NY Times Article on Nike Oregon Project implicates Ritz and Farah

I'm surprised that no one seems to be disgusted that Ritz and Welling were willing to have something injected into their bodies to improve athletic performance. Does that not bother anyone else?

For all of the talking that Magness and Goucher have done it's ridiculous that they have zero evidence to back up their claims.

All Kara had was an EMPTY pill bottle with a hand written label. Why was it empty if she didn't take what was in it? It would have added a lot of legitimacy to her claim if she has said. "Here's what Alberto tried to get me to take. Send it to the lab and have it tested." She couldn't though, because she'd already taken it.

Thrump wrote:

And yet several US postal riders, not just Lance, suddenly became top ten grand tour contenders. Sounds eerily familiar to the US winning medals in the 800, 1500(2) Steeple(2), 5000, marathon in 2016? You guys are fools if you think that the only American athletes breaking the rules and taking advantage of stealth technology are cyclists and NOP members.

EXACTLY! Thanks, gracias, merci!!!!

P.S. Lance was sponsored by Nike, Nike even had a building named after him, go figure.

How do you know she didn't? She went to Usada 2 years before she went public. Sounds like you are jealous of her career, life, whatever, and refuse to believe that some people actually do the right thing. But keep bashing her here to make yourself feel better about your life.

Leave it to Beaverton wrote:

For all of the talking that Magness and Goucher have done it's ridiculous that they have zero evidence to back up their claims.

All Kara had was an EMPTY pill bottle with a hand written label. Why was it empty if she didn't take what was in it? It would have added a lot of legitimacy to her claim if she has said. "Here's what Alberto tried to get me to take. Send it to the lab and have it tested." She couldn't though, because she'd already taken it.

Montesquieu wrote:

But what strikes me most is that L-c does not appear to be a PDF no matter how much of it or how it is consumed.

]

I know right. And Renato has proven time and time again that EPO is completely useless on the top Kenyans.

This sounds like a witch hunt and a complete waste of time and money. When will the haters just accept that Kenyan and American distance runners simply work harder than everybody else.

Guess they have never been to a hospital even with a gravity infusion that wouldn't be difficult at all

"Antidoping officials suggest that administering an infusion of less than 50 milliliters “continuously and uniformly over a one hour period is a practical impossibility"

Montesquieu wrote:

Please read my comments more carefully. I wasn't saying Contador's excuse had any evidentiary basis to it. I was showing as an example that if you could show that one ingest a banned substance innocently, depending how, one could get a ruling overturned, which the quoted portion from The Telegraph that I presented clearly showed, as athletes had positive tests overturned.

More bullshit. wrote:

Contador's excuse was bullshit, the restaurant where he supposedly ate the contaminated beef was hours away over the border and was just ridiculous that he would have gone there and back in the time required just for a steak, and wasn't it during a race?, can't be bothered researching for the exact details.

Please read my comments more carefully, I didn't say you did, I was showing as an example that Contador's excuse was bullshit and wasn't ingested innocently, which is why he couldn't get the ruling overturned.

Finally wrote:

Annoying how she is continually bashed here. People saying Dathan told Usada everything- from what they read in a NYT piece? After Usada had to go to him first? She left the group and went to Usada after she saw shady behavior. I'm so sick of people reading that Dathan had an illegal infusion and sticking up for him but bashing her for turning in a group she witnessed breaking the rules.

Good on Dathan for finally telling the truth but I'm sick of the crap she takes on here. If NOP goes down, it will be all because of her.

agoivnfm wrote:

maybe (gasp) Kara didn't actually do anything?

What Kara did was wait until she was pissed off at Nikes "late in her career offer," decline the offer, go to Oiselle, and then evidently Kara, Adam and Magbess had a pity party on the phone or at so e race and jerked themselves a "woe is us" soda, and cobbled together a bunch of things that fell way short of the obvious big doping violations the LRC underground would like to see. Then they contributed to a laughably amateurish and laughable, cringe worthy low rent and poor quality

documentary.

Some good came out of it. For the last 2+ years NOP has probably been the cleanest club (and most tested) on the planet.

