Mark Block is in Monaco As We Speak - $50 For 1st Person To Take Picture of Him in Monaco!!

You have to get the big names of sport "journalism" interested for this to get some legs, Bros. ESPN, SI, etc. Seriously.

WEJO, I understand where yu are coming from but aren't you talking to the wrong people? The problem here is that many believe you only exploit drug use on your site to increase readership and income. While probably true, you also need to carry this one step further and attempt to get USATF, WADA, IAAF and the IOC involved with this guy again. Good luck.

A few points.

1) Right now for Jason Richardson and Carmelita Jeter's sake I hope Mark Block is still acting as their agent. If not, considering his doping past, what is he doing in Europe? If he's not making money representing them, then the ways to make money seem to be a) coaching or b) doping. Both already have coaches so for their sake I hope he still secretly is their agent.

2) Meets that honor the WADA code should not be working with Mark Block. I believe that is a violation of the WADA code. Some of you have pointed out to section 10.2.2 of his ruling which says, "10.2.2 During his period of ineligibility, in addition to all other penalties or restrictions flowing from his ineligibility, Mr. Block is prohibited from participating in and having access to the training facilities of the USOC Training Centers or other programs and activities of the USOC including, but not limited to, grants, awards, or employment pursuant to USOC Policies."

However you are ignoring 10.2.1 "The "appropriate Consequences" imposed by the Panel is a ten year period of ineligibility commencing January 1, 2009 and ending on January 1, 2019"

If 10.2.2 was the only thing that applied then Mark Block would just say when confronted at the Trials, "I am only banned from USOC training facilities."

When Carmelita Jeter was asked who her agent was she would say, "Mark Block".

Mark Block's name would not have been taken off the Total Sports website.

The point is Mark Block is not supposed to be involved in the sport of track and field. Mmeets that recognize the WADA code are not supposed to work with him. That is like working with Marion Jones when she is banned.

Nike is not a signatory of the WADA code, but as a USOC sponsor they should be obligated to follow it. Thus they should not work with Mark Block.

Public pressure can play a factor.

And long term yes this may help the credibility of letsrun but short term this isn't a financial windfall for us. No one else is touching this story. Why do you think RunnersWorld almost never writes anything negative about anything in the industry?

I just broke it down for you. Block is still President and a stakeholder if not the main stakeholder in Total Sports Management. The toothless USADA "ban" does nothing to prohibit that. Again there is nothing in the "ban" that prohibits Block from maintaining an executive role and stakeholder position in a company that represents athletes. Nothing. The "ban" is the equivalent of probation and community service. Block can legitimately and is legitimately making money from the sport through Total Sports Management a company that represents Carmelita Jeter and others even under the terms of the ban because the "ban" does nothing to prohibit that. That is what I would be making noise about and pointing fingers at USADA if I were in your position and not the silliness about Mark Block appearing at track meets.

Keep up the good work Letsrun!!

If there is enough talk, someone will listen. It will be a shame if Mark Block is at the Olympics, especially if a shoe company is paying for his expenses.

Solinsky tweets his take on this thing.

"Chris Solinsky‏@ChrisSolinsky

@MattTegenkamp @evanjager @letsrundotcom they're too obsessed with Block. He goes to every meet, just not supposed to go in. #oldnews"

Life Time Bans! wrote:

Keep up the good work Letsrun!!

If there is enough talk, someone will listen. It will be a shame if Mark Block is at the Olympics, especially if a shoe company is paying for his expenses.

I doubt that a shoe company is directly paying for his expenses though they no doubt are indirectly doing so since Mark Block is at least part owner of Total Sports Management a company that represents athletes like Jeter and the company gets a cut of whatever endorsement deals the athlete signs.

Rojo,

Did you really just include an anonymous email in your report??? haha

10/10 for the troll who sent that in.

In fairness, 5 years ago Tiger Woods was bigger than the sport of baseball, Penn State and Track and field combined.

However, Mark Block going to these meets and you guys harassing him under the assumption that him being there is "He is up to no good" is poor journalism at its best.

Why is it so hard for you guys to aim the gun before firing it off randomly in the air? Gather some information, approach this more than as an outraged group of fans, you ruined a Golden opportunity at the trails to have a decent interview with the man and instead you immediately went into harassment mode and he left you looking like your everyday paparazzi, chasing a celebrity with a camera asking question that get no answers.

Stop making constant mentions and stupid black pages for a non-athlete while the entire time Evan Jager is setting ARs, World Juniors throwing down impressive times and whats going on with LetsRun? Mark Block controversy with not a shred of real story just tabloid type accusations.

This is not the NFL, stop comparing it to the NFL.

This is not Baseball, stop comparing it to the MLB

This isn't even close to anything similar to Penn State.

All of these meets you have someone there and instead you're yelling at someone else in the stands.

rojo wrote:

I guess the guy has no shame.

I think that's been obvious for years now.

