Alan Abrahamson writes column RIPPING Shelby H and all the journalists who have defended her & asks her to come clean

Your pissed, but it seems like it has more to do with you, and your imagination, rather than any facts related to Shelby.

… ironically combined with a lack of imagination: another way besides “cheating” is contaminated supplements or vitamins — one of the batches she couldn’t test.

But based on the CAS report, it’s premature to conclude that her doping positive still wasn’t accidental, or that she lied, or that she stole anything from anyone, or defiled BTC teammates.

"I am going to draw my own conclusions based on my own narrative, and just write "based on the CAS report" to make me seem smart or legitimate"

Superior to a lying doping cheater? Sure, but that's not a high bar.

It's the good old "too good to be true" progression - virtually a requirement now in pro sport and especially running.

There are two reasonable things to be mad about:

1) Wada prosecuted of such a ticky tack infraction, and

2) BTC runners looking soft af trying to cry their way out of this.

If you think there was a “clean” medalist at the Olympics this year, or any year, bless your sweet heart. We would be better off with zero enforcement with the way Wada picks and chooses who to bust. I just wanna see records get broken and springs in peoples shoes. It’s called progress.

R.ojo has sold out

suspicious jerryy wrote:

There are two reasonable things to be mad about:

1) Wada prosecuted of such a ticky tack infraction, and

2) BTC runners looking soft af trying to cry their way out of this.

If you think there was a “clean” medalist at the Olympics this year, or any year, bless your sweet heart. We would be better off with zero enforcement with the way Wada picks and chooses who to bust. I just wanna see records get broken and springs in peoples shoes. It’s called progress.

So we should let everyone out of jail.

Athletics is about competition not just time. I can beat all world records on a bike that make a nerd happy!

suspicious jerryy wrote:

There are two reasonable things to be mad about:

1) Wada prosecuted of such a ticky tack infraction, and

2) BTC runners looking soft af trying to cry their way out of this.

If you think there was a “clean” medalist at the Olympics this year, or any year, bless your sweet heart. We would be better off with zero enforcement with the way Wada picks and chooses who to bust. I just wanna see records get broken and springs in peoples shoes. It’s called progress.

There's progress - and there's bs. You just want to live in a fake world.

/mu/tant runner wrote:

That 'article' is nice from a debunking/factual angle but it is horribly, horribly written. The tone is a weird forced "outrage" that uses all the dumb tricks one could think of. Repetition, Short sentence fragments re-stating the claim, the almost-second person "you", rhetorical questions everywhere but lacking question marks. How is this guy an 'award winning journalist'?

Yes. He is a terrible writer. I tell my kids that good writing is also good thinking, and A.A. is generally well off the mark on both counts. I personally suspect that Shelby is guilty, but I think each of us on the outside needs to have the humility to admit we really don’t know the truth, and probably never will. A.A. is afflicted with fatalistic certainty and hubris, and his prose style is unpleasant.

oin09j wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Your pissed, but it seems like it has more to do with you, and your imagination, rather than any facts related to Shelby.

… ironically combined with a lack of imagination: another way besides “cheating” is contaminated supplements or vitamins — one of the batches she couldn’t test.

But based on the CAS report, it’s premature to conclude that her doping positive still wasn’t accidental, or that she lied, or that she stole anything from anyone, or defiled BTC teammates.

"I am going to draw my own conclusions based on my own narrative, and just write "based on the CAS report" to make me seem smart or legitimate"

I’m happy to update my narrative.

Can you show me where in the CAS report we can find the conclusions of cheating, or lying, or stealing, or defiling?

I saw evidence of one failed test in Dec. 2020, but nothing in the CAS report dating back to 2017.

I saw findings like “possible but improbable”, but no finding of “lying”, and no finding of any higher probability alternatives.

oin09j wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

+1

"end of 2017"? You might be on to something:

Houlihan, 1500 and 5000 m progression

2013 4:13.64 16:15.85 age 20

2014 4:10.89 16:11.63 age 21

2015 4:09.62 15:49.72 age 22

2016 4:03.39 15:06.14 age 23

2017 4:06.22 15:00.37 age 24

2018 3:57.34 14:34.45 age 25 5000 m American Record

2019 3:54.99 15:15.50 age 26 1500 m American Record

2020 4:02.37 14:23.92 age 27 5000 m American Record, popped for roids

(and banned from January 2021 - 2025)

Reaching for the stars...

Been looking for someone to do this. Thx. I'm going to discount 2013-2015 since she was still an NCAA athlete at the time.

