rojo wrote:
I must admit that I was stunned to find myself tonight reading
I must admit that I was stunned that you weren't taking a nap or watching TV and REALLY stunned that you were reading. WOW!!!!
rojo wrote:
I must admit that I was stunned to find myself tonight reading
I must admit that I was stunned that you weren't taking a nap or watching TV and REALLY stunned that you were reading. WOW!!!!
love me some boar taint wrote:
I believe that you should try to use all parts of an animal if you are going to kill it. Taint included.
My teeth chattered, the gritty texture of the hairs sprouting from his taint so tantalizing I nearly flicked my eager tongue to taste that perfect patch of skin, the halfway hill between pole and hole. No, I had to wait. Wait until the seasoning, wait until it’s cooked. Cooked! I bite down on his spriggy taint sprouts and excitedly jerk my head back, ripping them from his skin. Squealing, yes the squealing reminiscent of a stuck boar filling my basement now.
rojo wrote:
I must admit that I was stunned to find myself tonight reading an article on stinky barbecue where the person the author used to remind the readers that if you eat enough meet it's basically inevitable that you'll run into "boar taint" as some pigs are going to be cryptorchid (meaning they have hidden or undescended testicles) was none other than Dr. John McGlone, the man used an expert witness against Shelby Houlihan.
In the Houlihan case, Prof McGlone estimated that the "probability of a cryptorchid actually entering the pork supply chain is far less than 1 in 10,000" which seems impossible but in this article, it's presented as an inevitability.
https://jesspryles.com/boar-taint/jesspryles wrote:
Dr. McGlone observes that some mammals are Cryptorchid (meaning they have hidden or undescended testicles). “This means that even if outwardly castrated, the animal can still be an intact male internally, and boar taint will occur”, explains Dr. McGlone.
Erm, there's quite a difference between possibility and inevitability. Note the words "some", "can".
The letsrun coverage of this whole Houlihan story is bizarre.
rojo wrote:
I must admit that I was stunned to find myself tonight reading an article on stinky barbeque
did you eat paint chips as a kid?
It is really disturbing that Let’s Run wants to position itself as a journalism outlet, while simultaneously trafficking in shade, hearsay, calumny, etc. Internet chat rooms are fine, but those who want to consider themselves to be journalists should not have a revolving door to gossip. Believe it or not—and yes I am aware that many who come here will choose not to because you probably don’t know any real journalists—most journalists refrain assiduously from publicly engaging in partisanship. It is an important distinction that the Internet age has muddled. Let’s Run is an internet business, not a news outlet, however much it may aspire to such a status. The owner’s willingness to post threads such as this underscores this point. Hire someone as an editorial commentator to argue that Houlihan is not a cheater, but don’t ask us to take you seriously at press conferences if you continually post misleading threads such as this.
High hopes wrote:
Rojo still struggling with the concept of probability, I see. Well, here's an explainer: extremely unlikely events will happen, which is why people still buy lottery tickets. Now ask yourself, how many people ever win the lottery compared to total tickets sold.
I always said it was extremely unlikely that she got it from the burrito. I understand probability quite well. I am a former HS math teach who won the Dallas city math competition in elemntary school.
I talked on the podcast when this broke. I said I wouldn't be happy with it if I knew an American would test positive once in a million times automatically simply due to what they eat at a restaurant as the reality is WADA does hundreds of thousands of drug tests per year.
I just don't want a system where we are going to have someone of the stature of Jarrion Lawson, or Ajee Wilson testing positive every year.
But you also got to admit that it's quite unusual and rare for her to have eaten at a place that serves pig offal the night before her drug test. I mean the odds of that are rare. Let's try to estimate that.
I think there eare around 1,500 restaurants in portland (I read there were 24 restaurants per 10,000 people and Porland has 650,000 people). How many serve Pig Offal? Could it be more than 10? Let's say 10.
So you have a 1/150 shot of eating at a restaurant with pig offal. But she doesn't eat all of her meals at a restaurant. Let's say she eats at a restaurant 1//3 meals. So 1 /450 that she happened to eat at a restaurant with pig offal on the menu the night before the test. That's assuming there are 10 such restaurants in Portland. If it's 5, then it's closer to 1 in a 1,000 but it also goes the other way.
I'd like to see a similar odds done by scientists on her eating the pork burrito.
I have no idea on the following.
Odds: Get pork when order steak
Odds: Pork contains uncastrated boar meet:
Odds: There is enough uncastrated boar meet to test positive: ??
If the first two answers are 10% and 1 in 10,000 then we are at 1 in 100,0000 before we get to #3, but if they are 20% and 1 in 5,000 then we are only at 1 in 25,000 before we get to #3.
Small changes when you have multiple variables makes a huge difference in odds.
