Full Shelby Houlihan Report is Out from CAS

Brojos are in a STATE. I love the new pro-doping vibe this site has.

sanootage wrote:

What if it was sabotage?

Makes more sense than anything else.

I blame Dieter Baumann or Vladimir Putin. I also remember when Pre crashed his car into a rock outcrop or whatever it was, that one of my high school teammates blamed the Russians for his death.

Well, the probability of the first statement is 1 in 10,000 and the amount of boar meat in the U.S. pork market is 0.33%. So, both.

Can't believe that big Ivy-League brain couldn't figure this one out. The two probabilities are considering different things. If you actually read the report (instead of discussing it for hours on podcasts...without apparently reading it)...you would see the following.

Please exhibit a modicum of critical thinking skills. I'm embarrassed for you.

I totally agree! I think her ex-boyfriend Mr. Centro slipped it to her. Her dirty sample was collected at his house, if I remember hearing that correctly from her press conference.

Heard from my brother in law who works in the government intelligence community. Apparently they think Russia had agents target and sabotage US athletes before the games.

Jerry Maguire wrote:

Heard from my brother in law who works in the government intelligence community. Apparently they think Russia had agents target and sabotage US athletes before the games.

Now this is interesting. I've always wondered why Russia wouldn't do that. It seems like it would be the perfect way to just ruin anti doping. Imagine if they just took out like Simone Biles, Kipchoge, Ingebrigtsen, etc.

As for my pork question, it wasn't a majorly important question for me. I just noticed in a draft article someone on our staff had both stats and I found it to be confusing.

This is a scandal folks. Women's American record holder fails a drug test while in the house of. the most successful male American 1500 runner. But let's focus on how Sha'carri said sh×t onTV.

rojo wrote:

Jerry Maguire wrote:

Heard from my brother in law who works in the government intelligence community. Apparently they think Russia had agents target and sabotage US athletes before the games.

Now this is interesting. I've always wondered why Russia wouldn't do that. It seems like it would be the perfect way to just ruin anti doping. Imagine if they just took out like Simone Biles, Kipchoge, Ingebrigtsen, etc.

As for my pork question, it wasn't a majorly important question for me. I just noticed in a draft article someone on our staff had both stats and I found it to be confusing.

My god. The report is utterly damning of Houlihan and her defense. It systematically dismantles her case and confirms she is likely to have doped. If the owners of a news website are now willing to subscribe to conspiracy theories in order to exonerate one of their pet athletes, then LRC is lost, it's no better than Infowars

SeattleSilver wrote:

sanootage wrote:

Sabotage

Again, the allegation of sabotage has no credibility without a plausible explanation of who, how, and why.

At this point it does not have to be credible only a reasonable possibility. I am not certain by a long way but taking Deca when on whereabouts makes less sense.

Growth or sarms or bio passport yes; Deca no.

High hopes wrote:

rojo wrote:

Now this is interesting. I've always wondered why Russia wouldn't do that. It seems like it would be the perfect way to just ruin anti doping. Imagine if they just took out like Simone Biles, Kipchoge, Ingebrigtsen, etc.

As for my pork question, it wasn't a majorly important question for me. I just noticed in a draft article someone on our staff had both stats and I found it to be confusing.

My god. The report is utterly damning of Houlihan and her defense. It systematically dismantles her case and confirms she is likely to have doped. If the owners of a news website are now willing to subscribe to conspiracy theories in order to exonerate one of their pet athletes, then LRC is lost, it's no better than Infowars

The judgement was silent on intent, was not damning on her only the only reason she could think off when the test result came a month after the test.

Did you note Usada kept out of it and that they have been damning positives from contamination and the near impossibility of proving it.

Will they say anything ?

The defenses for Houlihan fail bc they could apply to anyone. I ate bacon today. It is possible that the bacon contained boar meat-even though the bacon isn’t supposed to and even though the meat for the bacon came from a plant that doesn’t slaughter boars. It is possible that my morning coffee contained tainted boar blood.

Also I think the decision would have used possible but not probable no matter her explanation. So if she said that her flu shot could have been a nandrolone injection-they would have said it was possible.

Finally, midwestern burritos (Chicago) are often good and “authentic” at least compared to Portland. Not like she got a burrito in Texas or California.

She cheated. That said, Sam Shepard-amazingly-really was innocent.

pavement88 wrote:

I suspect this website will take the following stances:

-It is difficult to prove you didn't do something

-Critical of the process used by CAS

-Find a way to criticize WADA

-Suggest that "we'll never what happened"

-Continue support of Jerry and his runners

-Something more about the shoes

-if we are so worried about small amounts of nandrolone but not doing anything about intersex athletes...etc etc

Again, I think that this is what the brojos will put out.

I personally think BTC operates in the same gray area as NOP did but most people like the personalities of BTC so are in denial.

I can see a grey area but Deca. The more grey your area the more not Deca.

Good laugh wrote:

The defenses for Houlihan fail bc they could apply to anyone. I ate bacon today. It is possible that the bacon contained boar meat-even though the bacon isn’t supposed to and even though the meat for the bacon came from a plant that doesn’t slaughter boars. It is possible that my morning coffee contained tainted boar blood.

Also I think the decision would have used possible but not probable no matter her explanation. So if she said that her flu shot could have been a nandrolone injection-they would have said it was possible.

Finally, midwestern burritos (Chicago) are often good and “authentic” at least compared to Portland. Not like she got a burrito in Texas or California.

She cheated. That said, Sam Shepard-amazingly-really was innocent.

Guilty but not cheated. Learn the difference.

You are right. Might have been unintentional. A wild boar could have slipped nandro in her Jarritos.

Good laugh wrote:

You are right. Might have been unintentional. A wild boar could have slipped nandro in her Jarritos.

Learn the difference between breaking the rules and being cheat.

And she never said it was the food.

And how do you prove you are not a cheat when you get the test result a month after the test.

sanootage wrote:

Guilty but not cheated...

ESL much, comrade?

Might not have been the food. Good point. All sorts of other possibilities then. Maybe watching the Bachelorette leads to high nandro levels. Have they ever proved it doesn’t?

How can you have a drug control system where the strap line and morality is “ stop cheating “ but then the rules say that you don’t have to cheat to get banned?

rojo wrote:

Sorry guys and gals. I've been busy all day and haven't been on her since page 2.

We recorded 3 podcasts today.

Anyway, have people been talking about this :

https://twoggle.github.io/DopingFiles/Article.html#Part1

Do we know who wrote that? That to me is mindblowing. If you wrote it, please email me as I want to talk to you. If you read that it's hard to understand why she hasn't been cleared

If you know who wrote it, please let me know.

robert@letsrun.com

.

That piece is definitely the most interesting one I've seen, far more impressive and multifaceted than the report itself.

I prefer generalities to specifics. That approach trends toward the truth far more often than not: When there is suddenly a known problem with positives and a given source, everything related is going to be exponentially more uncertain and complicated than early research will reveal or experts will prefer. That was the problem I had with the report. There were all these definitive or near-definitive conclusions that cannot be accurate, given immature status of nandrolone related to pork, and the related testing. How many cases have there been? How much research? Not fractionally enough, to make statements reaching that level. There is value at the extremes. This is an extreme, which links with uncertainty and therefore benefit of a doubt.

You should contact the author directly. He is on Twitter under the same user name, in fact commenting smartly on this case today.