Bahrain's world 400m champion Salwa Eid Naser (48.14 pb) suspended for whereabouts failures

dunes runner wrote:

YMMV wrote:

It is THREE whereabouts failures within 12 months.

That neither her nor her agent knew about any of them shows that this is a failure of the SYSTEM, not of the athlete.

WTF are you talking about?

ex-runner wrote:

El Keniano wrote:

Bahrain (and Qatar, Turkey and others) essentially buying athletes on the free market, throwing more money at them than most sponsorship deals, then pressuring the athletes for an instant return on investment, is a big part of the problem.

Yeah. I think she is Nigerian and changed her name to run for that oil money.

This is why the sport needs better, fairer and more evenly distributed wealth. And need to allow athletes multiple sponsorship avenues

When you have most athletes barely able to support themselves and then the elite few above them buying sports cars for fun, it makes short cuts mighty tempting.

I haven't read the whole thread but there is no reason any athlete can't have more than one sponsor. They just can't have a sponsor that competes directly with one they already have.

Kilian Hornet is a runner and has more than one sponsor and while not a runner Lance had multiple sponsors. Lots of pro athletes in many sports have multiple sponsors.

lap2owhs73vf9 wrote:

ex-runner wrote:

Yeah. I think she is Nigerian and changed her name to run for that oil money.

This is why the sport needs better, fairer and more evenly distributed wealth. And need to allow athletes multiple sponsorship avenues

When you have most athletes barely able to support themselves and then the elite few above them buying sports cars for fun, it makes short cuts mighty tempting.

I haven't read the whole thread but there is no reason any athlete can't have more than one sponsor. They just can't have a sponsor that competes directly with one they already have.

Kilian Hornet is a runner and has more than one sponsor and while not a runner Lance had multiple sponsors. Lots of pro athletes in many sports have multiple sponsors.

Jornet, that was auto-correct. Bolt had a few sponsors as well I thought

If you have one whereabouts, and you get a second one, if you have any sense you stop doping immediately and don't start again until one year after the first whereabouts.

Bad Wigins wrote:

If you have one whereabouts, and you get a second one, if you have any sense you stop doping immediately and don't start again until one year after the first whereabouts.

Whereabouts failure, or two of them, doesn't mean you ever started doping.

Stopping doping would not prevent a third whereabouts failure.

casual obsever wrote:

Yowzzzza wrote:

Matt London was touting her performance as the fastest from a clean athlete.

Amazingly, given the stuff he says, I knew that this was the most absurd.

Flagrant!

This guy?

matt_london_413 wrote:

Do you see me here roasting alot of todays female olympic sprinters? No you don't. Because the majority of them are doing this naturally.

LOL

His posts are the biggest clown show when it comes to his assessment of which female sprinters are doping and which ones aren't based on some crazy visual test of "3D shoulders." ???

Not surprising. Obviously juiced, especially considering her time, the fact that she had already run the mixed relay as well, her training partner bust and her agent.

Any talk of this benefitting Felix is a joke; she'll be lucky the even make the US team next year at 34, let alone even challenge for a medal.

And those saying SMU or Perec is the clean WR holder...give me a break. My honest thought on the cleanest is Cathy Freeman, and I'd say 48.6 is probably about right for the womens WR.

The current guidelines have 2 years as the default suspension period for 3 missed tests, reduced to 1 year if the athlete can prove they werent at fault. So she could miss Tokyo, but she may be back competing...but only a month before the Games.

rekrunner wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

If you have one whereabouts, and you get a second one, if you have any sense you stop doping immediately and don't start again until one year after the first whereabouts.

Whereabouts failure, or two of them, doesn't mean you ever started doping.

Stopping doping would not prevent a third whereabouts failure.

You still giving dopers the benefit of the doubt? Did you notice she runs for Bahrain? Bahrain is one of the nations listed on the AIU's "most at risk of doping" category. ?

Whereabouts failures game the system. Let Conte simplify it for you (I think he knows a thing or two about doping. ?):

lap2owhs73vf9 wrote:

ex-runner wrote:

Yeah. I think she is Nigerian and changed her name to run for that oil money.

This is why the sport needs better, fairer and more evenly distributed wealth. And need to allow athletes multiple sponsorship avenues

When you have most athletes barely able to support themselves and then the elite few above them buying sports cars for fun, it makes short cuts mighty tempting.

I haven't read the whole thread but there is no reason any athlete can't have more than one sponsor. They just can't have a sponsor that competes directly with one they already have.

Kilian Hornet is a runner and has more than one sponsor and while not a runner Lance had multiple sponsors. Lots of pro athletes in many sports have multiple sponsors.

No it is not allowed in athletics to have multiple sponsors on your shirt. In cycling you are. In many sports you are. In athletics it is strictly forbidden.

You are allowed to go and do adverts for companies, sure, but that is work in itself you are being paid for. And your real value is when you are running on TV in front of millions. That's where companies want to get their logos.

