LAGOT IS GOING DOWN

SO LET ME GET THIS RIGHT, even if you cant find anything in the tests to prove he was guilty, YOU STILL THINK HE WAS GUILTY.

if I were you guys, then I would refuse to race against anyone who was faster than me because they must all be cheating right?

Dr. Franke,

Thank you very much for setting the record straight. Here is the U.S., we have what are sometimes referred to as professional expert witnesses, who sell court room testimony for a fee. It's reassuring to know that this is illegal in Germany.

I am amazed that you are reading this list. Please ignore the background noise. A lot of us are serious about learning the truth regarding this EPO testing procedure and greatly appreciate your input.

Ivan, you and Clubber were both juiced, and I beat you cleanly. I don't want to hear you guys talking about who is guilty or not of drug use. Point the finger first at yourself.

Rocky VI out next summer.

designer drugs = epo, are made specifically to self destruct. His A sample tested positive because he was on epo. His B sample tested negative because once they freeze the sample of urine and then warm it back up for the B test, the temperature used to warm it up destroys the drug itself. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

the don wrote:That 1500 converted to a mile is around 341 342, that seems beyond the possiblity for improvement.

What 'seems impossible' is idle speculation and irrelevant.

You need real evidence.

lagot is a cheater wrote:

designer drugs = epo, are made specifically to self destruct. His A sample tested positive because he was on epo. His B sample tested negative because once they freeze the sample of urine and then warm it back up for the B test, the temperature used to warm it up destroys the drug itself. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

oh now I understand, some real expert testimony.

its bit too technical the way you describe it, but then, you are a lot better informed than anyone else and so we are bound to be somewhat confused by the brilliance of your scientific investigation.

well I suppose that clears it all up then

so much for LAGOT,

BUT WHAT ABOUT LAGAT?

well you were right that i am an expert. please accept my apologies for the mis-spell, I did mean lagat, and i did mean, that he is a cheater. he failed a test people, what more do you want? and someday, when it actually comes out how designer drugs work... you will think back on this moment.. how you already know.. because like you said.. i am an expert.

lagot is a cheater wrote:

well you were right that i am an expert. please accept my apologies for the mis-spell, I did mean lagat, and i did mean, that he is a cheater. he failed a test people, what more do you want? and someday, when it actually comes out how designer drugs work... you will think back on this moment.. how you already know.. because like you said.. i am an expert.

This, kids, is a perfect example of why you should stay in school. For all we know, "lagot is a cheater" might be on the inside of the entire situation, with information that's 100% correct, while "Werner W. Franke" might be a certifiable sauerkraut-sucking loon who's part of some grand coverup scheme, but compare these guys' writing skills and who comes off as being more informed, and therefore more believable?

If you take the time to state your case eloquently, with good punctuation, good spelling and good grammar, you have a better chance of winning a lot more people to your point of view.

JonnyO wrote:

SO LET ME GET THIS RIGHT, even if you cant find anything in the tests to prove he was guilty, YOU STILL THINK HE WAS GUILTY.

if I were you guys, then I would refuse to race against anyone who was faster than me because they must all be cheating right?

Can't find anything? The first test showed he was doped. After a month of wheeling and dealing, it turns out poor little Bernie had a "false positive". Right. Regina's clean as a whistle too.

Kilroy wrote:

Can't find anything? The first test showed he was doped.

This is getting awfully tedious. Look further up this very thread. You'll find this from someone who actually knows what they're talking about:

"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."

[quote]lagot is a cheater wrote:

designer drugs = epo, are made specifically to self destruct. His A sample tested positive because he was on epo. His B sample tested negative because once they freeze the sample of urine and then warm it back up for the B test, the temperature used to warm it up destroys the drug itself.

If you believe this, then I have a great bridge in brooklyn to sell you.... Why don't you read up on what the EPO test actually looks for? The test does NOT look for the drug EPO sitting in the blood stream.

It's people like you, who post crap like this, that give this board a bad name. Go back to highschool and use your "dizzying intellect" to impress your algebra teacher.

Drew Poulin wrote:

This is getting awfully tedious. Look further up this very thread. You'll find this from someone who actually knows what they're talking about:

"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."

