Evan Jager "likely doping" per new Fancy Bears leak

heyyo wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

"likely" is just a statistical measure based on blood passport results. Non-analytical positives would not factor in to this at all.

This is probably right. This table is completely contextless. My very minimal understanding is that the athlete blood passport (ABP) program has two broad steps: 1) apply "algorithm" to blood variables such as hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cell count, and mean corpuscular volume 2) evaluate each athlete's case by an expert panel.

The tables published by Fancy Bears are very likely the results of the step 1 analysis before the expert panel reviewed each case. The blood passport program and its associated algorithms are inaccurate due to inherent variability in the blood variables. False positives and obviously false negatives are both very common.

I doubt there is anything to see here. It's unfortunate for the athletes in these lists that fancy bears and letsrun is so recklessly dragging their names through the mud without providing more context or information on the ABP program.

Fancy bears as a hacker organization arguably doesn't have a responsibility to provide context, only information. Letsrun on the other hand as a self-proclaimed journalistic entity should make even a minimal effort to understand the ABP program and share that information alongside this data with their viewers. But alas Letsrun is not a journalistic organization but rather a gossip website whose only goal is to drive views and monetize eyeballs with borderline browser malware advertisements.

Alternatively, there is a giant conspiracy where each of these athletes had their cases evaluated by the expert panel, were found to be blood doping, and then WADA/IAAF/Nike covered up the results. Unless you're wearing a tinfoil hat this narrative seems farfetched.

trollism wrote:

heyyo wrote:

This is probably right. This table is completely contextless. My very minimal understanding is that the athlete blood passport (ABP) program has two broad steps: 1) apply "algorithm" to blood variables such as hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cell count, and mean corpuscular volume 2) evaluate each athlete's case by an expert panel.

The tables published by Fancy Bears are very likely the results of the step 1 analysis before the expert panel reviewed each case. The blood passport program and its associated algorithms are inaccurate due to inherent variability in the blood variables. False positives and obviously false negatives are both very common.

I doubt there is anything to see here. It's unfortunate for the athletes in these lists that fancy bears and letsrun is so recklessly dragging their names through the mud without providing more context or information on the ABP program.

Fancy bears as a hacker organization arguably doesn't have a responsibility to provide context, only information. Letsrun on the other hand as a self-proclaimed journalistic entity should make even a minimal effort to understand the ABP program and share that information alongside this data with their viewers. But alas Letsrun is not a journalistic organization but rather a gossip website whose only goal is to drive views and monetize eyeballs with borderline browser malware advertisements.

Alternatively, there is a giant conspiracy where each of these athletes had their cases evaluated by the expert panel, were found to be blood doping, and then WADA/IAAF/Nike covered up the results. Unless you're wearing a tinfoil hat this narrative seems farfetched.

Do you think someone at the IAAF would be allowed to use the term 'likely doping' on a document if the athlete in question isn't likely to be doping?

Somebody with in-depth knowledge of the bio-passport system would have made those calls. Of course it wasn't the final say on the matter, but I'm sure it wasn't just a blaze judgment call from an intern or something.

This is probably right. This table is completely contextless. My very minimal understanding is that the athlete blood passport (ABP) program has two broad steps: 1) apply "algorithm" to blood variables such as hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cell count, and mean corpuscular volume 2) evaluate each athlete's case by an expert panel.

The tables published by Fancy Bears are very likely the results of the step 1 analysis before the expert panel reviewed each case. The blood passport program and its associated algorithms are inaccurate due to inherent variability in the blood variables. False positives and obviously false negatives are both very common.

I doubt there is anything to see here. It's unfortunate for the athletes in these lists that fancy bears and letsrun is so recklessly dragging their names through the mud without providing more context or information on the ABP program.

Fancy bears as a hacker organization arguably doesn't have a responsibility to provide context, only information. Letsrun on the other hand as a self-proclaimed journalistic entity should make even a minimal effort to understand the ABP program and share that information alongside this data with their viewers. But alas Letsrun is not a journalistic organization but rather a gossip website whose only goal is to drive views and monetize eyeballs with borderline browser malware advertisements.

Alternatively, there is a giant conspiracy where each of these athletes had their cases evaluated by the expert panel, were found to be blood doping, and then WADA/IAAF/Nike covered up the results. Unless you're wearing a tinfoil hat this narrative seems farfetched.

SHILL DETECTED wrote:

This is probably right. This table is completely contextless. My very minimal understanding is that the athlete blood passport (ABP) program has two broad steps: 1) apply "algorithm" to blood variables such as hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cell count, and mean corpuscular volume 2) evaluate each athlete's case by an expert panel.

The tables published by Fancy Bears are very likely the results of the step 1 analysis before the expert panel reviewed each case. The blood passport program and its associated algorithms are inaccurate due to inherent variability in the blood variables. False positives and obviously false negatives are both very common.

I doubt there is anything to see here. It's unfortunate for the athletes in these lists that fancy bears and letsrun is so recklessly dragging their names through the mud without providing more context or information on the ABP program.

Fancy bears as a hacker organization arguably doesn't have a responsibility to provide context, only information. Letsrun on the other hand as a self-proclaimed journalistic entity should make even a minimal effort to understand the ABP program and share that information alongside this data with their viewers. But alas Letsrun is not a journalistic organization but rather a gossip website whose only goal is to drive views and monetize eyeballs with borderline browser malware advertisements.

Alternatively, there is a giant conspiracy where each of these athletes had their cases evaluated by the expert panel, were found to be blood doping, and then WADA/IAAF/Nike covered up the results. Unless you're wearing a tinfoil hat this narrative seems farfetched.

Get outta here shill. Your quasi-legalese will have no effect. Nike will pay up... BIG$$$

Salem, MA wrote:

Look, we're not naive anymore about doping -- we know it still happens. A lot of people on that list are people we've suspected in the past. They could easily be doping.

But COME ON!

This was a leaked document from the Russian government, who are known to

1) Have a state-sponsored doping program

2) Leak documents from WADA to try to make everyone else look bad so that somehow we no longer believe that forcing all of your athletes to take PEDs is a problem.

3) Sometimes even CHANGE pieces of information in the documents to create conflict.

In addition, these are all test values that DO NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A DOPING OFFENSE. There's a reason that you need such high values to test positive -- it's to avoid false positives.

So we have three possibilities for each athlete on the list

1) The high level is an anomaly.

2) The value was changed by the Russians to further their agenda.

3) The athlete in question was indeed doping.

Please, please, please, let's wait a coupe of days before burning them all at the stake. Since I'm doing lists today, this will give time for:

1) The athletes to put out statements explaining their test values.

2) The IAAF to put out a statement confirming/denying the data, maybe with some explanations.

3) Some journalists/scientists/LR readers to comb through the data and give us more informed conclusions.

Look, if these guys doped, and did it regularly, and did it intentionally, I want them out of the sport. Let's figure this out and spare no one who is guilty.

But let's just wait a couple of days for more information instead of indiscriminately cannibalizing the sport we all love.