Very few Russians were caught through testing. Their officials saw to that. It was their whistleblowers who said (and produced evidence) that 99% of their athletes were doping. Yet very very few Russian athletes were ever caught or identified. But we know their sports were/are rotten to the core.
What is discovered about doping - and who in particular is doing it - is merely the tip of the iceberg. You would have made a very good captain of the Titanic, who never saw icebergs either. Your ship hits "1% at most are doped" - and sinks without trace.
They don't seek my opinion because their goal was to trigger the emotions of the most "persuadables" and I would advise them to be Spock-like with cold facts, and explaining with further context how to interpret the figure and why it is relevant. I don't make for great tabloid TV.
Can you tell us the name of the documentary you saw, and the year?
We recently discussed this about a month and a half ago, and I gave you both the name of the documentary, and the amount of the unattributed estimate of something. It is something I already told you once, and I am unsurprised you have forgotten how far off you were.
To be sure, I just rewatched it, and the estimate given by an unnamed narrator most certainly did not say "a billion Euros" -- far from it, and he gave no attribution, or no description of who arrived at that estimate, how they arrived at that estimate, or the scope of products covered by that estimate, or the nature of the consumers.
Whether the figure is correct or not is not the issue, but rather what the "correct figure" actually means with respect to WADA banned doping in elite athletics. WADA doesn't spend money on the non-competing bodybuilders at the local gym who simply want to look good in the mirror.
Once you have established what the "correct figure" actually, and what it means, the next question is why you believe it is relevant. A high amount of spending on doping only confirms what I have said all along -- the faith in doping is high and wide and broad and deep.
You know nothing of their goals; they didn't state them and your views on that are mere assumptions. I recorded the documentary and later made notes of what it said. Apart from claiming the black market in drugs amounted to a billion Euros - which was based on estimates provided by WADA and others it referred to who were involved in anti-doping - the programme said there are believed to be at least a hundred products available on the black market for which there are currently no tests. The programme also gave a breakdown on which sports and which countries were amongst the worst doping offenders. Running sports were up there, as well as many of the countries often discussed in these boards. Clearly, you didn't see it. But it would have made no difference to a mind closed like yours.
So what was the name of the programme?
Did they distinguish gym from WADA athletes?
As you know next to nothing about science and the Wada code I think we can just ignore what you think you remember ( but destroyed the evidence).
Since we are wondering things, I wonder what percentage of dopers are even tested? I wonder if testing is a deterrent? Maybe detecting 1% of athletes tested is about right, because the untested ones dope significantly more because they know they won't be tested.
When you have 1% knowledge (composed of true and false positives) and 99% ignorance, you can fabricate many arguments from ignorance, with an imagination that wonders.
The significant point that seems to be passing way over your head - don't look up - is that NOP wasn't just "tested". One way to improve the percentages significantly is to conduct a multi-year investigation with whistleblowers and witnesses and increased target testing over several years.
Have I yet mentioned that USADA used 30 witnesses, and a wide range of evidence including eye-witness proof, testimonies, contemporaneous emails, and patient records, more than 2,000 exhibits, and 5,780 pages of transcripts?
And your feeble response is "testing sucks".
That wasn't my "feeble response" - it is the logical inference from the WADA statement that "only the dumb and the careless" amongst dopers get caught. No one has said the NOP investigation changed that.
But now I see that you think that doping is no more than the 1% positives. I can hear the guffaws from anyone who has investigated the issue (including WADA) - not to mention countless athletes, coaches and trainers.
Logical response from he who posts in consistent tautologies of logic.
A young athlete who has dedicated their life to success at their sport is told, there is something that will help you do even better. It might win you that state championship, it could help you become a pro, it could make you an Olympian, it will be the difference between going out in the heats and making the finals - or even getting a medal. They are also told if they do it right they won't be caught. The clincher is when they are also told, their competition will be taking it so they will have no chance if they don't also - so it's only fair that they should also take it. It isn't cheating. So what do you think that ambitious young athlete will choose?
When I have run this scenario past older recreational athletes they have responded - "where can I get this stuff!" Even musicians have said to me, if it would make them a better piano player they would take it.
That is why doping is everywhere in sports today. It is rooted in the ever-present human desire to succeed, to be the best at what you do. If it makes you more talented than you naturally are, better than what your training can achieve - better than the next guy, and make you famous and rich, then people will do it. Without hesitation. If we wait for statistics to confirm this we will never see it. And so it is is with the utterly deluded deniers here.
