Malcolm Gladwell: Why Was the Decision in Shelby Houlihan’s Doping Case So Unsatisfying?

Trying to make sense of your writing makes me feel like I’m having a stroke, rojo. Are you having a stroke?

That 2018 performance jump... What would you say if you saw it from an athlete in another country? What have you been saying about Katir?

interesting

Stories often give the impression that crimes and fraud are neat and tidy when in reality they usually make no fvcking sense.

Gladwell has now become an apologist for a second Nike group involved in doping. Hope he's being well compensated.

It's unclear to me why "we" (as in the larger athletics-interested community) ride Gladwell's jock. We're such geeks and so desperate for acclaim and relevance outside of the sport we hang on to people that have some wider notoriety and elevate them to levels their actual knowledge of the sport does not merit. See also Kevin Hart.

Gladwell rambles for several thousand words before coming to a conclusion that illustrates he doesn't really understand high-level athletics. This most recent article is just the latest example.

Houlihan deliberately took something else (either a supplement, or something more sinister) and it was contaminated with nandrolone. Not that hard to figure out. Victor Conte suggested this explanation back in June. Schumacher, Dobert, Flanagan, Houlihan, et al are not that sophisticated. Stop giving them so much credit.

Kvothe wrote:

I found the CAS decision in the Houlihan case very satisfying and I imagine those who actually care about clean sport did as well.

+1

Rojo and Malcolm,

Very easy explanation. USADA WAS NOT TESTING. Shelby tested positive during a time when USADA was not testing because of COVID and everyone knew this. It was the Wild West and many athletes felt like they were free to take whatever they wanted. WADA caught wind of this and SURPRISED Shelby.

we are talking about people who are highly competive, you do not get to that level being nice and as you see how the sausage is made you tried roll some of your own.

not that easy to understand by normal people

One thing that is often overlooked in doping cases where the athlete protests their innocence, is that they may genuinely have convinced themselves they are doing nothing wrong. Ben Johnson is a great example. He will swear blind he wasn't really cheating, Gatlin the same, and Linford Christie. Very few dopers actually hold their hands up and accept guilt. The most convincing liars are the ones that truly believe their own lies. Kiprop is another example, he'll never admit he used EPO deliberately and he may very well believe that. When the truth is painful, people are very good at deceiving themselves. At this point, it's as likely as anything that Houlihan falls into that category.

If Gladwell really wants to do something interesting on doping in athletics, he should do an article or podcast on dopers who are utterly convinced they never doped, despite the weight of evidence against them. He has no shortage of subjects

Yes! Same old, same old.

But, Ben Johnson actually admitted decades later that he was roiding up for several years until he got caught.

roho the ho wrote:

Trying to make sense of your writing makes me feel like I’m having a stroke, rojo. Are you having a stroke?

YIKES

He said it, not me

Another giver of +1 wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

I found the CAS decision in the Houlihan case very satisfying and I imagine those who actually care about clean sport did as well.

+1

++1

Terribly unsatisfying article from Gladwell.

I feel like if this was true then what's stopping an athlete from saying this and dropping names once they get popped? It's a 4 year ban either way and this way they could come clean about the cheating and take down others in the mean time.

Instead of saying "I cheated and here is why" she basically broke her back and the backs of countless others trying to prove she was innocent. She can't get unbanned anymore so what's stopping her from being a whistle-blower? Probably what's stopping her is the fact that it's not true what you stated lol.

America's fury wrote:

Another giver of +1 wrote:

+1

++1

Terribly unsatisfying article from Gladwell.

Gladwell has found a great formula for success (feeding pablum to the masses), so good for him.

His popularization of the famous "10000" hours rule for "greatness" is patently ridiculous and child's play to debunk.

Anything he says needs to be washed down with a container of salt.

U. Raynuss wrote:

America's fury wrote:

++1

Terribly unsatisfying article from Gladwell.

Gladwell has found a great formula for success (feeding pablum to the masses), so good for him.

His popularization of the famous "10000" hours rule for "greatness" is patently ridiculous and child's play to debunk.

Go on then genius debunk the 10,000 hours rule?

What do you mean with broke her back? The people that helped her were paid so I don't think they're backs were broken.

If she became a whistle-blower she would be admitting she's a liar and why would she do that? She would be dispised by the people who supported her and taking people down with her won't help her.

Nandrolonologists of the World wrote:

U. Raynuss wrote:

Gladwell has found a great formula for success (feeding pablum to the masses), so good for him.

His popularization of the famous "10000" hours rule for "greatness" is patently ridiculous and child's play to debunk.

Go on then genius debunk the 10,000 hours rule?

If a track runner averaged one hour a day of training in their respective events it would take over 27 years to get to 10,000 hours. Are no great track stars masters of their craft?

By the way, don't come back at me that elites actually train 3 or so hours a day without a single day off (therefore they only need 9 years), because hahaha no they definitely don't.

Preach. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Malcolm writes pop psychology for your mom's book club, it's hard to consider him a serious author. He reeks of faux-academia. Maybe I'm just mean and snooty about books, but, his writing is like "The Big Bang Theory," it's a way for dumb people to feel smart.

I think you said it well with the "We're such geeks..." thing. Part of it is the nature of the sport, a dedicated and great distance runner is a boring person — a skinny masochist that wakes up early and is asleep by 10. I'm not much of a sports enthusiast, but it's clear that a distance runner will never be "cool" like an NFL or NBA player.

When your destiny is eternal geekiness, it's easy to want to seek external validation. "I work just as hard as an NBA benchwarmer, yet I work a 9–5 and occasionally bring home a few hundred dollars from a road race," isn't very glamorous. You want something to make you feel, more or less, popular. That's why we have so many vapid influencers, that's why TME exists, and that's why we've given Gladwell this podium where he can issue his decrees from.