We shouldn't see medalists having their medals taken away. That's dumb.
When you start requiring fairness and equality, then you have to take into account the advantages and disadvantages each athlete has. Is it fair that some athletes live and train at altitude or have to train in intense humidity or cold weather? Is it fair that some athletes have smaller sponsorships and need to work second jobs while training? Is it fair that some athletes have massage therapists or strength coaches? Is it fair that some athletes have parents who had genetically superior slow twitch muscle fibers or cardiovascular performance?
Everyone who loses a race could probably point to the race being "unfair" for any of these reasons. In your view of "fairness" does everyone have the same chance of winning the race? If not, then define what your personal definition of fairness is.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
There are times when I think you're way over the top on this doping stuff. This is not one of those times.
Blood doping is a form of doping in which the number of red blood cells in the bloodstream is boosted in order to enhance athletic performance. Because such blood cells carry oxygen from the lungs to the muscles, a higher con...
Blood doping started in the late 1960s but was not outlawed until 1986. While it was still legal, it was commonly used by middle and long-distance runners
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
If male 14:00/29:00 type runners can run 2:08:00-2:10:00, and multitudes have done so, it is perfectly logical for a woman to run 2:11:53, with the same under distance credentials.
Good for you for seeing this coming. I certainly didn't.
One thing is for certain - this raised the bar a crazy amount for women's distance running. Within a decade, I see 220s being considered "good for an amateur" for women.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
Don't you realize that your attitude of baseless doping allegations is also profoundly offensive to any accused athlete who doesn't cheat?
How do you know who the clean athletes are? Why would you exclude Valerie Adams from suspicion? That seems arbitrary, and rather uncharecteristic of you to not accuse winners and achievers of doping.
Doping is a problem in the sport, but you are also the problem in the sport when you make unfounded doping allegations based purely on what you do not know.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
Don't you realize that your attitude of baseless doping allegations is also profoundly offensive to any accused athlete who doesn't cheat?
How do you know who the clean athletes are? Why would you exclude Valerie Adams from suspicion? That seems arbitrary, and rather uncharecteristic of you to not accuse winners and achievers of doping.
Doping is a problem in the sport, but you are also the problem in the sport when you make unfounded doping allegations based purely on what you do not know.
We shouldn't see medalists having their medals taken away. That's dumb.
When you start requiring fairness and equality, then you have to take into account the advantages and disadvantages each athlete has. Is it fair that some athletes live and train at altitude or have to train in intense humidity or cold weather? Is it fair that some athletes have smaller sponsorships and need to work second jobs while training? Is it fair that some athletes have massage therapists or strength coaches? Is it fair that some athletes have parents who had genetically superior slow twitch muscle fibers or cardiovascular performance?
Everyone who loses a race could probably point to the race being "unfair" for any of these reasons. In your view of "fairness" does everyone have the same chance of winning the race? If not, then define what your personal definition of fairness is.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
A doped athlete cheated a doped athlete? You might explain this strange view.
From the Guardian article linked above: Bryce Dyer, an associate professor in product development at Bournemouth University, said: “We’ve gone from a sport where essentially all you needed 20 years ago was a pair of trainers and a vest, to where the footwear has essentially been weaponised quite substantially over the last five or six years.”
Enter the Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1: Adidas claims these shoes are 40% lighter than any previous racing super shoe they have created, and contain a “first-of-its-kind forefoot rocker, placed at 60% of the length of the shoe”, which is “lab-tested to trigger forward momentum and improve running economy”.
Without sawing apart one of these trainers – which has been impossible until now, as they do not go on sale until Tuesday – experts say it is difficult to know whether the technology they contain is truly groundbreaking, or an incremental improvement on what has gone before.
We shouldn't see medalists having their medals taken away. That's dumb.
