Travis Tygart is right to be skeptical of the AIU's handling of this case, and more generally the WADA Code -- for these kinds of cases consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, the WADA Code is broken, and railroads athletes to 4-year bans as athletes are generally not experts in the complex nuances in the various meat industries.
Nice try, but Houlihan's artificial nandrolone was not consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, as CAS ruled very convincingly. May I suggest to stick to the facts next time.
I see rekrunner is back to yet again provide the same points time and time again that have been disproven via the CAS case and basic human logic.
Let's be honest, man, have you actually read the full thing? Or did you read moultonk's word salad garbage on the pig industry and Twoggle's garbage document; both of which are cited as viable "sources" on Shelby's website?
Are you here to just play the semantics game once again and piss off the forums? Because you've contributed nothing productive since this case surfaced.
If people want to keep starting new threads, I am more than happy to provide some balance interfering with the echoes in the echo chamber.
The CAS case was bound by the constraints and limitations and ambiguities of the WADA Code. It does not attempt to disprove or address defects inherent to the Code itself.
Honestly, I have read all those sources, and so much more.
Tygart is right when he says the WADA Code needs reform, as its current form permits the AIU and the CAS to railroad innocent athletes unable to reverse engineer what ingredients were in their USDA approved meals, one month earlier, to 4-year bans, as if they were intentional cheats.
Neither the CAS case, which is completely subservient to the Code, nor basic human logic has disproved that.
Words mean what they mean, when not redefined by WADA against the interest of the athletes -- this is not "playing semantics". And I'm actually not all that bothered who gets pissed off. If others are unable to control their own emotions, that doesn't seem like that should be my problem.
But I'm curious -- has anyone contributed anything productive in this forum? I mostly see negative productivity which is hurting the sport.
You are correct that CAS had to follow the Code and has no capacity to disprove or prove CAS. However courts of Human Rights have raised issues.
Travis Tygart is right to be skeptical of the AIU's handling of this case, and more generally the WADA Code -- for these kinds of cases consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, the WADA Code is broken, and railroads athletes to 4-year bans as athletes are generally not experts in the complex nuances in the various meat industries.
Nice try, but Houlihan's artificial nandrolone was not consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, as CAS ruled very convincingly. May I suggest to stick to the facts next time.
The WADA Code is broken? LOL.
CAS had to rule within the constraints of the WADA Code; thus your point is a meaningless tautology.
Travis Tygart is right to be skeptical of the AIU's handling of this case, and more generally the WADA Code -- for these kinds of cases consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, the WADA Code is broken, and railroads athletes to 4-year bans as athletes are generally not experts in the complex nuances in the various meat industries.
Nice try, but Houlihan's artificial nandrolone was not consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, as CAS ruled very convincingly. May I suggest to stick to the facts next time.
The WADA Code is broken? LOL.
It's not nice enough because you still don't realize I am sticking to the facts. It is absolutely consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, with respect to both levels of nandrolone, and carbon isotope, as confirmed by WADA's own TD, and decades worth of studies on pork ingestion, in line with the AIU-expert concessions in Houlihan's case.
The WADA Code was already partly broken in 2015, and after that, it got worse for innocent athletes.
If I had like 3 years of time off running and no job, and I believed the current doping system were unjust, I might use that time to, say, attend graduate school or law school. I could learn how to better defend athletes in hearings, or study the code and propose how to make it more fair for athletes, or write a thesis on the problems of the current system. If I then did a PhD, or specialized in these kinds of cases, I could eventually become an expert in the matter and perhaps become involved in reviewing and improving the system for athletes or at least in providing a stronger defence.
Or, I could go broke, live off my remaining savings, work as a contract delivery driver with no benefits, follow my former teammates around until I made some of them leave, run around on a track alone and have absolutely no purpose in life, thus sinking further into isolation and depression.
He never implied he thought she was innocent, just that he has doubts. I have doubts too because she is accused of a doping strategy that would be innefective and easy to detect. But on the other hand her burrito explanation is even more unlikely.
I think there is more to this story, for example she may have been taking suplements that contained various things and did not know it contained a banned substance. However, that defence still equals guilty as far as the doping agencies are concerned, because if it is a suplememt, it is your responsability to know whats in it. Therefore she can't use this excuse and had to make up the lame burrito one.
What ever the true story is, I think we will never know it, but I have do not believe the burrito defence at all and I also doubt she was taking nandralone orally, intentionally, for the specific nandralone effects. I think most likely she is guilty of something, but its unclear what. I'm happy with the result of the ban, since we didn't get a more plausible explanation than a burrito.
Travis Tygart led USADA while giving Galen Rupp 300 drug tests and all of them came back clean. The USADA also have Lance Armstrong numerous drug tests and never one tested positive, only Floyd Landis' big mouth spilled the beans. I think Travis Tygart should shut up and the USADA be disbanded as being as corrupt as the Russians and British Cycling.
Yep he's more concerned that this shatshow has happened under his watch
First, it’s just “USADA” not “the USADA.” Look at their website, not once do they refer to themselves as “the USADA” in any publication.
Second, AIU is NOT a doping agency in the traditional sense. They don’t conduct their own tests. They don’t have their own doping control officers (DCOs). Instead, organizations like USADA, Canadian Center for Ethics in Sport (CCES), Clearidium, Professional Worldwide Controls (PWC) and IDTM go out and collect samples from athletes both In-Competition and Out-of-Competition. The samples are sent to WADA approved laboratories (the Untied Sates has two, one in Salt Lake City and the other at UCLA). The results are then reported back to the proper authority, in this case AIU, who is the results management authority.
