Evan Jager "likely doping" per new Fancy Bears leak

rip wrote:

All he was saying was they never had let him know of this apparent test result that would be a "likely doping" thus forth proving his previous claim he doesn't think he was tested that date, numb nuts

Which in a way is saying the document was either doctored, or the IAAF/wada didn't record the dates/information properly or accurately

Hobby Yogger wrote:

Statement from Jager

http://www.evanjager.com/news/2017/7/6/statement-regarding-fancy-bears-document

page is deleted

rojo wrote:

I just posted this on the other thread.

I'm as anti-doping as anyone but we need more info/context. Either that or we should just shut the site down and put up a black page telling everyone to give up on being a fan.

I mean under the label "likely doping" you have the likes of Meseret Defar, Galen Rupp, Mo Farah, Silas Kiplagat, Geoffrey Mutai, and Evan Jager

Under "passport suspicious" , we have the likes of Asbel Kiprop, Henrik Ingebrigtsen, Luke Puskedra, Mary Ketiany, and Aries Merritt.

I just posted THIS on the other thread:

Bull crap.

He writes this:

"There is a possibility that I did take a test that day, but I have no record of it. I am trying to contact the authorities to determine if I was tested that day and how my name could have ended up on such a list."

How many of you runners keep a running diary/log? I have for almost 40 years. In that running journal I would CERTAINLY make a note that I was DRUG TESTED that day. I'm sure he keeps such a log. He seems to not to be able to find his, but allows that he may have been tested that day. This is the bull crap moment. He knows if he was tested and he probably was. His whole statement sounds so much like Lance Armstrong.

Read more:

Buy your shoes from LetsRun and save 20% everday

D2 Yogger wrote:

page is deleted

The plot thickens....

Yeah, he checked his records and couldn't find any evidence that he was tested that day. He may or may not log that stuff, but if he does, there's nothing in his log.

Let's wait until he hears back from the IAAF, and make sure that he gives an update at some point. If he doesn't, that's a bit shady.

If this test never happened, well that's a pretty good defense then!

Henrik wrote:

But see this chart below; a guy fasted for 3 days and shared his blood values before and after:

Ref Range 3/21/17 3/23/17

RBC (4.10-5.70) | 5.02 | 5.85

Hemoglobin (13.0-17.0) | 15.3 | 18.1

Hematocrit (37.0-49.0) | 44.6 | 52

It seems like due to dehydration his hematocrit and hemoglobin skyrocket! 52 for hematocrit, crazy. If you, let's say a marathon runner, go and do your 3h fasted run, no water, to train fat adaptation. You come back home, WADA asks you to pie and your hematocrit comes 52 you're in trouble. What do you say?

I understand it's just n-1 experiment, but how do you respond to your training, food, rest is very individual (that's what it tells me).

Here is the link to that self-study:

http://cholesterolcode.com/the-fasting-disaster/

But the key is the reticulocyte interaction in the off-score. They would test you for traces of epo or blood bag debris in the sample to explain your performances. So dehydration from a 3 hour run would easily be ruled out.

Dance like Lance wrote:

Cycling fans from the 90s and early 2000s...

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Some cycling fans might like to talk with you...

Back in the 1960s cyclists were doping on vitamins (b12 etc) and painkillers (probably steriods as well).

rip wrote:

All he was saying was they never had let him know of this apparent test result that would be a "likely doping" thus forth proving his previous claim he doesn't think he was tested that date, numb nuts

There is a clear difference between his statement

"the IAAF has clearly determined that there was no anti-doping rule violation committed"

and

"the IAAF has not determined that there was an anti-doping rule violation committed".

Gotta bee wrote:

SteepleKing wrote:

Are there seriously people out there that dont like Evan Jager????

He's white and fast, like Rupp, main reason for the hate if we are all honest with ourselves

Jager has barely run under 3:33 for 1500. It's not like he just dropped a 3:28...

Unlikely doping wrote:

Gotta bee wrote:

He's white and fast, like Rupp, main reason for the hate if we are all honest with ourselves

Jager has barely run under 3:33 for 1500. It's not like he just dropped a 3:28...

