Shelby Houlihan runs 4:03 1500

But everything he said is correct,twist whatever you want but the running world knows she is a cheat.

say it again. wrote:

original liar soorer wrote:

Every single phrase shows you are an uneducated bigot.

But everything he said is correct,twist whatever you want but the running world knows she is a cheat.

Ok…. Uneducated in the matter of doping control rules.

For instance; Wada had nowt to do with it.!

original liar soorer wrote:

say it again. wrote:

But everything he said is correct,twist whatever you want but the running world knows she is a cheat.

Ok…. Uneducated in the matter of doping control rules.

For instance; Wada had nowt to do with it.!

She's banned and a cheat

say it again. wrote:

original liar soorer wrote:

Ok…. Uneducated in the matter of doping control rules.

For instance; Wada had nowt to do with it.!

She's banned and a cheat

An other one from limited mountain who has come down to demonstrate a failure to read the rules and imagine they know more than CAS.

These arguments don't seem to really meet any definition of cheating or lying.

Before you can justify calling someone a cheat, you have to show these elements of dishonesty, or unfairness, in order to gain an advantage. The CAS did not do this.

Before you can justify calling someone a liar, you have to firmly establish what was the truth. The CAS ruled on the basis of balance of probability, and did not establish any alternative truths.

Some more things you got wrong:

- WADA didn't conclude anything about Houlihan -- WADA played no role except to author the Code and the TD.

- The cutoffs decided by WADA is not a cutoff between natural and unnatural amounts. In 1998 at the Nagano Olympics, the IOC tested 621 athletes for nandrolone and only five athletes, all women, were above the limits. At that time, the IOC limits were 2 ng/ml for men and 5 ng/ml for women. It appears that even without pork ingestion, some women can exceed the predefined limits set by IOC, and later WADA. Unfortunately, it appears that the IOC did not publish this data, but defended the limits of 2ng/ml for men and 5 ng/ml for women in 1999. At that time, FIFA, who conducted their own study of 356 soccer players, said there is a gray zone above the limit where "we must be careful". Since then WADA reduced the limit for women to 2 ng/ml. I'm unaware that either the IOC or WADA has published any data supporting their cutoffs.

- The CAS did not rule on the plausibility of ingestion by burrito.

- While it seems to raise many red flags for passionate "fans", I don't see any legitimate reason to think a coach or an athlete must have ever heard of nandrolone, especially if they are not trolling running forums and tabloids like casual "fans" of the sport. The main job of a coach is to coach, and the main job of an athlete is to train and race. Alternatively, they might have heard about it by another name -- apparently it is also known as "deca".

- 4 years is not the maximum penalty for a first offense. Article 10.4 defines how the penalty can be increased up to 2 more years.

original liar soorer wrote:

say it again. wrote:

She's banned and a cheat

An other one from limited mountain who has come down to demonstrate a failure to read the rules and imagine they know more than CAS.

Still banned,still a cheat.

She had legal support throughout this from Nike. If Nike lawyers couldn’t get her off or even get a reduced ban, something must have stunk big time!!!

You don’t get a four year ban that includes two Olympic Games for an unintended positive test. There’s much more behind this than we know.

nardi one wrote:

She had legal support throughout this from Nike. If Nike lawyers couldn’t get her off or even get a reduced ban, something must have stunk big time!!!

You don’t get a four year ban that includes two Olympic Games for an unintended positive test. There’s much more behind this than we know.

Foolish chap. That is exactly what the rules are.

Read them prior to posting.

say it again. wrote:

original liar soorer wrote:

An other one from limited mountain who has come down to demonstrate a failure to read the rules and imagine they know more than CAS.

Still banned,still a cheat.

Read the rules prior to posting.

So the argument you’re going with is that casual track fans have heard of nandrolone but the highest paid running coach with 30 years experience as a national class athlete, college coach and now coach funded by Nike will not have heard of nandrolone?

