Parker Valby is the most talented girl in the country

Boy was I over the target. Flak away.

No. It's not a matter of "somebody's calling out what a creep I am - that just proves that I'm right!" I'm calling you out as a creep because you're a freaking creep! There is nothing normal or healthy about posting over and over and over and over about what a villain some 20-year-old female college student you don't know is.

I expressed an opinion and people argued back and forth. Doping is an unpleasant topic in general. Deal with it.

No fanboy, without a shred of evidence, you’re singling out one or two particular runners that are likely faster now than tuohy. You say your flimsy evidence is circumstantial opinion. That is all you’ve got. It’s going to come back and bite you if/when it comes out that ‘muscular’ tuohy is the one that has been on ‘something’ all along.

And it is not about villifying but about the fairness and integrity of the sport. I accept certain realities in the sport on the pro level, but I will be damned if I allow what I perceive as evidence of doping in high school or college running to pass without any comment. What is the appropriate age of the athlete before an opinion is permitted? The Ma's army runners were teenagers, for example. We often talk about doping involving runners in their mid 20s. Much closer to home a few months back a high school runner suddenly popped off a crazy time. That athlete was 18. I withheld comment initially, but upon reflection that was wrong. Had I commented I would have been sniped at, called names, etc, but I would have been right. The time did not lie. It told the story. As it turned out doping had reared it very ugly head in high school distance running, and the athlete had associations that led all the way back through the Nike doping tree. Sound familiar? Point is, if you have a strange progression or pop off a crazy time it is and should be scrutinized. Because almost without fail it always means the same thing.

YOU are an unpleasant topic in general.

Or a boring topic.

Oh, right - you're just discussing the issues. Heroically, if anything, given the "unpleasant" nature of the topic.

How about if I started discussing the issue of weird internet stalkers? I could mention that when I search your name using the LetsRun search function, all I find is hundreds of Tuohy-related posts. Well, that's not strictly true - you did veer off into commenting on the the sex-and-PEDs scandal at Huntington Univ. But basically, you are someone who posts very frequently about one very, very specific part of running: Katelyn Tuohy. Like old Captain Ahab, you have a case of monomania.

Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with posting about Tuohy - lots of people do it. Posting about her - and nothing else - dozens of times a day is, however, something that raises eyebrows, or as you say about Ms Valby's improvement as a runner - it's a red flag.

Furthermore, let's say I make some general accusation against you and then repeat it every few minutes all day long. How would that make you feel? I have nothing but circumstantial evidence against you. But hey, dealing with internet stalkers and internet predators is an unpleasant topic in general. Deal with it.

You hide behind ‘fairness and integrity of the sport’, while incessantly and unfairly attacking the integrity of an individual of the sport, without evidence. A broken clock is right twice a day; even if you were correct on something in the past, it has no bearing here.

Nothing remotely heroic about expressing an opinion on a message board. Can be amusing though. I comment about doping a lot btw. Someone popped off a crazy time and people commented. Sorry it upset you. Not really.

Well at least you acknowledge I was correct about something. Score.

Rather, in your mind, you think you were correct about something in the past (whether actually true, or not), so you think that justifies your incessant attacks on Valby and Cook.

You’ve already shared your shady opinion on theses runners multiple times. To continue to do so is vilification and bullying and it’s past time for you to be banned.

Hmm yeah that is the golden question.
the answer is effective screening, with the aim of preventing women who aren’t menstruating (when they would otherwise) from competing until they do again. I know this seems drastic, but it should be the norm.
the only screening you have to do before each academic year for this is ticking a “do you have a regular period” box yes or no… very easy to just lie because it’s kind of uncomfortable to tick ‘no’ anyways! also I know you were joking, but could schools actually use bf% as a screening tool if they’re collecting weight results anyways? not a calliper test cause that’s potentially traumatising, but one of the electromagnetic pulse ones where you step on the scales barefoot for a body fat reading.. could be a good monitoring tool that’s inexpensive, not in ya face, and highly useful.

Please. A couple of threads were started about a crazy time that was run a day ago and I commented. And just like the Houlihan example regarding pro progressions, the AW example really hits home. All the sudden what apologists told me over and over would never happen happened, doping in high school/college running. I tend to be correct about this subject because I am honest and unsentimental. Not that it is so complicated. Just requires honesty. What you know you cannot show me is that I am wrong. Call it circumstantial if you want to but with doping it is almost always a circumstantial case. Testing is non-existent, positives are rarer still, and I know of only one uncoerced confession in all of sports. (Riis). So you look at times. Progressions. Physical changes. Associations. And here the progression is super odd. The time is a time associated with pro dopers already in a doping cycle. The associations are rotten. The athlete did undergo a recognizable physical transformation. All true in all respects. You think that is vilification? No. In a magical pill sport that is reality. You are now forced to resort to drivel about "generational talent" because you know that Valby ran a doping rated time, a time which if rated correctly that only pro dopers have run. That type of "generational talent" is only found one place, in a bottle. You know it. I know it. All the other whiners desperately attacking and deflecting know it.

Btw, weren't you a big Wiley booster? Go back to that thread when Wiley ran that crazy 1600m time. It is embarrassing. I stupidly kept my mouth shut trying to play nice, but not one person even asked how a high school kid could run that time clean. She couldn't of course And sorry but neither can Valby suddenly solo a sub 15 rated time without "help."

I don’t know who wiley is. unlike you, I don’t come here to bully athletes.

And somebody else has already copied my fleeting handle, so I’ll just get another one. I’m not here to stoke my ego.

BF scales aren't remotely accurate enough to tell the difference between a low BF of like 17% and an unhealthy 13%. Heck you can change the numbers by drinking/dehydrating yourself and you are crazy if you don't think athletes would figure out how to beat the test. The line between healthy lean and unhealthy is like a half dozen lbs. I suppose you could throw all the borderline cases into a decade scan but that isnt easy everywhere.

I can't even imagine how to monitor periods in an acceptable way.

And all of these problems are worse to figure out in HS (more athletes, less cash) where this all starts.

She was coming off a broken foot in June. Why is it unusual to be significantly faster now, with uninterrupted training?