D2 Yogger wrote:

Hobby Yogger wrote:

Statement from Jager

http://www.evanjager.com/news/2017/7/6/statement-regarding-fancy-bears-document

page is deleted

It was just moved

Good points.1. We need more context about the process. People are jumping to conclusions.2. It's fair to point out the difference between how the site addresses NOP vs other US groups. 3. Lots of others are implicated - it's a broader story and it may be that we just know little about the process and /or the program is flawed,

Skips Arm Day wrote:

Let's keep in mind that this information was leaked by people with a clear agenda. Therefore, it's safe to assume they only selectively leaked information that incriminates the people they want to incriminate, and this information is biased towards that agenda. For all we know there could be hundreds of other documents with evidence the athletes are clean that the hackers chose not to release, or these "likely doping" flags could be a routine occurrence and that clean athletes can get them depending on how the data is processed. Certainly they wouldn't release data that didn't further their agenda.

Unless we know how this information fits within the broader context of IAAF's anti doping procedures, we can't safely draw any conclusions from it.

I've been suspecting WADA's testing and methodology. The subject of doping and human physiology is so complex. WADA's scientists are not infallible. Seems the tests keep getting more sensitive, to the point where eating beef in certain countries can cause a positive test result. Since there is no transparency in their methodology we have no idea how WADA is coming to certain conclusions and conjectures. They want to keep the process secret so dopers don't subvert the system but that also opens the possibility WADA is making mistakes which severely impact athlete's reputations.

I agree with much of the last post .

Wada and drug testing started on a simple basis that the result of a test was clear and obvious and any appeal could not really take place because of the remarkable assumption that the test is correct and the lab makes no mistakes .

What we seem to see from the leaks is that the whole process is fraught with poor science and subjective interpretation from those linked/ bound to wada

I think it won't be long before drug control is dead and we can look to lots of wonderful world records , just like we did 20 years ago .

left, right, right wrote:I just posted THIS on the other thread:

Bull crap.

He writes this:

"There is a possibility that I did take a test that day, but I have no record of it. I am trying to contact the authorities to determine if I was tested that day and how my name could have ended up on such a list."

How many of you runners keep a running diary/log? I have for almost 40 years. In that running journal I would CERTAINLY make a note that I was DRUG TESTED that day. I'm sure he keeps such a log. He seems to not to be able to find his, but allows that he may have been tested that day. This is the bull crap moment. He knows if he was tested and he probably was. His whole statement sounds so much like Lance Armstrong.

No. I don't keep a log, much be a doper.

Even if I did, I wouldn't record non-training information.

There isn't anything a guy can do these days, no matter what he says pos's like this guy are gonna say someone is a doper, even if he had someone watching him 24/7 they'd think up something to say he's doping

Of course Jager is doping!!! Do you really think you can approach #1 in your event without doing so?

You people are total suckers!

What I said.

KipOverThisSport wrote:

Sorry, I don't know if I'm missing something, but doesn't this look really bad for WADA for having the blood passport controls in place, seeing these athletes as "highly likely doping" and not doing anything about it?

I realize it's not a positive, but certainly a report for "abnormal blood values" could be announced as it is in cycling? In that case, usually the team makes a statement, sidelines the rider, talks with WADA until it's sorted out and the rider comes back. I don't know, I think we're looking at the athletes and are disappointed, as we should be, but we should also be looking at the more serious implications.

Unless I'm missing something though, feel free to call me out

Yes you are missing something. Did you try reading first before speaking? Or did you just spew out whatever came to your mind and assumed it must be right?

See the IAAF press-release. I will highlight key parts for you:

The official terminology which includes “Likely doping”, “Passport suspicious; Further data is required”, “Likely medical condition”, “Normal”, “Cancelled by APMU” (Athletes Passport Management Unit) are used to classify profiles flagged as “atypical” by the ADAMS mathematical model, indicating whether or not an athlete’s biological passport profile should be further investigated. It does NOT provide a final determination on whether or not an athlete has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation. It is a dynamic process in which the status of an athlete’s profile can change at any time.