alpha wrote:
Most of the posts pointing out the congruities between *current* Nike athletes/coaches and Block/Balco have been deleted.
If you want a pat on the back for pointing out Block being at the trials then it appears you got it. Congratulations!
No one will ever accuse you of asking any real or hard questions.
i have no idea what you are talking about. feel free to email me at
weldonjohnson@letsrun.comwejo wrote:
Many of the posts defending Block or trying to deflect the attention to whether LRC should require registration are by the same guy posting under different handles.
Ah, the irony.
Even though I've defended CJeter on here a number of times (although this story now makes it more difficult), I acknowledge that steroids have made a lot of things questionable since the late 50's. Heck, the Lithuanian female marathoner (Balčiūnaitė) who was caught taking steroids earlier this year weighs 94lbs! She's the one who originally won the Euro 2010 gold and lost it after her suspension to one of the Russians who got caught today (Yulamanova). Could someone still look like a Muna Lee and take steroids? I guess that's mild confirmation and is saddening (not going into fiber types/yada yada yada).http://www.zimbio.com/Steroids/articles/Lx936G2Y9NP/Steroid+Use+Keeps+Ninety+Four+Pound+Marathonhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-2168163/London-2012-Games-Russian-trio-miss-banned-doping.html--------The marathon remains an enigma - like I've said before, the men's Russian and Chinese national records are 2:09:x and 2:08:x, respectively - set after EPO testing began. If EPO were as good as advertised, those times would be much much lower.
23132 wrote:
as frank shorter puts out, doping has made everything questionable since the late 70s, since the east german athletes dominated in 76.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LB0bSQbgTwinspiring lecture by frank shorter. The part on doping really starts at 20:30. Damn, I didn't know EPO gives a 1-2% boost. That can make a world of difference in the marathon.
He says the independent testing has helped some. But says that it was rampant in the late 90s. Steve Holman, who had an up and down career, spoke of this too. When EPO emerged in the very early 90s, so many times just dropped like crazy.
Weldon-
I posted this earlier in the thread, but it got buried. Do you have any information on the status of Mark Block's appeal of the USADA decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. He was purported to have begun an appeal in March 2011, but no mention of the result.
http://www.athleticsweekly.com/news/mark-block-to-challenge-usada-ban/
wow, you'd never watch pro T&F again? That's so harsh. Maybe you should rethink penalizing T&F like that. What a huge loss your viewership abscence would be. Hell, probably just cancel the Olympics..
Here is the Arbitrator\'s Award as of March 17, 2011http://www.usada.org/uploads/ArbitrationAwardBlock.pdf
scoops wrote:
Weldon-
I posted this earlier in the thread, but it got buried. Do you have any information on the status of Mark Block\'s appeal of the USADA decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. He was purported to have begun an appeal in March 2011, but no mention of the result.
http://www.athleticsweekly.com/news/mark-block-to-challenge-usada-ban/
That's the AAA decision he was supposedly appealing to CAS. Here is the CAS search engine for any searching experts. I can't seem to find any decisions, but possibly a way to search active cases?
http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/caselaw/help/home.aspx
wejo wrote:
A Duck wrote:Again, agree.
The brojo's once gave me, via email, the excuse that they tolerated Rupp being called gay and worse on this board, because they understood that "fans" out there were jealous of the support Rupp has gotten his entire career .
Instead of addressing the issue people are going on red herring attacks.
I like Robert and pleased with the tremendous support in this thread and the emails from people as well.
However, I have to address this issue above because it is false. The post above is not true. We put in a filter so people could not post the words "rupp" and "gay" in the same post. So for two or three years if you wanted to post about Galen Rupp and Tyson Gay in the same thread you could not for that reason.
What we probably told the poster is some people are not going to like Rupp. Who cares? That is sport. People hate the NY Yankees because they buy their way to championships.
I repeat we have a "Report a post" feature. We take those posts that are reported seriously. Yes posts can not be pre-screened but the discussion on here is way above what you see on most newssites. Read an article about Obama on a major news site.
Right now there is not a recent post on the forum that has been reported as Offensive by more than one person that is still up on the forum or that has not been approved by a moderator. If you don't like something please report it.
Now let's stay on track. Mark Block should not be in the VIP section of the Olympic Trials. Anyone who says so is an apologist for dopers in my mind.
Sorry dude,
The email I received back from you or your brother was exactly as I described it.
Which is why I then went on to contact Alberto, several people at Nike, Oregon, and some of your sponsors, one of who dropped you because of the low class nature of this site -- and encourage them all to contact you guys and ask you to better citizens in the sport.
And who cares? First of all, this sport is not the New York Yankees. The Yankees have more fans in the USA than Track does.
You want to know who cares? I care. And about a half dozen high class posters on this site the past few weeks.
Who cares? People who know these people personally and know them to be good people -- who would never act as accused on this site, and who, would never act with the behavior you do on this site, or the behavior you permit.
Now, you want to stay on track?
How about you get smarter? I am not going to do your work for you, but I will tell you there is ONE reporter who would have salivated to take this on and attack Nike and work with you on this. And you are not informed enough to know who that reporter is.