You aren't allowed to be paid by multiple organisations for running itself. Nick Symmonds took his case to court when he wasn't allowed a second logo on his body at the Olympic trials. The judge ruled that to protect the 'amateur spirit' of the sport USATF could uphold it's ban.

Nike have a monopoly and they have the IAAF on their payroll to ensure it stays like that.

It is a farce. Treat the sport like an amateur organisation and it will die like one.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

So obvious.

My post from that thread: “Gross, just like CC and SAFP. The 3 stooges of the meet”.

CC: busted, whereabouts

SAFP: busted, oxycodone

SEN: busted, whereabouts

I am still basically 100%.

I do have some false negatives, which were tepidly negative: one guy from JAM, and Lawson of USA. Lawson has subsequently been “cleared”, so that’s some vindication on that one.

Basically, 100%.

So obvious.

Thank you sprintgeezer for reaffirming your greatness

Bad Wigins wrote:

If you have one whereabouts, and you get a second one, if you have any sense you stop doping immediately and don't start again until one year after the first whereabouts.

More likely, you decrease your doses to stay below the detection window. Especially if missed test 1 and missed test 2 were within a few weeks of each other, because otherwise you'd miss almost a full year of doping.

But if you or your handlers are too ambitious, or trust the good old bribery system, then you just keep going full speed.

Yeah I know, lol

The point I tried to make was that some situations are totally obvious, not worth discussing, really. Naser is one of them.

A problem is that our idea of what is seen as an athlete’s reasonable progression is now tainted by drug-fueled progressions that were never caught—the half-second jump in the 100m, for instance. Our baseline is now drugs.

Naser’s progression wasn’t just incredible, it was laughable.

You have some good insight sprintgeezer

Joking aside

Barrel of Laughs wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Whereabouts failure, or two of them, doesn't mean you ever started doping.

Stopping doping would not prevent a third whereabouts failure.

You still giving dopers the benefit of the doubt? Did you notice she runs for Bahrain? Bahrain is one of the nations listed on the AIU's "most at risk of doping" category. ?

Whereabouts failures game the system. Let Conte simplify it for you (I think he knows a thing or two about doping. ?):

It looked to me like Bad Wigins was speaking generally. He said "you", and not "she".

If I knew "you" were a doper, there would be no doubt to give benefit from.

Conte was only asked for his belief and he expressed opinions and beliefs about what could possibly be happening.

That doesn't seem relevant.

rekrunner wrote:

Barrel of Laughs wrote:

You still giving dopers the benefit of the doubt? Did you notice she runs for Bahrain? Bahrain is one of the nations listed on the AIU's "most at risk of doping" category. ?

Whereabouts failures game the system. Let Conte simplify it for you (I think he knows a thing or two about doping. ?):

It looked to me like Bad Wigins was speaking generally. He said "you", and not "she".

If I knew "you" were a doper, there would be no doubt to give benefit from.

Conte was only asked for his belief and he expressed opinions and beliefs about what could possibly be happening.

That doesn't seem relevant.

Neither your opinion is relevant. Facts are clear by the rules broken: rules state you “ miss 3 test within a 12 month period you get provisionally suspended and face a penalty of up to 4 years suspension. “ is that clear enough for you?

Another RELEVANT fact: Why would you miss 3 tests? One can be explained, 2 ... ok keep explaining, 3 you are a suspicious of doping.

I’ll give some much needed advise Mr. or Ms. if you don’t like the rules don’t play the sport, that simple.

With the reputation you have of defending dopers and the likes, trust me I don’t anticipate anything more than a 3 pesos spin from you.

Speaking on an Instagram Live video, the 22-year-old said: "I've never been a cheat. I will never be.

"I only missed three drug tests, which is normal. It happens. It can happen to anybody. I don't want people to get confused in all this because I would never cheat.

"This year I have not been drug tested. We are still talking about the ones of last season before the World Championships.

"Hopefully, it'll get resolved because I don't really like the image, but it has happened. It's going to be fine. It's very hard to have this little stain on my name.

"I would never take performance-enhancing drugs. I believe in talent, and I know I have the talent."

https://www.sportsmax.tv/index.php/other-sports/column1/athletics/item/63795-naser-i-m-not-a-cheat-i-only-missed-three-drug-tests?fbclid=IwAR2Vs8gsnTOkN75G2l70_IRwfNAHSTeseoT92j1Kp3duldg1lnEnflR83e4

she sonds pretty deluded

Her logic is impeccable. Don't worry about this because it's normal to miss three drug tests, and besides it was just last year before the World Championships, not this year. What's the big deal?

And they haven't tested me at all this year. That's totally normal not to test the reigning World Champion in what would have been an Olympic year. January, February, March before quarantine and no testing of a 48.14 runner??? Guilty as sin and so is the IAAF. Is the IAAF being paid off by Mideast oil barons again, as in the World Championships selection?

I wonder if she will lose her title then? If she claims to have missed drugs tests before her World Champs victory?

As for no testing this year that is probably because of corona