The worst part of this disaster is that the dopers likely cost Shannon Rowbury a small fortune. Doping = theft.
honestly the worst part is that at some point any of these 4 dopers were a small part of a reason why morgan uceny tripped and fell. i were her i would sue for damages lol. no medal for her but why not a fat check?
Crazy story. Lisa Dobriskey who represented the UK in the 1500m at the 2012 Olympics was upgraded several times over the years from her initial 10th place to 5th after more and more athletes from the race tested positive.
Seoul 100m men? (Fewer people but a high percentage had allegations at some point).
this one Seoul 100 has one hundred percent full meal deal dopers.
including Lewis, who was doped, but was clean a year prior or so
Lewis might be the cleanest fastest of all time
i have no clues about this gout gout, his frame isn't anabolic, but a skinny lad can micro dose. which is to say, i like to pipe dream this dude is clean.
Crazy story. Lisa Dobriskey who represented the UK in the 1500m at the 2012 Olympics was upgraded several times over the years from her initial 10th place to 5th after more and more athletes from the race tested positive.
Isn't highlighting "the one we don't know about" just another way to talk about belief?
I look to experts to share their knowledge, not talk about the unknown.
Included in their knowledge is their awareness that doping exceeds what is known or detected because it is inherently done in secret. In the same way, white-collar crime or a "black market" is known to be greater than what is actually revealed. The old tip of the iceberg analogy. But you can be trusted not to understand that.
Of course. Thanks to the knowledge of anti-doping experts, I understand now that "It’s all a shot in the dark", because even the experts know that no one really knows anything. That's the stuff myths are made of.
That race had almost no clean athletes, but the idea that you have to doping to be accelerating in the final meters of a race is one of the dumber things I have ever seen here. Have you never heard of a kick?
There are kicks that are believable and those that aren't.
“When you’re competing against someone who’s cheated, their bodies don’t behave the way a normal, clean body would when everybody else is fading,” Rowbury says. “They seem to have these other gears. They don’t seem to be impacted by lactic acid in the same way as everybody else, because they aren’t like everybody else. They’ve cheated.” It is striking, watching the final metres of the race, that two athletes appear almost to be accelerating in the final metres, like a pair of e-bikes on a hill overtaking flagging pedal cyclists. (quote)
It brings to mind a recent thread about a certain African distance runner. Actually, quite a few threads these days.
Jakob's lack of a kick at the end of his global 1500m finals must mean he's super clean then.
Doping also provides superhuman endurance - and especially for those without much native speed. So, no.
Included in their knowledge is their awareness that doping exceeds what is known or detected because it is inherently done in secret. In the same way, white-collar crime or a "black market" is known to be greater than what is actually revealed. The old tip of the iceberg analogy. But you can be trusted not to understand that.
Of course. Thanks to the knowledge of anti-doping experts, I understand now that "It’s all a shot in the dark", because even the experts know that no one really knows anything. That's the stuff myths are made of.
That isn't what they are saying, that they don't know anything, but that the full extent of a clandestine practice (which is known to occur) cannot be definitively measured. It has to be estimated. You are the biggest m*ron on these boards.
Not really. Obviously that is correct. The only question is, how many such programs exist.
I have a lot more questions than that. It is correct that the unknown is not knowledge.
The "unknown", which is that which hasn't been definitively identified, may at the same time be known to exist but cannot be measured or otherwise quantified. For example, we know black markets exist but we don't know for sure their exact extent or who the specific practitioners are. You shouldn't vex yourself about these things. They are out of your (very limited) pay range.
Not really. Obviously that is correct. The only question is, how many such programs exist.
I have a lot more questions than that. It is correct that the unknown is not knowledge.
We can know something exists without knowing its full or exact extent - that is "unknown" - or, in the case of a practice, who is doing it - like doping. Too subtle for the concrete in your cerebral cortex.
Of course. Thanks to the knowledge of anti-doping experts, I understand now that "It’s all a shot in the dark", because even the experts know that no one really knows anything. That's the stuff myths are made of.
You are the biggest m*ron on these boards.
Says the guy who is corrected day in day out on many occasions. Who writes the same stuff which anybody knows hundreds of times. So, no, reky isn't the biggest m*ron on these boards.
Says the guy who is corrected day in day out on many occasions. Who writes the same stuff which anybody knows hundreds of times. So, no, reky isn't the biggest m*ron on these boards.
Says the guy who is corrected day in day out on many occasions. Who writes the same stuff which anybody knows hundreds of times. So, no, reky isn't the biggest m*ron on these boards.
He does sound permanently angry. Roid rage for sure. He is a doper.
Says the guy who is corrected day in day out on many occasions. Who writes the same stuff which anybody knows hundreds of times. So, no, reky isn't the biggest m*ron on these boards.
He does sound permanently angry. Roid rage for sure. He is a doper.