In 2023-2023, Sport Integrity Australia performed 4,177 tests. There were a total of 27 disclosure notices issued, which may be for any adverse findings. That is a tiny number - less than 1%.
Yet Bol has at least one (if not 2) atypical findings, and an incriminating screenshot on his phone, all of which coincided with the year he finished 4th at the Olympics despite never previously making it out of the heats.
At least enough smoke to suspect there might be a fire.
What's this incriminating screenshot on his phone?
The Code requires the mandatory provisional suspension to be lifted when the B-sample analysis does not match that of the A-sample. As required under the Code, Sport Integrity Australia conducted an investigation into the results. As part of this investigation, Sport Integrity Australia initiated further analysis of the samples using a different independent WADA-accredited laboratory and different WADA-recognised EPO expert. Sport Integrity Australia also sought confirmation from WADA regarding the applicable EPO analysis process. The further analysis resulted in varying expert opinions as to the positive or negative reporting of the sample, and the A-sample was reported as negative. As a result, Sport Integrity Australia has taken the decision not to progress an anti-doping rule violation for this sample. The investigation into this sample is finalised.
I don't think this makes the case you want it. This is far from a "nothing to see here." On the facts - his A sample tested positive. His B sample tested "atypical" - with WADA scientists suggesting this was due to degradation. They therefore had to declare the suspension lifted because the two samples did not match.
Note that neither of these initial tests were negative - one was positive, one was atypical.
On a subsequent reanalysis of the A sample, there were differing opinions as to it being positive or negative - essentially rendering it "atypical".
Again - note here that this is not a universal "negative".
In 2023-2023, Sport Integrity Australia performed 4,177 tests. There were a total of 27 disclosure notices issued, which may be for any adverse findings. That is a tiny number - less than 1%.
Yet Bol has at least one (if not 2) atypical findings, and an incriminating screenshot on his phone, all of which coincided with the year he finished 4th at the Olympics despite never previously making it out of the heats.
At least enough smoke to suspect there might be a fire.
Likewise with Bernard Lagat. What are or were the odds of a 3:26 runner getting a false positive out of the thousands tested? And then to find it had been 'contaminated'? I think at the time, only two other sportspersons had had an EPO positive overturned - one was Marion 'Balco' Jones, and the other was a pro cyclist who later tested positive again and was banned.
And here we have Bol who moved up a gear in his late 20's, researched how to get away with micro-doping EPO just five weeks before the A-sample positive (according to WADA), gets it 're-tested' and overturned (by the same manager who got Lagat off), runs like jelly for the next couple of years, and is suddenly back jogging a 1:43 in April at the age of 31.
Do you get that having a stretch of injury-free training is all it takes for an athlete (in most disciplines) to improve over the last couple of years? Happens all the time.
Hoady: Coe must have doped because he was fast and white and had too much neanderthal DNA!!!
Hoady: So what that Bol had a positive A sample and an atypical B sample 5 weeks after researching mircodosing EPO!!! Jogging a new pb at 31 while another guy with the same coach is suddenly destroying the world at 25 is completely normal and you're a RACIST if you say it isn't!!!
This post was edited 41 seconds after it was posted.
This would be the equivalent of Coe casually destroying his own 800m WR at age 31 in 1988. In April.
No it is like 1989 Coe running 1:43.3 for his fastest time in years after not being able to best 1:46 in 1987, all while about to turn 33 and sharply falling off a cliff and retiring the following year.