Katelyn Tuohy?
Kenesisa Bekele?
That guy’s brother?
Galen Rupp?
Jared Ward?
Brigid Kosgei?
Mary Keitany?
Lawrence Cherono?
Geremew?
Shita Kitata?
Some Japanese dude?
Katelyn Tuohy?
Kenesisa Bekele?
That guy’s brother?
Galen Rupp?
Jared Ward?
Brigid Kosgei?
Mary Keitany?
Lawrence Cherono?
Geremew?
Shita Kitata?
Some Japanese dude?
buckle up wrote:
macdaddy wrote:
OP says no one “top tier” and then people start naming:
-Hassan (best female runner in the world)
- Dibaba (top 3 female runner of all time)
- Farah (best track runner of the decade)
It’s probably Andy Bayer. Or any of those Schumacher guys. Not top tier, rarely racing... couple ++++ guys in the squad
At no time did I ever say no one “top tier”. It’s not an American. I’m an expat Brit living in LA with 25 years of competing in and being around international athletics. I was only shocked twice previously- both times were known dopers- the shock was that they were allowed to be exposed. It is the same this time. I believe that I still fall under British law while living abroad- ie libel/slander laws apply. I probably shouldn’t have started the thread without naming the specific name, but just wanted to start the thread to give some encouragement that there actually is a significant change in doping prosecution. In the past, this athlete would have arranged some type of underground agreement without exposure of their name.
So it is not an American.
Earlier Buckle Up stated:
"Wow. I just got a text from a very much “in the know” individual. Brace yourselves. You’re going to be shocked."
Then,
"You’re half correct. Appeal has been/is the limiting factor here, but this athlete is definitely top tier."
On Kevin Castille (who I've never heard of), "No, I sure did not. That’s not even in the same stratosphere as this athlete."
Worried about British laws, tells me that we are looking at someone like Mo, Bolt, a Jamaican sprinter chick. Someone like Aikines, even Muir.
It would be good if it was Mo.
Bolt would likely kill the sport among general fans, even though most of us here know he was likely as juiced (or more) as all the other top sprinters.
I still think it sounds like a female, given the OP is careful not to say 'he'. Surely not squeaky clean Laura Muir? Everybody knows Mo is dodgy, but Laura Muir would just about end athletics in GB with all the present troubles going on.
Mary Keitany
There is no way it is Dolt.
But if it ever was, I would be on this board 24/7 for a week, so you can plan to take a week off. I will be absolutely intolerable.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
There is no way it is Dolt.
But if it ever was, I would be on this board 24/7 for a week, so you can plan to take a week off. I will be absolutely intolerable.
You already are,
The person has been named at least a couple of times on this thread and it's been known for a while.
El Keniano wrote:
The person has been named at least a couple of times on this thread and it's been known for a while.
It hasn't been known for awhile. It's still not known, unless you mean by the people involved in the legal process, which would be patently obvious.
Coevett wrote:
macdaddy wrote:
OP says no one “top tier” and then people start naming:
-Hassan (best female runner in the world)
- Dibaba (top 3 female runner of all time)
- Farah (best track runner of the decade)
It’s probably Andy Bayer. Or any of those Schumacher guys. Not top tier, rarely racing... couple ++++ guys in the squad
No, the OP didn't. Somebody else making a separate claim did. That's made the thread confusing.
From what the actual OP has said.
It's a very big name.
Has been in the appeal process for a long time.
We can perhaps infer :
The athlete is British.
It's a woman.
The other poster is making a separate claim about a non top tier former athlete he 'suspects' is going down, and people are replying to him thinking he is the OP.
C'mon - you're falling for the bait from the OP - he's/she's got you eating out of their hands.
"It's been in the appeal process for a long time?" For what? If it's a charge of doping that would have been publicly revealed on the AIU Provisional-Suspensions-in-Force list. As soon as an athlete is charged with a doping violation whether it be for a positive drug test or an ABP violation (all three anti-doping experts that reviewed a flagged passport would have to agree there's sufficient for a doping charge in the first place) the charge is publicly revealed per their transparency policy. And on a drug positive test the athlete will be provisionally suspended even before a request is made for the B sample to be tested.