We are at 1 in 100,000 if the first two are at those levels. But
Szolt Bende wrote:
It is really disturbing that Let’s Run wants to position itself as a journalism outlet, while simultaneously trafficking in shade, hearsay, calumny, etc. Internet chat rooms are fine, but those who want to consider themselves to be journalists should not have a revolving door to gossip. Believe it or not—and yes I am aware that many who come here will choose not to because you probably don’t know any real journalists—most journalists refrain assiduously from publicly engaging in partisanship. It is an important distinction that the Internet age has muddled. Let’s Run is an internet business, not a news outlet, however much it may aspire to such a status. The owner’s willingness to post threads such as this underscores this point. Hire someone as an editorial commentator to argue that Houlihan is not a cheater, but don’t ask us to take you seriously at press conferences if you continually post misleading threads such as this.
the thing about LetsRun is that the co-founders aren't very smart
casual obsever wrote:
^ This ^
Plus, the androgen was wrong and the CIR not explainable with commercially fed pork. Going through the CAS report, one finds escalating improbabilities for the above from
1) "possible" (that the beef burrito was pork burrito)
2) to "possible but improbable" (that the pork came from a cryptorchid)
3) to "possible but improbable" (that the nandro amount would be that high EVEN IF it was a cryptorchid)
4) to "possible but highly improbable" (that the cryptorchid had such elevated androgen)
5) to not "consistent with the carbon isotope signature of commercial pork".
Recall that we are talking about number 2 here, with Prof. McClone stating that the chance for that is "far less
than 1 in 10,000". And then note that number 3 has a similar chance, and number 4 a much lower chance, not too mention number 5.
And then recall Statistics 101: one has to multiply these chances with each other to get the probability that all of the above happened. For example (and one can debate the numbers of course):
0.1 x 0.0001 x 0.0001 x 0.00001 x 0.000001 = 0.00000000000000000001
Which is a chance of 1 in 100000000000000000000...., or a guilty chance of 99.9999999999999999999%.
For comparison, Kiptum was banned because of his Hb and off-score "exceeding the respective upper 99.99% specificity level". So even the above-mentioned "far less than 1 in 10,000" night have been enough for a guilty verdict.
Open-and-shut case of a caught doper with a ridiculo excuse, imho.
Now this is a great post. This is what I've been looking for.
Can you please elaborate on where the report said that her positive test was " "consistent with the carbon isotope signature of commercial pork?"
I want to know if it's 1 in a 100,000 or one in a million or 1 in a hundred million, etc.
its only 5k wrote:
Come on Rojo you need to do better than this to prove a USA athlete which systematically doped is not a drug cheat.
Just accept it and move on. Look at other athletes in the group which suddenly stop racing and that didn’t defend her, it shows a pattern on we know the group doped
Systematically doped?
The one thing I'd no hesitate is betting my life on is that there is no systematic doping going on at the BTC.
Could she have gone rogue and doped? Yes. Systematic? No chance in hell.
People have confirmation bias. Your post proves it
Your theory makes no sense. I don't understand logically how this could work in your head. You seem to believe that Houlihan got popped and therefore people stopped racing as they were afraid they'd get popped.
First of all, I'm not sure who really stopped racing.
Are you talking about Colleen Quigley who is always seemingly injured and wasn't even part of the group this year? By the way, if there was systematic doping, wouldn't the BTC kind of need to keep her on contract so she wouldn't squeal? Or Jager who hasn't run a steeple in years not racing?
But what's wrong about your statement is it doesn't mention anything about the sizeable percentage of athletes in the group that had the seasons of their careers and race a lot.
So Houlihan gets popped and they stop doping Jager and Quigley, but for some reason they keep doping Fisher, Tuntivate, Kincaid, and oh yeah the best person in the group - Mo Ahmed who won the Olympic silver? And I almost forgot Courtney Frerichs - the best woman in the group and the only woman with a global medal. She won Olympic silver, broke the AR and raced a ton.
rojo wrote:
I understand probability quite well. I am a former HS math teach who won the Dallas city math competition in elementary school.
You taught high school math and you don't know how to spell. got it
LRC note> Rojo also won the regional spelling bee. He doesn't bother to use spellcheck and it drives us nuts too.
skyboy wrote:
The Carbon isotope of the nandrolone didn't match pork. Period. The End. It doesn't matter how unlikely a "cryptorchid" pig is. The drugs didn't come from a pig. They did, however, perfectly match banned supplements. This is the non-negotiable nail in the coffin.
Everyone acts like I think she's 100% innocent. I don't know that. I'd like to really try to understand this all. Can you please quote the part where it says the isotope of the nandrolone doesn't match pork.
rojo wrote:
skyboy wrote:
The Carbon isotope of the nandrolone didn't match pork. Period. The End. It doesn't matter how unlikely a "cryptorchid" pig is. The drugs didn't come from a pig. They did, however, perfectly match banned supplements. This is the non-negotiable nail in the coffin.
