Rojo's question to Ruth Chepngetich being widely reported on news sites

Saying "it's all bs and bias to me" is far too harsh. Not that he's not biased towards Houlihan--he absolutely is, and his continued defense of her is (in my opinion) wrong and frankly a bit weird.

But the reason we KNOW that Rojo is biased towards Houlihan is that he's one of the few journalists who seriously engages with the doping problem. He's willing to ask interview questions about doping, willing to acknowledge red flags (as he sees them), willing to at least try to take both the athlete and anti-doping agency seriously, and willing to allow all sorts of discussion, including lots and lots of criticism of him personally, on the website he co-founded.

Much easier to just never ask the questions at all, like most of the media. Easier to draw bright lines and claim that e.g. the WADA decision is always the final word. You will never show bias if you outsource your thought process to an official governing body.

Instead, Rojo takes the epistemically-much-better approach of encouraging (and participating in) real discussion. I haven't seen this mentioned much, but the VERY REASON I feel comfortable disbelieving Houlihan is the in-depth discussion on this website. Where else was I going to get detailed analysis of why Houlihan's excuse was bunk? Coupled with enough smart people defending her that I can be confident I've heard all their good arguments? Large parts of this forum are trash, but the threads on specific doping cases? Very informative and useful.

Most of all, I don't believe that inconsistency is the ur-sin, especially when that inconsistency comes from a good-faith effort to get the answers right. In my personal opinion, Rojo is right to ask (nonaccusatory!) questions of Ruth Chepngetich, wrong not to ask the same questions of Jess Hull, right to be tough on the NOP (although often done poorly), right to believe Ajee Wilson and Jerrion Lawson, right to disbelieve Asbel Kiprop, wrong to believe Shelby Houlihan, but most of all, right to nurture a culture of good-faith discussion that allows us to actually form reasoned opinions about these non-obvious questions.

I don't recall a single doping question being asked by the Brojos and Gault during the Olympics about the Italian woman.

You’re completely rattled.

What was your stance on CONVICTED sooner Shelby Houlihan?

And Wejo, come on man 😂

2:14 is a time, not a type of athlete. Look at the way she's run her 2:14 races: it's obvious they don't tell the whole story of her potential. She takes HUGE swings and runs world class times "blowing up" in the second half. You could easily argue that makes it all the more likely she's doping. But it also demonstrates a mindset and concept of what's possible which is radically different from anyone else I've seen in the sport. That's what I'm talking about when I say she's the type of athlete to do it.

I agree with almost everything, except for "right to believe Ajee Wilson and Jerrion Lawson". Where is that coming from?

Neither had any evidence aside from a receipt for beef. USADA (doing for Wilson exactly what the Chinese NADO did for its swimmers!) and CAS led them off on the balance of probabilities, which strikes me as rather odd and rare. Even Tygart just argued that Lawson was not to be believed.

I think rojo asked a great question which occasionally happens. Even a broken clock is right twice per day!

It's interesting how Ruth Chepngetich pretends not to be aware of the Kenyan doping scandal. I find it impossible to believe that she and her training partners aren't gossiping about the scandal on a regular basis. The way that she played dumb eerily reminds me of the way so many busted dopers have played dumb over the years.

Yeah, I’ve always thought that any top athlete not wanting to talk about doping is a huge red flag. If I was a successful clean athlete, I would love to talk about cheating. I’d be extremely pissed about anyone who does cheat, and I’d gladly take any chance I could to assure fans that I’m clean and would never even consider doping. Athletes’ reluctance to talk about it completely rubs me the wrong way

You'll never see Citius ask these questions. Respect to the Brojos and Jgault for doing the muckraking no one else wants to.

Or Hull. Or Bell. Rojo's statement that "We've been 100% consistent on doping. We ask the questions that need to be asked whether you are white (Galen Rupp, Salazar, etc), black (Regina Jacobs, Justin Gatlin, etc.), male, female, American or Kenyan" is I think self-delusional.

To Rojo's defense: using Salazar as an example exactly proved our point - you guy always pick an easy target. Salazar and NOP were pretty much universally hated in the professional running circus. Of course you picked on them just as you did to Ruth. Dared you ask the same question to Paula Radcliffe? Of course not, that woman could reduce you twin to ashes in twinkling of an eye.

This is a good post, but maybe the point you're missing is no one really cares about Jess Hull? She got dragged to her best performances by Kipyegon. No one is starting posts about her saying she broke 1500 meter running. Yeah she had an awesome 2024 but will it last? In my mind she caught up to the second tier but she's not much better than Muir, Hiltz, St. Pierre. The times say she is (for now) but I'm not wowed by her. I don't know how else to explain it.

Rojo you have NOT been 100% consistent on doping. You've been about 73% consistent on doping give or take.

It's good you called this shambolic "record" out. You should. Everyone should. Bravo.

It's good that you did this with Regina. With Lance. With Galen. With Alberto. It's good that you have made enemies of the right people in doing this. Those against cheating appreciate it.

But you are either for cheating in it's entirely, in it's ugliness, in it's many forms...and faces...of you are against it. And with your one glaring exception, you have outed yourself, not as someone of principal, but as someone who has tons of bias.

What is it about the Shelby Houlihan case for you because you never actually explained why you gave her a pass. Why did you never come down hard on Jerry or Shalane the way you have done for other coaches? The amount of rope you have given Shelby over the years borders on support. On disbelief. It is such an outlier to your previously consistent positions.

Why do you think her case is different? Because you clearly think something is different. She tested positive, twice. She is serving a ban. Yet here you (still) are, ignoring the elephant in the room, using any little straws you can find in her case to cast doubt on the whole system. Why?

I am asking sincerely. Can you explain why you and all of letsrun hedged? Do you realize it ruined your credibility as reporters because it makes you look biased instead of hard hitting?

I saw on a twitter feed someone say he should be sacked. I laughed and replied, “he’s the owner”.

“Normal trajectory” for 7:17 has to be one of the craziest statements I’ve ever read, even by LetsRun standards. And we really need to stop with this “came out of nowhere” nonsense.

Unfortunately (speaking as a real fan of track), 2:09:56, 2:00:35, and 7:17:55 should all be met with some degree of skepticism.

Stop with the "racist" accusations. When all else fails you fall back on racism, it's people like yourself the cause and create racism. Running is one of the LEAST racist sports on the planet.

You are a mental midget. According to you, racism was and is a fabrication of the left. You are the worst of humanity.

Suspect? We know he was doping. This is Lets Run Dot Com baby, Wejo is guilty until proven innocent!

Did he do the same to the burrito eating US athlete?

This forum reeks of racism ... with a monument called coevett.

That's the first thing that jumped to my eyes the first time I visited it.

As for what I'm ... you have absolutely no idea.

As some point I was writing 3 to 4 pages of original scripts.