Did Shannon Rowbury have dinner with Russian doper Anna Alminova?

This was before the bio passport ban was announced.

I'm more curious how they'd know each other and be friends.

Alminova did have a 3 month ban previously but so has Maggie Vessey.

In other news, I saw both of these doctors that Tiger Woods saw that are both making news:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/tiger-woods-spent-200k-hgh-guru-doc-new-book-article-1.1860280

including the one who is considered his "HGH" doctor.

Mark Lindsay was Donovan Bailey's chiropractor.

I had previously written about seeing Galea:

http://www.letsrun.com/2009/galea1215.php

Why would you need hgh for golf??

wejo wrote:

This was before the bio passport ban was announced.

I'm more curious how they'd know each other and be friends.

Alminova did have a 3 month ban previously but so has Maggie Vessey.

In other news, I saw both of these doctors that Tiger Woods saw that are both making news:

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/tiger-woods-spent-200k-hgh-guru-doc-new-book-article-1.1860280

including the one who is considered his "HGH" doctor.

Mark Lindsay was Donovan Bailey's chiropractor.

I had previously written about seeing Galea:

http://www.letsrun.com/2009/galea1215.php

[quote]french guy wrote:

Why would you need hgh for golf??[quote]

To recover quicker from surgery.

Actually its a spot on analogy, dinner is just a dinner and this doping violation was announced months after.

Nothing to see here, just some borsche. Move along.

Bio passport is an unscientific guessing game.

Example: last week you ate potatoes, but this week you ate rice, therefore............. you're on drugs.

Also there's the constant commercial implication that drugs improve performance more than natural means, which they don't.

I have a friend who smokes pot.

Stating the obvious wrote:

Actually its a spot on analogy, dinner is just a dinner and this doping violation was announced months after.

Nothing to see here, just some borsche. Move along.

1. I didn't know the moment I posted it that the bio passport finding was made subsequent to the photo and hangout.

2. If she didn't have the status of a doper, then there is no analogy in the first place.

3. It's not a spot-on analogy. As can be arguably gleaned from the brojos' opinions, athletes in our sport who are trying proactively to maintain a clean image are obligated to eschew association with doping athletes, doping coaches, doping professionals, doping agents, etc. The analogy to sexual orientation makes no sense, unless you are an ultra-conservative on a witch hunt against unorthodox sexuality (but mostly homosexuals). Otherwise, the presumption in society in general is to be tolerant, and people of different sexualities and diversity intermingle. Is it normal for squeaky clean athletes of high integrity to intermingle with the doping community?

J.R. wrote:

Bio passport is an unscientific guessing game.

Example: last week you ate potatoes, but this week you ate rice, therefore............. you're on drugs.

Also there's the constant commercial implication that drugs improve performance more than natural means, which they don't.

Yeah, cause that's how they choose who gets banned.

You seem to have changed your mind on the whole drugs thing though, in the past you've been hollering like a mental patient that drugs don't have any effect. Now you're happy to accept they do have an effect, but not as much as by 'natural means'.

So what if you're doing drugs and these 'natural means'? This must be better right?

No ban for Vessey. Warning only. You guys know better.

[quote]wejo wrote:

This was before the bio passport ban was announced.

I'm more curious how they'd know each other and be friends.

Alminova did have a 3 month ban previously but so has Maggie Vessey.

J.R. wrote:

Bio passport is an unscientific guessing game.

Example: last week you ate potatoes, but this week you ate rice, therefore............. you're on drugs.

Also there's the constant commercial implication that drugs improve performance more than natural means, which they don't.

You are about as wrong a 3 dollar bill, except for the OOC testing program, the BP is without doubt the most effective tool in WADA's arsenal. This not just in T&F, but the NGOs for soccer, Swimming, Skiing and Cycling, etc., all praise the BP. The true effectiveness of BP will never be published because in many cases the results for an athlete is not an absolute positive, but there are numerous confidential letters that go out to athletes alerting them to abnormalities. There are a lot of athletes who for a lack of not knowing the official terminology, have become a WADA "athlete of interest". There are entire nations that have disappeared from elite level sports competitions because of the BP program and I'm sad to say (I think) this includes at least 2 U.S. T&F athletes as well. Look at the number of athletes who were healthy, in the prime of their careers who for no apparent reason can't return to their late 2000s form and simply disappeared from the sport. No smart athlete competes with drugs in their system and when nations/teams/training groups are complicit in an athlete’s doping, it hard to catch them during OOC and that’s where analytics like the BP program come in to play. Have you ever wondered why a female athlete for example in their early 20s runs a 1:57x 800m, but over the next couple of years can’t break 2 minutes. You never heard they were injured, no doping positive or a retirement announcement is made and in what should be the prime of their career, they disappear…there is a very good possibility, they received some type of notice from WADA that BP has found some adverse analytics. With all of that said, even with BP it is still possible to dope, but you need a team of folks working with you and it ain't easy by no means. – Btw, nobody expects an LR poster to be an AD expert, but you should have a minimum amount of knowledge before you make certain statements or at least let people know that this is your naïve opinion.

3. It's not a spot-on analogy. As can be arguably gleaned from the brojos' opinions, athletes in our sport who are trying proactively to maintain a clean image are obligated to eschew association with doping athletes, doping coaches, doping professionals, doping agents, etc. The analogy to sexual orientation makes no sense, unless you are an ultra-conservative on a witch hunt against unorthodox sexuality (but mostly homosexuals). Otherwise, the presumption in society in general is to be tolerant, and people of different sexualities and diversity intermingle.

--- Is it normal for squeaky clean athletes of high integrity to intermingle with the doping community? ---

Responding to your last sentence. It is nearly impossible.

SO WHAT !!!! wrote:

If you were racing internationally wouldn't you want to meat other athletes!

Yeah, definitely, especially if she was grinding her into burger for some kind of Russian dish, how could she not meat that woman?

J.R. wrote:

Also there's the constant commercial implication that drugs improve performance more than natural means, which they don't.

Look, if you don't understand science and medicine, that's fine, but you don't need to be so flamboyant about it.

Wha?

You are so far from Stating the obvious... just sayin'

Just look at her face. She has a typical steroid/HGH user jaw. It is so clear. Use Google Images and take a look at her face's pictures.

Rowburry joins Salazaar

Salazaar introduces Rowburry to other dopers who have run well in the past

Rowburry PR's for the first time in 6 years and is killing it

Huddle still beats Rowburry on the juice.

Sucks to be Rowburry

trollism wrote:

Now you're happy to accept they do have an effect, but not as much as by 'natural means'.

I've always said the drugs have effects, not good effects, but effects. They make people sick, and thousands of people die from the drugs every day.

Your own phrase "not as much", means the effects by drug use are worse than with natural means, i.e. not using any drugs.

So what if you're doing drugs and these 'natural means'? This must be better right?

Do you feel that since water is natural to drink, and plutonium is not natural to drink, that mixing them would be better? No, of course not.

trackcoach wrote:

the BP is without doubt the most effective tool in WADA's arsenal.

It's an effective unscientific guessing game tool that's being used improperly to do the wrong things.