You are describing faith.
I am describing "faith"? Doping has existed for decades and become more and more sophisticated, so that those in anti-doping acknowledge it will always be ahead of them. Enormous amounts of money are spent on it in the black market and countless athletes have been and are involved. And you think that the advantages it confers on athletes are merely "faith". The world is mad or ignorant - or you are. I think we which.
You know nothing of their goals; they didn't state them and your views on that are mere assumptions. I recorded the documentary and later made notes of what it said. Apart from claiming the black market in drugs amounted to a billion Euros - which was based on estimates provided by WADA and others it referred to who were involved in anti-doping - the programme said there are believed to be at least a hundred products available on the black market for which there are currently no tests. The programme also gave a breakdown on which sports and which countries were amongst the worst doping offenders. Running sports were up there, as well as many of the countries often discussed in these boards. Clearly, you didn't see it. But it would have made no difference to a mind closed like yours.
So what was the name of the programme?
Did they distinguish gym from WADA athletes?
As you know next to nothing about science and the Wada code I think we can just ignore what you think you remember ( but destroyed the evidence).
So what's your point about gym users? That people will dope to get bigger muscles but not to win races and competitions and make money?
So Salazar was high-mindedly trying to help his athletes avoid testing positive through external sabotage of their tests? What a guy. For that he gets a 4 year ban? Apparently the adjudicators weren't taken in by that bs, as you obviously were.
It is all explained in the AAA Panel report, and the subsequent CAS appeal. The "bs" that was unanimously "rejected" (by your standard), even by the prosecuting USADA, was any NOP athlete doping, in its whole history.
USADA had that burden, and failed to meet that burden.
I'm on the side of the adjudicators here, and they are not supporting the bs you preach.
You know nothing of their goals; they didn't state them and your views on that are mere assumptions. I recorded the documentary and later made notes of what it said. Apart from claiming the black market in drugs amounted to a billion Euros - which was based on estimates provided by WADA and others it referred to who were involved in anti-doping - the programme said there are believed to be at least a hundred products available on the black market for which there are currently no tests. The programme also gave a breakdown on which sports and which countries were amongst the worst doping offenders. Running sports were up there, as well as many of the countries often discussed in these boards. Clearly, you didn't see it. But it would have made no difference to a mind closed like yours.
Maybe you watched a different documentary -- do you have the name of the one you recorded and took notes? Because when I watched "The Endless Chase Pt. 1" they did not say "a billion Euros", nor that it was "provided by WADA and others it referred to who were involved in anti-doping". They did not say how they formed that estimate, and they did not say which products they considered "doping", and how much of that estimate covers athletes competing in sport. They did interview athletes and officials, and sports editors, but did not attribute that estimate to anyone interviewed. While they did interview a banned French shotputter, they also talked about non-Olympic sports like soccer, and baseball.
What is so stupid is that we had this dicussion just six weeks ago, where all these questions you are floundering with now were already answered, and rather than doing a quick search, you are still "winging it", playing all of your same games of "I know you are but what am I", and feebly attempting to flip the burden of disproving your claims you cannot prove, and for frosting on the cake, getting the Jamaican whistleblower's name wrong, again.
These are not isolated events, but a consistent pattern of not reading what is written, or not comprehending it when you do. How can I rely on your recollection of notes with all this plain evidence that you can't even repeat what you just read accurately? When a headline explicitly says "300 million per year" you argue that it is really "80 million" and pretend I'm the moron -- like the iron pot calling the stainless steel kettle black.
Very few Russians were caught through testing. Their officials saw to that. It was their whistleblowers who said (and produced evidence) that 99% of their athletes were doping. Yet very very few Russian athletes were ever caught or identified. But we know their sports were/are rotten to the core.
What is discovered about doping - and who in particular is doing it - is merely the tip of the iceberg. You would have made a very good captain of the Titanic, who never saw icebergs either. Your ship hits "1% at most are doped" - and sinks without trace.
And yet, whistleblowers and 30 witnesses and all that evidence, in addition to testing ..., could not identify one NOP athlete who actually doped, and after 9 long years, four anti-doping bodies were aligned on this point.
Is it an iceberg, or a bunch of ice floats? How to argue the true size and not fall into the trap of making arguments from ignorance fallacy?
