I coach the winner of the W60-64 5,000. She has been legit for years in masters cross country and track competition. Some years not racing at all. Seriously talented runner where my role is small in relation to the talent. As a youngster DII track 10,000 champion at Cal Davis, winner CIM and Honolulu. Inducted to the Pacific Association Hall of Fame a few years back. Best of all, a really nice person, teacher, mother, all around great human being. So fresh, and non-obsessed, I had to instruct her on the advantages of super shoes a few months back. She chose to race in Hoka spikes in loyalty to Aggie club sponsor. I doubt she is much aware of this site, and certainly not one to spend a lot of time posting.
Your team is clean. I'm sorry that so many wins are being stolen by likely dopers. Maybe you can ask Hoka if they'd be willing to make a donation to the Pacific Association to sponsor drug testing at your XC meet in the Fall and test the entire field. It'd definitely be interesting to see the results.
I'm also glad that the presence of testing at this meet kept your athlete from losing to someone who is probably doping.
The bulging veins in his arms… that doesn’t happen naturally when you’re 70 years old.
Au contraire. I know plenty of 70+ PED free men with bulging veins in their arms. I'm at 71 and have bulging veins in my arms and legs. My BF hovers around 7.5% and I do several hundred arm related reps (pushups, curls, pullup, Arnold presses, etc.) per day plus run anywhere from 40 to 75 mpw - every week. Not defending this guy - just saying 'bulging veins' is not necessarily a giveaway.
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
The only way it could be more obvious was if he had a needle hanging out of his arm or was consuming a bottle of pills at the start that was labeled “PEDs”
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
The only way it could be more obvious was if he had a needle hanging out of his arm or was consuming a bottle of pills at the start that was labeled “PEDs”
After this meet, I am forever referring to SRA Elite (Masters only, their open division is clean and it's sad that those great runners are being tarnished by this BS) as "Senior Roidrunners Association."
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
I can understand the DNS, which could always be explained by a sudden illness or injury even if no one is actually buying that excuse. But why in the world would someone run 600 m in the lead and then drop out without apparent injury? It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
I can understand the DNS, which could always be explained by a sudden illness or injury even if no one is actually buying that excuse. But why in the world would someone run 600 m in the lead and then drop out without apparent injury? It just doesn't make any sense to me.
The more I think about the DNF the more it becomes blatantly obvious. I mean there were ways where our eyebrows would be raised but you could theoretically have a defense (pacing a teammate or friend for instance and dropping out after 3k or whatever). But to show up, run 600 meters in the lead and then step off the track mid stride? Can it be more obvious?
I can understand the DNS, which could always be explained by a sudden illness or injury even if no one is actually buying that excuse. But why in the world would someone run 600 m in the lead and then drop out without apparent injury? It just doesn't make any sense to me.
It makes no sense. He's entered in the 1500 too. Will be interesting to see if he shows up or DNSes that. Or maybe run 300m in the lead and drop out. USATF has the right to test any competitor even if they didn't finish. I hope they did (or will) in this case. I guess he could refuse to cooperate with the test and have a whereabouts failure.
Though I'm not really sure that 3 year competition bans are right for people in their late 60s and early 70s. As far as I'm concerned if you refuse a test or test positive as a Masters runner, the penalty should be revokation of your USATF membership. That way you can still participate at most meets and have fun but everyone knows you're a cheat and you don't get any awards. I've raced against this guy and this stunt has made my opinion of him, in the words of Phil Leotardo from the Sopranos, "just fing plummet."
Nur didn't declare. So he doesn't even show up as DNSing this morning. He apparently told people he pulled his hamstring in the 400 at the Pacific Championship meet a couple weeks back. But I went back and looked at the schedule for that meet. The 800 was after the 400. He ran the 800 and won it after the 400. So that one doesn't add up. I think out of competition testing for him and Hastings is warranted. I went and checked the USADA tests results. They tested Hastings once in 2018 and they don't appear to have tested Nur.
Hastings progression of times make no sense: 3:10 marathon at 42 in 2005, a 2:46 marathon at 48 in 2011, then slowing into the high 2:50s and low to mid 3s around 50 in 2014-2017. Then low 2:50s in late 50s around 2019. Then 2:45 at London at 59.
Likewise Nur's progression makes no sense. A 46:30 10k at 50 in 2008. A 3:53 marathon at 51 in 2009, then 40-41 minute 10ks and high 19/low 20 5ks at 51-52 in 2009-2010. Then a 1:30:11 half in 2011 at 53 (I think this was his last clean race), then suddenly a 17:43 5k, a 1:23:55 half and a 2:57 marathon at 53-54 in 2011. In 2013, his mile time (which had been 5:30 two years before) declines to 5:06, where it stays for years. Then in 2017 at 62, he runs an 80 half. At 2022 at Boston at aged 66, he runs a 2:45 marathon and a 17:00 turkey trot (certified course) 5k at 67.
Why they haven't tested him with those odd results, I don't know. If they want us to take Masters records seriously, they need to do random out of competition testing of Masters runners. The above, combined with what happened this week, is highly, highly suspicious.
Nur didn't declare. So he doesn't even show up as DNSing this morning. He apparently told people he pulled his hamstring in the 400 at the Pacific Championship meet a couple weeks back. But I went back and looked at the schedule for that meet. The 800 was after the 400. He ran the 800 and won it after the 400. So that one doesn't add up. I think out of competition testing for him and Hastings is warranted. I went and checked the USADA tests results. They tested Hastings once in 2018 and they don't appear to have tested Nur.
Hastings progression of times make no sense: 3:10 marathon at 42 in 2005, a 2:46 marathon at 48 in 2011, then slowing into the high 2:50s and low to mid 3s around 50 in 2014-2017. Then low 2:50s in late 50s around 2019. Then 2:45 at London at 59.
Likewise Nur's progression makes no sense. A 46:30 10k at 50 in 2008. A 3:53 marathon at 51 in 2009, then 40-41 minute 10ks and high 19/low 20 5ks at 51-52 in 2009-2010. Then a 1:30:11 half in 2011 at 53 (I think this was his last clean race), then suddenly a 17:43 5k, a 1:23:55 half and a 2:57 marathon at 53-54 in 2011. In 2013, his mile time (which had been 5:30 two years before) declines to 5:06, where it stays for years. Then in 2017 at 62, he runs an 80 half. At 2022 at Boston at aged 66, he runs a 2:45 marathon and a 17:00 turkey trot (certified course) 5k at 67.
Why they haven't tested him with those odd results, I don't know. If they want us to take Masters records seriously, they need to do random out of competition testing of Masters runners. The above, combined with what happened this week, is highly, highly suspicious.
Other than getting her last name wrong you are spot on with everything.
I don't this he's suspicious anymore, it's basically confirmed. Prior to this meet he was highly suspicious.
they should test everyone who pulled out races because that alone is a sign of something. The masters who think not showing up race day after entering or dropping out of a race means they can't be tested are 100% wrong.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.