I swear all of these threads turn into the same nonsense back and forth between the same two morans.
This wasn't a thread about her innocence/guilt. It was a thread about GDS leaving BTC because of the sketchy way Jerry has been handling this situation.
It's such an odd situation. Coach Flanagan was on the Finding Mastery pod last month and in conversation shared that she's really careful regarding who she allows into her inner circle, even alluding to John Cook without naming him as someone she regretted associating with.
Whatever John Cook did, somehow he was past the threshold of acceptable yet this whole Shelbo situation is cool. Host Michael Gervais probably doesn't know enough about the sport to have pushed back and questioned her response. To the informed listener, it comes across as hot air. GDS voted with her feet and similarly Flanagan's actions speak louder than her words.
nice post. it’s a shame it go lost in the never ending mindless drivel that has perpetuated the last few pages
It's such an odd situation. Coach Flanagan was on the Finding Mastery pod last month and in conversation shared that she's really careful regarding who she allows into her inner circle, even alluding to John Cook without naming him as someone she regretted associating with.
Whatever John Cook did, somehow he was past the threshold of acceptable yet this whole Shelbo situation is cool. Host Michael Gervais probably doesn't know enough about the sport to have pushed back and questioned her response. To the informed listener, it comes across as hot air. GDS voted with her feet and similarly Flanagan's actions speak louder than her words.
nice post. it’s a shame it go lost in the never ending mindless drivel that has perpetuated the last few pages
What if Shalane is right and the "informed listeners" put too much faith in an anti-doping system that sometimes nets dolphins with the tunas?
This thread is about GDS, and here's what she told "Letsrun" about PEDs at BTC during her time:
"DeBues-Stafford stressed that she never saw or heard anything during her time at Bowerman to suggest anyone on the team was taking performance-enhancing drugs. "I have no reason to believe anyone on the team is involved in anything like that," DeBues-Stafford said."
"I can’t imagine him putting his athletes in a position that he thinks would break any codes or any guidelines given to either himself or Shelby."
I want to raise one thing JG said on the latest LRC podcast. Let me preface this by saying JG does an incredible job and is a huge asset to the sport of running in the US and abroad. However, I think he missed the mark in part of his framing of the situation here. That is, he mischaracterized GDS’s comments with respect to her view of potential doping within BTC.
Specifically, on the podcast, either Rojo or Wejo was saying they don’t believe BTC, as a team, are doping. JG said something to the effect of ‘GDS said as much in here statement regarding leaving the team’, and was referring to her comments that effectively said (paraphrasing) ‘I didn’t see anything that would make me believe BTC is doping.’ However, GDS’s statement does not mean what JG said it means, ie that she *believes* BTC is not doping. That is *not* what she said. She said she didn’t *see* anything that would make her think BTC is doping, *but she could nonetheless believe BTC is doping* while simultaneously saying she didn’t see anything suggestive of doping (which, by the way, strikes me as carefully crafted language) so as to mitigate any potential negative impact to the team and her sponsor.
I am not suggesting that JG was intentionally misleading in what he said, but he did unfortunately mischaracterize her statement in a way that put words in her mouth which she did not say, and which meaningfully changed the meaning of her comments and their implications.
I want to raise one thing JG said on the latest LRC podcast. Let me preface this by saying JG does an incredible job and is a huge asset to the sport of running in the US and abroad. However, I think he missed the mark in part of his framing of the situation here. That is, he mischaracterized GDS’s comments with respect to her view of potential doping within BTC.
Specifically, on the podcast, either Rojo or Wejo was saying they don’t believe BTC, as a team, are doping. JG said something to the effect of ‘GDS said as much in here statement regarding leaving the team’, and was referring to her comments that effectively said (paraphrasing) ‘I didn’t see anything that would make me believe BTC is doping.’ However, GDS’s statement does not mean what JG said it means, ie that she *believes* BTC is not doping. That is *not* what she said. She said she didn’t *see* anything that would make her think BTC is doping, *but she could nonetheless believe BTC is doping* while simultaneously saying she didn’t see anything suggestive of doping (which, by the way, strikes me as carefully crafted language) so as to mitigate any potential negative impact to the team and her sponsor.
I am not suggesting that JG was intentionally misleading in what he said, but he did unfortunately mischaracterize her statement in a way that put words in her mouth which she did not say, and which meaningfully changed the meaning of her comments and their implications.
Well, she also said she had no reason to believe it.
"I have no reason to believe anyone on the team is involved in anything like that," DeBues-Stafford said."
