Sports Scientist Ross Tucker breaks downs the Shelby Houlihan case for us

Ah yes, maybe, but sunscreen in December in Oregon wouldn't fly. Maybe toothpaste?

Brojos, I read Ross Tucker’s piece and I believe that he is misinterpreting the WADA Technical document. One CAS legal arbitor agreed that the correct process wasn’t followed. However, if Houlihan’s legal team relies on the same arguments they already made, they will probably lose in the Swiss Court.

There is quite a bit of the article citing prosecution experts such as Ayotte but not following up to see if they deliberately misrepresent (“over generalize”) their own research.

Unfortunately, I am traveling around the country now and typing up a multi-page response on my phone is difficult. Happy to point out some issues by phone or not.

Twoggle

Oh good thing, now we know what the next ‘front page’ story on LRC.com will be:

”Facts remain, Twoggle seeds doubt”

I have not read any of the official reports, so I am just here asking if somebody who has, can tell me the chances of getting a false positive on a doping test? That is if I hand one of their labs a clean sample what is the odds it comes back saying I am doping with some (any) substance? Second, SH's sample came back positive, what if anything was done to produce an independent test to rule out the chance it was a false positive? I have no idea what the answer is to any of these questions. I would just like to know the answers before having much of an opinion about the likelihood SH is or is not a doper.

Thank you for the analytical report on the SH case! Before reading it, I was believed that it could have been a mistake. After, I agree that was unlikely to be the pork burrito. I still believe general that athletes are clean, and need solid evidence to prove doping. The analytical reports sufficient proof. Thank you Let’s Run!

the grammar is strong in this post

Here’s just a general framing:

Jerry has had how many sub 13 5k guys now? But we are supposed to only hate Alberto Salazar

And i hate Alberto Salazar FYI

And the head clown shows up. It's officially a three ring circus now.

False positive. We don’t know as the rules say the lab does not ever make mistakes.Some labs get closed for Wada finding errors in their control systems as they are the ones who send secret samples in but these may be false negatives.
Independent check.Forbidden by the rules.

At what level do you not have a right to compete?

Explain by reference to the rules.

Brojos,
I too am an uneducated, self important, blow hard, nobody with an I’ll informed opinion.
I can also type up a misleading wall of text that proves nothing and avoids the issue if you want.

or you could leave it to an expert like Ross Tucker…it’s totally your call.

1.5.2 Athlete Support Personnel must:
(a) be knowledgeable of and comply with these Anti-Doping Rules at all times;
(b) co-operate with Doping Control;
(c) use their influence on Athlete values and behaviour to foster anti-doping attitudes;
(d) disclose to their National Anti-Doping Organisation and the Integrity Unit any decision (whether by a Signatory or by a non-Signatory) finding that they committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years;
(e) co-operate fully with the Integrity Unit and any other Anti-Doping Organisations investigating possible anti-doping rule violations and/or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules. Failure by any Athlete Support Person to cooperate in full with the Integrity Unit investigating anti-doping rule violations or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules will constitute a violation of Rule 12; and
(f) not Use or possess any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method without valid justification. Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete Support Person without valid justification will constitute a violation of Rule 2.
1.5.3 Other Persons subject to these Anti-Doping Rules must:
(a) be knowledgeable of and comply with these Anti-Doping Rules at all times;
(b) disclose to the Integrity Unit (and, if applicable, their National Anti- Doping Organisation) any decision (whether by a Signatory or by a non- Signatory) finding that they committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years; and
(c) co-operate fully with the Integrity Unit and any other Anti-Doping Organisations investigating possible anti-doping rule violations and/or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules. Failure by any other Person to cooperate in full with the Integrity Unit and/or other Anti-Doping Organisations investigating anti-doping rule violations and/or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules will constitute a violation of Rule 12.
1.5.4 Offensive conduct by an Athlete, Athlete Support Person or other Person towards a Doping Control official or other Person involved in Doping Control that does not otherwise constitute Tampering is a violation and may be prosecuted as such under Rule 12 of these Anti-Doping Rules and/or the Integrity Code of Conduct.

1.5 Responsibilities of Athletes, Athlete Support Personnel, other Persons, and Member Federations
1.5.1 Athletes must:
(a) be knowledgeable of and comply with these Anti-Doping Rules at all times;
(b) know what constitutes an anti-doping rule violation and the substances and methods that have been included on the Prohibited List;
(c) be available for Sample collection at all times;
(d) take responsibility, in the context of anti-doping, for what they ingest and Use;
(e) carry out research regarding any products or substances that they intend to Use (prior to such Use) to ensure that Using them will not constitute or result in an anti-doping rule violation. Such research must, at a minimum, include a reasonable internet search of:
(i) the name of the product or substance;
(ii) the ingredients/substances listed on the product or substance label;
(iii) other related information revealed through research of points (i) and (ii).
(f) inform medical personnel of their obligation not to Use Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods, and make sure that any medical treatment they receive does not violate these Anti-Doping Rules;
(g) disclose to their National Anti-Doping Organisation and the Integrity Unit any decision (whether by a Signatory or a non-Signatory) that they committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years;
(h) co-operate fully with the Integrity Unit and any other Anti-Doping Organisations investigating possible anti-doping rule violations and/or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules. Failure by an Athlete to cooperate in full with the Integrity Unit investigating anti-doping rule violations or other breaches of these Anti-Doping Rules will constitute a violation of Rule 12; and
(i) disclose the identity of their Athlete Support Personnel upon request by the Integrity Unit, a Member Federation, and/or any other Anti-Doping Organisation with authority over the Athlete.
1.5.2 Athlete Support Personnel must:
(a) be knowledgeable of and comply with these Anti-Dop

and btw a right is not a right if it can be taken away, which is what professional athletes acknowledge before these organizations.

So dont then go on about rights, these are privileges. You have the privilege to compete and participate on good behavior of said organization. Everyone knows that, everyone has agreed to that. Sorry some dont abide by it, such is life

Always good to hear from the tweener constituency.

They do a B sample for this reason.

What a lot you have posted but not one bit about at which level you no longer have a right but it becomes a privilege.

Also, I have many many rights in society but nearly all of them can get taken away if I break the law. So by your definition, in society, I have no rights.Think you better think better.

Why are people talking about pork burritos.

She bought a beef burrito.