Goucher: I didn't go to Rio because Shalane and Amy wore VFs (which is the same as EPO)

They look more like cushioned streaks , maybe a vf prototype

https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/f4a5997/2147483647/strip/true/crop/1600x1028+0+0/resize/840x540!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcalifornia-times-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F51%2Fcc%2F3d0bdd7d221fe1404ced2c2341a5%2Fla-sp-oly-marathon-trials-20160213-pictures-013

Across wrote:

There is irrational hate of Goucher on this message board.

She did it to herself.

That's because they're designed to fool people on purposes not draw attention.

The folding lines in the zoomx foam is unmistakable.

Flanagan herself made an IG post of how the 4% basically gave her that race/changed everything.

zzzz wrote:

I'm with rojo, I don't understand the vitriol. Everything in the article is factual, including her statements. I think it's more likely than not true that she would have made the team if the shoes were equal. Must be Nike interns - check that, Nike execs - posting.

Those saying she is singling out a couple peers are distorting the article. The focus is on the shoes, and pointing out that the shoes likely changed the outcome of an important race shows why the shoe talk is important. You can't talk about that race without mentioning who were wearing the shoes. She didn't say anything bad about Flanagan or Cragg.

Her statements ostensibly seem factual; in reality they are whining about unfairness.

Her whole message for the last 3 years has been essentially about unfairness.

These types of statements are a plea for help, a plea for all of us to stop what we are doing and help Kara. To right the wrongs committed against her.

That type of press and attention gets exhausting, to hear that crap over and over, doesnt it?

We are tired of it. We are tired of Kara Goucher.

Instead of Ok, Boomer...

We should say Ok, Goucher.

Neither Cragg or Flanagan will make the 2020 Olympic Team.

BOHICA wrote:

To Kara's statements, if she had made the case that she could have placed better herself with the shoes or relative to the field if the shoes were excluded from competitors, that would seem fairest and acceptable (minus the obvious anti-Kara crowd). But instead she singled out a couple of peers, one of whom is nearly universally respected and beloved in the sport and who has enough class to have never publicly commented on Kara's confessed involvement with microdosing.

Wait what?! She didn’t single out anyone. Did you even read the article or just make all of your posts based on the OP’s fabricated statement?

Doesn't matter, she's close to the article's author and she clearly knew his intent and played right along. Her name is attached to the statements, she did nothing to distance herself from singling out her peers by name. It's cool if you love Kara and the various pious stands she takes, I simply prefer to side with someone who intentionally maintains intellectual distance and doesn't throw peers under the bus, even if only tacitly. That's not the level of activist I'd want on my side of a debate.

BOHICA wrote:

Doesn't matter, she's close to the article's author and she clearly knew his intent and played right along. Her name is attached to the statements, she did nothing to distance herself from singling out her peers by name. It's cool if you love Kara and the various pious stands she takes, I simply prefer to side with someone who intentionally maintains intellectual distance and doesn't throw peers under the bus, even if only tacitly. That's not the level of activist I'd want on my side of a debate.

She literally did what you said "could have placed herself better", you assigned statements to her that she didn't make because you were too lazy to read, and now you are trying to backpedal. That's not the level of intellectual application I'd want on my side of a debate.

lazy OP DEVASTATED wrote:

That is not what Goucher said. OP is intellectually dishonest because the truth isn't as easy to attack:

"There is no way to know that the shoes kept me out of the Olympics, but I do feel like it wasn’t a level playing field- I mean the research proves that. "

Yes! AND how many letsrunners call them cheaterflys and when they work for Rupp it's the shoe, when it works against Kara it's not.

Whatever, keep chasing your tail, champ.

When she was sponsored by Nike and doping everything was cool. I wonder if she has any remorse for doping to get all her good times?

Hi Adam!!

BOHICA wrote:

Whatever, keep chasing your tail, champ.

Who's chasing their tail, if not you? No matter how vacuous your lines of "reasoning" are shown to be by other posters, you keep coming back to your trump card, which is, "but she's a horrible person".

Black Market Bob wrote:

She also said Doc Brown had ethical issues , except when she used him , he was a legit Dr.

And her husband, Adam, and who knows how many others of the CU team, sent there, by Wetmore apparently, which is what Adam said in his email from the time. And that the Gouchers seem to have been the ones to introduce Dr. Brown to the Salazar/NOP in the first place.

dsk wrote:

When she was sponsored by Nike and doping everything was cool. I wonder if she has any remorse for doping to get all her good times?

Exactly!!!!!

She's could break from Skechers oselle or whatever, and spend $250 on vf.. no judgment here

BOHICA wrote:

... one of whom is nearly universally respected and beloved in the sport and who has enough class to have never publicly commented on Kara's confessed involvement with microdosing.

You have a source for this? Seems pretty significant if true.

Someone reported this thread and said it should be deleted because the title is not accurate with Goucher's quote . I understand the sentiment but does anyone have a better title? I think hyperbole should be allowed when discussing pros but I would consider renaming the thread.

How about :

Goucher: 2016 OT "wasn’t a level playing field" due to VaporFlys.

Ekin Live wrote:

How about :

Goucher: 2016 OT "wasn’t a level playing field" due to VaporFlys.

+1

Ironically Flanagan claimed that the 2016 Olympics "wasn’t a level playing field".