Let me add this. There have been enough athletes in and out of NOP over the years, that if micro dosing of actual peds had been going on, some one of those athletes would have gotten it out.

So now we're talking about about a protein building block drip that was later found to not work and dropped.

And this what you wrote:

So, you meant to say: "after all of the investigations into Ritz, there is not a lot about EPO testosterone, etc."? Ok then, that would have been correct.

And this what you wrote:

And I was subsequently pointing put that he is a doper based on the NY Times report. As simple as that. Why he hasn't been banned yet, I don't know, but possible reasons were discussed here earlier. None of them included that Ritz was clean.

After the Fancy Bears leak of a one year old "draft" report, in February, USADA told us the current status as of Feb. 2017:

"... we continue to investigate whether anti-doping rules were broken ..."

Does anything in the NY Times article change the current status from USADA? Note: this presumably includes Ritz, and Tara Welling and Kara.

USADA's statement was issued nearly two years after the BBC Panorama and ProPublic pieces first featured public whistleblowers Steve Magness and Kara Goucher. Since the documentaries in June 2015, at least 17 former Nike athletes and employees have stepped forward to express their concerns, and share their personal knowledge of NOP's practices with USADA. USADA, the same USADA that aggressively pursued Lance to a lifetime ban, has been investigating NOP, long before the documentaries, at least since 2012.

This status is not surprising, and completely predictable from the facts and allegations in the documentaries. Unlike letsrun forum, USADA can only act on facts and evidence, and within the WADA code. They cannot act on what they believe "likely" happened.

USADA's remaining strategies to get any NOP-related conviction appear to be:

- Getting Salazar to confirm he has a medical need for testosterone

- Finding evidence that infusions were more than 50ml, a method not allowed for blood thinning reasons that would reduce hematocrit

These look like desperate measures, indicating the strength of the collective testimony of 19 cooperating witnesses, while USADA continues "... to investigate whether anti-doping rules were broken ..."

I see Ritz as a hero in all of this. I don't see intent based on what we know.

1. He was told by his coach that everything was USADA approved.

2. USADA asked him What was approved?

3. He honestly told them.

4. They told him it wasn't approved.

5. That was the first time he thought that they were doing anything wrong.

6. This all took place as a sponsored Nike athlete. So it was not a reaction of being dropped by Nike.

7. Although answering honestly to USADA he never went to the press as that was not allowed in his contract. Being honest with USADA is permitted.

8. He still has never cried to the Press after being dropped by Nike.

9. His story has never changed.

This is all a ruse NOP are doing way harder stuff than l-Carnitine. Salazar said to be in the top 5 in the world you have to be on EPO.

These Nike shills should be shot.

rekrunner wrote:

After the Fancy Bears leak of a one year old "draft" report, in February, USADA told us the current status as of Feb. 2017:

"... we continue to investigate whether anti-doping rules were broken ..."

Does anything in the NY Times article change the current status from USADA? Note: this presumably includes Ritz, and Tara Welling and Kara.

"... we continue to investigate whether anti-doping rules were broken ..."

A no-information political statement... can't really blame USADA for that.

Nothing new for USADA of course. New for most of us:

Not only does USADA claim to have evidence that Salazar doped Magness (discussed here in the last big NOP-dope thread), they are also convinced that he doped Ritz and Tara, and likely the others too.

"United States antidoping officials now believe that Salazar and a Texas endocrinologist administered an infusion procedure in violation of antidoping rules, colluded to cover it up and then lied to their athletes about its legality."

and

"Antidoping officials suggest that administering an infusion of less than 50 milliliters “continuously and uniformly over a one hour period is a practical impossibility and Dr. Brown knew this,” concluding that Ritzenhein “received 9.67 grams of L-carnitine over 1 hour, which demonstrates that Ritzenhein likely received an infusion far in excess of 50 mL.”"

and

"Galen Rupp, an Olympic silver medalist, and Mo Farah of Britain, one of the most successful runners in Olympic history, also received infusions of L-carnitine."

It would seem they still try to figure out how much Rupp and Farah got in late 2011/early 2012. That's where it gets interesting: if Salazar doped them like Ritz (as one might assume), and USADA proves it, they'd lose their 2012 Olympic medals.

