The Worm Provides! wrote:
imsus wrote:
LetsRun note: it is LetsRun policy to let people speculate about drugs for all athletes as we believe it leads to a cleaner sport
Explain how, exactly, you think this contributes at all to having a "cleaner sport."
It doesn't, of course. But if posters weren't allowed to slander runners with drug accusations, this message board would have 90 percent less traffic. That's bad for business.
LetsRun note: it is LetsRun policy to let people speculate about drugs for all athletes as we believe it leads to a cleaner sport
You knuckleheads can't possibly be stupid enough to believe this tripe.
It leads to more traffic on the boards which is the goal.
fada tyme wrote:
LetsRun note: it is LetsRun policy to let people speculate about drugs for all athletes as we believe it leads to a cleaner sport
You knuckleheads can't possibly be stupid enough to believe this tripe.
It leads to more traffic on the boards which is the goal.
Nah. Think of all the runners who were going to dope but then thought about how they would be eviscerated on LRC.
Puddin head Joe wrote:
Oppenheimer wrote:
Or something like "I personally injected Keira with PEDs"
The OP was clearly offering an opinion.
It's a false statement. She's doing it clean. It's published, false, and injurious.
Why are you stretching so hard? It looks like you are doing damage control. You practically admit to not caring whether or not you have a clue about legal comprehension.
LikeAnsweringQuestionsOnAmazon. wrote:
Puddin head Joe wrote:
It's a false statement. She's doing it clean. It's published, false, and injurious.
Why are you stretching so hard? It looks like you are doing damage control. You practically admit to not caring whether or not you have a clue about legal comprehension.
I'd pay to see you and FartKing69 advocate for this libel in court.
Puddin head Joe wrote:
I'd pay to see you and FartKing69 advocate for this libel in court.
Sounds like you have skin in the game or are a troll. Not sure why a troll would come on here and post over and over again just to be called stupid. Although that happens all the time on Letsrun and you are stupid, you most likely know the person who raised the suspicion of the OP. Your defense of her while valiant, is better left to others more equipped.
Puddin head Joe wrote:
LikeAnsweringQuestionsOnAmazon. wrote:
Why are you stretching so hard? It looks like you are doing damage control. You practically admit to not caring whether or not you have a clue about legal comprehension.
I'd pay to see you and FartKing69 advocate for this libel in court.
I wouldn't be an advocate for anything but you shutting up about libel people can say the doubt the lady is clean O.k.?
LetsRun note: it is LetsRun policy to let people speculate about drugs for all athletes as we believe it leads to a cleaner sport
wejo and rojo take viagra to try and pretend they arent delapidated couch potatoes.
it does not fool their wives, who still demand seperate bedrooms,
but sometimes keeps them awake for part of the podcast.
Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:
Not An Expert wrote:
It’ll obviously vary runner to runner, but these are pretty good rules of thumb, though maybe a bit conservative (and with a bit larger gap between men and women’s adjustments than time justifies).
2% of 130 minutes (2:10) is 2 minutes 36 seconds, so a 2:10-flat guy would become a 2:07-mid guy with an average response to the shoes. And 2% of 140 minutes (2:20) is 2 minutes 48 seconds, so an 2:20 gal with an average response would become a 2:17-low gal.
The interesting thing, though, is if there are high responders—if a 2:10 guy is a high-responder and gets a 4% benefit from the shoes that turns him into a 2:04-high guy. And if a 2:20 gal gets 4%, that turns her into a 2:14-mid gal. With the way world (and various other national and area) records have improved on the roads over the last few years, it would make sense if some already high-performing (whether clean or r not) high-responders to the shoe tech have been the recent record breakers.
All of this is a long way of saying that I think D’Amato would’ve run 2:22-2:24 without super shoes, and Hall 1:08-1:09. And I bet Flanagan, in her marathoning prime (think 2014, when she ran 2:21 in Berlin) would’ve run right around what D’Amato did today, and maybe dipped II to the 2:18s, with today’s shoe tech.
But if it’s and buts we’re candy, we’d all have a merry Christmas—congrats to D’Amato and Hall, the new American record holders!
If a 2;10 guy gets turned in to a 2:04 guy, why are all American 2:10 guys still 2:10 guys? Ain't no American guys running 2:04.
Anabolic steroids and HGH aid female performance more than said drugs aid male performances. There is a performance loop for men. Take too many T-level boosters, males then produce less natural T. Females taking T-boosters, women almost turn into men.
I believe Malindi Elmore's 2;24 and top 10 at the Olympics after a long layoff a lot more than I believe this.
bladerunner wrote:
The Worm Provides! wrote:
Explain how, exactly, you think this contributes at all to having a "cleaner sport."
It doesn't, of course. But if posters weren't allowed to slander runners with drug accusations, this message board would have 90 percent less traffic. That's bad for business.
^This
LetsRun note: it is LetsRun policy to let people speculate about drugs for all athletes as we believe it leads to a cleaner sport[/quote]
That doesn't make this thread any better.
So the Marathon Project doesn’t count?
Or top 15 at the Trials in Atlanta?
In ‘05 Kastor ran 2:21.
3 weeks before her 2:19:36 she ran 1:07:34
Keira ran 1:07:55 solo a few weeks ago and 2:22 last year.
So what’s this about “no resume”?
Update for LRC: D'Amato was drug tested after the race.
Let's wait for the results because, remember, as Schumacher and Houlihan and Flanagan and Goucher have argued, the "tests are so sophisticated now that they pick up everything, incriminating the innocents."
How long do results take to show and/or record gets verified: 3-6 months?
I'd expect her to be clean as a whistle for the race. To go into a race with drugs in your system is the most amateur thing you can do. A well-elaborated doping plan will get you clean to races.
Would love to know how many tests she's undergone in the build-up for this marathon...
Puddin head Joe wrote:
Oppenheimer wrote:
Or something like "I personally injected Keira with PEDs"
The OP was clearly offering an opinion.
It's a false statement. She's doing it clean. It's published, false, and injurious.
There has to be proof that the writer acted with actual malice.
well,, wrote:
bladerunner wrote:
It doesn't, of course. But if posters weren't allowed to slander runners with drug accusations, this message board would have 90 percent less traffic. That's bad for business.
^This
Pretty much impossible to slander runners on a forum like this.
Libel, not libel, does it really matter if you can't identify the person because it's coming from an anonymous account? And the owners of the website are legally protected under CDA 230? So isn't it all irrelevant regardless of what it technically is?
Nike doesn't have clean athletes so yes, she dopes.
Notime wrote:
Update for LRC: D'Amato was drug tested after the race.
Let's wait for the results because, remember, as Schumacher and Houlihan and Flanagan and Goucher have argued, the "tests are so sophisticated now that they pick up everything, incriminating the innocents."
How long do results take to show and/or record gets verified: 3-6 months?
Same day drug testing is just about pointless. It's the out of competition testing that is important.