Travis Tygart/USADA Supports Shelby Houlihan

Jombo3 wrote:

I think an open, free-speech forum such as Letsrun is vital to discussion and debate. We need it.

When you see people sharing things like this six weeks ago, such as I did here, and then being crucified for saying it in the first place, it calls a lot of the conversation on these message boards into question - and calls a lot of people’s motives in crucifying Shelby and jumping to the same hasty conclusions as CAS/AIU into question as well.

If AIU believed in a fair and honest sport, they would have taken the defense’s arguments more seriously. Some of the most prominent food scientists in the country came to Shelby’s defense and CAS refused to hear any of it. These are flaws in the AIU/CAS system that merit discussion.

When David Epstein, a journalist who has been committed to investigatory journalism and catching cheaters, thinks that Shelby didn’t cheat, this merits discussion as well.

Letsrun, and it’s message boards, can be an advocate for changing the sport so that clean athletes are banned - in the same way that they advocated for Salazar being banned from the sport for legitimate rule breaking. Why do we continue to crucify the innocent? Why can we not believe that Shelby may not have cheated? What is it in us that keeps us from even having the imagination that she may not have cheated?

These boards were made to help runners, not to harm them, yet they often function in a way that causes more harm than discussion and debate. They should absolutely exist, but the way that people have crucified Shelby on these boards, without any context for her story has opened my eyes to the hypocrisy of Letsrun posters. Why do we want to believe that people doped? Why are we fixated on believing this?

Armstronglivs wrote:

Jombo3 wrote:

I think an open, free-speech forum such as Letsrun is vital to discussion and debate. We need it.

When you see people sharing things like this six weeks ago, such as I did here, and then being crucified for saying it in the first place, it calls a lot of the conversation on these message boards into question - and calls a lot of people’s motives in crucifying Shelby and jumping to the same hasty conclusions as CAS/AIU into question as well.

If AIU believed in a fair and honest sport, they would have taken the defense’s arguments more seriously. Some of the most prominent food scientists in the country came to Shelby’s defense and CAS refused to hear any of it. These are flaws in the AIU/CAS system that merit discussion.

When David Epstein, a journalist who has been committed to investigatory journalism and catching cheaters, thinks that Shelby didn’t cheat, this merits discussion as well.

Letsrun, and it’s message boards, can be an advocate for changing the sport so that clean athletes are banned - in the same way that they advocated for Salazar being banned from the sport for legitimate rule breaking. Why do we continue to crucify the innocent? Why can we not believe that Shelby may not have cheated? What is it in us that keeps us from even having the imagination that she may not have cheated?

These boards were made to help runners, not to harm them, yet they often function in a way that causes more harm than discussion and debate. They should absolutely exist, but the way that people have crucified Shelby on these boards, without any context for her story has opened my eyes to the hypocrisy of Letsrun posters. Why do we want to believe that people doped? Why are we fixated on believing this?

It's quite easy to believe an athlete has doped when they test positive for a banned substance against all evidential probability that it was accidental. Her defence didn't pass the level required to establish doubt. You can choose to believe she is "innocent", albeit against the weight of evidence - like you probably believe OJ was "innocent". But most of us will go with what the known facts and not mere speculation demonstrate.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Jombo3 wrote:

I think an open, free-speech forum such as Letsrun is vital to discussion and debate. We need it.

When you see people sharing things like this six weeks ago, such as I did here, and then being crucified for saying it in the first place, it calls a lot of the conversation on these message boards into question - and calls a lot of people’s motives in crucifying Shelby and jumping to the same hasty conclusions as CAS/AIU into question as well.

If AIU believed in a fair and honest sport, they would have taken the defense’s arguments more seriously. Some of the most prominent food scientists in the country came to Shelby’s defense and CAS refused to hear any of it. These are flaws in the AIU/CAS system that merit discussion.

When David Epstein, a journalist who has been committed to investigatory journalism and catching cheaters, thinks that Shelby didn’t cheat, this merits discussion as well.

Letsrun, and it’s message boards, can be an advocate for changing the sport so that clean athletes are banned - in the same way that they advocated for Salazar being banned from the sport for legitimate rule breaking. Why do we continue to crucify the innocent? Why can we not believe that Shelby may not have cheated? What is it in us that keeps us from even having the imagination that she may not have cheated?

These boards were made to help runners, not to harm them, yet they often function in a way that causes more harm than discussion and debate. They should absolutely exist, but the way that people have crucified Shelby on these boards, without any context for her story has opened my eyes to the hypocrisy of Letsrun posters. Why do we want to believe that people doped? Why are we fixated on believing this?