Yes. It's tedious. The A sample tests positive. Then it tests negative. After a month of shenanigans as the earlier posters pointed out. Smells fishy. If it smells fishy, it is fishy. If Lagat weren't African, you guys wouldn't defend him. In fact, if he were European or American, you'd jump all over this cock and bull story.

the thread was started on "why didn't he stand up and fight at the World Championhsips" Because he needed time to clean up his blood!!!!!!!!

Teedeeum wrote:

Yes. It's tedious. The A sample tests positive. Then it tests negative.

When I see conflicting results from the same test -- and the testers concede that the original results were erroneous -- I would tend to question the test rather than condemning the poor sap who provided the sample. The apparent absence of a proper validation study also makes me suspicious of the test.

After a month of shenanigans as the earlier posters pointed out. Smells fishy. If it smells fishy, it is fishy. If Lagat weren't African, you guys wouldn't defend him. In fact, if he were European or American, you'd jump all over this cock and bull story.

What shenanigans? As BL's agent explained, they took the month allowed under the rules in order to pull together the technical help they needed and set up the B sample test. They merely did what they needed to do to prove BL's innocence. Maybe you'd prefer to believe that BL and Co. took that time to pay off the Cologne lab staff? If so, there's just no help for you.

You are right about one thing, though: BL did get the benefit of the doubt from a lot more people than Olga Yegorova did.

Drew, you jump all over those who think Lagat and co. are lying, and imply they are being silly. Yet you take everything that Lagat and co. say at face value. That would appear to be silly also.

The reason Lagat is getting the benefit of the doubt is simply because he is African (black). White people are so brainwashed and beaten down that they are far too hesitant to call black miscreants onto the carpet. Look at the media treatment of the 400 slob in Cincy that went on the rampage. Despicable. It was his own fault, end of story. Not even worthy of national news if common sense were in place.

Johnboy wrote:

Drew, you jump all over those who think Lagat and co. are lying, and imply they are being silly. Yet you take everything that Lagat and co. say at face value. That would appear to be silly also. The reason Lagat is getting the benefit of the doubt is simply because he is African (black).

Race has nothing to do with this. Absolutely nothing.

The test has everything to do with it.

If the test hadn't suggested that BL had done something wrong, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

But it looks very likely that the test is unreliable.

It's that simple. There is no reason whatsoever to think race has anything to do with this.

As others have suggested in the past, BL probably got the benefit of the doubt because many more Americans know him. He speaks English. He went to school here. He's a familiar and likable guy. None of this could be said about Olga Yegorova, and I think that's probably why the mob here was so eager to lynch her. I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb in saying that her reception in Russia was probably much warmer. Sometimes maybe it's unfamiliarity that breeds contempt.

To me it looked like the IAAF was going to let it go, that the matter was settled, until Lagat and Templeton started sqwaking. Their behavior mimics that of guilty criminals trying to look for reparations to make sure everyone can hear about their innocence.

Let's wait and see how it all plays out. If they're going after Templeton, there's a lot more to the story.

True. Everyone wants to ignore the first sample. Either it's magically irrelevant, or that B sample, tested when everyone has had a chance to cut just the real deal is THE WORD, straight from Mt. Sinai.

He was caught, just like Chouki. But Chouki isn't E. African, a poster boy for Nike. It's the end result of the IAAF letting things slide for the "poor third worlders" for too long, so Lagat has to be pronounced innocent, while Chouki, being from France, is in for a whale of a fight, and won't be there in Athens. Interesting how the B samples for the other guys turn up positive, but when it happens to one of the sacrosanct E. Africans, the buzzers go off, and all kinds of strange things begin to happen. Yessiree, Lagat is innocent, and the IAAF is looking to cane Templeton. Nothing wrong here.

Well think..They all live and train together.......

The group is lagat Baumann Chirchirs and D Krummy. Under Templeton in germnay.Under some coach Lee.

Chrichirs run well till Champs then bomb (they always suffer out of the GP circiut?), Krummy runs crap this year, Lagat is guilty as hell and Baumann need I say more.

Too much if you ask me.