Luis Grijalva comments on Mo Katir Suspension

Love this. An athlete who has worked hard for it and isn’t afraid to call out the bullshet of doping in our sport.

Agreed. Good on him.

I read Katir's explanation and it made him sound more guilty.

It was like "yeah, if I'd known I already had two failures I wouldn't have been dosing at a time when I'd have to be avoiding testers. I need to know so that I can be aware of when I can and cannot be doping and have the option to hide from testers."

forget Luis in the photo behind those three, it is mind boggling to see Kejelcha and Aregawi in the background when you really think about it.

it is so hard to understand the out of this world unbeatable capabilities of some racers in some races, when in certain situations we end up with outcomes like this.

“Peaking”, “good race”, “bad race”, “virus”, “rounds”. man, that’s where we all want to summarize it, but honestly, after accounting for all that, HOW DOES AREGAWI NOT WIN THAT RACE?

you have to factor in the shady underbelly factor and its effect on everyone.

Well said Luis, this is what you're supposed to say when an athlete gets banned.

BTC athletes did themselves zero favors when they supported Shelby.

More of the same, expected complaining from the "cheated" athletes.

Grijalva's place doesn't change. He can tell himself that the only reason he didn't medal is because people in front of him cheated, but it won't change the result. Katir was the better runner on the day. If you are going to throw a hissy fit that the only people who beat you are people with better nutritionists, pharmacists, and trainers, then maybe you shouldn't be in the sport.

To be clear, "doping" is a bogus allegation. It's 2024. Modern sports science is such that every athlete today would be considered "dopers" in 2016. Let our athletes make decisions about what they put in their bodies and how they train. Then line them up on race day and see who wins. This is not the early-20th Century where athletes are ingesting strychnine. The scientists and athletes are professionals who can be trusted to make safe decisions.

The ones who complain the loudest are usually at it themselves. Paula anyone?

The supportive comments include some well-known athletes. Colin Sahlman reposted this in his IG story.

If the rules of the sport were always "anything goes as long as it's safe" this would be a valid argument. As it is however, anything goes is not the rule. The rules are fairly black and white. This isn't the enhanced games. Athletes are allowed to take every "natural" advantage they can get. You seem to imply that this definition is open to interpretation and that all current athletes are abusing the system to go beyond natural. I understand that the rules just look like a grey soup to a casual observer, but they aren't. Everything is spelled out and athletes know the boundaries. The boundaries may have changed over time, but again that's a strawman argument.

I read his statement and couldn't find one thing LG complained about. Could you highlight some for me please?

Dude got a medal stolen from him by a cheater less than 6 months ago, these were far nicer words than I would have had for Katir if I were in the same situation.

Horrible take. While there are methods of illegal performance enhancement that probably have relatively low health risks (micro dosing), legalizing doping would open up the door to much more powerful/dangerous forms.

Also, scientists and athletes can NOT be trusted to make safe decisions for themselves, as has been demonstrated in both in research and in practice.

bjsm.bmj.com

Would you dope? A general population test of the Goldman dilemma

Objective: To test Goldman's dilemma on a general population sample by asking whether they would take the Faustian bargain of a drug that guaranteed sporting success but would result in their death in 5 years' time. Between 1...

Open link

Long story short, in the general population, only around 1% of those surveyed would take a drug that would guarantee success but also guarantee death in 5 years. Among elite athletes surveyed, around 50% said they would take the drug.

They both went from 7.4x to 7.2x in 3 years.

Sorry to kill the vibe, but Grijalva seems equally suspect to me.

13:10 to 12:52 and 7:38 to 7:29 in a year.

Maybe that is why many BTC athletes (still sponsored by Nike) have left? The mishandling of the Shelby situation could have not sat well among the many other internal things.

Good on Louis. Different sponsors though which makes stating the obvious and the right thing much easier.

There is a local proverb we use often:

When the cow fall, the knives appear in multiplied numbers.

The difference is that nutritionists and trainers are completely 100% legal so complaining that that's why someone beat you would be stupid. Nutrition and trainers are important but a nutritionist won't be the sole reason why you go from 13:50 to 12:50 either lmao. Doping is cheating, nutritionists and trainers aren't.

More like an arrogant hypocrite. ( Only those who competed against actual pro athletes , not hobby joggers will understand).