Secondly, after the athlete is charged the case goes to the DT hearing where the athlete can contest the charge and present any exculpatory evidence (e.g., contaminated supplements, altitude training and/or sickness that affected the ABP violation, etc.). Whether the athlete is found in violation and the charge is upheld or the charge is dropped, the decision becomes part of the "First Instance Decisions" category which is publicly available for review for anyone that's interested in reading the case. Only after that does the athlete have the right to appeal to CAS, and those appeals become publicly available once there's a decision from the arbitrator.
So, if this mysterious athlete is going through an "appeal" process for a doping charge, then there should some record of the Provisional Suspension and First Instance Decision on the AIU site.
https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/disciplinary-process/first-instance-decisionshttps://www.athleticsintegrity.org/disciplinary-process/appeal-decisionsbuckle up wrote:
macdaddy wrote:
OP says no one “top tier” and then people start naming:
-Hassan (best female runner in the world)
- Dibaba (top 3 female runner of all time)
- Farah (best track runner of the decade)
It’s probably Andy Bayer. Or any of those Schumacher guys. Not top tier, rarely racing... couple ++++ guys in the squad
At no time did I ever say no one “top tier”. It’s not an American. I’m an expat Brit living in LA with 25 years of competing in and being around international athletics. I was only shocked twice previously- both times were known dopers- the shock was that they were allowed to be exposed. It is the same this time. I believe that I still fall under British law while living abroad- ie libel/slander laws apply. I probably shouldn’t have started the thread without naming the specific name, but just wanted to start the thread to give some encouragement that there actually is a significant change in doping prosecution. In the past, this athlete would have arranged some type of underground agreement without exposure of their name.
British (well, strictly English when it comes to defamation law) law only allows for damages where the statement was not true. If your source is correct, you should have no fear from posting on here the name of the athlete, especially if the outcome will be known very shortly. You should feel confident at the very least narrowing it down with nationality and gender.
What's up with this? wrote:
So, if this mysterious athlete is going through an "appeal" process for a doping charge, then there should some record of the Provisional Suspension and First Instance Decision on the AIU site.
Coleman would be a counterexample, as would Salazar.
Is it a past WR holder?
What's up with this? wrote:
after the athlete is charged the case goes to the DT hearing
The Senate already had the Donald Trump hearing and acquitted him.
Throwing out my guess that it’s Muir
Oh god please be mo
What's up with this? wrote:
"It's been in the appeal process for a long time?" For what? If it's a charge of doping that would have been publicly revealed on the AIU Provisional-Suspensions-in-Force list. As soon as an athlete is charged with a doping violation whether it be for a positive drug test or an ABP violation (all three anti-doping experts that reviewed a flagged passport would have to agree there's sufficient for a doping charge in the first place) the charge is publicly revealed per their transparency policy. And on a drug positive test the athlete will be provisionally suspended even before a request is made for the B sample to be tested.
Secondly, after the athlete is charged the case goes to the DT hearing where the athlete can contest the charge and present any exculpatory evidence (e.g., contaminated supplements, altitude training and/or sickness that affected the ABP violation, etc.). Whether the athlete is found in violation and the charge is upheld or the charge is dropped, the decision becomes part of the "First Instance Decisions" category which is publicly available for review for anyone that's interested in reading the case. Only after that does the athlete have the right to appeal to CAS, and those appeals become publicly available once there's a decision from the arbitrator.
So, if this mysterious athlete is going through an "appeal" process for a doping charge, then there should some record of the Provisional Suspension and First Instance Decision on the AIU site.
If the athlete is caught by an AIU test, yes.
If it's a NADA test, national rules apply.
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Throwing out my guess that it’s Muir
But she has been racing rather than hiding in the last few weeks. I think it's either a hoax or someone closer to the end of the career or not quite that famous.
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Throwing out my guess that it’s Muir
I've got pretty good intel on that group and have heard no indication of anything wrong. If it were the case it would be absolutely devastating to Scottish Athletics. She's adored. I'm very confident that it's not from that group though.
sneaky wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Throwing out my guess that it’s Muir
I've got pretty good intel on that group and have heard no indication of anything wrong. If it were the case it would be absolutely devastating to Scottish Athletics. She's adored. I'm very confident that it's not from that group though.
Seems unlikely.
El K has posted on this thread already and he's talking about it as if he already knows.
He would have posted countless threads already with that name and his other fake names if it was a big name Brit. He's not mentally capable enough to control himself.