I knew this would inevitably make its way on here so I would like to say a few things.
1) You may disagree or not believe in Shelby, but I sincerely ask you to listen to this episode. You will benefit greatly from hearing Shelby’s vulnerability, heart, and openness in sharing her story. We could be here endlessly debating all the different facts of the case, evidence on both sides, and much more. But that’s not what we’re here to do. All we’re here to do is give Shelby an opportunity to share her heart, give her side of the story in full, and give her the opportunity to answer every misconception about the situation.
2) Shelby has never spoken publicly in a long-form manner since her ban. She speaks on many news things that aren't publically known and addresses all of the misconceptions that you all wrongly speculate on here all the time.
3) Please listen to this with an open mind and not your predisposed mindset. If you want to speak on the podcast AFTER you listen to it, that's fine, but don't assume to know what she said without listening to it. 4) Lastly, Shelby and I both deserve respect. Whether you agree with Shelby or not, these are very sensitive and life-altering subjects. I demand that you show the utmost respect in any comment sections about this episode whether you agree with her or not. Every human being has dignity and should be treated with such.
I hope you will all give Shelby a chance. If you would like more info you can go to
I wish she would stop blaming the system of drug testing for her positive sample. I read her statement. And she thinks the drug testers are supposed to prove her innocence? They give you the opportunity to give a plausible explanation via appeals. It's not the duties of the international drug testing labs to prove anyone is innocent. Shelby needs to reflect on herself and her close surroundings for the truth. Stop blaming "the system of drug testing ".
I think you’re focusing too heavily on the intent component. I submit, Ross Tucker makes the point that if someone cuts off a corner of a marathon “unintentionally” but then crosses the finish line first, is that person the winner because they didn’t intend to do that? As a professional athlete, Shelby has a responsibility to make sure that no illegal substances are ingested or injected by herself. Unfortunately she failed with that and now she is banned and she doesn’t seem to convey that she understood that responsibility us.
Many many millions in each country have exactly the same responsibility to account for what was in their system a month ago and not just the likes of SH. Is this reasonable ?
I wish she would stop blaming the system of drug testing for her positive sample. I read her statement. And she thinks the drug testers are supposed to prove her innocence? They give you the opportunity to give a plausible explanation via appeals. It's not the duties of the international drug testing labs to prove anyone is innocent. Shelby needs to reflect on herself and her close surroundings for the truth. Stop blaming "the system of drug testing ".
The corridor to prove the source, after a month, to get a reduced sentence is very very narrow.
There's a few "tough" questions asked that just allow Shelby to repeat the same talking points she (and her team) have been making for months.
You literally payed one of the pre-eminant sports scientists to dissect the case for you, why don't you go point-by-point through that with Shelby? When she mentions the hair sample test, you ask her why that would matter given CAS are implying she didn't take Nadralone but a precursor, that wouldn't show up in a hair sample test anyway.
Running media especially suffers from this tendancy to go in with a list of questions, a few "hard ones" mixed in and just go question by question, and try to walk out still friends with the interviewee. Go back and watch the Frost-Nixon interviews - you get the quality answers when the interviewee is not allowed to get comfortable and settle in.
There's a few "tough" questions asked that just allow Shelby to repeat the same talking points she (and her team) have been making for months.
You literally payed one of the pre-eminant sports scientists to dissect the case for you, why don't you go point-by-point through that with Shelby? When she mentions the hair sample test, you ask her why that would matter given CAS are implying she didn't take Nadralone but a precursor, that wouldn't show up in a hair sample test anyway.
Running media especially suffers from this tendancy to go in with a list of questions, a few "hard ones" mixed in and just go question by question, and try to walk out still friends with the interviewee. Go back and watch the Frost-Nixon interviews - you get the quality answers when the interviewee is not allowed to get comfortable and settle in.
Opposite in the Frost interview.
Frost got Nixon to get comfortable or at the minimum he did not go in hard.
My question is why we should give Shelby and chance to open up now when she and her team have been opaque and borderline dishonest from the start about the whole situation a year and a half ago? From the get-go, they fed us some misleading BS that omitted key data, went scorched earth on doping authorities, then went silent (ESPECIALLY Jerry and Shalane) and wouldn't respond to legit any questions about the situation once everything came to light. And even now, their lack of transparency around her training situation (at the expense of her own teammates!) makes it even more aggravating for us fans. She and her coaches have spent any goodwill they may have been entitled to.