When you start requiring fairness and equality, then you have to take into account the advantages and disadvantages each athlete has. Is it fair that some athletes live and train at altitude or have to train in intense humidity or cold weather? Is it fair that some athletes have smaller sponsorships and need to work second jobs while training? Is it fair that some athletes have massage therapists or strength coaches? Is it fair that some athletes have parents who had genetically superior slow twitch muscle fibers or cardiovascular performance?
Everyone who loses a race could probably point to the race being "unfair" for any of these reasons. In your view of "fairness" does everyone have the same chance of winning the race? If not, then define what your personal definition of fairness is.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
What is your evidence that Valerie Adams was clean?
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
What is your evidence that Valerie Adams was clean?
For millions and millions of $$$$$$$ - why would anyone NOT seize every possible advantage?
Exposure of the corrupt World Athletics' President himself has shown the entire anti-doping fascade to be a money-making ruse, designed to bury doping positives, AAFs and numerous other breaches of doping regulations at national and international level.
From the Guardian article linked above: Bryce Dyer, an associate professor in product development at Bournemouth University, said: “We’ve gone from a sport where essentially all you needed 20 years ago was a pair of trainers and a vest, to where the footwear has essentially been weaponised quite substantially over the last five or six years.”
Enter the Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1: Adidas claims these shoes are 40% lighter than any previous racing super shoe they have created, and contain a “first-of-its-kind forefoot rocker, placed at 60% of the length of the shoe”, which is “lab-tested to trigger forward momentum and improve running economy”.
Without sawing apart one of these trainers – which has been impossible until now, as they do not go on sale until Tuesday – experts say it is difficult to know whether the technology they contain is truly groundbreaking, or an incremental improvement on what has gone before.
Obviously she is suspect but I don't know why everyone is ignoring the shoes? The vaporflys were revolutionary because they were about as light as previous flats and had the high stack height. Now these are the same stack but 40% lighter. Surely that is worth several minutes doping or not. Question is if she was wearing the same shoes last year while they were still prototypes.
I bet you Galen Rupp has a hard time bettering this in Chicago in a few short weeks.... but she's clean lmfao.... some of the arguments here is mind numbingly comical.
This post was edited 21 seconds after it was posted.
Your attitude is profoundly offensive to any athlete who doesn't cheat. Valerie Adams finished second to an athlete from Belarusa in the 2012 Olympic shot-put. The athlete, Astapchuk, subsequently tested positive for banned substance as a result of retested blood samples. Adams was outraged that she had been cheated out of her Olympic moment in winning the competition. Any athlete would be.
You are incapable of understanding how a clean athlete who has been cheated out of a genuine accomplishment might feel. On this, you live in a moral vacuum, devoid of any principle that conforms to sportsmanship.
Don't you realize that your attitude of baseless doping allegations is also profoundly offensive to any accused athlete who doesn't cheat?
How do you know who the clean athletes are? Why would you exclude Valerie Adams from suspicion? That seems arbitrary, and rather uncharecteristic of you to not accuse winners and achievers of doping.
Doping is a problem in the sport, but you are also the problem in the sport when you make unfounded doping allegations based purely on what you do not know.
So you liken speculation or suspicion about doping, a problem that is endemic in the sport, to an athlete actually doping and cheating other athletes out of winning or gaining medals. I am never surprised by your stupidity. No athlete today can escape speculation and in some cases suspicion they are doping in a dirty sport - many will be - but that you seek to draw an equivalence between speculation about doping and the act of doping itself breaks some kind of record for moronic illogicality. But you're the champ, when it comes to that.
Don't you realize that your attitude of baseless doping allegations is also profoundly offensive to any accused athlete who doesn't cheat?
How do you know who the clean athletes are? Why would you exclude Valerie Adams from suspicion? That seems arbitrary, and rather uncharecteristic of you to not accuse winners and achievers of doping.
Doping is a problem in the sport, but you are also the problem in the sport when you make unfounded doping allegations based purely on what you do not know.
False dichotomy
In a nutshell. But that's what the board's resident doping-denier does. Defend them at all costs. But never successfully.
This post was edited 34 seconds after it was posted.
