But after sticking with her rediculous burrito excuse for almost a year, then admitting he other day that she never really thought the drug came from a burrito, it's hard to believe anything she says.
OK, if she said she never really thought the drug came from a burrito that is ridiculous given how vehemently she argued about the burrito and the pig meat. It's almost as bad as never having heard of nandrolone.
Good thing you said "if". (BTW, she argued "pig offal" and not "pig meat".)
She doesn't admit that in the podcast. She says she is not 100% sure where it came from.
Why should dedicated athletes have ever heard of nandrolone?
Because she doesn't know with 100% certainty, it could have been, and still can be, a burrito, or the vitamins, or sabotage, or any other possibility that still exists she hasn't thought of.
It *could* have been a million different things, each with vanishingly low probability. There are not many particularly likely explanations. One very likely explanation is intentional doping. There are no other possibilities that are particularly likely. That doesn’t mean I think she doped with 100% certainty. But that she very likely doped, with almost no chance of an innocent explanation.
Intentional doping is also a low probability. That probability also vanishes to zero if Houlihan never ordered or ingested the nandrolone pre-cursors.
Prof. Ayotte didn't estimate the likelihood of the alternative she proposed (without any evidence), so there is really no way to compare whether the burrito likelihood is greater than or less than the intentional doping likelihood.
What is highly likely is that athletes cannot prove the source of a banned substance on the balance of probability if they don't really know how it got there, and they don't have a sample to test.
It *could* have been a million different things, each with vanishingly low probability. There are not many particularly likely explanations. One very likely explanation is intentional doping. There are no other possibilities that are particularly likely. That doesn’t mean I think she doped with 100% certainty. But that she very likely doped, with almost no chance of an innocent explanation.
Intentional doping is also a low probability.
[citation needed]
What is likely is that she won't run in any meets for some years as she is banned!
OK, if she said she never really thought the drug came from a burrito that is ridiculous given how vehemently she argued about the burrito and the pig meat. It's almost as bad as never having heard of nandrolone.
Good thing you said "if". (BTW, she argued "pig offal" and not "pig meat".)
She doesn't admit that in the podcast. She says she is not 100% sure where it came from.
Why should dedicated athletes have ever heard of nandrolone?
Offal is meat. It's organ meats. Nandrolone is a steroid. Its use is common in athletics. Pretty sure her coach would've heard of it, and SH. I've heard of it within the context of doping in sport. The point is she argued and argued about the burrito and is now saying she isn't sure where it came from.
This is a list of doping in sport cases, or known cases of performance-enhancing substance use by professional athletes. Anabolic steroids Boldenone undecylenate Tennis: on 15 January 2020, it was revealed that Wimbledon doub...
The thing about probability is that, outside a limited number of things with reproducible frequencies, like coin flips and casino games, probability is subject, reflecting a measure of degree of belief. We are all free to weigh the evidence according to our own point of view and experience, and assign our own probabilities. And none is expressly right or wrong, nor objectively better or worse. The only way to test one's estimate of probability quantitatively is to run a number of trials and see how many come up true. In a one-off real-life situation that's already happened, there's no way (in this universe anyway) to re-run it a bunch of times. The best we can do is a thought experiment with the evidence at hand.
*Most* people who've poked at the publicly available evidence (none of us have access to all the facts, and only SH has an objective knowledge of the true version of the facts) have formed the reasonable conclusion that she very probably (almost certainly) doped intentionally. You, for whatever reason, have landed in a different place, and that's totally fine.
None of us expressing a probability (recognizing that most people are expressing a black and white guilty or innocent, not a probability) are right or wrong, and none of us (save SH) know the truth. But *most* of us have a different opinion than you. Which is neither here nor there; for all of us this is an academic locker room discussion. The only one with skin in the game (SH) is the only one who knows the truth.
I'm wondering how rekrunner (and the similarly-minded here) is going to cope with the "sabotage" defence, since he has gone so hard on the contaminated burrito defense.
Whatever the cheater's excuse is, the troll will vehemently support it, and insult your intelligence and attack your credibility if you don't play along.
I'm wondering how rekrunner (and the similarly-minded here) is going to cope with the "sabotage" defence, since he has gone so hard on the contaminated burrito defense.
I've already given you my reaction -- and rather than reading it for comprehension, you not so cleverly reworded it like a child -- I guess out of intellectual insecurity.
The CAS ruling was that she could not establish the source of the nandrolone, on the balance of probability.
This is consistent with Houlihan simply not knowing how it got there. She didn't 100% know then, when she told us that the burrito was the "most likely" explanation. And she still doesn't 100% know now.
There is no change of defense here. Ingestion by burrito during a pandemic remains a possibility, even if she was unable to prove it to 50% likelihood, despite expert estimates that most burritos across America wouldn't cause a positive result in normal times.