I am describing "faith"? Doping has existed for decades and become more and more sophisticated, so that those in anti-doping acknowledge it will always be ahead of them. Enormous amounts of money are spent on it in the black market and countless athletes have been and are involved. And you think that the advantages it confers on athletes are merely "faith". The world is mad or ignorant - or you are. I think we (know) which.
You are a self-appointed travelling preacher who admits "we wait for statistics to confirm" as if knowledge is something we should avoid.
Enormous amounts of money spent on doping is a reliable measure of the magnitude of faith within the countless athletes involved in the doping that exists for decades, not to mention its travelling preachers.
The advantages conferred confirmed by the statistics you are still waiting for, but until then, it remains faith.
Your iceberg is just your faith building ice mountains out of molehills while running in circles screaming the sky is falling.
Your many readings from the Gospels According to Amstronglivs are pure faith.
The world could also be mad or ignorant, but it is certainly full of faith.
So Salazar was high-mindedly trying to help his athletes avoid testing positive through external sabotage of their tests? What a guy. For that he gets a 4 year ban? Apparently the adjudicators weren't taken in by that bs, as you obviously were.
It is all explained in the AAA Panel report, and the subsequent CAS appeal. The "bs" that was unanimously "rejected" (by your standard), even by the prosecuting USADA, was any NOP athlete doping, in its whole history.
USADA had that burden, and failed to meet that burden.
I'm on the side of the adjudicators here, and they are not supporting the bs you preach.
The bs is that they didn't accept he was trying to protect his athletes from foul play. He was trying to find ways to dope his athletes so they could get away with it. For that he earned a 4 year ban.
So what's your point about gym users? That people will dope to get bigger muscles but not to win races and competitions and make money?
Exactly
And the point is, and you have been told many many times, how much of the suggested billion was spent by Wada athletes and how much by gym people.
Why do you avoid such simple question?
Programme name ?
Body-building (like pro wrestling) isn't subject to WADA and so they aren't using banned drugs. They are therefore not part of the billion Euro doping black market. You are totally clueless.
I am describing "faith"? Doping has existed for decades and become more and more sophisticated, so that those in anti-doping acknowledge it will always be ahead of them. Enormous amounts of money are spent on it in the black market and countless athletes have been and are involved. And you think that the advantages it confers on athletes are merely "faith". The world is mad or ignorant - or you are. I think we (know) which.
You are a self-appointed travelling preacher who admits "we wait for statistics to confirm" as if knowledge is something we should avoid.
Enormous amounts of money spent on doping is a reliable measure of the magnitude of faith within the countless athletes involved in the doping that exists for decades, not to mention its travelling preachers.
The advantages conferred confirmed by the statistics you are still waiting for, but until then, it remains faith.
Your iceberg is just your faith building ice mountains out of molehills while running in circles screaming the sky is falling.
Your many readings from the Gospels According to Amstronglivs are pure faith.
The world could also be mad or ignorant, but it is certainly full of faith.
That is why doping is everywhere in sports today.
Thousands of athletes, coaches and trainers in every sport have been convinced of the efficacy of doping through their own experiences and the results they have achieved. It has been so for decades. But you - who have never doped let alone been an elite sportsman - know better than all of them. Without experience of what you deny, you are the very definition of self delusion. You cannot bear to believe your heroes are fake.
Very few Russians were caught through testing. Their officials saw to that. It was their whistleblowers who said (and produced evidence) that 99% of their athletes were doping. Yet very very few Russian athletes were ever caught or identified. But we know their sports were/are rotten to the core.
What is discovered about doping - and who in particular is doing it - is merely the tip of the iceberg. You would have made a very good captain of the Titanic, who never saw icebergs either. Your ship hits "1% at most are doped" - and sinks without trace.
And yet, whistleblowers and 30 witnesses and all that evidence, in addition to testing ..., could not identify one NOP athlete who actually doped, and after 9 long years, four anti-doping bodies were aligned on this point.
Is it an iceberg, or a bunch of ice floats? How to argue the true size and not fall into the trap of making arguments from ignorance fallacy?
You'd make a good Chicken Little.
They weren't caught. That isn't the same as saying they weren't doping. Yet their coach was trying to find ways to dope his athletes and so incurred a 4 year ban. If that is a clean operation I have some real estate on the moon that could interest you.