Interesting to see Tygart taking shots at AIU. He tends to stick to giving it to WADA every chance he gets. But hey, let me grab my popcorn…
Thank you for your valuable contribution about the use of "the", Mr. Pedant.
Leaving that aside, I should know better than expect the morons of LRC (not necessarily you) to see subtlety. I'm not defending Houlihan in the slightest. But I find it interesting that Tygart has raised some questions, and I think Tygart and USADA (look, didn't use "the"!) have plenty of credibility.
But the angry-mob-with-torches goes wild when someone does just that (i.e., raises questions). The idea that USADA is a wildly corrupt organization protecting American athletes because Tygart made these comments is absurd...especially in light of how aggressively they went after Lance, among others. Wake me up when Jamaica's ADA and Ethiopia's ADA go after say, Bolt and Bekele respectively. Hmm, wake me up when those agencies go after anyone of note. Wouldn't happen in a million years.
Its obvious that Nike is engaged in PR. They already had NOP sink under doping allegations. And now BTC. Yet what is remarkable is the having been caught Houlihan never goes away. She is still getting puff pieces by sympathetic or Nike influenced journslists. She is still training with the BTC coach, and neither Nike or her coaches or her teammates have ever disavowed her. In fact, unlike the Armstrong situation BTC teammates are still in our faces dominating the sport domestically. Houlihan was one of the most obvious dopers I ever saw, and her teammates are very close behind. But the whole circus goes on. In that case guilt cannot be admitted and instead we will get endless protestations of Houlihan's and BTC's innocence. Nike does not care if SH is innocent or not.
He never implied he thought she was innocent, just that he has doubts. I have doubts too because she is accused of a doping strategy that would be innefective and easy to detect. But on the other hand her burrito explanation is even more unlikely.
I think there is more to this story, for example she may have been taking suplements that contained various things and did not know it contained a banned substance. However, that defence still equals guilty as far as the doping agencies are concerned, because if it is a suplememt, it is your responsability to know whats in it. Therefore she can't use this excuse and had to make up the lame burrito one.
What ever the true story is, I think we will never know it, but I have do not believe the burrito defence at all and I also doubt she was taking nandralone orally, intentionally, for the specific nandralone effects. I think most likely she is guilty of something, but its unclear what. I'm happy with the result of the ban, since we didn't get a more plausible explanation than a burrito.
If that is the case she should have just been honest and said so. Coming up with implausible burrito defenses instead of saying "I was taking a bunch of shady stuff and one must have been tainted" would have at least been honest
He never implied he thought she was innocent, just that he has doubts. I have doubts too because she is accused of a doping strategy that would be innefective and easy to detect. But on the other hand her burrito explanation is even more unlikely.
I think there is more to this story, for example she may have been taking suplements that contained various things and did not know it contained a banned substance. However, that defence still equals guilty as far as the doping agencies are concerned, because if it is a suplememt, it is your responsability to know whats in it. Therefore she can't use this excuse and had to make up the lame burrito one.
What ever the true story is, I think we will never know it, but I have do not believe the burrito defence at all and I also doubt she was taking nandralone orally, intentionally, for the specific nandralone effects. I think most likely she is guilty of something, but its unclear what. I'm happy with the result of the ban, since we didn't get a more plausible explanation than a burrito.
If that is the case she should have just been honest and said so. Coming up with implausible burrito defenses instead of saying "I was taking a bunch of shady stuff and one must have been tainted" would have at least been honest
I wonder how the public would take it if an athlete was just like “My bad, you got me. I passed a lot of tests, but I guess every lucky run comes to an end. Chalk it up to the game!”
Would people be horrified they weren’t remorseful or would they respect someone being honest and just being like “I did what I had to do to compete, I got caught, I accept the consequences. Oh well.”
He never implied he thought she was innocent, just that he has doubts. I have doubts too because she is accused of a doping strategy that would be innefective and easy to detect. But on the other hand her burrito explanation is even more unlikely.
I think there is more to this story, for example she may have been taking suplements that contained various things and did not know it contained a banned substance. However, that defence still equals guilty as far as the doping agencies are concerned, because if it is a suplememt, it is your responsability to know whats in it. Therefore she can't use this excuse and had to make up the lame burrito one.
What ever the true story is, I think we will never know it, but I have do not believe the burrito defence at all and I also doubt she was taking nandralone orally, intentionally, for the specific nandralone effects. I think most likely she is guilty of something, but its unclear what. I'm happy with the result of the ban, since we didn't get a more plausible explanation than a burrito.
If that is the case she should have just been honest and said so. Coming up with implausible burrito defenses instead of saying "I was taking a bunch of shady stuff and one must have been tainted" would have at least been honest
The defence is provided by Wada with their TD.
However it might have been better to say “ Like 99.9 % of the population I have not a clue what I ate for a week or so as long as over a month ago”.
Travis Tygart is right to be skeptical of the AIU's handling of this case, and more generally the WADA Code -- for these kinds of cases consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, the WADA Code is broken, and railroads athletes to 4-year bans as athletes are generally not experts in the complex nuances in the various meat industries.
Nice try, but Houlihan's artificial nandrolone was not consistent with ingestion of small quantities from USDA approved food, as CAS ruled very convincingly. May I suggest to stick to the facts next time.
The WADA Code is broken? LOL.
Don't forget that Travis also thinks that Tupac is still alive!
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.