Athletes react to Alberto's ban: almost all negative towards him

dfsfdssfdfsd wrote:

This was a terrible article more than 1/3 of the "quotes" were from Oiselle which has a dislike of nike.

They aren't quotes if they are from someone sponsored by Oiselle? Next you'll tell me they are only quotes if they came from someone currently coached by AlSal.

just my opinion wrote:

New theory - the anti-NOP anonymous letsrun posters are pro athletes. The rest of us are fine with ethical grey area coaching.

The verdict actually makes me like Salazar better. He was trying to help his athletes in any way he could within the rules. He made mistakes, but his mistakes did not directly affect any athlete and he was only trying to protect them (like trying to make sure Galen couldn't be sabotaged). He was not the intentional, undercover rule-breaker like some letsrun posters insinuate.

My take. Posters supporting Al Salazar are Nike corporate employees and/or blood relatives of Phil Kight. My issue with Salazar are his dealings with testosterone.

washed up athlete wrote:

just my opinion wrote:

New theory - the anti-NOP anonymous letsrun posters are pro athletes. The rest of us are fine with ethical grey area coaching.

The verdict actually makes me like Salazar better. He was trying to help his athletes in any way he could within the rules. He made mistakes, but his mistakes did not directly affect any athlete and he was only trying to protect them (like trying to make sure Galen couldn't be sabotaged). He was not the intentional, undercover rule-breaker like some letsrun posters insinuate.

My take. Posters supporting Al Salazar are Nike corporate employees and/or blood relatives of Phil Kight. My issue with Salazar are his dealings with testosterone.

As an amateur athlete, I am always finding ways to improve myself as a runner. Why shouldn't our professionals try to improve themselves within the rules? That is what Salazar was doing (though he made a mistake).

Shoes, altitude training, physical therapists, some nutritional supplements, and alter-G's are all expensive but legal ways professionals use to enhance performance. Nobody has an issue with them. So why do pro athletes have issues with seeking other legal ways to enhance performance?

Our sport is broken because "performance enhancing" has become synonymous with "doping". Everything an athlete does is "performance enhancing".

And when you break anti-doping rules, that means you are doping, not performance enhancing.

I think Alberto deserves the ban he received, but the athlete reactions are self righteous.

For one, many pro runners including Ryan Hall, those running under Wetmore and presumably a whole stable of runners went to Dr. Jeffrey Brown:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323550604578412913149043072

None of the NOP athletes are accused of any wrongdoing and yet many are putting an * next to their accomplishments. Does Kara Goucher get one too? Maybe we should re-consider their performances, but there's such a comical lack of transparency in track and field relating to supplement use and gray area doping methods. I'm curious as to what is the norm at this level of sport in the U.S. What would turn up in a similar multi-year investigation took place looking at the Bowerman Track Club, for example?

The reactions are negative because many athletes are jealous of NOP success. Add to that fact many distance runners aren't the sharpest spikes in the bag, and you have an un-discerning pack mentality.

Only one 'athlete' was shown to have broken doping rules as per the USADA report. Oh wait, that athlete is the one making many of the accusations. After getting fired from NOP. Huh. No axe to grind there, I'm sure.

^another poster criticizing those condemning a cheating coach instead of the cheating coach himself^

A lot of the posts defending Salazar sound like they are written by the same person under different handles.

just my opinion wrote:

New theory - the anti-NOP anonymous letsrun posters are pro athletes. The rest of us are fine with ethical grey area coaching.

The verdict actually makes me like Salazar better. He was trying to help his athletes in any way he could within the rules. He made mistakes, but his mistakes did not directly affect any athlete and he was only trying to protect them (like trying to make sure Galen couldn't be sabotaged). He was not the intentional, undercover rule-breaker like some letsrun posters insinuate.

I'll echo the first sentence in bold, and I'm still trying to process the second one. I'm not really sure what Salazar has been banned for? He basically did experiments that adults consented to that would determine how best to stay within the rules. Unless I'm missing something?

A panel found that Salazar unintentionally broke doping rules with no evidence of bad intention.

Uh, sure. Cheated. Salazar is foolishly paranoid and obsessive. Happy? Well, thinking it through, given the massive effort to smear his reputation and accuse him of wrong-doing by this board and disgruntled former associates, I think the paranoia might be warranted. Especially since all that could be turned up in 5-ish years was some extra mL of L-Carnitine and a goofy paranoid testosterone experiment. Uh, yeah. Throw the book at him.

Y'all are funny.

You're missing a variety of vindictive ex-associates and ex-athletes who don't like Salazar.

You don't get a 4 year ban for adhering to the rules. And you are mad at the athletes criticizing his cheating. Unreal.

It's clear the nuances of intelligent appraisal are over your head.

Uh...hmmm. How to reach you...

Al Sal bad cheat! Broke rules!

That should be good. All one sentence words, definite mob mentality. Am I on the side of justice now? Do I get to be part of the unthinking mob now?

wonder how many of them actually read the report and saw that Magness was the only "athlete" doping

L-Carnitine wrote:

It's clear the nuances of intelligent appraisal are over your head.

Uh...hmmm. How to reach you...

Al Sal bad cheat! Broke rules!

That should be good. All one sentence words, definite mob mentality. Am I on the side of justice now? Do I get to be part of the unthinking mob now?

You already have the "unthinking" part down.

L-Carnitine wrote:

You're missing a variety of vindictive ex-associates and ex-athletes who don't like Salazar.

The same tired excuses from supporters of dopers.

Next up ... "everybody else is doing it"

Try and come up with something more original than the Armstrong Defense

doodo wrote:

wonder how many of them actually read the report and saw that Magness was the only "athlete" doping

That's either the most funny (or most sad) part of the whole thing.

LetsRun.com wrote:

We've got an article up on some of the athlete reaction to Alberto's ban. Nearly all the athletes expressing their sentiment are against Alberto.

Article here.

https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/10/the-running-world-reacts-to-alberto-salazars-4-year-ban-nick-willis-calls-it-justice/

Feel free to include others we may have missed here in this thread.

Lauren Fleshman has a 6 page blog mapping out and explaining Bruce's tweet .

Uhh wrote:

L-Carnitine wrote:

You're missing a variety of vindictive ex-associates and ex-athletes who don't like Salazar.

The same tired excuses from supporters of dopers.

Next up ... "everybody else is doing it"

Try and come up with something more original than the Armstrong Defense

Eh, the fact that the statement explicitly says that they found that Salazar was particularly proactive about trying to stay compliant within the rules is pretty clear. He was trying to help with athletes, without having them violate doping rules (aka without them cheating).

Salazar seems to be a first class dick, but the USADA verdict is pretty telling. They basically felt that he was trying to ensure his athletes were NOT cheating, but in his fanatical desire to do so ended up violating legal/anti-doping laws himself.

Read that statement. What in there makes you think Salazar was doping his athletes?