You may be entirely right, but what I've learned as a lawyer is that people don't spend nearly as much effort putting their words together as others do pulling them apart after the fact. So while your reading could be accurate, the language is ambiguous and could as easily mean how JG characterized it.
I want to raise one thing JG said on the latest LRC podcast. Let me preface this by saying JG does an incredible job and is a huge asset to the sport of running in the US and abroad. However, I think he missed the mark in part of his framing of the situation here. That is, he mischaracterized GDS’s comments with respect to her view of potential doping within BTC.
Specifically, on the podcast, either Rojo or Wejo was saying they don’t believe BTC, as a team, are doping. JG said something to the effect of ‘GDS said as much in here statement regarding leaving the team’, and was referring to her comments that effectively said (paraphrasing) ‘I didn’t see anything that would make me believe BTC is doping.’ However, GDS’s statement does not mean what JG said it means, ie that she *believes* BTC is not doping. That is *not* what she said. She said she didn’t *see* anything that would make her think BTC is doping, *but she could nonetheless believe BTC is doping* while simultaneously saying she didn’t see anything suggestive of doping (which, by the way, strikes me as carefully crafted language) so as to mitigate any potential negative impact to the team and her sponsor.
I am not suggesting that JG was intentionally misleading in what he said, but he did unfortunately mischaracterize her statement in a way that put words in her mouth which she did not say, and which meaningfully changed the meaning of her comments and their implications.
Well, she also said she had no reason to believe it.
"I have no reason to believe anyone on the team is involved in anything like that," DeBues-Stafford said."
Ok, I acknowledge that that is more in line with JG’s comment. Nonetheless there remains a difference between ‘I have no reason to believe’ and ‘I do not believe’
You may be entirely right, but what I've learned as a lawyer is that people don't spend nearly as much effort putting their words together as others do pulling them apart after the fact. So while your reading could be accurate, the language is ambiguous and could as easily mean how JG characterized it.
Yes this is fair, although it could indeed be precise language (we don’t know!) and at no point has she said ‘I don’t believe BTC is doping’ which is how her comment was represented
You may be entirely right, but what I've learned as a lawyer is that people don't spend nearly as much effort putting their words together as others do pulling them apart after the fact. So while your reading could be accurate, the language is ambiguous and could as easily mean how JG characterized it.
Yes this is fair, although it could indeed be precise language (we don’t know!) and at no point has she said ‘I don’t believe BTC is doping’ which is how her comment was represented
Nitpick I just blocked you. Same with Armstrong and the other people who derail threads. You know exactly what you're doing. And it's annoying.
Thank you brojos for adding the block feature. This ability to curate the messageboards just this little bit helps so much
You do realize that blocking someone only means that you can't see their posts but they can still reply to you and everyone else can still see everything?
I Imagine if GDS came out and said, “I don’t know if there is doping at BTC”. Just that would open a can of worms she probably doesn’t want to/ can’t deal with.
But I do want to believe her account about no doping at BTC and that makes me wonder if maybe SH was sabotaged somehow. If the PED was ingestible orally, does anyone know how easy or difficult it would be to contaminate something she eats/drinks?
I could totally see one of her competitors, heck maybe even a jealous teammate having a motive to do that if it would be as easy as I’m thinking it might be.
I realize that is far fetched given that SH brought no such claim or evidence, but then again what evidence would there even be?
Just another outsider looking in, I want to believe everyone is doing things the right way, but it would not surprise me at all if athletes at BTC are doping to be competitive and keep up with the workouts. Life can be brutal and maybe taking some PEDs and being a track star (with no integrity) is a better trade than putting together burritos at the local food truck.
But I do want to believe her account about no doping at BTC and that makes me wonder if maybe SH was sabotaged somehow. If the PED was ingestible orally, does anyone know how easy or difficult it would be to contaminate something she eats/drinks?
.
Tbh, if you believe GDS that BTC are a clean team, I'd say by far the most likely scenario would just be that Houlihan decided for whatever reason do something on her own. I'd put sabotage well below burrito as possible explanation. You would have to consistently have been putting nandrolone in Shelby's system somehow since you wouldn't know when testers are coming. You could slip some crushed nandy pills in someone's drink once and hope they don't notice, but week in week out?? Beyond unlikely.
That’s a good point. I presume “no-one” knows when an athlete comes due for a test, although it might be possible to put some good guesses in especially if you know her schedule. What’s the glow period for oral nandrolone?