BUT, the thing is, and this is where your intelligence seriously comes into question, a handful of people post on this thread (and frankly I am glad a bunch did hours and hours before I logged) that you and your site cannot be taken seriously as a journalistic source because you have a bad reputation for what you have allowed on this board.
It's a legit complaint.
A Duck - you have completely missed the point and your response is an inarticulate jumble of words. If you are a U of O grad, you must have opted out of any classes devoted to composition. BTW, everyone is impressed that you went right to Alberto. Did you share a DMSO cocktail?
It's too bad FLotrack and Letsrun don't get along better: that footage of Block scrambling away would make a fantastic Kick Of The Week!
Apparently a ban means you aren't allowed to go to track meets now.
A Duck why don't you just say your name and where you work if you're so high and mighty? Give us your email address? You're missing the point and changing the story. The issue is that a convicted drug trafficker that has aided drug cheats is poking around the US olympic trials. What is wrong with exposing that? That is a serious issue. Do you really want cons and druggies running around our meet? You're losing it. You can't even produce the email evidence that you've spoken of. Go to bed, get your priorities in order, and try again tomorrow.
The last poster has it right. Ya'll are arguing over yourselves, and in essence, are destroying yourselves and track and field.
A Duck,
You have absolutely no credibility. It is obvious to everyone that you are an Oregon fanboy and drug cheat apologist.
Please do everyone a favor and stop littering this thread with your poorly written prose.
Cons and druggies running around our meet?? hahahaha! Have you ever been in a professional football player locker room? You people are stupid and so naive, it's ridiculous. You all must be liberals and perfect living in your own pajama morning environments.
Wejo/Rojo
keep up the heat -- you have touched a nerve and some apologists are trying to distract and combat which tells me you are onto something.
in the end what moral responsibilities do the sponsors have? obviously they have no legal responsibliities but we are now at a "spirit of the law, letter of the law" issue -- if you are making money off of someones illegal actions then what are you doing?
Our sport is not a profitable one and has been taken over as the media outlet for an important American shoe company. There is good with bad. But in the end a company sponsoring an athlete that commits a crime (posession of illegal substances) should have some accountability. The Nikes of the world will say that steroids produce profits and that increasing their risks in any way with athletes will reduce the sponsorship dollars in the sport -- all of which is true. But the fan base dwindles, and I have to believe that it is bad business long term for them. Look at pictures of some of the Nike sponsored athletes through the years -- particularly women sprinters. HGH makes your palette grow and your teeth jut from your head --notice how many wear braces for years and years. This is obvious. I remember 100m finals in the 90s where all 8 runners were wearing braces. Horrifying.
oldsub4 wrote:
Wejo/Rojo
keep up the heat -- you have touched a nerve and some apologists are trying to distract and combat which tells me you are onto something.
in the end what moral responsibilities do the sponsors have? obviously they have no legal responsibliities but we are now at a "spirit of the law, letter of the law" issue -- if you are making money off of someones illegal actions then what are you doing?
Our sport is not a profitable one and has been taken over as the media outlet for an important American shoe company. There is good with bad. But in the end a company sponsoring an athlete that commits a crime (posession of illegal substances) should have some accountability. The Nikes of the world will say that steroids produce profits and that increasing their risks in any way with athletes will reduce the sponsorship dollars in the sport -- all of which is true. But the fan base dwindles, and I have to believe that it is bad business long term for them. Look at pictures of some of the Nike sponsored athletes through the years -- particularly women sprinters. HGH makes your palette grow and your teeth jut from your head --notice how many wear braces for years and years. This is obvious. I remember 100m finals in the 90s where all 8 runners were wearing braces. Horrifying.
Just a crazy post.
A lot of African American's are sprinters. And a lot of African American's have dental issues due to having lots of mixed blood in their lineage. Ask a dentist.
WOW!!! this last post by oldsub4 was interesting. Perhaps HE/SHE should go and look in the mirror and adjust something upstairs. Unbelievable.
Juris Luzens Prudence wrote:
A Duck - you have completely missed the point and your response is an inarticulate jumble of words. If you are a U of O grad, you must have opted out of any classes devoted to composition. BTW, everyone is impressed that you went right to Alberto. Did you share a DMSO cocktail?
How old are you?
Are you sober?
I got straight A's in all my writing classes, and also in all my debate classes.
I went to two other schools after Oregon, so I'll put my educational creds up against your immature jumble of bullsh*t any day.
oh please you're the same guy that probably gives the brojos and everyone else crap for being gun loving conservatives in other threads. Jeter dodged the question asked of her. She has been hanging out with a convicted (con!) drug trafficker who helped drug cheats. so said so on her twitter feed. why doesn't she come out and clear up the discussion on her very active twitter feed? that would solve a lot.
why doesn't Nike respond after they've been asked about the situation? that would clear this all right up. just say oops, we don't support drug use and it was a poor decision, blah blah blah. anything. instead everyone looks guilty as hell to everyone in their pajama morning environments.
nike won't say anything because they're a corporate giant that doesn't have to answer an inquiry like this until their feet are held to the fire. only then will they make some bland statement that would have satisfied fans on day 1.
who says "pajama morning environments?"