Everyone acts like I think she's 100% innocent. I don't know that. I'd like to really try to understand this all. Can you please quote the part where it says the isotope of the nandrolone doesn't match pork.
you're wrong. just shut up already and admit your mistake
Williamson wrote:
Rojo, I just don't understand why you et al keep defending her. The only rationale she has provided for the nandrolone being in her system is simply not acceptable by any reasonable standard.
I don't think the BTC dopes athletes. Is it possible she doped herself? Yes.
Is it possible she got it some other way? Yes.
The pork excuse doesn't seem likely but imagine you are clean and you test positive. Then you get a lawyer and he said," I need you to figure out where you ate the night before you were teststed. Pig offal is the most likely explanation for this."And you think , "but I don't eat pig offal."
But you find out that you ate at the food truck with pig offal on it, you'd be stunned and go with that . It's not crazy at all for them to say that. In fact, they have to as you have to have an excuse as to how it's in your sample.
One option would be to go for contamination in the lab or something. When they test the B sample, do they use the same equipment. I mean the Brit got off of the cocaine charge. The rumor in Tokyo was the lab was adamant there was no cross contamination.
rojo wrote:
Williamson wrote:
Rojo, I just don't understand why you et al keep defending her. The only rationale she has provided for the nandrolone being in her system is simply not acceptable by any reasonable standard.
I don't think the BTC dopes athletes. Is it possible she doped herself? Yes.
Is it possible she got it some other way? Yes.
The pork excuse doesn't seem likely but imagine you are clean and you test positive. Then you get a lawyer and he said," Ineed you to figure out where you ate the night before you were teststed. Pig offal is the most likely explanation for this."And you think , "but I don't eat pig offal."
But you find out that y ou ate at the food truck with pig offal on it, you'd be stunned and go with that . It's not crazy at all for them to say that. In fact, they have to as you have to have an exucse as to how it's in your sample.
One option would be to go for contamination in the lab or something. When they test the B sample, do they use the same equipment. I mean the Brit got off of the cocaine charge. The rumor in Tokyo was the lab was adamant there was no cross contamination.
ever heard of occam's razor?
Szolt Bende wrote:
It is really disturbing that Let’s Run wants to position itself as a journalism outlet, while simultaneously trafficking in shade, hearsay, calumny, etc. Internet chat rooms are fine, but those who want to consider themselves to be journalists should not have a revolving door to gossip. Believe it or not—and yes I am aware that many who come here will choose not to because you probably don’t know any real journalists—most journalists refrain assiduously from publicly engaging in partisanship. It is an important distinction that the Internet age has muddled. Let’s Run is an internet business, not a news outlet, however much it may aspire to such a status. The owner’s willingness to post threads such as this underscores this point. Hire someone as an editorial commentator to argue that Houlihan is not a cheater, but don’t ask us to take you seriously at press conferences if you continually post misleading threads such as this.
Dude. I'm allowed to be a fan. I was posting this as a fan at like midnight while I was waiting for my wife to come home from work.
All journalists are biased. The most biased are those who act like they don't have private feelings. I'm posting a private posting on the messageboard. Would you rather I post it aonymously. Would that make you feel better?
I'm open to the possibility she went rogue. But i have great faith in the team being clean.
I just was stunned to see the guy who testified against her as being used as a source in an article talking about how boar taint is bound to happen.
industry cat wrote:
ever heard of occam's razor?
Yes i've heard of it. So then let's go ban Ajee and Jarrion.
When the head of USADA says tainted food is a problem, I'm concerned.Now I'm not an experrt in food supply or doping chemicals so one case may be a millioin times more likely than the other.
BUT I do worry about the false testimony in the lawson case.
industry cat wrote:
Szolt Bende wrote:
It is really disturbing that Let’s Run wants to position itself as a journalism outlet, while simultaneously trafficking in shade, hearsay, calumny, etc. Internet chat rooms are fine, but those who want to consider themselves to be journalists should not have a revolving door to gossip. Believe it or not—and yes I am aware that many who come here will choose not to because you probably don’t know any real journalists—most journalists refrain assiduously from publicly engaging in partisanship. It is an important distinction that the Internet age has muddled. Let’s Run is an internet business, not a news outlet, however much it may aspire to such a status. The owner’s willingness to post threads such as this underscores this point. Hire someone as an editorial commentator to argue that Houlihan is not a cheater, but don’t ask us to take you seriously at press conferences if you continually post misleading threads such as this.
the thing about LetsRun is that the co-founders aren't very smart
Actually they’re very smart. They keep posting stupid stuff for clicks and we respond to it. So they laugh all the way to the bank. This isn’t a legit journalism site anyways. It’s the TMZ of running.
rojo wrote:I always said it was extremely unlikely that she got it from the burrito. I understand probability quite well. I am a former HS math teach who won the Dallas city math competition in elemntary school.
is that the same year you won the spelling bee?
This post was removed.
rojo wrote:
When the head of USADA says tainted food is a problem, I'm concerned.Now I'm not an experrt in food supply or doping chemicals so one case may be a millioin times more likely than the other.
typo, typo, typo
no, you are not an expert
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it