Breaking: Victor Conte Claims Huge Doping Cover Up At The 1988 Olympics With Flo-Jo And Others; Corruption In WADA

It's interesting that Dick Pound asked Victor Conte to name 6 athletes and his coaches, and he quickly named Mo, Galen and Alberto in his list.

It's like to say that NOPers are in the top of the doping game.

rojo wrote:

Wow. Big bombshell about Salazar/Rupp/Farah and the Jamaicans.

The guy is like a letsrun troll. He'll say anything. Very little of it is true.

No wants doping in our sport. The idea that Dick Pound is corrupt is BS.

"He is definitely a publicity hound and has a pattern of making himself sound more important and involved in things than can be proven."

Agree on this point. If you follow him on twitter you will see. He's big into boxing now with helping boxers with nutrition and stuff ....and always going after Angel Memo Heredia.

But he's been on the other side of doping and knows how it all works. I think he IS credible but I don't believe everyone is microdosing. Gotta have some faith that some athletes are clean.

With the WADA refusing to test Bolt, Rupp, Jeter etc. I think they are just scared about what they could find.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

When Conte says "everyone" he just means the people who are consistently on the podium, not truly everyone that is racing.

Does the guy like the spotlight? Yes, absolutely. But he likes it because a part of him enjoys people being shocked by what he knows to be true.

So you go after the messenger (Conti) and don't use your common sense, and knowledge of the history of T&F, to draw the conclusion that he's probably telling the truth? Does his past disqualify him from telling the truth?

Maybe he's bitter that he got caught and he's actually the most reliable source here throwing everyone under the bus, ever think of that/

Is this a stupid argument? I have two words for you:

Jose Canseco

Most are doping...sad but true.

WWRD wrote:

So you go after the messenger (Conti) and don't use your common sense, and knowledge of the history of T&F, to draw the conclusion that he's probably telling the truth? Does his past disqualify him from telling the truth?

Maybe he's bitter that he got caught and he's actually the most reliable source here throwing everyone under the bus, ever think of that/

Is this a stupid argument? I have two words for you:

Jose Canseco

Most are doping...sad but true.

Canseco established a record.

I don't know if Conte knows anything beyond his personal involvement in doping. I do believe he testified truthfully about Balco and knew stuff about there.

What is his track record beyond that? I am asking because I don't know. Does he have a record of exposing people?

CIR needs to be implemented on high profile athletes immediately instead of using the T/E ratio and only using CIR on suspected athletes.

Two things I find amazing:

(i) that you find any of this shocking. People who do rigorous research on elite sport and doping in sport wouldn't be shocked by this at all. None of it is new, out of line with the way sport has been conducted for decades, shocking, mind-blowing... choose your adjective. All it is is status quo;

(ii) that you consider yourselves to be on, or close to, the cutting edge when it comes to pushing this issue, but have yet to educate yourselves on any of what's out there research-wise. You still do little but parrot WADA's perspective on things. If you did some research you'd learn that WADA isn't much more than a marketing machine for a certain type of sport.

"Ignorance is bliss" they say.

Reaganomics wrote:

(ii) that you consider yourselves to be on, or close to, the cutting edge when it comes to pushing this issue, but have yet to educate yourselves on any of what's out there research-wise. You still do little but parrot WADA's perspective on things. If you did some research you'd learn that WADA isn't much more than a marketing machine for a certain type of sport.

"Ignorance is bliss" they say.

Not disputing your claim but more interested. Can you post some evidence.

Carl Lewis is going down, and for that I say good riddance.

Carl's Jr wrote:

Carl Lewis is going down, and for that I say good riddance.

Banned from singing The National Anthem at track meets?

thank goodness!!

But but but....the wind?That were one fast tranny in a leotard.

BigDuh wrote:

If you don't think FloJo was dirty the only Olympics you need to concern yourself is the Special Olympics 'cause you're retarded.

Not too surprising. I knew an older fellow who claimed he saw with his own eyes Flo Jo using several steroid medications for an added boost. But he said everyone did it so it wasn't a big deal to him at the time.

Consider the NOP scandal. USADA and their UK equivalent both asked WADA to ban or restrict thyroid medication like cytomel. WADA flat out refused. Most people who are legitimately hypothyroid will have a familial history, ans it is mostly genetic. For example, my wife, who was a varsity tennis athlete, has Hasimoto\'s; So does her aunt and her sister. It would be easy to clear people for a TUE for family history. But the head of WADA essentially rejected it out of hand.

Another example is the unwillingness to open the frozen samples for Farah and test them--and also Bolt, Blake, etc. as Conte said. Too many skeletons in the closet.

Another example is the deafening silence from both IAAF and WADA about the document shown on the ARD documentary, with Nike putting money into a bribe fund, and corrupt Kenyan officials taking large amounts of money out.

The real rot is at the top, with people like Diack, Coe, the people running WADA. The athletes are just trying to make a living, and enough will do whatever is necessary that you have to do it too.

What I\'m afraid of now is that Charlie\'s quote isn\'t true any more. Some athletes have things like the Nike Drug Lab or governments not willing to conduct our of competition tests. And I think athletes with Nike or Jamaica have an unfair advantage....even if you have a source for testosterone PEDs.

Pretty sickening, eh wrote:

Shockingly, johnson's test was positive for a steroid that he didn't take. He admits to roids, but denies to this day that he had never taken what he came back positive for. Flo Jo and Jackie were basically men with wigs after their drug regimens.

If you take the time to actually read the Dubin Inquiry text, what they concluded was that the main doping doctor, Jamie Astaphan, had lied to the athletes about the steroid they were receiving. He called the drug "estragol", what they actually got was vials of Winstrol-V (stanozolol that was in an injectable form that was for veterinary use only).

In the inquiry, Dr Astaphan insisted the drug was another steroid called furazabol. However, furazabol was not available as an injectable steroid while Winstrol-V was. Also, Angella Issajenko turned over the vials she had received from Dr. Astaphan. Their contents were analyzed and did not contain furazabol but instead did contain stanozolol. Meanwhile, there were sales records found that Dr. Astaphan had purchased injectable Winstrol-V as well as Winstrol-V tablets. The excuse the good doctor made about that particular purchase was pretty amusing.

If you want to check, look at the report at

from page 303 or so onwards.

So a stanozolol positive may have been surprising to Johnson, but consistent with the sordid back story anyway.

Yeah, Charlie Francis was mystified as to how Johnson tested positive as it wasn't what he'd been giving him, but they became mildly estranged in the months leading up to SeoulI'm of the view that Johnson's positive result being released was an error. Had the right person intercepted his test before it became public knowledge we'd have known no more, as it was, he got destroyed whereas many, many equally culpable and guilty athletes got off scot-free, reputations unblemished. Only now looking back at the prevailing culture do we realize that the entire decade (and likely the 70s too) are provably and extensively littered with fraudulent and highly obvious doping cases.It may not be very different now and for marketing and $$ alone, the IAAf does not care about exposing it, however hard they protest that they do.

Where is the bombshell about Bolt, Blake and Glen Mills?

The bombshell is that if certain samples are retested that they would test positive?

Now how does one defend yourself against that supposition.

In real life scenario if Conte was a witness in a trial his word wont mean shid , so why would anyone anywhere in the world believe what Conte says ???

Victor Conte cherish the attention more than a 15 yrs old female high schooler