Tinny 2 Shoes wrote:
Probably because they are personal friends. Regardless of their opinions they arnt going to publicly dump on a friend. You would be doing the exact same, dont kid yourself.
They might publicly dump on a high school track though
-
151
-
Hard to care about clean sport when you don't even have clean split shorts
50 -
Former Coach wrote:
Some posters have some serious issues and need to reflect on what is important. They probably are not condemning her for several reasons.
1. She is considered a friend who made a mistake.
2. Why the need to condemn people? What is the benefit?
3. Something to think about: If you find Bowerman 'disgusting' or you have 'lost respect' you really need to step off your soap box because nobody cares what you think. They're professional athletes in a fringe sport trying to chase a dream and make a living. Your respect is the least of their concerns directly behind condemning a former training partner.
1) She didn’t make a mistake. She choose to intentionally cheat and got caught. Her poor choice has put BTC in a very bad position.
2) As you mentioned, this sport is extremely niche so reputation is exceedingly important. The benefit of condemning cheating is to regain the trust of the very few followers of this sport.
3) They don’t have to care what I think, but they should care what the masses think. It’s fair to say that sponsorship comes from both performance and popularity. The BTC just took a major hit.
No one has “serious issues” for wondering why the team continues to support a cheat - especially those on the team who have condemned cheaters previously.
142 -
Hahaha, yes indeed.
I look at all dopers, and I don’t even look at the money. Yes, they steal money. But they’re stealers of dreams and stealers of moments.
50 -
casual obsever wrote:
Hahaha, yes indeed.
I look at all dopers, and I don’t even look at the money. Yes, they steal money. But they’re stealers of dreams and stealers of moments.
Look , Shalane and Meb can point fingers at Rupp and Jordan , but this site is deleting posts pointing out the new reality of BTC today . Shelby basically said Shalane was giving her workouts on Insta , that post was deleted on LRC , and Shelby deleted that Insta post and made her Strava private .
120 -
casual obsever wrote:
Hahaha, yes indeed.
I look at all dopers, and I don’t even look at the money. Yes, they steal money. But they’re stealers of dreams and stealers of moments.
Hi rojo.
00 -
sandy p wrote:
I find it disgusting that no Bowerman TC runners have not come out to condemn the convicted cheater that is Shelby Houihan. She had her due process and was confirmed a terrible drug cheat. Why would anyone in the club not come out and say what a rotten person she is? She continues lying and yet they say nothing. Don't they feel filthy associating with a convicted drug cheat? Don't they want a clean sport where the rules are fair for all?
Clean sport? From what I hear the Bowerman guys don't even want clean tracks.
70 -
Former Coach wrote:
Some posters have some serious issues and need to reflect on what is important. They probably are not condemning her for several reasons.
1. She is considered a friend who made a mistake.
2. Why the need to condemn people? What is the benefit? Why do you think they have a responsibility to condemn someone else? I have fired numerous people for various reasons and feel no need to bash them publicly or privately. I know people who have gone to jail, cheated on their spouses, etc and I have felt no responsibility to bash them. Their actions speak for itself and doesn't need to be addressed.
Something to think about: If you find Bowerman 'disgusting' or you have 'lost respect' you really need to step off your soap box because nobody cares what you think. They're professional athletes in a fringe sport trying to chase a dream and make a living. Your respect is the least of their concerns directly behind condemning a former training partner.
Well said, Former Coach.
21 -
Gina2011 wrote:
It’s got me wondering if they have all signed or sign some type of non-disclosure or support contracts upon joining the group?? Perhaps they are not allowed to not fully support someone within the group??
could be why so many left, but haven’t publicly spoken out against Shelby. They can leave… but perhaps they can’t speak out??
This is truer than we’d like to admit. Nike is very protective of their brand. Athletes aren’t even supposed to part of training groups other than BTC, Union, etc.
In the end, bite the hand that feeds you? Goodbye.
30 -
rekrunner wrote:
Why single out Bowerman TC runners (and coaches and assistant coaches)? Have any athletes come forward and outright condemned Houlihan as a rotten lying cheat, for not explaining the presence of the banned substance? Who is the model athlete that represents the kind of condemnation you are looking for? Maybe I missed it, but most all of the condemnation comes from what appears to be a zero-tolerance mentality from sceptical pundits and outraged "fans".
This question is open to everyone -- why single out BTC runners/coaches? Which athlete/coach has come forward to condemn Houlihan as expected by the anonymous huddled masses here? Who is the model that BTC should follow?
