4125 wrote:
jc369 wrote:
Kind of gives you an idea how good Mary Slaney was, that some of her records still stand after all this time. I think at one point she held every AR from 800 to 10,000
Before or after her abnormal test ratios?
You boys don't know anything about T&F. ... Slaney's records were all set between 1982-1985. She was banned retroactively to 1997 when she was already in her late 30s. In other words, her records stand.
Perhaps the event is OPEN to more than BTC but, no one registers, attends, or, accepts an invitation? Let's invite the Ulanbaatar Track Club of Mongolia to our race in three days! They can't make make it? Too bad...we tried!
The rules do not state that a representative of any other club must be there. Only that the event is open to another organization. In any event, USATF hasn't said boo.
no team only wrote:
4125 wrote:
Before or after her abnormal test ratios?
You boys don't know anything about T&F. ... Slaney's records were all set between 1982-1985. She was banned retroactively to 1997 when she was already in her late 30s. In other words, her records stand.
What's more, I don't ever recall Slaney having pacers when she ran fast times. She always ran from the front. She certainly didn't run time trials in perfect conditions and team pacing to set her records.
Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:
The rules do not state that a representative of any other club must be there. Only that the event is open to another organization. In any event, USATF hasn't said boo.
So, you are claiming they could invite the local girl scout's club. And they can have a single girl scout show up as a spectator. And RECORD will be accepted! Record acceptance does not work the way you think it does.
Once more: who is the second club? And who will they have running in the event?
Cricket . . . . . . . .
The BTC runners are not a USATF club. They are all individuals who happen to be sponsored and use that name.
mondo23 wrote:
no team only wrote:
You boys don't know anything about T&F. ... Slaney's records were all set between 1982-1985. She was banned retroactively to 1997 when she was already in her late 30s. In other words, her records stand.
What's more, I don't ever recall Slaney having pacers when she ran fast times. She always ran from the front. She certainly didn't run time trials in perfect conditions and team pacing to set her records.
But she did cheat. That’s worse to me than running in a few time trials. Call me crazy.
racing all day wrote:
The BTC runners are not a USATF club. They are all individuals who happen to be sponsored and use that name.
BTC = Bowerman Track Club
Now that is an interesting claim. You are wrong.
BTC. USATF Member #37-0820
https://legacy.usatf.org/clubs/search/info.asp?associationNumber=37No. There is a club and then there is the professional training group. Same name.
racing all day wrote:
No. There is a club and then there is the professional training group. Same name.
0/10.
BTC = USATF Club. That is how they got a USAFT Club number.
Now, name the other club(s) participating in the event, and which runners from that club(s) are running the record attempt race.
Crickets . . . .
Yeah, they are not following that rule under any remotely sensible interpretation. I guess the question is how much people will care, since a 4:16 is still a 4:16.
history repeats wrote:
mondo23 wrote:
What's more, I don't ever recall Slaney having pacers when she ran fast times. She always ran from the front. She certainly didn't run time trials in perfect conditions and team pacing to set her records.
But she did cheat. That’s worse to me than running in a few time trials. Call me crazy.
You have a lot of confidence in the cleanness of present day track. It's long been dirty but there's been no effective testing for months, because of the Covid crisis.
Armstronglivs wrote:
You have a lot of confidence in the cleanness of present day track. It's long been dirty but there's been no effective testing for months, because of the Covid crisis.
Out-of-competition has continued in the USA and you can look up for instance that USADA has tested Shelby 9 times OOC in 2020.
no team only wrote:
Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:
The rules do not state that a representative of any other club must be there. Only that the event is open to another organization. In any event, USATF hasn't said boo.
So, you are claiming they could invite the local girl scout's club. And they can have a single girl scout show up as a spectator. And RECORD will be accepted! Record acceptance does not work the way you think it does.
Once more: who is the second club? And who will they have running in the event?
Cricket . . . . . . . .
Yeah, not to mention even if there was another unattached runner it's hard to say these events are "bonafide competetions", which is subjective but clearly this isnt bonafide.
Maybe they were technically open but nobody from another team showed up. Apparently they cleared beforehand that the records would count but on the surface it does not seem to agree with the rules.
I think it was a missed chance for more excitement not to compete with the teams who did the "big friendly meetings".
rojo wrote:
Thoughts? Fake news. Her 1500 NR equates to 4:13.84 for the mile according to the 1.0802 conversion.
This conversion is for men.
zxcvzxcv wrote:
Have your reporter ask them why she is not going to Monaco.
4125 wrote:
Not comfortable with overseas travel in a pandemic.
Any little excuse to avoid a bona fide competition.
https://m.dw.com/en/has-the-coronavirus-opened-the-door-to-unchecked-doping/a-52991515Hardloper wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You have a lot of confidence in the cleanness of present day track. It's long been dirty but there's been no effective testing for months, because of the Covid crisis.
Out-of-competition has continued in the USA and you can look up for instance that USADA has tested Shelby 9 times OOC in 2020.
"The corona pandemic has paralyzed a lot of things in life, including the battle against doping in sports. It has made drug testing almost impossible. Is this an open invitation for would-be cheaters?"
Armstronglivs wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Out-of-competition has continued in the USA and you can look up for instance that USADA has tested Shelby 9 times OOC in 2020.
"The corona pandemic has paralyzed a lot of things in life, including the battle against doping in sports. It has made drug testing almost impossible. Is this an open invitation for would-be cheaters?"
Why don't you send that link to the testers that have continued to test BTC out of competition and after every competition.
dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:
That 3:55 was a one off in conditions that are unlikely to be replicated. Put in her more normal 3:58 and we are looking a 4:16 or so mile.
What about anything Shelby has done since she was a pro has made this seem like a one off? That's a bad take.
Hardloper wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
"The corona pandemic has paralyzed a lot of things in life, including the battle against doping in sports. It has made drug testing almost impossible. Is this an open invitation for would-be cheaters?"
Why don't you send that link to the testers that have continued to test BTC out of competition and after every competition.
"In March, both UK Anti-doping (Ukad) and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) publicly announced a reduction in their testing programmes."
https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bbc.com/sport/amp/athletics/53017626?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15966546157502&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24sYou appear to be saying the BTC is an exception to what the USADA previously announced in its reduction in testing. I wonder why that would be so. Is it virtual or on-line testing?