There is a huge difference between your claim (i.e. the panel did not know that she cheated) and the rules (deemed intentional). But sure, lie about me (i.e. that I neither read the rules nor the decision) instead of admitting that you are wrong.
Another attempt to mouth about the rules without a hint of depth or actually reading them.
The rules are clear ; to evaluate guilt they are not to evaluate intent.
I wanted to make sure that you got at least one upvote for your apparently disfavored (but seemingly well-considered) analysis. As an appellate lawyer for many years, I've dealt with these kinds of issues hundreds of times. Almost everyone seems to have a strong opinion about almost everything and every case in the law, but almost no one bothers to read (at least, with any detectable comprehension) the applicable statutes, regulations, Constitutional provisions, precedents, or even the very judicial opinions (including all concurrences and dissents) that they have such strong views about. In many instances, I'm often the one person who doesn't have a strong view about a particular case or legal issue, but I'm almost always by far the most knowledgeable about the actual case and its issues.
In the Houlihan case, I read all of the official reports, decisions, opinions, applicable rules, and arguments. I still don't have a strong opinion about whether Houlihan doped (intentionally or not). I could do more research on nandrolone, but I butted heads decades ago with one of the most well-known (and, some would say, notorious) doping lab directors about so-called "false positives" in nandrolone testing, and it was not terribly surprising to see that particular lab director in the middle of this case as well. Fortunately, I have little interest in this case, and even less interest in getting involved in its merits.
Do I care she ran/runs? No. Do I feel bad for people she beat? Unless it's qualifying for something or for $ then of course not - 99% of them are running against a clock.
As someone has pointed out, there was $300 prize for the first place.
Molly Wedel-Radigan, Class: 2003 Induction: 2014 Sport(s): Women's Track & Field/Cross Country - Radigan is the first female student-athlete at USD to earn All-America
Kelsi Kearney - Career Bests 2020-21 Cross Country Fall cross country season canceled due to COVID-19 pandemic. Indoor Track & Field Earned all-Summit League
Hannah Neusch - 2022-23: CROSS COUNTRY: Competed in five meets…Her best 5,000 meter performance came at the Briar Cliff Invitational in a time of 19:51.5…Her best
Do I care she ran/runs? No. Do I feel bad for people she beat? Unless it's qualifying for something or for $ then of course not - 99% of them are running against a clock.
As someone has pointed out, there was $300 prize for the first place.
Check out someone like Jenny Simpson. Jenny broke 4 in college and had been maintaining that ever since. Check out someone like Emma Coburns steeple progression. The only big jumps as a pro would be right when she left college. Check Nikki hiltz check heather Maclean
Are you kidding? Those progressions are all over the place.
Simpson: Dropped over 11 seconds to run 3:59 at age 22, then didn't break 4 again until four years later
Coburn: Steady progression from 18 to 21 but after running 9:23 at 21, she went 9:28, 9:11, 9:15.
Maclean: Made a huge (suspicious!) jump from 4:17 to 4:05 at 23.
I don't think you understand what a steady progression means.
Nothing about the progression of any of those runners is suspicious and you'd be a fool to think that Shelby's isn't suspicious as all get out.
Simpson only dropped 11 seconds when she switched from the steeple to the 1500. She ran an elite time and did tons of work to maintain it.
Coburn saw a huge improvement when she turned pro which is natural. Then she saw steady gains until she hit her peak in 2017.
Maclean is truly a fresh legged-talent, not what Shelby pretends to be. Again she made that gain in her first year out of the NCAA.
I'm glad you started Hiltz in high school. That's cute. anyways not suspicious.
Shelby saw superhuman growth in her fourth (4th) year as a pro. Where did that come from? She'd been training hard since high school, running 65+ miles a week in college. Then came to Jerry where she did well and improved, but 2018 she found all this new improvement in her legs that wasn't there before.
She made Jenny look silly at Pre and USAs'. The world silver medalist and this rando came out of nowhere to destroy her. Just smelt so so bad.
I'm thankful this doper was caught. You should be too. Shelby made the sport so much worse and has done permanent damage to it. She has records that are dirty and no one can touch.
She’s following the guidelines of her ban. Shes also been tested multiple times this year. Seems like a lot of people need to chill the hell out.
I am going to be the first to say I’m super ignorant to the “guidelines” of suspensions. I genuinely didn’t know if they test people during their ban, so that’s why I put that out there. It seems like an obvious thing they should do, right? BTW, could you care to show me a source that I can reference for those guidelines so I can enlighten myself?
also curious how you might know she is following her ban guidelines and has been tested multiple times?
Google is pretty neat if you want to look up the guidelines of suspensions. here’s a quick link to lookup athletes drug testing
You never see NFL players in the CFL during a suspension. This sport is a joke
I don't think its comparable to a CFL game.
This is a local no-name trail run with a $300 cash prize for the top man and top woman. The winning male time was over 35 minutes. She beat all the men by 5 min, thats how uncompetitive and no name this event is. The average time in this run was a full hour.
I think its equivalent to a suspended NFL player playing in a casual YMCA meetup league on a local field (not the CFL). Personally, I think Shelby is guilty and she shouldn't be allowed in any official elite events, with big prizes (regardless to the country putting it on), but I don't care if she wants to run in local fun runs. The organizers should be free to not let her run them if they don't want her there, but if they allow her best wishes to her and them.
I am going to be the first to say I’m super ignorant to the “guidelines” of suspensions. I genuinely didn’t know if they test people during their ban, so that’s why I put that out there. It seems like an obvious thing they should do, right? BTW, could you care to show me a source that I can reference for those guidelines so I can enlighten myself?
also curious how you might know she is following her ban guidelines and has been tested multiple times?
Google is pretty neat if you want to look up the guidelines of suspensions. here’s a quick link to lookup athletes drug testing
This is a local no-name trail run with a $300 cash prize for the top man and top woman. The winning male time was over 35 minutes. She beat all the men by 5 min, thats how uncompetitive and no name this event is.
Taylor HusemanDistance - Career Bests2014-15Cross CountryRan a season-best 8,000-meter time of 26:16 at the Bradley Classic...finished 29th at the South Dakota
Where/when did Tygart say it's "somewhat likely" in this case? Or do you mean generally somewhat likely?
Generally likely. He was already dealing with cases of tainted supplements and false positives. It was during the long interview on "The Running Effect" back last Winter.
Show The Running Effect Podcast, Ep CEO Of USADA Travis Tygart Shares His Story, Taking Down Lance Armstrong, The Shelby Houlihan Case & Thoughts On Keeping Sport Clean - Dec 16, 2022
Where/when did Tygart say it's "somewhat likely" in this case? Or do you mean generally somewhat likely?
Generally likely. He was already dealing with cases of tainted supplements and false positives. It was during the long interview on "The Running Effect" back last Winter.
In this interview Travis made it clear that he believed the aiu and cas handled Shelby’s case correctly. Shelby had been spouting the lie that Travis was on her side for months. I feel like Travis was fed up.
