing to win a match they don't want to win, Makhloufi would be in a worse position by going out and running hard in the 800. I don't see how faking an honest effort is more in line with the Olympic spirit than stepping off the track after 200m.

I realize the fallacy of my argument in arguing that one choice is the lesser of two evils. I don't see a better alternative.

I'm struggling to come up with a specific example ... although I'm convinced I've seen it before ... let me dig around a bit ...

What are you even talking about? Unfair tactics?

rules are rules wrote:

SkeptiKAL wrote:

He's going to have a tough time convincing the IOC he was injured: he was poppoin' his jersey at the start line and milking the cameras and the crowd ...

I'm convinced he DNFed to avoid a drugs test ...

Wasn't he going to run in the 1500 finals? Why would he be worried about drug tests now if still planning to run the 1500?

He obviously didn't want to expend the energy of running the 800 to save himself for the 1500. These little petty rules are out of control.

His actions affected the seeding of the 800m heats. Remember he is a 1:43 guy.

His federation was clumpsy when they did not scratch him from the 800m. Or maybe tried to be smart and used the 800m entry as a second chance if he were to miss to qualify for the 1500m final. If so it backfired due this little mishap.

On the other hand, as other have pointed out, I'm fairly sure this is not over yet.

NahBro wrote:

Agreed on all points, HOWEVER, as with the badminton players giving the ole college effort and playing to win a match they don't want to win, Makhloufi would be in a worse position by going out and running hard in the 800. I don't see how faking an honest effort is more in line with the Olympic spirit than stepping off the track after 200m.

I realize the fallacy of my argument in arguing that one choice is the lesser of two evils. I don't see a better alternative.

It's not in keeping with the Olympic spirit at all, but at least if you give a little better show you don't risk getting kicked out of the whole affair. These athletes aren't getting kicked out for not trying-- they're getting kicked out for blatantly not trying and rubbing it in the IOC's face. If you're too dumb to not realize it might be a bad idea to pull out of a race and then run across the infield to cheer, I have no sympathy for you.

And of course the better alternative would have been (for Makhloufi) to just withdraw from the race by the deadline or (for the badminton players) to just go ahead and try to win, and play the higher ranked team that just got upset. Not too complicated.

Well we can hand the gold to Kiprop now, especially since he only had to run 3:42 yesterday while everyone in the other semi had to run 3:33-3:34.

I will be shocked if he isn't reinstated.

Both the badminton players and Makhloufi were doing what they thought was the best thing to help them win a medal. The badminton controversy was due to how the prelims worked and will probably be changed.

Makhloufi could have withdrawn from the 800 had the paperwork been done in time. It is a mistake by either him or his team but not so severe that he has to hurt his chances of a 1500 gold. So the paperwork gets turned in 15 minutes before the race instead of an hour. BIG DEAL. Petty rules.

IOC saw how he seemed to be a clearly doped runner. Instead of hoping they catch him and potentially be embarrassed later if he turns out to be dirty after winning a medal, they saw an opportunity to just get rid of him.

Have you ever heard of "out ofcompetition"? Athletes are tested randomly in the village and out of it.

I suppose the blame here is twofold. Makhloufi likely entered both events before realizing how ass backwards the London schedule was. He should have scratched from the 800 as soon as the games began but apparently didn't. It would have been in his best interest to simply jog a 1:52 though.

I still lay most of the blame on the IOC due to their inability to properly schedule a track meet. Maybe Lord Coe doesn't want anybody completing the double!

Should give his spot to Brannen

"Have you ever heard of "out ofcompetition"? Athletes are tested randomly in the village and out of it."

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

This is a telling two paragraphs from a Globe & Mail (Canada) piece last week ...

"The IOC and WADA have changed their anti-doping strategy in recent years, moving away from random testing and toward targeting athletes the organizations suspect of cheating. For example, WADA now relies on intelligence gathering from police, border officials and other agencies to decided who to test, particularly out of competition.

Jonathan Harris, who heads the anti-doping program at the London Games, said officials meet daily during the Games to assess intelligence and decide which athletes to test. He added that everyone working at the Games, including cleaning staff at the athletes village, has been instructed to watch for any signs of doping and report it to the anti-doping officials."

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/sports/olympics/ioc-anti-doping-chief-defends-chinese-swim-star/article4448360/?service=mobile

What's the difference between jogging 1:52 and dropping out after 200? Both aren't an honest effort. The 1:52 even more so because it doesn't give him the injury excuse.

I didn't see the race. Did he just stop and walk off? Dude needs some acting lessons. Should have been cluthing a hammy and waiting for a stretcher.

and here's the skinny on competition testing:

"The first five finishers in every event are tested, plus two at random. They are tested immediately afterwards, in the venue."

roy jones wrote:

What's the difference between jogging 1:52 and dropping out after 200? Both aren't an honest effort. The 1:52 even more so because it doesn't give him the injury excuse.

I didn't see the race. Did he just stop and walk off? Dude needs some acting lessons. Should have been cluthing a hammy and waiting for a stretcher.

Nah.

By jogging a 1:52 he could at least say he was tired from the 1500.

Remember when Kiprop tried to double in 2009? He ended up jogging a 1:52.

Makhloufi stepped off the track and clapped for the other runners. It was silly.