Lolcats wrote:
Lagat.
Lagat is from one of the "protected" groups - doubtful even his US citizenship will allow him to be punished - among the protected are athletes from: Kenya, Ethiopia, Cuba, Brazil (Brazilian athletes have to be of a certain profile to enjoy protection) ... these athletes have to do something totally outrageous or be in a situation wherein the powers that be can't hide the offense for them to get in trouble.
Phantasy Star wrote:
Sacrificial lambs. Again.
North Africans and Eastern Europeans. Yawn.
Wake me up when they nab some East Africans, Jamaicans, and Americans.
Americans are nabbed all the time. Aware people know that certain people are shielded because of politics, and that doesn't mean politicking in the sport, this has to do with an agenda far beyond sports.
wr potential wrote:
On that note, maybe we will finally see Ennis get that bronze medal in the Heptathlon. She was appealing to the IAAF to get it upgraded recently..
She's a hypocritical cheat. Eff her.
Ben L Wrong wrote:
This is the ultimate proof about the IAAF covering many, many positives.
If the re-analysis of these samples has been ongoing for some time (allegedly before ARD-Seppelt's doping investigation) why was announced now? it's not a casuality.
Probably, with the retesting methods, they're catching at least 70% of the top 8 athletes for each individual event. With all these positives, they pick some "sacrificial lambs" (Russian walkers, Old-Eastern Bloc Throwers, Moroccans, Algerians, Indians, etc) and then, they notify the athletes. The rest of the dopers are covered, because it would be a mess for any sport to say that 70% of the top 8 athletes for each event are doped.
Sacrificial lambs would of course be Arabs, Europeans in general, Japanese. Protected include Cubans, Ethiopians, Kenyans and other third world peoples, lots of Africans and Latin Americans fit the bill. Whites, Asians, Arabs - most of them - are to be considered "bad", Africans, Latin Americans, most are to be considered "good". You'll see.
Devil Dog wrote:
Ramzi is going to lose two golds and a silver.
07 1500 will be Lagat, Korir, Kiprop
05 1500 will be Kouch, Silva, Heshko
05 800 will be Yuriy, Yiampoy, Bungei
Lagat is a cheating pig.
HardLoper wrote:
Webb is finally going to get his medal!
I was thinking he may be on the list.
Does Steve Scott get his mile AR back?
George Orwell wrote:
1984 wrote:I hope they retest the samples from the 1984 Olympics..
Right on!
King Carl's excuses would be hilarious.
And your proof of this is?
What i don't understand about this "retesting" is how can you retest and maintain that the chain of custody (COC) is still valid?
Karl Marx Ignatiev wrote:
Americans are nabbed all the time.
Not by IAAF.
Does anyone know or feels they have a good idea what these athletes are being accused of using? What wasn't there a test for 10 years ago that they could still test for now with a high degree of confidence, even given the length of time the blood has been stored? Seems like it wouldn't be a very long list... maybe knowing the drugs would help us figure out who it was. I might be forgetting, but I can't recall many high profile field athletes getting nabbed back then. We might be wrong to be speculating about distance runners. That said, I can't believe no one's listed the obvious candidate: Radcliffe G WM '05
Link wrote:
Does anyone know or feels they have a good idea what these athletes are being accused of using? What wasn't there a test for 10 years ago that they could still test for now with a high degree of confidence, even given the length of time the blood has been stored?
I think the positives are for:
1-"blood abnormalities"
2- Peptides (like GW501516, GW501, GW516, GW1516, GSK-516 and Endurobol) because they were added on the banned list in 2009.
Barney Fife wrote:
What i don't understand about this "retesting" is how can you retest and maintain that the chain of custody (COC) is still valid?
If they purposely preserved extra samples that presumably have properly documented chain of custody (like any other sample they collect), then why would they not be valid?
Dingleberry wrote:
wr potential wrote:If they have any samples from 2003 they should make it 12 years and retest them too - but it looks like they only started this long term storage program in 2005 sadly..
Yes, there is a very specific 1500 runner who retired between 2003 and 2005 who's samples I would also like to see re-tested.
Maybe if you knew more about the sport you would know that while El G's last race was in 2004 he did not officially retire from the sport until 2006 :)
Ben L Wrong wrote:
Link wrote:Does anyone know or feels they have a good idea what these athletes are being accused of using? What wasn't there a test for 10 years ago that they could still test for now with a high degree of confidence, even given the length of time the blood has been stored?
I think the positives are for:
1-"blood abnormalities"
2- Peptides (like GW501516, GW501, GW516, GW1516, GSK-516 and Endurobol) because they were added on the banned list in 2009.
How does that work, then? If they weren't on the banned list, can they still be busted for using them?
Hingle McCringleberry wrote:
Dingleberry wrote:Yes, there is a very specific 1500 runner who retired between 2003 and 2005 who's samples I would also like to see re-tested.
Maybe if you knew more about the sport you would know that while El G's last race was in 2004 he did not officially retire from the sport until 2006 :)
Really? You come back from your fart-wrangling comments of late, in an attempt to post something intelligent, but end up saying something as inconsequential as this? Weak.
Ryan Braun's Agent wrote:
rojo wrote:All week there had been rumors of a major drug bust that was coming and now it's out. The IAAF has gone back and used new technology to re-test samples stored since the 2005 and 2007 World Champs.
I would like to challenge both the handling of said samples and the storage procedures. If you can not prove to me that all storage procedures are fully compliant, then I shall challenge the legality of said test. Please provide me with daily records from said storage. This includes daily temperature (and humidity) readings, who had access to the storage vault and how often it was accessed.
That's going to end badly for you Mr. Agent. If you took the time to read the WADA standards, you'd know they address chain of custody in great detail. Funny how it still doesn't prevent swapped samples as mentioned in the last IAAF corruption scandal.
If you are really smart, you demand a retest and witness the retest with a test expert. That would blow high-five-figure money on experts and not change a thing.
Best thing to do, really, with low six-figures is bribe the CAS panel. Whoops! That's not supposed to happen....
Phantasy Star wrote:
Sacrificial lambs. Again.
North Africans and Eastern Europeans. Yawn.
Wake me up when they nab some East Africans, Jamaicans, and Americans.
This is the truth. Everything Victor Conte, Charlie Francis, and Jose Canseco have said about doping in sports eventually comes to light.
If it wasn't banned until 2009, they shouldn't have been testing those sample for it.
Protective Coloration wrote:
Lolcats wrote:Lagat.
Lagat is from one of the "protected" groups - doubtful even his US citizenship will allow him to be punished - among the protected are athletes from: Kenya, Ethiopia, Cuba, Brazil (Brazilian athletes have to be of a certain profile to enjoy protection) ... these athletes have to do something totally outrageous or be in a situation wherein the powers that be can't hide the offense for them to get in trouble.
Yes. Only a fool would be oblivious to the fact that these rich third world countries are the ones who are really in control.
Muppet.