Don't get me wrong on this, I want Block-Chaplin-Hightower-Knight the whole goon squad held accountable. So why does Mark Block continue to get away with his indiscretions? It's money. (Bear with me).

USATF's annual budget of $23,000,000~ is about 200th on the list of the "Highest Paid Sports Teams in the World." This is just what the professional athletes are paid (not how much their team is worth or how much revenue they generate), and amounts to a nuisance of a tax write-off for NIKE.

USATF could only pay a small percentage of the New York Yankees average annual salary.

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/7850531/espn-magazine-sportingintelligence-global-salary-survey-espn-magazine

The athletes are fighting over crumbs. I'm starting to think the powers that be want it that way so they can control the athletes. And despite the fact that track has dirty athletes, compared to "professional" sports (which appear to give lip service for the most part to their anti-drug messages), track is relatively clean.

How relevant is this to Mark Block? Well, part of the problem is this sense of being untouchable if you are playing the game right in USATF. It's like fighting Al Capone in the 1930s, everybody seems to be on the take in some way.

So what if a few peasants (us) complain, in its collective arrogance these organizations (fiefdoms) have little to no regard for us and think we are ineffectual lightweights. Snap a photo of Mark Block? So what, they might say.

The Mark Blocks (Chaplins/Hightowers, etc.) of the sport are symptoms, not the original problem. These organizations seem too impervious to public pressure. Why? What is their ace in the hole? Who's covering for them? Why can't they be brought tumbling down? That's your story.

Is there an oversight committee above and beyond USATF and these organizations which purportedly police it? Would the US govt take an interest?

It's becoming a case of the fox guarding the hen house.

rojo wrote:

$50 extra if it's at the meet which has started or at the meet hotel.

I'm working on a story on this right now but wanted to get this up.

I thought our story would cause him to lay low for a while. I guess the guy has no shame.

What a coincidence - a vacation in Monaco on the day of the DL meet.

WHO CARES! OK SO HE IS BANNED HIS LIFE OBVIOUSLY IS CENTERED AROUND THE SPORT AND UNLESS THERE IS SOME LAW WHY DO U FREAKIN CARE IF HE IS AT A TRACK MEET OR NOT.

THE SPORT IS DOPED HIM BEING THERE OR NOT BEING THERE ISNT GOING TO CHANGE THAT.

No need to shout buddy. I agree it's not much of a story but I'm not gonna freak out about it.

I'm more pissed that they completely ignored the whole Ian Stewart thing while they act like a white night riding into town to save T&F over the Mark Block thing.

Old school quote from 2001

http://www.rediff.com/sports/2001/aug/03susp.htm

In a heavy-handed piece of censorship on Thursday a compere at a news conference for several leading athletes contracted to shoe company Nike refused to let reporters ask any questions about drugs.

Briton Paula Radcliffe, the world long course cross country champion and an outspoken opponent of doping, was asked for her comments on the Yegorova case when John Capriotti stepped in and said no questions would be taken on drugs.

Capriotti was unrepentant afterwards, saying "the drugs issue was not part of our agenda".

zuba wrote:

I'm more pissed that they completely ignored the whole Ian Stewart thing while they act like a white night riding into town to save T&F over the Mark Block thing.

Why is that such a big deal? He's in charge of arranging the athletes and he could just take the position, "I don't like him. I'm not going to invite him." That's his prerogative, isn't it?

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Why is that such a big deal? He's in charge of arranging the athletes and he could just take the position, "I don't like him. I'm not going to invite him." That's his prerogative, isn't it?

Yes of course it is. But that doesn't mean it's a non-story. Pretty outrageous abuse of power imo. Worth mentioning at the very least. All they did was link to the message board thread.

These Mark Block (lack of) stories are getting boring.

zuba wrote:

Yes of course it is. But that doesn't mean it's a non-story. Pretty outrageous abuse of power imo. Worth mentioning at the very least. All they did was link to the message board thread.

I'm not seeing the abuse part. If I'm going to have my kitchen remodeled and I decline to hire a perfectly qualified contractor on the basis that I don't personally like him, have I abused my power? Or I work for a company that gets lots of VIPs coming in and out of the area, and we contract hired cars to take them from place to place and it's my job to contract the car company. If I decide to go with Company B over Company A because the rep for Company A isn't someone I like personally, have I abused my power?

Jeff Wigand wrote:

I'm not seeing the abuse part. If I'm going to have my kitchen remodeled and I decline to hire a perfectly qualified contractor on the basis that I don't personally like him, have I abused my power? Or I work for a company that gets lots of VIPs coming in and out of the area, and we contract hired cars to take them from place to place and it's my job to contract the car company. If I decide to go with Company B over Company A because the rep for Company A isn't someone I like personally, have I abused my power?

Not really fair comparisons. Ian Stewart isn't setting up a track meet for his own personal amusement. A man in his position has a duty to do what is right for the sport. He didn't have a legit reason to call Symmonds a "liability" and stop him from competing with no other explanation given. Journalists in London should have been sticking a microphone down his throat instead of giving him a free pass.