Of course they aren't more interesting than you malmo, but you already knew that?
I agree with your comment about drugs being a psychological prop.
Of course they aren't more interesting than you malmo, but you already knew that?
I agree with your comment about drugs being a psychological prop.
You don't care who he is but have 'your best men on it'? Not buying that. A Duck's clearly a nutjob, but you're not coming out of this smelling like roses either, grumps
malmo wrote:
I don't write crap or misinformation. So why are you asking?
Malmo:
I have no desire to get into a pissing match with you. You take as much or more abuse on this board as just about anyone.
By the way, I did not accuse you have posting crap or misinformation (I believe you have me confused with A Duck).
If you read my comment, it was about the board. As a moderator, I would think you would welcome those who advocate a cleaner, more gentile forum.
It just appears that in situations such as this, when a simple "this was the conversation" acknowledgement would take care of an issue, you cloud the picture with "plausible."
I have no doubt that you are an intelligent man. I assume you have a reason for the way you respond.
I would appreciate it greatly if you would stop playing this "why are you asking" game.
Why? Because it is crap and you, sir, know it.
Bluto wrote:
You don't care who he is but have 'your best men on it'? Not buying that. A Duck's clearly a nutjob, but you're not coming out of this smelling like roses either, grumps
Ummm...you might want to get your sarcasm detector checked.
Bluto wrote:
You don't care who he is but have 'your best men on it'? Not buying that. A Duck's clearly a nutjob, but you're not coming out of this smelling like roses either, grumps
Bluto, chill out. "I've got my best men on it" is a quip I've been using for over 10 years.
the clarifier wrote: I would think you would welcome those who advocate a cleaner, more gentile forum.
Believe me, I but heads with the brojos often about cleaning up the forum. I'm a strong advocate for a registered forum.
So, no Alphonse Duck, Armando Duck, and/or Ashley Ducks that know Salazar or work at NIKE......and now one that might refer to themselves in the 3rd person as "A Duck" around Salazar or through the halls at NIKE...
malmo wrote:
Alberto told me that he doesn't know "A Duck" and that "A Duck" is not a Nike employee,and also he doesn't want A Duck to attempt to speak for him.
At the risk of being labeled an apologist for dopers, I just want to point out one thing that Malmo's admission highlights about our sport.
The super top-heavy nature of prize money in the sport is, in my opinion, the biggest motivating factor amongst the dopers.
Let's contrast Track & Field with MLB. The league minimum in baseball was $480,000 last year. With 40 active players on each of the 32 teams, simple math tells us that the 1280th best baseball player makes damn near half a million dollars.
Now, even if we divide that amongst all the recognized individual events in outdoor track, that's about 55 athletes per event. Well, in 2012 we had less than 50 athletes go sub-29 in the 10k. How much do you think a 29:00 guy makes? If we're talking strictly from running, I'd guess less than 5% of the MLB minimum.
Granted it's still a pipe dream for national elites to get to the level that'll pay the big bucks, but I don't think it takes a terribly miscalibrated moral compass to at least consider doping. Then factor in the justification of "leveling the playing field" since many ARE getting away with it, I have a hard time judging these athletes for such transgressions.
Instead of trying to slam Malmo for what you view as a hypocrisy, try looking at it from this standpoint. I don't expect everyone to agree, but taking such a black and white stance that "cheaters = bad people" is ignorant.
this made me laugh - two unconnected tweets:
Lauren Fleshman @laurenfleshman 27m
My advice: be transparent. Unless someone is willing to publish their declared substances list and TUE's...it's all talk.
Expand
Nike @Nike 1h
#justdoit
Retweeted by Nike NYC
Expand
KingAdRock wrote:
Let's contrast Track & Field with MLB. The league minimum in baseball was $480,000 last year. With 40 active players on each of the 32 teams, simple math tells us that the 1280th best baseball player makes damn near half a million dollars.
Now, even if we divide that amongst all the recognized individual events in outdoor track, that's about 55 athletes per event. Well, in 2012 we had less than 50 athletes go sub-29 in the 10k. How much do you think a 29:00 guy makes? If we're talking strictly from running, I'd guess less than 5% of the MLB minimum.
The prize money in track and field is NOT top-heavy - it is the same as any other talent market.
So a 29:00 runner makes 5% as much as a backup catcher? (VERY generous btw... I don't see how a 29:00 guy makes $20k)
What does the top in each sport make? $30 million a year for the baseball player.... less than 1% of that for the runner!
