Hundreds of thousands of Americans paid the ultimate price, willingly giving up all of their tomorrows, suffering and dying in battle, for the freedoms we enjoy, including getting banned and re-instated for PED use.
Hundreds of thousands of Americans paid the ultimate price, willingly giving up all of their tomorrows, suffering and dying in battle, for the freedoms we enjoy, including getting banned and re-instated for PED use.
If you want to run because you love to run then go for it. If you want to take any substance in the world for your health or your vanity that is fine.
But if you stand on the start line of a race you should be agreeing to compete by the rules. There is no difference in cheating methods. Would people be forgiving her if she had taken a short cut?
Competition is competition whether you are 9 or 109. What makes "elite" runners' races more important than masters competition as far as being contested fairly?
I don't care if Kristi wants to run whatever mountain trails she wants but if she is competing there are rules. No one is stopping her from running but they should stop her from cheating in races.
Did the race spend the moeny to put out the press release and enforce the ban in the future?
It's not just about the cost of testing. There is the cost of writing and sending a press release. The cost to manage the reaction and the cost to institute the ban and track it. It's a total waste of resources. Testing only being a small portion of the cost.
Oh, ffs, get over yourself.
Dear certain masters:
I know you’re reading this thread. Despite your legion of clueless sycophants, plenty of us know that you cheat. It’s beyond obvious.
At USATF Club Nationals at Lehigh earlier in the month I placed 10th among the 35 65+ runners. Did anyone beat me because he took anything?
If someone had a health problem and had to take some hormones and beat me how bad can the health problem be if he could run that well?
If so maybe I should have hidden in the bushes to skip a lap? That would be an easier way to cheat. Can you picture all these old men hiding behind the shrubbery?
Dfgfhhjgf wrote:
It's not just about the cost of testing. There is the cost of writing and sending a press release. The cost to manage the reaction and the cost to institute the ban and track it. It's a total waste of resources. Testing only being a small portion of the cost.
LOL! Ok.
If she's a trail runner from CO, I'm surprised they didn't ding her for pot as well.
Used illegal drugs.
Get's one year ban.
Those are the rules.
It's up to the athlete to know them.
Ignorance of the rules isn't a get out of jail free card.
When I was still competing in my late 40's, a friend told me that DHEA would help with recovery. I passed. My own research told me it was a PED of sorts.
If a race application stated that there was going to be testing, that would certainly be something I would need to be aware of.
I was a decent age grouper, but never at the "pee in a cup" level. I still wouldn't use it.
beyond obvious wrote:
Dear certain masters:
I know you’re reading this thread. Despite your legion of clueless sycophants, plenty of us know that you cheat. It’s beyond obvious.
rage against the dark!
but you aren't brave enough to name names.
What I think is that this is much more common than the casual fan might think. I've been to races recently where 55 year olds were running sub 17:30 5ks and who looked like body builders. It's pretty easy to find a doctor who will prescribe testosterone and these local races almost never test. For the runners who do this, there's plenty of upsides, even without big prize money, and virtually no risk. They look good, they get some athletic glory etc etc.
I'm 55 and I agree with you. It is impossible to explain to someone young how much your body changes (and "weakens") as you age.
I see some guys my age who I was beating in my prime and now they're running sub 18 and I can't break 19.
I look at their training and I wonder. I don't think they're cheating but it is very tempting to tell my Dr. that I would love to have the testosterone I had when I was in my 20's and 30's- just for life in general.
rekrunner wrote:
I'm remain unconvinced. Despite her website, biology degree, and her physiotherapy background (all very compelling arguments to be sure), this is a "recreational" lady not really expecting to place in any masters standings with any depth. She is an "open" non-USATF runner not expecting to be subject to the obligations of professional athletes.
Look at the results:
http://www.skyrunner.com/ppresults/2014ppm_f.htmAided by the banned substance DHEA, Kristi Anderson still finished some 40 minutes behind the 50 year old Anita Ortiz. This is not the result of a competitive masters athlete, despite her self declaration that she enjoys competitive running.
At Pikes Peak, the real competitors were in the "Ascent":
http://www.skyrunner.com/ppresults/2014ppa_f.htm]
The drug testing may most likely have been a result of having about 10 national mountain running teams, both male and female, in the Ascent.
She ran the PP marathon, not the Ascent, so the expectation of drug testing may be slim to none. Since she was 2nd in her age group, she may have gotten a trophy by deceit at best. Plus the entry opens in March, 5 months before the race so the thought she may be using PED's so she can get the 2nd place age group trophy is a stretch. Yes, she tested positive so take your medicine, learn from the occurrence and move on.