Because she doesn't know with 100% certainty, it could have been, and still can be, a burrito, or the vitamins, or sabotage, or any other possibility that still exists she hasn't thought of.
She is the only one in a position to know the probability of steroid pre-cursors, and claims it is not possible (probability=0) because she simply didn't ingest steroid pre-cursors. Prof. Ayotte didn't give us any estimated likelihood of this possibility.
No change of defense? Really? So sabotage is essentially the same as food contamination? Her varying rationale might be more accurately called the "defence of sheer desperation", of anything that she can think of that has no evidence to back it up.
"The CAS ruling was that she could not establish the source of the nandrolone, on the balance of probability.This is consistent with Houlihan simply not knowing how it got there."(quote)
You left out the bit where CAS also concluded she committed an intentional violation - on the same balance of probability. By that measure, her being unable to establish the source of the nandrolone is more consistent with her lying about it than not knowing about. But you will support any excuse she comes up with, no matter how flimsy.
You have put everything thus far into supporting the unproven and unprovable (for her) "possibility" of food contamination; I expect you to now make the same effort to show "possible" sabotage. I am sure if she said she had been abducted by aliens you would go with that, too.
There are not many particularly likely explanations. One very likely explanation is intentional doping. There are no other possibilities that are particularly likely. That doesn’t mean I think she doped with 100% certainty. But that she very likely doped, with almost no chance of an innocent explanation.
The most likely explanation is that it was put there by the testers, since they are the ones who magically "found" it, and they are the ones who benefit when they "find" such things, as that is the entire purpose of their existence.
Without their existence and the existence of the multitude of drug corporations that back them, there wouldn't be any ongoing issues with drugs, not only with spurious accusations of athletes but also with the major drug issues in society as a whole.
You left out the bit where CAS also concluded she committed an intentional violation
That's from the panel of wolves who are "guarding" the hen house.
According to them it's one of the hens who are guilty, not they themselves who are eating the hens. It is the wolves who are finding the hens guilty. Then when the interest in that particular hen disappears, they will magically find another hens, to support their "cause" and their ongoing and increasing big bucks $$$$$$ from "finding" more guilty hens.
Meanwhile what they are doing is right out in broad daylight $$$$$$, and the unsuspecting minions continue to close their eyes to the truth that is right there in front of them.
"or it could've been someone around me. Like maybe I got drugged and didn't know about it "
Who drugged Shelbo , Karissa ? Ellise ? centro?
It's a good question. Who? I hope they are looking at her main competitors in the 5000, and also everyone who had access to her personal dwelling/abode. Even the landlord can't be ruled out at this point. That's how these investigations are done in the criminal context, which this could very well be. It's illegal to dope someone for financial gain in most states.
No change of defense? Really? So sabotage is essentially the same as food contamination? Her varying rationale might be more accurately called the "defence of sheer desperation", of anything that she can think of that has no evidence to back it up.
"The CAS ruling was that she could not establish the source of the nandrolone, on the balance of probability.This is consistent with Houlihan simply not knowing how it got there."(quote)
You left out the bit where CAS also concluded she committed an intentional violation - on the same balance of probability. By that measure, her being unable to establish the source of the nandrolone is more consistent with her lying about it than not knowing about. But you will support any excuse she comes up with, no matter how flimsy.
You have put everything thus far into supporting the unproven and unprovable (for her) "possibility" of food contamination; I expect you to now make the same effort to show "possible" sabotage. I am sure if she said she had been abducted by aliens you would go with that, too.
Sabotage and vitamins are not new defenses, but other possibilities. These possibilities existed when she told us last June that pork ingestion from a burrito was the "most likely explanation".
Not sure what more I can say about sabotage beyond the existence of the possibility, both then and now.
What is likely is that she won't run in any meets for some years as she is banned!
Why the double standard?
Where is the citation for the likelihood of intentional doping with a norsteroid precursor?
In every Shelby thread you seen convinced she took a precursor. There is a high probability you supplied her with the precursor . We have to look at this possibility .
In every Shelby thread you seen convinced she took a precursor. There is a high probability you supplied her with the precursor . We have to look at this possibility .
The nandrolone precursor was the speculation of Prof. Ayotte.
My conviction is the collection of evidence is inconclusive to determine the source.
My conviction is the collection of evidence is inconclusive to determine the source.
My own conviction is that the simplest explanation is usually closest to the truth. Those who invoke the toothbrush, vigorous kissing and frequent sex as their explanation deserve a fair measure of doubt...
Don't get me wrong, mind you, I'm open to unlikely explanations. of COURSE the moon landings were faked, there was a second shooter and the world, she's-a-flat, like YOUR head... :-D
I like the sarcasm and the concept of a "saboteur" (which is a great word btw!) but I have always maintained this hypothesis of events.
