Wow: IAAF bans Ekaterina Kostetskaya - Steve Hooker's wife and 1:56 Russian who went to HS in Arkansas - for doping

JR - in your opinion, what is the likelihood that Paula doped?

In "Albuquerque" wrote:

JR - in your opinion, what is the likelihood that Paula doped?

100%

J.R. wrote:

rojo wrote:

In 2012 before the Olympics, I asked about her on this thread -

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4723880

- and when it came out that her mom had run 3:54, I though to myself, "I hate to say it but doesn't that mean 100% her mom was a doper and she most likely is as well?"

Paula Radcliffe, 2:15 and 2:17 marathons.

Besides that, no woman has bettered 2:18 for a marathon.

Why not, "I hate to say it but doesn't that mean 100% that Paula Radliffe IS a doper", and that since you keep supporting her you're most likely dopers too, and that you sidestepping this issue keeps blowing any credibility that you have.

I'm just saying.... how about a few headlines with your suspicions of Radcliffe being doped.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I see your point and that's why I don't just go off of times.

There are a few key differences which were implied and I thought everyone would pick up on.

1) Her mother ran for the Soviety Union. It's a well known fact that many communist countries had state supported doping. Even if not state supported, look at all of the doping positives that have come from Soviet Unions/Russians distance women.

So because of that, I was thinking, "doesn't this mean it's almost 100%?" I should have said 'almost.'

SOCAL-RUNNER wrote:

Also something i was surprised you never posted was Mary Akor.

http://www.runnersworld.com/elite-runners/prolific-marathoner-mary-akor-gets-2-year-doping-ban?page=single

I'Im not sure something wasn't posted about Akor but how is that relevant?

Akor is a 2:33 minor leaguer. Minor leaguing doping barely interests me. Plus it was last December.

J.R. wrote:

100%

Thanks, I thought I remember reading your opinion on the subject but just wanted to confirm.

J.R. wrote:

In "Albuquerque" wrote:

JR - in your opinion, what is the likelihood that Paula doped?

100%

J.R.: you're the anti-science guy, right? am I confusing you with someone else? are you the guy who thinks the pharma business is virtually fraudulent?

If that is you, how do you reconcile your distrust of medical science with your apparent belief that doping works so well in running?

feel free to challenge my assumptions.

Geelong Runner wrote:

Hooker is commentating on Australia's coverage of the Comm Games. Nothing has been mentioned. The article link was also posted on a track facebook forum with very little comment. I find this a bit disturbing. Why are my fellow Australians not asking questions about this?

Recent article stating that Steve has quit his duties at the CG to go home to be with his wife.

agip wrote:

J.R.: you're the anti-science guy, right? am I confusing you with someone else? are you the guy who thinks the pharma business is virtually fraudulent?

If that is you, how do you reconcile your distrust of medical science with your apparent belief that doping works so well in running?

feel free to challenge my assumptions.

I had the same thought. Isn't JR contradicting himself? He thinks drugs don't work, yet he thinks Paula doped AND it improved her performance?

Please clarify your opinion JR. Otherwise you're just old and senile.

agip wrote:

J.R. wrote:

100%

J.R.: you're the anti-science guy, right? am I confusing you with someone else? are you the guy who thinks the pharma business is virtually fraudulent?

If that is you, how do you reconcile your distrust of medical science with your apparent belief that doping works so well in running?

feel free to challenge my assumptions.

Agip, I am not anti science, but anti pseudo science.

Sure, of course big pharma is fraudulent, which anyone should be able to see. Everything they do is a fraud.

I didn't say that doping works well, believe it does not, and that better results are better without it.

However, I still believe that (1) Radcliffe used some nefarious means (besides doping, also likely done) to achieve her marathon times, and (2) that the doping witchhunts are a sham which have nothing to do with athletics, but simply are designed to sell more of the drugs.

JR is losing his mind wrote:

agip wrote:

J.R.: you're the anti-science guy, right? am I confusing you with someone else? are you the guy who thinks the pharma business is virtually fraudulent?

If that is you, how do you reconcile your distrust of medical science with your apparent belief that doping works so well in running?

feel free to challenge my assumptions.

I had the same thought. Isn't JR contradicting himself? He thinks drugs don't work, yet he thinks Paula doped AND it improved her performance?

Please clarify your opinion JR. Otherwise you're just old and senile.

hahahaha.... see above

rojo wrote:

I see your point and that's why I don't just go off of times.

There are a few key differences which were implied and I thought everyone would pick up on.

1) Her mother ran for the Soviety Union. It's a well known fact that many communist countries had state supported doping. Even if not state supported, look at all of the doping positives that have come from Soviet Unions/Russians distance women.

So because of that, I was thinking, "doesn't this mean it's almost 100%?" I should have said 'almost.'

Let's say Russia, and China, have effective doping programs, which I don't believe. Already we have the given that women from these countries, brought up with physically labor intensive backgrounds, are naturally stronger than women in the states. Add to this their so called effective drug programs, that take normal human beings and turn them into super heroines.

Add these together and you have women that no clean athletes can touch!

Now you have a woman who was getting thrashed all the time, who has run the two fastest marathon times in the world, far ahead of competition that is faster, stronger, and on well established drug programs???????

Something doesn't add up.

Also if some country has the most effective drug program for athletics, then that would not be China or the Soviet Union, but the country with the most of medical facilities, and where almost every citizen has a doctor and takes drugs.

That his wife was doping (being injected by his own trainer) without his knowing it was Roger Clemens's defense.

Not an Aussie, but I know posting a link to the Courier Mail can never strengthen your post.

yes JR is right

the Russians and Chinese were busting their asses 12 hours a day and never doped

also epo and testosterone and steroid and growth hormone are no better than placebo

thankyou JR for shedding light on this whole phoney drug debate

TrackCoach wrote:Sometimes WADA will alert athletes of chemical abnormalities year-over-year and in so many words suggest they disappear. Sometimes the athlete will continue to compete and when the actual bust comes down, it will be backdated to when they were originally suspected of doping

bullsh!!t

it is bust or nothing

if haematocrit creeps to 50, there is no wada contact

if ever a

50.0 or +

it is a bust

TrackCoach wrote:

Btw, there was trend in the mid-2000s where Russia would have over a half dozen female sub-2 half milers in May, but they could never hold their form for the season.

Ah, and who can forget the Soviet women's 4x800 squad that went sub-8:00...and finished *third* in the USSR relay championships?

Dear, dead days.

The fact about russians Is that they don't sell tickets, they aren't marketable for the big brands, ergo, they're an easy target for WADA. Except Isimbayeva, who has never failed a test. Like Paula.

ventolin^3 wrote:

TrackCoach wrote:Sometimes WADA will alert athletes of chemical abnormalities year-over-year and in so many words suggest they disappear. Sometimes the athlete will continue to compete and when the actual bust comes down, it will be backdated to when they were originally suspected of doping

bullsh!!t

it is bust or nothing

if haematocrit creeps to 50, there is no wada contact

if ever a

50.0 or +

it is a bust

You are wrong, I know of 2 athletes where this happened and heard from a very-very reliable source that USADA and WADA has been doing this for years. One of those 2 athletes is an American female sprinter whose name we all know.