Great post.
But the reason why they did that is simple - she still had an appeal going on. They were fearful that going public would potentially piss of people while the appeal was going on. Shelby said as much today.
I certainly feel now Jerry should go public. We've asked him to come on our podcast. We'd love to have Shelby too. When we hired Ross Tucker, we initially thought of doing like a debate discussion with all parties.
PS. When posting about the podcast, please remember the host is 16-years old. I think it's great he's so into the sport but if you expect him to be a perfect journalist at age 16, then I have a bridge to sell you.
I don't get why so many Shelby haters get so upset. Even if she is guilty, she certainly has the right to be a psychopath and declare her innocence like people on death row.
Lol dude. You’ve done everything you can over decades to on purpose cultivate the most toxic place possible because it gets you clicks. For years people have asked you to make basic changes to get a handle on the racist, sexist, trolling, ignorant posting on here and you’ve done nothing while fanning the flames. And now because it’s a situation where you’re sympathetic you’re clutching your pearls begging people not to be mean to a teenager? You mean like all the teenage girls who you’ve gleefully encouraged people to say disgusting things about over the years? Too late, dude. You created this space. Don’t cry about it now. The scorpion and the frog, etc.
Shelby believes she didn't intentionally dope, but she can't prove it. Her counsel never challenged the WADA pork farming expert John McGlone with their own expert. Why? Her hair was tested for NA-19 but the experts say she took pre-cursors in the report. Why not test her hair for the pre-cursors? Maybe they did and didn't like the results which would have shown guilt. Why were no other women who say they ate similar meat from the same food truck on the same day test positive? Shelby doped, she did it intentionally, and she got caught. She may not like the process and procedures but even CAS agreed they were followed. But like all dopers, if she keeps claiming innocence people will believe her because she has a personality and belief system where she could never dope. She is responsible for her actions and what goes into her body, it's not WADA's or the AIU's job to look out for her. She cheated.
I wish she would stop blaming the system of drug testing for her positive sample. I read her statement. And she thinks the drug testers are supposed to prove her innocence? They give you the opportunity to give a plausible explanation via appeals. It's not the duties of the international drug testing labs to prove anyone is innocent. Shelby needs to reflect on herself and her close surroundings for the truth. Stop blaming "the system of drug testing ".
The corridor to prove the source, after a month, to get a reduced sentence is very very narrow.
That is because they almost always have doped and there isn't another "source". What doesn't exist is indeed hard to prove.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
To that I would say start a Go-Fund Me to conduct an experiment. Collect a couple hundred authentic offal burritos from food trucks on the West Coast and measure the amount nandrolone. Calculate how much would be in the system of a 110 lb woman, some 10-12 hours later. What's the probability that such consumption would result in a positive test. And as a back-up. Have 20-30 volunteer subjects eat an authentic pig offal burrito (and sure, why not from wild pigs?) and see what their levels are the next day.
I'm not paying for the Shelby fund but I'd put in $50 or $70 for such a study.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
Hi, liar soorer. He didn't have offal burritos in mind when he said that. Truth is that which can be proven. Mere conjecture and fantasy doesn't count. Try again.
There's a few "tough" questions asked that just allow Shelby to repeat the same talking points she (and her team) have been making for months.
You literally payed one of the pre-eminant sports scientists to dissect the case for you, why don't you go point-by-point through that with Shelby? When she mentions the hair sample test, you ask her why that would matter given CAS are implying she didn't take Nadralone but a precursor, that wouldn't show up in a hair sample test anyway.
Running media especially suffers from this tendancy to go in with a list of questions, a few "hard ones" mixed in and just go question by question, and try to walk out still friends with the interviewee. Go back and watch the Frost-Nixon interviews - you get the quality answers when the interviewee is not allowed to get comfortable and settle in.
Opposite in the Frost interview.
Frost got Nixon to get comfortable or at the minimum he did not go in hard.
As I recall, Nixon admitted in the interview what he did - the President can be "above the law". Shelby believes the same about an athlete but is some distance from admitting that.
Frost got Nixon to get comfortable or at the minimum he did not go in hard.
As I recall, Nixon admitted in the interview what he did - the President can be "above the law". Shelby believes the same about an athlete but is some distance from admitting that.