4:03 in your first year as a pro to 4:06 in your second, and then a low 3.57 in 2018 is narsty. 14:34 in her third year as a pro. Huge improvement.

Of course there can be breakthroughs. But if they happen on this scale in mid-20s within less than a year, it raises red flags. Houlihan was on the lower end of extended world class barely making the worlds 2017 final and finishing second to last. Already in winter indoors 2018 she suddenly was the best US woman in 1500/3000m.

In summer 2018 she beat world class athletes like Muir or Hassan whereas in late summer 2017 she had been two tiers behind them. She improved massively on all levels, both 1500m and 5000m and on top of this a kick with sub 60 final laps and 28 secs. for last 200m or so.

Look at that race where she cannot keep up with the leaders at sub 4 pace (ISTAF 2017) and fades to 8th place and compare how she would have destroyed that field a year later.

+1

It was like a switch just flipped. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t suspicious of her long before this.

oin09j wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Shelby is far from being the first athlete to contest a ban so I don't understand the outrage in particular for her doing so. She was trying to get the CAS to overturn the ban and not necessarily to fool people. Her goal was to salvage her career and outside of her friends and family, it doesn't matter what people think.

Cheating is not just being stupid. It indicates a person of low character and confessing doesn't change anything.

It's not just that she's contesting the ban. That would be expected. A lot of this "vitriol" is actually directed at the dishonest running media.

Making up excuses for her and wrapping it up in pretty language, while trashing any other African runner who would test positive: (Looking at you Alison Wade and Erin Strout).

It's pathetic.

Why the obsession with the "running media"? The articles are just opinions of the writers and not everyone is going to take them at face value. Blaming tainted meat for exceeding the limits for a banned substance is nothing new and if people didn't believe that excuse before, they won't believe Houlihan either. As I posted before, comments I've seen in response to WAPO articles about her, indicate only a small minority of the readers support her.

If evil Nike wins some type of PR battle, what good does it do for Shelby? She'll still be serving her 4-year ban and public opinion in the U.S. will have no effect on any legal action she is taking in the Swiss courts.

"Two, all the journalistic sheep who wanted to believe, who maybe still want to believe despite the overwhelming evidence against Houlihan, that there was no way, just no way, a white American distance runner affiliated with the Bowerman Track Club"

Why is this author bringing racism into mix?

rekrunner wrote:

oin09j wrote:

"I am going to draw my own conclusions based on my own narrative, and just write "based on the CAS report" to make me seem smart or legitimate"

I’m happy to update my narrative.

Can you show me where in the CAS report we can find the conclusions of cheating, or lying, or stealing, or defiling?

I saw evidence of one failed test in Dec. 2020, but nothing in the CAS report dating back to 2017.

I saw findings like “possible but improbable”, but no finding of “lying”, and no finding of any higher probability alternatives.

Your simpleminded literalism is without limits. It was not within the purview of the decision to deliver a judgment as to whether Houlihan "lied", only as to whether she doped. It said she had. But it also rejected her attempted excuse with reasons that showed they considered her defence to be well beyond the realms of probability. A story that is shown to be clearly improbable is therefore a made-up story. A lie in other words. CAS didn't have to say that to make it obvious that's what it was. Except to you.

I’ll go even further — I’m happy to update my narrative based on facts of the case, and facts outside of the case.

These facts have limits.

If the CAS did not deliver decisions like “cheating”, “lying”, “stealing”, “defiling”, and “getting everyone in the media to hedge their bets”, where do these judgements come from?

Imagination? Imagination is also a made-up story — in your “other words”, a lie.

Are posters like “fffghhbjhvg” pissed based on the facts in the CAS report? or are they pissed because they are lying to themselves?

“Clearly improbable” can still be real or truthful — in this case, it is a spectrum of 0-49%, while a lie would be just 0%.

In other words, you are lying to yourself, and to all of us, and I find it unconvincing.

You are lying - which is what you always do - when you deny that Houlihan lied, because she made up a story that wasn't true. CAS didn't have to call it a lie to show it was lie. Just like I don't have to say outright you a moron when you demonstrate it with everything you write.

Armstronglivs wrote:

You are lying - which is what you always do - when you deny that Houlihan lied, because she made up a story that wasn't true. CAS didn't have to call it a lie to show it was lie. Just like I don't have to say outright you a moron when you demonstrate it with everything you write.

On the other hand, if you provide no facts, there is no need to “update my narrative”.