I suspect that most athletes/coaches do not condemn Houlihan, because this is not their idea of what deliberate doping looks like. To athletes/coaches, this is not comparable to Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones, or Regina Jacobs. To the AIU, and WADA lab directors, and the CAS, it is a different story. By refined design, the codified presumptions that form the WADA anti-doping "due process" does not even attempt to make any distinction between unprovable accidental ingestion, and deliberate injection of a banned substance. But the athletes/coaches can. As USADA anti-doping chief has told us repeatedly, there is a wide range of athletes across the guilt spectrum who will be caught by this same net, and receive the same 4-year ban.
In fact, deliberate injection seems to be preferable to the AIU and to WADA, compared to defending, yet not proving, accidental ingestion. Recently the AIU only gave a 3-year ban to Kenyan Edward Kiprop Kibet, for buying Deca-Durabolin and deliberately injecting himself, leading to a test result 3x greater than Houlihan. And since it was injected directly into the muscle, much more of it gets into and stays in the blood stream for as long as 9 months, rather than mostly filtered out in first pass and completely gone within a day.
Had Houlihan simply said "I don't know. I plead"nolo contendere".", she could have qualified for a reduced sentence and still make the 2024 Olympics. It's a hard pill for athletes to swallow, resisting the temptation to "prove" their innocence, but the WADA "due process" gives accused athletes few choices, as most of the available defenses have been removed by design from both innocent and guilty athletes alike.
Athletes/coaches may learn from Houlihan's story, and put themselves on notice that a robust defense may require freezing portions of all their meals for a period of 1 month or longer, and keeping samples of all their medicine and supplements for any subsequent testing. With luck, they may be able to prove their innocence, like handballer Simon Getzmann, and merely serve a 1 year ban, at a personal non-reimbursed cost of more than 10,000 dollars/Euros for legal and scientific tests, for their first offense ADRV.
51 -
rekrunner wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Why single out Bowerman TC runners (and coaches and assistant coaches)? Have any athletes come forward and outright condemned Houlihan as a rotten lying cheat, for not explaining the presence of the banned substance? Who is the model athlete that represents the kind of condemnation you are looking for? Maybe I missed it, but most all of the condemnation comes from what appears to be a zero-tolerance mentality from sceptical pundits and outraged "fans".
This question is open to everyone -- why single out BTC runners/coaches? Which athlete/coach has come forward to condemn Houlihan as expected by the anonymous huddled masses here? Who is the model that BTC should follow?
I suspect that most athletes/coaches do not condemn Houlihan, because this is not their idea of what deliberate doping looks like. To athletes/coaches, this is not comparable to Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones, or Regina Jacobs. To the AIU, and WADA lab directors, and the CAS, it is a different story. By refined design, the codified presumptions that form the WADA anti-doping "due process" does not even attempt to make any distinction between unprovable accidental ingestion, and deliberate injection of a banned substance. But the athletes/coaches can. As USADA anti-doping chief has told us repeatedly, there is a wide range of athletes across the guilt spectrum who will be caught by this same net, and receive the same 4-year ban.
In fact, deliberate injection seems to be preferable to the AIU and to WADA, compared to defending, yet not proving, accidental ingestion. Recently the AIU only gave a 3-year ban to Kenyan Edward Kiprop Kibet, for buying Deca-Durabolin and deliberately injecting himself, leading to a test result 3x greater than Houlihan. And since it was injected directly into the muscle, much more of it gets into and stays in the blood stream for as long as 9 months, rather than mostly filtered out in first pass and completely gone within a day.
Had Houlihan simply said "I don't know. I plead"nolo contendere".", she could have qualified for a reduced sentence and still make the 2024 Olympics. It's a hard pill for athletes to swallow, resisting the temptation to "prove" their innocence, but the WADA "due process" gives accused athletes few choices, as most of the available defenses have been removed by design from both innocent and guilty athletes alike.
Athletes/coaches may learn from Houlihan's story, and put themselves on notice that a robust defense may require freezing portions of all their meals for a period of 1 month or longer, and keeping samples of all their medicine and supplements for any subsequent testing. With luck, they may be able to prove their innocence, like handballer Simon Getzmann, and merely serve a 1 year ban, at a personal non-reimbursed cost of more than 10,000 dollars/Euros for legal and scientific tests, for their first offense ADRV.
You are right in pointing out that she could have held her hands up and gone for two year ban.
All this is too subtle for simple minds.
40 -
While I tink she cheated, why would you expect her friends/teammates to condem her? Would you publicly scold your buddy or just not say anything. Not saying anything is the default, and for a friend says quite a bit. The firends defending her, maybe that's a bit too far, but seriously complaining about people saying nothing? Talking about their teammates is not part of their job.