It's quite easy to believe an athlete has doped when they test positive for a banned substance against all evidential probability that it was accidental. Her defence didn't pass the level required to establish doubt. You can choose to believe she is "innocent", albeit against the weight of evidence - like you probably believe OJ was "innocent". But most of us will go with what the known facts and not mere speculation demonstrate.

Jombo4 wrote:

Surprise! wrote:

They don't want it to be. We already know she is. You are trying to cast doubt and pretend there's still many things to be discovered. There are not. You are close to Shelby and that's why you are doing this. This is all very obvious to those of us without an agenda.

Letsrun message boards in a single word:

Presumption.

Governing bodies are often the ones with an agenda, particularly those who answer to no one. They act as a god unto themselves.

The idea that Shelby Houlihan deliberately put Nandrolone into her body is far more ridiculous than the idea that WADA/AIU is a corrupt governing body with an agenda to defend itself, no matter how wrong it’s judgements may be.

This is exactly what Tygart said about this particular governing body as honestly as he possible could.

Why does Letsrun blindly accept the judgements of these governing bodies? In America we have an addiction to finger pointing - to distract us from our own baggage and our own issues - what Letsrun message boards have done to Shelby is nothing but compensation.

No one who points fingers at Shelby knows her or anything about her process, they just assume her guilt and feel better about their self-righteousness because they assume that she was wrong and they were right.

Letsrun message boards proliferate the culture of modern America - pointing the finger at a brother or sister, without knowing the full story.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

By "innocent" athletes you are of course referring to Shelby and Asbel and of course the dirty coach, Alberto.

With fans like you, who needs enemies?

Just listing those who have often been accused by "fan-emies of the sport" but have never been charged, off my head we have all NOP athletes in its entire history, including Slo Mo; Jerry and the remaining BTC athletes; Jama Aden and all the Sabadell athletes (except Balla for possession); more than 4 decades worth of Kenyas and Ethiopians since they started dominating World Cross Country in the '80s; and numerous world record holders, ranging from Bolt to El G to Dibaba to Siffan to Paula to Kipchoge, etc. ad infinitum.

The basis for all these accusations appears to be the huge magnitude of what "fan-emies" like you don't know, but simply want to believe, for some probably because they were charmed and fooled by Lance.

Given what we do know about the cases of Lawson and Getzmann and 27 USADA athletes since 2015, we can see how unlikely it is and how lucky it is for an athlete to be able to establish their innocence against a principle of strict liability. Given the facts in the Houlihan case, we should re-evalaute the 50 Kenyans busted for nandrolone between 2014 and 2018, from a nation that does not routinely castrate their pigs, nor have USDA inspectors keeping the intact boar meat/offal off the market. Most athletes cannot afford the legal and scientific support to defend their innocence, but even then, when the few who can do succeed, every one one of these athletes still remain guilty under the broken WADA Code of a violation that doesn't depend on intent -- they "win" a guilty verdict at a huge personal cost of fees, and served suspension, with a reduced or waived sanction.

And given what we do know about the history of cases like Colvert, Sommer, and Karus, and dating as far back as Lagat in 2003, we see that it is hard for WADA labs to get this urine test for EPO right, and even harder for athletes to get access to the damning evidence from the WADA lab that is being used to convict them, in order to get a truly independent assessment of the result.

The WADA Code is broken for innocent athletes, making it harder to prove their innocence, and still broken for the few who do prove their innocence.

Jombo3 wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

It's quite easy to believe an athlete has doped when they test positive for a banned substance against all evidential probability that it was accidental. Her defence didn't pass the level required to establish doubt. You can choose to believe she is "innocent", albeit against the weight of evidence - like you probably believe OJ was "innocent". But most of us will go with what the known facts and not mere speculation demonstrate.

Why do people want Shelby to be guilty? Why do people want it so badly?

The question most worth imploring:

Why is WADA/AIU/CAS worthy of our trust? They answer to no one but themselves and have IOC members who are involved in their governing body.

In the Simpson case, he was found not guilty because the jury was rigged - the jurors were under threat that if they came back with a guilty verdict, their lives and futures would be at risk. The verdict was controlled by fear.

In fact, the erroneous Simpson determination mirrors the faulty determination on Houlihan. CAS essentially acted as a jury controlled by fear, because they didn’t want to come to a ruling different than the initial determination by AIU. They wouldn’t even hear the Houlihan arguments, from the evidence put forward by the team of reputed scientists she used in her defense. Thus, they made a judgement based on a fear of contradiction that was incomplete in considering the width of evidence from all sides.

