LAGOT IS GOING DOWN

Maybe you better learn how to read and write! Stay in school!

Lagat is not getting off on a technicality. Don't let the idiot BroJo's fool you. They pass themselves off as experts, but all they do is set up links to other stories on the net.

Lagat's "B" sample contained no traces of EPO.

Fellow 1500 runner, calling yourself a "fellow 1500 runner" to Lagat is like me calling myself a "fellow guitar player" to Jimi Hendrix because I learned the chords to "Hey Joe."

I'm in school jerk. 10th grade

you do know that when they have put he got off on technicalities its always been quoting other people

The only "technacality" i've heard mentioned that one can be cleared by is having no traces of the drug in your sample. Why are they calling that a technicality?

Dude makes a good point though about B-lag not raising Hell if he was innocent.... so respond to that and cut this dude some slack

"Mr. Lagat, the IAAF rule XXX.XX states that you can not compete in this sanctioned event because your A sample has come back with a result that requires we test your B sample before you can compete again. You have up to one month to bring anybody you like to witness the testing of the B sample, though it's not mandatory that you are there at all. In the meantime, there will be absolutely no releasing this information to the public until the B sample is tested."

Bernard is shocked, along with his entourage. What should they do? If they know Bernard did nothing wrong, then it is not worth it for them to risk having them quickly test the B sample, as they should already feel the test is suspect at best. It is in their best interest to research like all hell and make as many contacts with knowledgeable people as to why this result could come back positive when he's clean. Competing at Worlds is big, but being falsely found guilty of doping is much bigger. He wanted to cover all his bases and didn't have time to point fingers in the press at anybody, especially because he had been assured that the A sample results would not go public.

...so respond to that and cut Lagat some slack bitch.

westcoastballer wrote:

Dude makes a good point though about B-lag not raising Hell if he was innocent.... so respond to that and cut this dude some slack

Yes raising hell has been such an effective way of combatting test results in the past! If you are innocent a far better way to deal with is to do as Lagat did . Of course Pound gets all bent out of shape when things don't go his way.

Lagat's B sample DID contain EPO, but as speculated at the time of the B sample test not enough to test positive. The B sample test also requires a higher level for a positive teat than the A, so he did "get off". He was also never told to withdraw from Paris, and he made the decision to wait as long as possible before testing the B sample.

Whatever wrote:Lagat's B sample DID contain EPO, but as speculated at the time of the B sample test not enough to test positive.

Nope, not according to BL's expert, Dr. Heid. Below are quotes from his report summary. Read the report yourself for the details (follow link on front page).

A) All experts present agreed that the urine of Mr. Bernard Lagat did not contain any recombinant erythropoietin (rhEpo) and he therefore had not committed Epo-doping.

B) While the test of Mr. Lagat´s B-sample did not reveal any reactive components in positions taken as indication of a positive test, the original A-sample showed bands in this region which, however, were not fully identical with those of the reference recombinant Epo and might well be due to glycoprotein modifications.

WHAT HAS ALL THIS GOT TO DO WITH LAGOT?

the man is a complete lunatic, he murdered his wife and then tried to frame his best friend.

where does BERNARD LAGAT and epo testing fit into all of this?

BL's expert is paid to sya those things.

licensed scientists can't just lie. If they do, they can get their license and practice taken away from them. Scientists such as Lagat's expert, who is supposedly known as one of the top guns in his field, is under very tight scrutiny amongst his peers and the public eye. He can't just make shit up. And if he did, then the lab the IAAF is using would tear him apart. Obviously that didn't happen either.

Whatever wrote:

BL's expert is paid to sya those things.

True, but his day job is as a scientist at the German Cancer Research Center. I doubt that a one-off job for Lagat would pay him enough to risk his reputation by prostituting his expertise. Reputation is everything to a scientist. But it will be interesting to see how the IAAF experts respond to his charges, especially since -- as BL's agent noted -- the people who actually performed the tests on the A and B samples apparently agreed that there was no rhEPO detected in them.

I've read every pertinent journal article I could find on the Lasne rhEPO test (Don Catlin told me there were 6, and I've read all 6), and nothing I've read indicates that the test has been validated in a study that looked at the effects of variables like ethnic origin, age, sex, exercise level, and altitude vs. hypobaric chamber on the test results. Lasne said that such a study was conducted, but it apparently has not been published. This point was also raised by Dr. Hein in his report.

Whatever wrote:

Lagat's B sample DID contain EPO, but as speculated at the time of the B sample test not enough to test positive. The B sample test also requires a higher level for a positive teat than the A, so he did "get off". He was also never told to withdraw from Paris, and he made the decision to wait as long as possible before testing the B sample.

Of course Lagat's urine contained EPO, so does yours! Why are you making things up about the test results? There is no different requirement for the B sample, his B sample showed no rhEPO, which is what is tested for and a review of the A test showed that the apparent rhEPO was probably an artefact.

Whatever wrote: BL´s expert is paid to say those things.

I am the head of the division of biology of the German Cancer Research Center, a governmentally run Federal institution (comparable to the NIH in the USA) and I have asked Dr. Hans Heid as one of our highly experienced protein chemists to supervise the analysis of the B-sample of BL, of course without any honorarium. To accept any payment other than expenses (railway ticket, hotel etc.) actually would represent a crime under German law. Dr. Heid has given his report as a formal affidavit, is willing to declare its content under oath such as that "all experts present", including the control laboratory head, Prof. Dr. Schaenzer, and the IAAF representative, Dr. M. Saugy, agreed that the urine of Mr. Bernard Lagat, i.e. A + B sample, did not contain any recombinant EPO. Full stop.

Further for explanation: By the way, BL was more or less forced to withdraw from Paris as, in contrast to the IAAF rules, the-false-A sample result had been given to the public. As he lived at the time in Tuebingen, Germany, and the control lab was in Cologne, Germany, he asked a known law-firm here in Heidelberg (same state as Tuebingen) to handle his case, i.e. the same law-firm that represents most of the victims of the doping in the former GDR.

Loosing to Goucher in a 3k to 326.something in 4 years? That 1500 converted to a mile is around 341 342, that seems beyond the possiblity for improvement.

Lagat is guilty. The whining from he and his manager is some type of smokescreen they feel will promote the image of innocence. Some kind of a deal was cut, and the announcement of a negative B sample was trumpeted. But then crooked ass Templeton began to shoot off his mouth, then lying Lagat followed suit, and it pissed off the IAAF, which probably wanted the matter to fade away. The USA Today article wasn't ambiguous in terms when it mentioned that the IAAF was going to state that Lagat was let off on a technicality (what technicality? Nike? Being E. African? Implication of IAAF officials, etc?) and that Templeton would be out the door. The whole situation stinks. The IAAF doesn't really want the truth to come out about the drug mess with the E. Africans, especially with the 'roid mess going on in the States. But, Templeton and Lagat had to force the issue, loudly proclaiming innocence while giving the opposite impression.

Lagat: Struggles to 1:46 in the 800, yet runs 3:26. Not clean. No way. Ask Goucher what he really thinks, off the record.

Well put. Thank god someone knows whats going on and has the balls to say it.