20 -
Media Watch 2022 wrote:
casual obsever wrote:
Hahaha, yes indeed.
Look , Shalane and Meb can point fingers at Rupp and Jordan , but this site is deleting posts pointing out the new reality of BTC today . Shelby basically said Shalane was giving her workouts on Insta , that post was deleted on LRC , and Shelby deleted that Insta post and made her Strava private .
For real? Well maybe some crawlers have caught that.
00 -
MatthewXCountry wrote:
While I tink she cheated, why would you expect her friends/teammates to condem her? Would you publicly scold your buddy or just not say anything. Not saying anything is the default, and for a friend says quite a bit. The firends defending her, maybe that's a bit too far, but seriously complaining about people saying nothing? Talking about their teammates is not part of their job.
Interesting that CAS never found her guilty of cheating rather a reliable witness
02 -
What we have here is a case of a dirty official, one who was already caught faking the results of one person's tests.
She has no business being associated with the WADA or any other organization testing athletes.11 -
JohnMD1022 wrote:
What we have here is a case of a dirty official, one who was already caught faking the results of one person's tests.
She has no business being associated with the WADA or any other organization testing athletes.
What on earth is your post about?
10 -
I’m very confused why on the thread I started “BTC has a secret” there was overwhelming support for the BTC athletes being considered clean, but on this thread we find the exact opposite. I honestly suspect bots or interference by the mods in my thread earlier. Very peculiar.
21 -
rekrunner wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Why single out Bowerman TC runners (and coaches and assistant coaches)? Have any athletes come forward and outright condemned Houlihan as a rotten lying cheat, for not explaining the presence of the banned substance? Who is the model athlete that represents the kind of condemnation you are looking for? Maybe I missed it, but most all of the condemnation comes from what appears to be a zero-tolerance mentality from sceptical pundits and outraged "fans".
This question is open to everyone -- why single out BTC runners/coaches? Which athlete/coach has come forward to condemn Houlihan as expected by the anonymous huddled masses here? Who is the model that BTC should follow?
I suspect that most athletes/coaches do not condemn Houlihan, because this is not their idea of what deliberate doping looks like. To athletes/coaches, this is not comparable to Lance Armstrong, or Marion Jones, or Regina Jacobs. To the AIU, and WADA lab directors, and the CAS, it is a different story. By refined design, the codified presumptions that form the WADA anti-doping "due process" does not even attempt to make any distinction between unprovable accidental ingestion, and deliberate injection of a banned substance. But the athletes/coaches can. As USADA anti-doping chief has told us repeatedly, there is a wide range of athletes across the guilt spectrum who will be caught by this same net, and receive the same 4-year ban.
In fact, deliberate injection seems to be preferable to the AIU and to WADA, compared to defending, yet not proving, accidental ingestion. Recently the AIU only gave a 3-year ban to Kenyan Edward Kiprop Kibet, for buying Deca-Durabolin and deliberately injecting himself, leading to a test result 3x greater than Houlihan. And since it was injected directly into the muscle, much more of it gets into and stays in the blood stream for as long as 9 months, rather than mostly filtered out in first pass and completely gone within a day.
Had Houlihan simply said "I don't know. I plead"nolo contendere".", she could have qualified for a reduced sentence and still make the 2024 Olympics. It's a hard pill for athletes to swallow, resisting the temptation to "prove" their innocence, but the WADA "due process" gives accused athletes few choices, as most of the available defenses have been removed by design from both innocent and guilty athletes alike.
Athletes/coaches may learn from Houlihan's story, and put themselves on notice that a robust defense may require freezing portions of all their meals for a period of 1 month or longer, and keeping samples of all their medicine and supplements for any subsequent testing. With luck, they may be able to prove their innocence, like handballer Simon Getzmann, and merely serve a 1 year ban, at a personal non-reimbursed cost of more than 10,000 dollars/Euros for legal and scientific tests, for their first offense ADRV.
How do you know she would have received only 2 years if she didn’t try to appeal the ban? Sha’Carri didn’t appeal her ban but it wasn’t reduced to 15 days.
What you’re suggesting is illogical. Why give her a 4-year ban when they really meant 2?
10 -
I find the BTC runners to be of low moral character. Some are good role models but most don't dress properly and their sexual habits are disgusting.
06 -
I don't get it, did they dodge questions about Shelby or something? Why would they go out of their way to CONDEMN her, what would anyone gain from that? That would be such a weird thing for them to do. The answer to your question OP - they didn't publicly CONDEMN her because they are normal, mentally healthy people who don't publicly bash their teammates for no reason.
00
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.