Plus, according to SI's report, Rupp had elevated testosterone (Rupp, seriously?) and Centro a suspicious off-score.

Montesquieu wrote:

I could be wrong, but I believe Article 13 of CAS has elements covering this.

What is Article 13 of CAS?

Do you mean the WADA code?

I can't find any article 13 of CAS and article 13 of the WADA code doesn't seem to be on point.

The closest thing I can find is this:

http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Code_2017_FINAL__en_.pdf

It really only deals with procedural matters of arbitration, not the substantive matters which are covered in the WADA code (that they are interpreting and applying).

If there is something else, please link to it, I would like to look at it.

Shall we not forget wrote:

I see Ritz as a hero in all of this. I don't see intent based on what we know.

Seriously? Do you really believe such an experienced professional athlete was unaware of WADA's list of "Prohibited Methods"?

He claimed that he was, but a) I don't believe him, and b) according to WADA, intent is not required to be found guilty of doping.

I have higher expectations of heroes.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Montesquieu wrote:

I could be wrong, but I believe Article 13 of CAS has elements covering this.

What is Article 13 of CAS?

Do you mean the WADA code?

I can't find any article 13 of CAS and article 13 of the WADA code doesn't seem to be on point.

There are parts of the WADA code that refer to an athlete establishing lack of fault. I have included those below. Note that the remedy is not to declare the athlete not guilty, but merely to reduce the penalties, which will still include at the least a reprimand, but not necessarily a period of ineligibility. Note that these sections specifically refer to "Specified substances" and to

"contaminated products." The definition of "no significant fault or negligence" appears to be without a lot of definition to me, but I'll keep digging.

Also, I would note that the violation we are speculating about (more than 50ml of infusion) is a prohibited method and doesn't seem to me to fall clearly under the terms "specified substances" or "contaminated products"

10.5 Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on

No Significant Fault or Negligence

10.5.1 Reduction of Sanctions for Specified Substances

or Contaminated Products for Violations of

Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6.

10.5.1.1 Specified Substances

Where the anti-doping rule violation

involves a Specified Substance, and the

Athlete or other Person can establish

No Significant Fault or Negligence, then

the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a

minimum, a reprimand and no period

of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two

years of Ineligibility, depending on the

Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of

Fault.

10.5.1.2 Contaminated Products

In cases where the Athlete or other

Person can establish No Significant

Fault or Negligence and that the

detected Prohibited Substance came

from a Contaminated Product, then

the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a

minimum, a reprimand and no period

of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two

years Ineligibility, depending on the

Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of

Fault.

I admit that I had completely forgotten about the Clembuterol cases in general. I'm not sure that is at all relevant to Ritz or other NOP members who allowed a physician to inject them at the direction of a coach. The Bezabeh case might be a more relevant precedent on point here.https://web.archive.org/web/20131212111223/http://www.supersport.com/athletics/article.aspx?Id=420857

Montesquieu wrote:

I could be wrong, but I believe Article 13 of CAS has elements covering this. But think of the case with the Alberto Contador, who claimed that beef he had eaten was laced with clenbuterol. In a Telegraph article that reported his ban (it's complicated because Spain let him off and WADA had to appeal the case to CAS), we find this remark: "Similar clenbuterol cases of athletes testing positive for clenbuterol and being cleared on the grounds that it was accidentally ingested include Alessandro Colo (Italian cyclist), Dimitrij Ovtcharov (German table-tennis player), Li Fuyu (Chinese cyclist), Lainer Bueno (Major league baseball player) and most recently Phillip Nielsen (Danish cyclist)." Allowance surely has to be made for something like this, which means of course that the standard is not (at the risk of being redundant) strict "strict liability."

i agree with spencer wrote:

she wants to spill beans on all the injections and things she saw but alberto blackmailed her hard. how? did you guys not read the small bits alberto showed of their email exchanges? it sounded pretty much like affair material. he told her "look if you try to expose me and NOP, nike will ruin you like they did to lance, and i will tell adam that he isnt the father of your child, and how we had a 7 year affair!"

This story is long and I confess that I sometimes forget all the parts of it.

Can you link to those emails and the source for them?