As an FYI, I have run for almost 40 years at a sub-national class level and got tested only 1 time in my 30's. Never at the masters level. I have moved from the competitive focus to just being thankful I can still run at 60 years old.
Amazing how everyone online is a pious do-gooder yet in real life, the world is full of unmitigated DBs.
rekrunner wrote:
I'm remain unconvinced. Despite her website, biology degree, and her physiotherapy background (all very compelling arguments to be sure), this is a "recreational" lady not really expecting to place in any masters standings with any depth.
Are you another total friggin idiot who hasn't read the thread. On her website she classes herself as a "competitive runner", she's also won and placed in her age group, depth or otherwise, and she looks like a cut "competitive runner":
http://masterstrack.com/2014/12/33461/When you work in the health industry, have biology and physical therapy degrees, experienced runner, advised of possible testing at race, etc, etc, how could you not have just the very slightest of inklings that DHEA might be a PED and maybe, just maybe on the banned list?
She unexpectedly got pinged, hard luck. Good on the race organizers.
They should throw the book at this insolent tw*t, defiling our proud and storied sport with her wicked, wicked ways.
When I ran the still-standing marathon world record of 2:15:25, I was as clean and shiny as Lord Coe's halo.
Despite never using what you Americans call "PEDS", nobody has come within 3 minutes of my time--except Liliya Shobukhova, who was recently exposed as "drug cheat". But I digress.
If I can do it clean, so can Kristi Anderson. The dump she has taken on the international credibility of athletics is far larger, and less liquid, than the dump I took while winning the 2005 London Marathon.
I have to agree with your take about the press release. It's overkill.
It's not whether drug use hurts or doesn't hurt you or others. It hurts the sport even if it was inadvertent. Ignorance is not an excuse. Crucifying the person in the press is not necessary.
Years ago a friend of mine inadvertently cut a marathon course. He followed a half dozen other runners off course and then back on. Cameras caught them and they were all banned for a year from championship competition. It was done quietly and the names of the runners were never published. I only knew because my friend told me. The only press was that six runners had been DQ'd for going off the course and then returning to the race and crossing the finish line.
He admitted later he should have dropped out but he crossed the finish line.
He was a top age group competitor.
He paid the price and moved on.
I'm Convinced. wrote:
http://masterstrack.com/2014/12/33461/When you work in the health industry, have biology and physical therapy degrees, experienced runner, advised of possible testing at race, etc, etc, how could you not have just the very slightest of inklings that DHEA might be a PED and maybe, just maybe on the banned list?
you couldn't
ffs we're talking dhea testosterone here and she looks like someone on it
[L]inkwrote:
What I think is that this is much more common than the casual fan might think. I've been to races recently where 55 year olds were running sub 17:30 5ks and who looked like body builders. It's pretty easy to find a doctor who will prescribe testosterone and these local races almost never test. For the runners who do this, there's plenty of upsides, even without big prize money, and virtually no risk. They look good, they get some athletic glory etc etc.
.
runn wrote:
I'm 55 and I agree with you. It is impossible to explain to someone young how much your body changes (and "weakens") as you age.
I see some guys my age who I was beating in my prime and now they're running sub 18 and I can't break 19.
I look at their training and I wonder. I don't think they're cheating but it is very tempting to tell my Dr. that I would love to have the testosterone I had when I was in my 20's and 30's- just for life in general.
Thanks. I'm 50. What I tell people is that - at least for me, but, probably, for plenty of other men, too - 45-50 is like 12-17, but in reverse. Even in my early 40s, I felt pretty good: energetic, horny like a teenager, I responded to training just as quickly as I did in my 30s (although, 40 is when I started getting injured more often...). The explanation is changed body chemistry. There might be a few guys who reach my age in better hormonal shape than I do, but, not many (I'm one of a very small number who reached 50 without needing glasses, for example). At my best, I could run a marathon at 3:30/km. Now, I can't run even a single one in that time. If by taking a pill, I could restore my hormone levels to what they were in my 20s, I would dominate all but the other cheaters my age.
To those who think this doesn't matter because it involves old people running obscure events, let me just remind you of this:
1. For most, young people running what you think are major events in WR times are obscure - the sport itself has become so.
2. Drugs are largely responsible for making that so.
you guys have to be careful with the accusations - I am 47, I've been running for 35 years and truly I've barely lost a step since my teens. And I don't take anything - not even ibuprofen.
I'm starting to get regionally fast - I ran 17:15 for 5k and 1:20 for a half marathon this year - which weren't great times when I was in my 20s but now I am starting to win age groups in larger races.
Some people, myself included, just haven't been hit by aging virtually at all - it's just luck - no drugs needed.
I