Read his bio and then say it out loud, “this man has never heard of nandrolone but casual track fans have.”

https://www.ussportscamps.com/coaches/jerry-schumacher

Are you still buying it?

Why is she asking for $300,000 for legal fees from GoFund me? Why have the Nike legal team stopped defending her? You don’t need $300,000 for legal fees unless you’ve done something really bad.

Legal fees for legal defense for murder are apparently $100k to $150k:

https://www.legalpriceguide.com/criminal-defense-legal-costs/

And Shelby needs $300,000! The whole story is not out. As is the case with Athletes West and Nike Oregon Project, it will eventually come out.

Shelby may have the IQ of a turnip but there is a negative one billion percent chance someone like Jerry Schumacher isn't aware of, say, Dieter Baumann

nardi one wrote:

So the argument you’re going with is that casual track fans have heard of nandrolone but the highest paid running coach with 30 years experience as a national class athlete, college coach and now coach funded by Nike will not have heard of nandrolone?

Read his bio and then say it out loud, “this man has never heard of nandrolone but casual track fans have.”

https://www.ussportscamps.com/coaches/jerry-schumacher

Are you still buying it?

The charge as presented in the charge as presented in the decision did not reference Nandrolone.

Where they referring to the charge sheet in their presser ; yes they were.

Thus was it a simplification?

fermin cacho wrote:

Shelby may have the IQ of a turnip but there is a negative one billion percent chance someone like Jerry Schumacher isn't aware of, say, Dieter Baumann

Is it SH that was charged ?

nardi one wrote:

Why is she asking for $300,000 for legal fees from GoFund me? Why have the Nike legal team stopped defending her? You don’t need $300,000 for legal fees unless you’ve done something really bad.

Legal fees for legal defense for murder are apparently $100k to $150k:

https://www.legalpriceguide.com/criminal-defense-legal-costs/

And Shelby needs $300,000! The whole story is not out. As is the case with Athletes West and Nike Oregon Project, it will eventually come out.

Cheap to go thru a Swiss Court.

Duke of York has £1.25 million costs already and the case has not got to a trial yet.

original liar soorer wrote:

nardi one wrote:

She had legal support throughout this from Nike. If Nike lawyers couldn’t get her off or even get a reduced ban, something must have stunk big time!!!

You don’t get a four year ban that includes two Olympic Games for an unintended positive test. There’s much more behind this than we know.

Foolish chap. That is exactly what the rules are.

Read them prior to posting.

Read them yet?

original liar soorer wrote:

fermin cacho wrote:

Shelby may have the IQ of a turnip but there is a negative one billion percent chance someone like Jerry Schumacher isn't aware of, say, Dieter Baumann

Is it SH that was charged ?

That question doesn't compute. How is that matinee K-hole treating you?

As a casual fan of track I don’t need to read WADA rules.

That’s elite athletes, elite coaches, and Nike lawyers job.

I’ve never attended a coaching conference or international track meet, I’ve never talked to an international level runner. Yet some how I’ve heard of nandrolone and I clearly remember the fracas around Dieter Bowman’s claim that someone spiked his toothpaste with nandrolone.

I’m pretty sure Schumacher, obvious German heritage, and international level athlete when Bowman’s nandrolone bust went down heard the story.

nardi one wrote:

As a casual fan of track I don’t need to read WADA rules.

That’s elite athletes, elite coaches, and Nike lawyers job.

I’ve never attended a coaching conference or international track meet, I’ve never talked to an international level runner. Yet some how I’ve heard of nandrolone and I clearly remember the fracas around Dieter Bowman’s claim that someone spiked his toothpaste with nandrolone.

I’m pretty sure Schumacher, obvious German heritage, and international level athlete when Bowman’s nandrolone bust went down heard the story.

You are a casual fan who won’t read the rules nor the decision.May I ask what strength should we give to your views.

A rhetorical question, I think.