Hardloper wrote:
The prize money in track and field is NOT top-heavy - it is the same as any other talent market.
So a 29:00 runner makes 5% as much as a backup catcher? (VERY generous btw... I don't see how a 29:00 guy makes $20k)
What does the top in each sport make? $30 million a year for the baseball player.... less than 1% of that for the runner!
When fat people start going to the mall to buy their Nike CentroJr running shoes and going to track meets, the money for track runners will improve.
the clarifier wrote: I would think you would welcome those who advocate a cleaner, more gentile forum.
malmo wrote: Believe me, I but heads with the brojos often about cleaning up the forum. I'm a strong advocate for a registered forum.
Cleaning up the forum will result in fewer visitors. Fewer visitors means less money made.
Registration would also kill the anonymity the brojos have to create threads that create anonymous discussion threads, and hit$, on LRC.
I am not an advocate of forced registration. It doesn't bother me one bit that the brojos may start some of the anonymous threads. The anonymous threads are the most interesting features of LRC. Wejo and Rojo both realize this.
1.)I did say "less than 5%".
2.)Perhaps "top heavy" didn't illustrate my point clear enough. The bottom line is that the highest paid guys in the sport can make a very comfortable living, but after that it's such a drastic dropoff that most can't afford to live on athletic income alone.
And to the comment about fat people buying Centro t-shirts at the mall, that is my point exactly. The marketing and positioning of our sport needs to improve drastically. I know the sport will never be as sexy of a sell as the major sports, but it could be a hell of a lot better...at least get better enough to where we don't have top college runners abandoning the sport 2-3 years after graduation b/c they simply can't afford to do it.
jono wrote:
Of course they aren't more interesting than you malmo, but you already knew that?
I agree with your comment about drugs being a psychological prop.
\
Right-o. Alllll psychological:
http://www.bodybuildingrd.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/JayCutler-MD_01-2012-PerBernal-983.jpgmalmo wrote:
the clarifier wrote: I would think you would welcome those who advocate a cleaner, more gentile forum.Believe me, I but heads with the brojos often about cleaning up the forum. I'm a strong advocate for a registered forum.
malmo, since you have the ear of the brojos, have you ever considered pushing for a registered *sub-forum*? A place for people to go if they're not in the mood to sift through BS. (And all registered threads could appear on the main board, mixed with the unregistered threads, for those who enjoy BS)
malmo wrote:
Alberto told me that he doesn't know "A Duck" and that "A Duck" is not a Nike employee,and also he doesn't want A Duck to attempt to speak for him.
e.g. esquire wrote:
So, no Alphonse Duck, Armando Duck, and/or Ashley Ducks that know Salazar or work at NIKE...
...and no one that might refer to themselves in the 3rd person as "A Duck" around Salazar or through the halls at NIKE...
+1
Alberto saying he doesn't know A Duck means nothing. Do you really think that if they're acquainted A Duck would tell Salazar the trolling he does and the name he uses?
And how would Salazar know if A Duck is a Nike employee? Impossible that he could.
Al doth protest too much, methinks. Of course he might know A Duck. Of course A Duck might work for Nike.
Hardloper wrote:
So a 29:00 runner makes 5% as much as a backup catcher? (VERY generous btw... I don't see how a 29:00 guy makes $20k)
Show me a 29 minute guy who makes 20k.
Link wrote:
Right-o. Alllll psychological:
http://www.bodybuildingrd.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/JayCutler-MD_01-2012-PerBernal-983.jpg
And Malmo has also rationalized that his dark side dalliance also cured his anemia.
the clarifier wrote:
I am asking because there has been so much crap written on this topic, so much misinformation, so many people being drug into this, so much weird editing on these threads.
malmo wrote:
I don't write crap or misinformation. So why are you asking?
He asked why you keep deleting his posts, though. Seems like a fair question.
Glad to see you fighting the good fight on doping, malmo. A Duck is out of his depth here.
I haven't read past page 1 yet and given how quickly the thread exploded I suppose I'll be compelled to wade through everything, but out of the gate I just don't understand why "A Duck" is hammering away at something that 1) malmo has never denied and in fact has freely expanded on himself, and 2) everyone here who would possibly care about, already knows about.
Seriously, what next? A histrionic post by someone claiming he knows for SURE that Bill Clinton WAS NOT 100 percent faithful to Hillary during his second term, and that you could be DAMN WELL ASSURED he fooled around with at least one chubby intern? Damn! You don't say?! Oh, and a link to the evidence too! Bad Slick Willie, bad!
