I don't know why you guys and gals even pay attention to the sport.
You are so cynical. You have your idea of greatness and as soon as someone exceeds it you start whining. Instead of ignoring your lack of progress, start to pay attention to those who are making progress.
Does anyone know how many coaches this kids family have gone through over the last few years? Didnt his brother run for Andy Powell? Then transferred away from Oregon to turn pro ?
At least as far as coming up, they went to three different high schools: Malvern Prep, Downingtown West, and Bishop Shanahan. Mom worked her way into coaching positions at at least two of them, and stayed at Shanahan for a few years after the youngest graduated, I think.
Jaxson, his older brother, ran at Penn State for a year. Then he transferred to Oregon and ran indoor, but left when Josh graduated HS/went pro and they were down in San Diego. Not sure how many coaches they've gone through since, but I'd be curious as well.
Pretty sure it has been at least 5. Though it sure seems like he's got the right one for him now.
Failing tests means nothing - as you show in your countless posts on Houlihan's conviction. Despite her confirmed testing positive and CAS deciding she committed an ADRV you are still unable to draw any "conclusions" from it.
to me it doesn't make any sense to implicate one athlete based on the facts of another.
Here it was the UCI itself who determined that they should have investigated further at the time, to determine if this failed test constituted an ADRV, rather than accepting an obviously fake and backdated prescription of something not declared on the doping control form.
Then you can't link someone's innocence on the facts of another. And you shouldn't accept an obviously fake and fabricated excuse for a positive test, right?? ( do i need to give you a real life example?)
to me it doesn't make any sense to implicate one athlete based on the facts of another.
Here it was the UCI itself who determined that they should have investigated further at the time, to determine if this failed test constituted an ADRV, rather than accepting an obviously fake and backdated prescription of something not declared on the doping control form.
Then you can't link someone's innocence on the facts of another. And you shouldn't accept an obviously fake and fabricated excuse for a positive test, right?? ( do i need to give you a real life example?)
I always presume innocence until proven guilty. And I do not accept obviously fake and fabricated excuses for a positive test.
In the case of Lance Armstrong, the CIRC determined that just asking Lance for a medical certificate already breached the UCI's ADR, and the right course of action was to launch a disciplinary proceeding.
Then you can't link someone's innocence on the facts of another. And you shouldn't accept an obviously fake and fabricated excuse for a positive test, right?? ( do i need to give you a real life example?)
I always presume innocence until proven guilty. And I do not accept obviously fake and fabricated excuses for a positive test.
In the case of Lance Armstrong, the CIRC determined that just asking Lance for a medical certificate already breached the UCI's ADR, and the right course of action was to launch a disciplinary proceeding.
Claiming cortisone cream for their saddle sores was the " unintentional doping" excuse all the cyclists used back then. Very popular and effective. Just like today's dopers using the Tainted Food excuse.
I always presume innocence until proven guilty. And I do not accept obviously fake and fabricated excuses for a positive test.
In the case of Lance Armstrong, the CIRC determined that just asking Lance for a medical certificate already breached the UCI's ADR, and the right course of action was to launch a disciplinary proceeding.
Claiming cortisone cream for their saddle sores was the " unintentional doping" excuse all the cyclists used back then. Very popular and effective. Just like today's dopers using the Tainted Food excuse.
In 1999, intent was not a factor to be considered under the UCI's ADR rules. The athletes were permitted to use creams for saddlesores but the rules required declaring it on the Doping Control Form. Furthermore, the rules did not permit the UCI to request an explanation. So both the athletes violated the rules, and the UCI violated the UCI's anti-doping rules. Submitting false evidence is currently considered tampering and athletes have had 2-year bans extended to 4-years, and 4-year bans extended to 8-years for submitting falsified evidence.
This is not comparable to the cases of otherwise clean athletes eating meat from animals who are routinely given steroids to promote muscle growth (e.g. cattle), or naturally possess steroids (e.g. intact boars). Eating meat is always WADA legal. WADA has known about this issue since at least 2011, and conducted studies worldwide on the presence of many banned substances found in meat worldwide.
In a statement from June 2024, WADA confirmed: "WADA Director General Olivier Niggli said: "The issue of contamination is real and well-known by the anti-doping community. Over the years, there have been thousands of confirmed cases of contamination in its various forms, including more than 1,000 for meat contamination in Mexico, China, Guatemala, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and other countries.""
Claiming cortisone cream for their saddle sores was the " unintentional doping" excuse all the cyclists used back then. Very popular and effective. Just like today's dopers using the Tainted Food excuse.
In 1999, intent was not a factor to be considered under the UCI's ADR rules. The athletes were permitted to use creams for saddlesores but the rules required declaring it on the Doping Control Form. Furthermore, the rules did not permit the UCI to request an explanation. So both the athletes violated the rules, and the UCI violated the UCI's anti-doping rules. Submitting false evidence is currently considered tampering and athletes have had 2-year bans extended to 4-years, and 4-year bans extended to 8-years for submitting falsified evidence.
This is not comparable to the cases of otherwise clean athletes eating meat from animals who are routinely given steroids to promote muscle growth (e.g. cattle), or naturally possess steroids (e.g. intact boars). Eating meat is always WADA legal. WADA has known about this issue since at least 2011, and conducted studies worldwide on the presence of many banned substances found in meat worldwide.
In a statement from June 2024, WADA confirmed: "WADA Director General Olivier Niggli said: "The issue of contamination is real and well-known by the anti-doping community. Over the years, there have been thousands of confirmed cases of contamination in its various forms, including more than 1,000 for meat contamination in Mexico, China, Guatemala, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and other countries.""
But not the USA! Any reported cases of beef turning into wild boar?
Don't feel good about this one. Yes, he ran very fast in HS. But he trained hard for years & wasn't able to make big improvements. Now he's doing that, which doesn't happen if you were tapped out at/near your potential. Don't understand how you wouldn't hit some modest PBs on your way to these new times. Also, for those downplaying 3:33, it's 3:33 indoors plus the caliber of field he took down of guys who have run faster than that outdoors. Something feels off.
3:33 indoors is about 3:30 outdoors or just under.
Are you saying Hoey could’ve run 3:30 on an outdoor track the day he ran 3:33 indoors?
In a statement from June 2024, WADA confirmed: "WADA Director General Olivier Niggli said: "The issue of contamination is real and well-known by the anti-doping community. Over the years, there have been thousands of confirmed cases of contamination in its various forms, including more than 1,000 for meat contamination in Mexico, China, Guatemala, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and other countries.""
But not the USA! Any reported cases of beef turning into wild boar?
He did say "other countries", and there are many examples of meat contamination cases also in the USA.
But, I have to concede, I have never heard of beef turning into wild boar. Good point.
You nailed it. The kids jumped around from school to school and then mom getting the coaching job is par for the course with this family. Franny and Leslee just wanna be the "American Ingebrigtsens." Despicable people.