Who is more likely to be an Olympic champion, Parker Valby, Addy Wiley or Katelyn Tuhoy?

Wiley will definitely be drug tested at USATF. She's only 19 and not being charged with anything.

Almost the entire NCAA 1500 field pr'd behind Barnett and Touhy as pacers. Was that due to EPO, or perhaps because June is the championship they have peaked for?

Who is paying for this sophisticated doping program? Wiley & Johnsons have no money. If they had funding, would a small time coach at a tiny Christian college really set up a doping program to podium at the NAIA meet?

There's a good chance these cases ultimately get dropped. They have witness 'he said/she said' allegations, but not much factual evidence. When the accuser realizes they have to face cross examination of their credibility by the opposing lawyer in front of a courtroom and media, they often decide not to testify. Then case disappears.

In USA, we are thankfully innocent until proven guilty. I don't like the allegations either and Addy should be tested regularly, but unless she fails a test she's free to compete. We also have to let the legal process play out to see if allegations result in conviction.

woah, obsess much?

Tuohy is the one who avoids testing. Easy to see when she comes down from the mountain.

Basically agreed. I’d put it this way: I think Wiley’s chances are the farthest from zero, but really, none of them are very far from zero. In a tactical 1500 she can actually be in the mix. Tuohy and Valby would be lucky not to get lapped in an international 5000.

None of the above. Running is 99+% psychological. Human behavior is predictably replicable from past behavior. None of these are "happy champions". What's a happy champion? Look at Jenny Barringer winning her first NCAA titles & setting her first NCAA all time records indoors & you'll know what I'm talking about. Addy Wiley will never live down the allegations. Tuohy is not a champion as evidenced at NCAAs just now. Valby is by far my personal favorite of these 3 (although I'd likely pull harder for someone else like perhaps Amina Matooug, Juliette Whitaker, Sophie O'Sullivan, Weini Kelati, Taylor Roe, etc etc), but only being able to put in like 20 miles per week for the last year when she's in her early twenties is **not**predictive of success. She will likely end up debilitated by her early 40s with an autoimmune disorder in my opinion.

I don't think any if them will, because they're too slie. Here in Scotland, we already have an 18 year old running sub 32 for 10k on the roads. Valby and Tuohy are both 21 already, aren't they? Tuohy might just about get to sub 15 if she gets fitter and loses a little weight, but progress isn't happening quickly for her and she might have peaked. Valby might be a worlds also ran next cycle if she strengthens up. She hasn't got a finishing kick but she has far better knee lift than Tuohy so I'd say more potential. Haven't heard of the other one.

Let me preface this by saying I'm rooting for Wiley, partially because Astro drove me to really look into her past results and I'm convinced that she's either clean or at least could be running these times clean so I 100% give her the benefit of the doubt as I do with all athletes that have very consistent results and have never tested positive.

But when it comes to epo, it's not sophisticated and it's not expensive unless you have cancer and your insurance provider is in cahoots with amgen pretending it's totally ok to pay an arm and a leg for something that anyone can get from China for a couple hundred bucks. If you want to do epo and know how to use the internet, it's there for the taking, no doubt about that.

The thing is that her results have been way too consistent in my opinion for her to be doping, especially given that she's been tested multiple times at big meets where she raced well.

As JWH was suggesting earlier, maybe one of these gals medals in another sport altogether, such as triathlon. I can't imagine Valby swimming very well, same for Tuohy she's so tiny. Wiley has been a multi-sport star athlete her whole life, so maybe she's already a decent swimmer or could pick it up. She'd be a monster on the bike. But yeah of course I don't actually see her transitioning to tri given her potential in the 1500 and 5000, the latter of which I think may be her best event by 2028.

Impossible to say at this stage who will be the better pro. Setting the bar at Olympic champion is unrealistic for any American runner. We haven't had an Olympic champion at a distance longer than 800 meters since Joan Benoit in 1984.

Delusional

No amount of pork burritos can turn Tuohy into an Olympic champion.

Superman or Mighty Mouse

Who is most likely to inspire VALBYMANIA, baby?!

Barring injury i would pick Valby because she's a front runner and comfortable at it. And she would stand a good chance to progress over the years. She's similar to Laura Muir style of racing. But I'm throwing in a fourth choice and that's Chmiel because her strength in distance is the 5k she stays healthy and more importantly she's trainable. She needs the tight fit of a coach but for now she's in Touhy's shadow and runs as a team supporter and seems very loyal. But she has the talent and potential.

Before she suddenly ran 4:03 her pr was 4:11. And in high school she did not run one time of note until her senior year when she ran that 1600 out of no where, a race where Lauren Johnson paced her. She is running for coaches who have been very credibly accused of doping their athletes, and one of whom admits even worse and is facing criminal conviction. And she refuses to part with them. The idea that people on this board think "well, I'm going to give this situation the benefit of the doubt" is delusional. And as you note these are products you can get relatively cheap on the internet. And testing, especially in competition, is virtually useless, very rarely catching anyone. People can shoot the messenger all they want, but it requires a level of credulity to accept this situation at face value that is extraordinary.

This message will self-destruct in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.