I believe that someone close to her, maybe someone that gee I dunno, possibly left another group because of certain factors associated with doping or "pushing the legal limits", who then never really got better, looked less ripped etc after coming to the group and then eventually left...^^, introduced her to these types of "supplements" (and I think we can be very sure from her recent comments and the findings of WADA that she wasn't ingesting nandrolone directly but instead the over-the-counter precursors) that ultimately she didn't really know how to use in the right way. Clearly "someone" had better advice and resources with respect to pushing up to but not above legal limits and Shelby didn't.
I think the reason this is is because BTC doesn't have a structured program in place of how to bend the rules as far as possible but not break them a-la other now defunct groups so she was left to her own judgements. So think about how difficult this is to get right - you are taking something that synthesizes into something that you are allowed to have in your body - but only to a certain amount. I mean good luck with that. The factors that are in play there are so wide-ranging and nuanced you have to be both pretty stupid and very desperate to roll the dice on - but I think Houlihan is/was both.
I still maintain that despite Schumachers outright dumb comments of "never having heard of nandrolone" and his vehement support of her in the face of her first ludicrous story, he didn't know what was happening or have things in BTC to support this kind of stuff. It is completely possibly and likely she was ultimately acting on her own accord (I mean ultimately in the sense of purchasing and using) - if we are talking 1-2 pills before bedtime each day this isn't exactly a big routine with chance of exposure. If anything the fact she was so far over the limit when she was busted points to someone not very intelligent doing things on their own. I doubt Jerry risks his group and his reputation letting her just do what she wants with stuff he introduced. On the flipside there is a reason none of the Oregon Project guys were busted despite their hematocrit, nandrolone, testosterone etc levels probably being about as optimum as humanly possible for half a decade - that's because Alberto had a crew in place making sure there was no way they would get impatient and just "pop and extra pill after feeling bad in a workout" etc.
Again, saboteur is a great word but "co-conspirator" is my bet ;)
Normally I agree with your takes, but I'm not buying the idea that Schumacher is totally out of the loop or that BTC doesn't have the resources and/or organizational structure that NOP did to facilitate a team-wide doping program. I think Shelby was pissing hot because she intentionally took a nandrolone precursor and wasn't expecting to be tested.
Look I don't have issue with that at all and yeah it's very possible. I believe a couple of things with BTC
1) They certainly didn't/don't have a Salazar'esque system in place. Like I don't think Jerry is massaging testosterone cream into his kids legs to see how close he can get them to a legal limit. If you know any old school guys that were running on the west coast back in the day ask them about Alberto - he's borderline insane. Schumacher isn't that
2) When I say Jerry "didn't know" that can also be a very grey area. Because when you coach someone every day for multiple years and you have a lot of experience you see stuff and you just know. Like when Shelby suddenly transforms to more gaunt in the face and ripped with a marked performance increase you have to be pretty stupid not to have some idea. So "doesn't know" can also be "just turn a blind eye because my job is to set workouts and coach" which is how a lot of this works in professional athletics.
3) Having the resources and org structure to do something vs actually doing it are different things. But really what are we talking about here? If it is over the counter stuff like precursor supplements then I myself have the resources to structure to do that. This is why I doubt there is any Schumacher involvement because it's too rudimentary. If she gets popped for some designer steroid like Marion Jones and "the clear" then I think we can point a hard finger. If we came across her name on charts with "10mg phenalazonalozzalzol" scribbled at the bottom of it like our boy Rupp then that's something else.
4) Agree with you totally on your final sentence. I don't think she was expecting to be tested and/or got greedy with dosage. What is a trait of cheating at anything? - when you think you are getting away with it you try and cheat more and more and more. Like people that steal petty cash at work - starts with a dollar and just snowballs until it's so obvious they get caught. Same thing at play with her.
OK, if she said she never really thought the drug came from a burrito that is ridiculous given how vehemently she argued about the burrito and the pig meat. It's almost as bad as never having heard of nandrolone.
Good thing you said "if". (BTW, she argued "pig offal" and not "pig meat".)
She doesn't admit that in the podcast. She says she is not 100% sure where it came from.
Why should dedicated athletes have ever heard of nandrolone?
I just got pulled over for a DUI. I have one call to make. I call Rekrunner, my attorney. Rekrunner tells them my client has never even heard of alcohol…my client appears to be Amish…is there any proof he was actually driving?
Good thing you said "if". (BTW, she argued "pig offal" and not "pig meat".)
She doesn't admit that in the podcast. She says she is not 100% sure where it came from.
Why should dedicated athletes have ever heard of nandrolone?
Offal is meat. It's organ meats. Nandrolone is a steroid. Its use is common in athletics. Pretty sure her coach would've heard of it, and SH. I've heard of it within the context of doping in sport. The point is she argued and argued about the burrito and is now saying she isn't sure where it came from.