It's hard to really came to a conclusion until:
"Cas is expected to release its full reasoning in the coming days, but Houlihan’s lawyer Paul Greene said an appeal to the Swiss federal tribunal was being considered."
However, why wouldn't one automatically appeal the decision unless the basis for the decision is air-tight?
Genny Cream Ale wrote:
It's hard to really came to a conclusion until:
why wouldn't one automatically appeal the decision unless the basis for the decision is air-tight?
The jurisdiction of the Swiss court in these cases is generally limited to broad human rights issues, and the court has discretion to refuse review of cases that don't seem an appropriate exercise of that jurisdiction. Some lawyers will, in fact, appeal all the way to the top. Others (including me) believe we have an obligation not to pursue such avenues where the standards of review, jurisdictional requirements, and extremely low probability of even getting a hearing do not warrant the further expenditure of resources. (And personally, I want to preserve my reputation as someone who takes cases to the next appellate level only when I believe that I have a substantial argument.)
I mean I’m just not buy her whole story. Guilty in my mind and apparently I’m front of the court of arbitration.
BTC athletes are rarely in public. They compete maybe 3-4 times a year. They hardly ever talk to the press. Details of their training are mostly dark secrets. Their coach almost never speaks in public. Athletes (like Quigley) come and go without explanation. Shelby has a sudden ability to go below 4 minutes finally shaving a couple seconds from an American record that hadn't moved that much in decades. Then she moves to a longer distance with a teammate and obliterates the American record there also. This all happens for reasons unknown to the public.
Now we are told by international doping authorities that she is guilty. There is actual. presumably incontrovertible, physical evidence. This has been going on in secret for four months. The only explanation is lame:"I ate at a taco truck."
In the absence of any real knowledge about Shelby, her training or her personality, we have to follow the science. That's really all we have. Guilty.
You may note, by the way, that Dr. Ayotte in that discussion sought to distinguish a couple of articles that, thirty to forty years ago, described "findings due to ingestion of meat contaminated with steroids."
alanson wrote:
There is actual. presumably incontrovertible, physical evidence. This has been going on in secret for four months.
In the absence of any real knowledge about Shelby, her training or her personality, we have to follow the science. That's really all we have. Guilty.
I don't recall the applicable burden of proof or standard in these cases, but I don't recall any court or tribunal that requires "incontrovertible evidence," so I don't see a basis for your conclusion that the evidence in this case was incontrovertible.
As for the secrecy, even USADA's Travis Tygart, who is not shy about publicizing doping cases, has repeatedly repeated his belief that initial doping findings should not be made public until after they are reviewed.
And I don't think that anyone here is quarreling with the idea of "following the science." The current state of the science here, however, recognizes a range of possibilities with various probabilities, and a proper analysis does seem to require a consideration of something more than a single number, unless you simply believe that the number itself is all that's needed to institute a four-year ban. But that, as I understand it, would be contrary to the current state of the science..
Avocado's Number wrote:
I don't recall the applicable burden of proof or standard standard of review in these cases.
Comfortable satisfaction
Avocado's Number wrote:
Harambe wrote:
Can you name any previous cases? Interested in reading up on this.
I haven't kept up much with recent cases, and I'm not sure where to find a comprehensive list of nandrolone doping cases, but I did see that, within the last day, someone "bumped" a thread that I started under a different name ("oldguy" -- think how I feel about that name now) sixteen years ago on the subject. I was very surprised when I saw that the first response to my comment was Christiane Ayotte, the director of Canada's WADA-accredited lab and a prolific author and speaker on the subject. It led to a spirited discussion among posters who seemed quite familiar with questions about how to interpret nandrolone levels.
Thank you. Very interesting -- the same lady whom Lawson was able to escape his ban by (partially) attacking her credibility.
Has this been discussed? Shelby wrote the food log not in real time but weeks later when she found out about the positive test. How many of you remember what you ate three weeks ago? Maybe pro athletes should be keeping food logs all the time.
Guilty!!
And the next person better come up with a better excuse than pork. It’s run it’s course
Who's not guilty?
Not Guilty
Guilty
Guilty! Houlihan never passed the smell test! Not even close!
While I allow for possibility Houlihan is innocent, and might prevail on appeal, there seems to me high probability of guilt .
The clown show BTC press conference seems to reinforce that view, if anything.
The next question... If she was willfully taking nandrolone, who knew or helped her?
Genny Cream Ale wrote:
It's hard to really came to a conclusion until:
"Cas is expected to release its full reasoning in the coming days, but Houlihan’s lawyer Paul Greene said an appeal to the Swiss federal tribunal was being considered."
However, why wouldn't one automatically appeal the decision unless the basis for the decision is air-tight?
Money. You have to retain a Swiss attorney and the fees will probably be at least $100k. Ruling won't come in time to get her a spot in the Olympics. She may just consider retiring and moving on.
I am afraid that Houlihan may have given in to the pressures to dope. Athletes are always hearing from people who are on the inside in the sport that this athlete and that athlete are using a microdosing strategy that evades testing and that if they want to even be competitive, they need to do the same.
I have been to my fair share of taco stands. They mostly have very similar menus. I have never seen pork heart, kidney or liver on a taco stand menu. Also, carne asada and pig offal could not be any more different, especially when you are talking about liver.
Explosive final kick, boosted chemically. Most likely, guilty.
Guilty.
Having competed in track and field and talked to actual athletes who used steroids or PEDs, I believe Houlihan is guilty. I laughed when I heard the excuse was a burrito. Come on. Plus I don't know why any collegiate/professional coaches would not know what Nandrolone is. I had an old coach, who has since passed away, who would tell me he knew of very few athletes competing in college/open and professionally who were clean. Some were dosed unknowingly when they were kids by a since-banned coach, but a lot willingly took them to compete. Using steroids and other PEDs hurts athletes health and encourages even children in middle school to use them. I don't believe WADA is a bad organization and getting a four-year ban probably means she did something else to get the four-year ban. There are athletes who work years with consistent training to improve a lot and when someone makes huge improvements all of a sudden, it raises red flags in my mind. I believe there are clean athletes but from my experience and knowledge of the sport, there are a lot of cheaters. Marion Jones never tested positive, despite being tested numerous times, so the argument Houlihan has tested clean before does not fly. Before this announcement about Houlihan's ban, I was telling people I thought track and field athletes, especially runners, were going to get busted for using PEDs because the performances have been very dramatic this year. It does not mean all athletes are cheating and it is not just American athletes as it is a world-wide problem. The BALCO scandal revealed a lot of athletes were cheating and it was just the tip of the iceberg. It is my sincere hope WADA will catch some more cheaters because I believe in a clean sport. I competed clean and although I did not accomplish my goals, I do not regret not taking steroids. It saddens me to read about really talented athletes using PEDs. I was in the stands at the US Championships when Regina Jacobs won the 1,500 meters with an incredible last 200 meters. After she tested positive for steroids, my old coach said it was a shame such a talented runner would ever need steroids.