Judgements which actually consider all evidence are complete, not ones led by the fear of contradiction or of upsetting the masses.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Jombo3 wrote:

Why do people want Shelby to be guilty? Why do people want it so badly?

The question most worth imploring:

Why is WADA/AIU/CAS worthy of our trust? They answer to no one but themselves and have IOC members who are involved in their governing body.

In the Simpson case, he was found not guilty because the jury was rigged - the jurors were under threat that if they came back with a guilty verdict, their lives and futures would be at risk. The verdict was controlled by fear.

In fact, the erroneous Simpson determination mirrors the faulty determination on Houlihan. CAS essentially acted as a jury controlled by fear, because they didn’t want to come to a ruling different than the initial determination by AIU. They wouldn’t even hear the Houlihan arguments, from the evidence put forward by the team of reputed scientists she used in her defense. Thus, they made a judgement based on a fear of contradiction that was incomplete in considering the width of evidence from all sides.

Judgements which actually consider all evidence are complete, not ones led by the fear of contradiction or of upsetting the masses.

It's reassuring that you understand as little about the OJ Simpson case as you fail understand why Houlihan was found guilty. She was treated the same way and according to the same process as any other athlete who has been shown to have committed a violation. She was given the opportunity to present a defence. It didn't cut it. It failed the test of probability. Clean sport won. Close the door on your way out.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Jombo3 wrote:

Why do people want Shelby to be guilty? Why do people want it so badly?

The question most worth imploring:

Why is WADA/AIU/CAS worthy of our trust? They answer to no one but themselves and have IOC members who are involved in their governing body.

In the Simpson case, he was found not guilty because the jury was rigged - the jurors were under threat that if they came back with a guilty verdict, their lives and futures would be at risk. The verdict was controlled by fear.

In fact, the erroneous Simpson determination mirrors the faulty determination on Houlihan. CAS essentially acted as a jury controlled by fear, because they didn’t want to come to a ruling different than the initial determination by AIU. They wouldn’t even hear the Houlihan arguments, from the evidence put forward by the team of reputed scientists she used in her defense. Thus, they made a judgement based on a fear of contradiction that was incomplete in considering the width of evidence from all sides.

Judgements which actually consider all evidence are complete, not ones led by the fear of contradiction or of upsetting the masses.

It's reassuring that you understand as little about the OJ Simpson case as you fail understand why Houlihan was found guilty. She was treated the same way and according to the same process as any other athlete who has been shown to have committed a violation. She was given the opportunity to present a defence. It didn't cut it. It failed the test of probability. Clean sport won. Close the door on your way out.

Armstronglivs wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

With fans like you, who needs enemies?

Just listing those who have often been accused by "fan-emies of the sport" but have never been charged, off my head we have all NOP athletes in its entire history, including Slo Mo; Jerry and the remaining BTC athletes; Jama Aden and all the Sabadell athletes (except Balla for possession); more than 4 decades worth of Kenyas and Ethiopians since they started dominating World Cross Country in the '80s; and numerous world record holders, ranging from Bolt to El G to Dibaba to Siffan to Paula to Kipchoge, etc. ad infinitum.

The basis for all these accusations appears to be the huge magnitude of what "fan-emies" like you don't know, but simply want to believe, for some probably because they were charmed and fooled by Lance.

Given what we do know about the cases of Lawson and Getzmann and 27 USADA athletes since 2015, we can see how unlikely it is and how lucky it is for an athlete to be able to establish their innocence against a principle of strict liability. Given the facts in the Houlihan case, we should re-evalaute the 50 Kenyans busted for nandrolone between 2014 and 2018, from a nation that does not routinely castrate their pigs, nor have USDA inspectors keeping the intact boar meat/offal off the market. Most athletes cannot afford the legal and scientific support to defend their innocence, but even then, when the few who can do succeed, every one one of these athletes still remain guilty under the broken WADA Code of a violation that doesn't depend on intent -- they "win" a guilty verdict at a huge personal cost of fees, and served suspension, with a reduced or waived sanction.

And given what we do know about the history of cases like Colvert, Sommer, and Karus, and dating as far back as Lagat in 2003, we see that it is hard for WADA labs to get this urine test for EPO right, and even harder for athletes to get access to the damning evidence from the WADA lab that is being used to convict them, in order to get a truly independent assessment of the result.

The WADA Code is broken for innocent athletes, making it harder to prove their innocence, and still broken for the few who do prove their innocence.

Endlessly repetitious waffle. WADA isn't broken. But your stuck record is.