Since you argue that athletes only have "faith" that doping works and not real evidence you should be arguing that Shelby didn't in fact take a performance enhancing drug as in your view drugs don't enhance performance. In your strange world WADA and CAS are punishing athletes for rules that are based on a misapprehension, that drugs aid performance. If only Shelby had known they don't.
But SH may well have not taken drugs knowingly.
Do you now how they got there as CAS does not ?
Caught by strict liability and then the flipped burden of having to prove a negative.
All this was after Wada broke the rules in not notifying her of the test result as set out in their own rules.
Shelby tested positive and Centro and Jager have not been the same since.
Lazy. Centro's form was fine last year, least he beat Engels which he couldnt do in 2019 and he PRd in the mile. His problem is the 1500 has progressed while he hasn't.
Jager has been broken since 2019, he hasn't finished a steeplechase in nearly 4 years. His problems waaaayyy pre-date Houlihan's ban.
The 1500 has not but progressed. Centro’s Olympic field was the strongest ever with 7-8 active sub 3:30 dudes in their prime. Centro has simple gotten older and even more injury prone. Secondly, we don’t know what type of shape he will be in when we see him. None of the contenders from 2016 are contenders now. Centro has actually aged more gracefully than his peers.
A positive test means your blood chemistry contains performance enhancing drugs.
A four-year ban means a review board has decided that it is unlikely that the performance enhancing drugs in your system were accidentally ingested.
Still not correct.
The postive test meant that her urine contained nandrolone, not her blood.
The 4-year ban is a consequence prescribed in the WADA Code of Houlihan not being able to collect enough evidence to override the default presumption of "intentional".
Could you prove that a meal you ate 1 month ago contained an ingredient to a panel on the balance of probability, without a sample of that meal to test? Or is it more likely, because your career and reputation are at stake, you would make a great effort to collect a lot of evidence that falls short of meeting the burden of balance of probability?
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.