I know she served time for testosterone levels or something, and ran a few slowish, low key races, but she's fallen off the radar. Is she still training/competeing at all? Has she bagged it and gone into medicine? I've checked out her website which pretty much sucks....anyone know?
Cheat
I'll second that. Notice how she NEVER ran the same again after her drug conviction ban. She's a phony all the way through. Let's hear again how she took steroids when she lived in East Germany. Think ole Dieter knows all about that stuff?
she was racing in 2002,
I last saw her at Providence 5k.
An absolutely beautiful woman. I loved the way she would finish her races blowing kisses to the crowd. She made running attractive to many.
She is was a beast of a runner...remimber that one boston where she finished the race even though she was haveing....problems...
How come Mary Slaney never ran the same after her conviction?
She was last seen in Berlin, taking her underwear to the dry-cleaners.
An absolutely beautiful woman. I loved the way she would finish her races blowing kisses to the crowd. She made running attractive to many.
______________________
Agreed, she was beautiful. But back to my original question....with her becoming a US citizen and living & running in the US running community (Boulder?) does anyone actually know what she is up to career-wise?
i think she gets paid to give motivational speeches. she gave one to a couple middle school teams, some local high schools, and a college team around here last year.
She was running quite well 2 years ago.
Canada National Capital Race Weekend- Ottawa, Canada.
2001 and 2002 edition, she won the 10K's in 32-mid to high?
Last season 2003- she wasn't racing hot at all in early season, as if she was injured. She was planning on doing the marathon trials for Athens?
But is she even a US citizen yet? I am not sure she is. Lotsa talk from her but no discernible results. Put a fork in her...blah, blah, blah.
Living with new boyfriend but Deiter Hogan lives in house as well.
Skylon,
From a paper I wrote 2 years ago.
Uta is the only athlete I know who has ever beaten the IAAF rap, but she was too exhausted after 2 years of struggling to take the DLV or the IAAF to court to get back the $500000 they had stolen from her.
By 1996, however, the highest sensitivity GC/MS apparatus could detect epitestosterone in concentrations of less than 0.02ng/ml, one ten thousandth of what was possible with the plain GC analysers in 1982. In 1998 the three times Boston Marathon champion, Uta Pippig, failed an out-of-competition test and she was suspended for two years for having a T:eT ratio of 9.2. She had taken time out from her medical studies to race professionally, so she knows a bit about illness. She was to prove more than a match for the German Athletics Federation, the DLV, when after her suspension had expired she took her case to a civil court independent of it and the IAAF.
Pippig was ill, very ill. She had DNF?d in the 1996 Olympic marathon and she had raced only once since then until, in April 1998, she tested ?positive? at a time when she was suffering from severe hormone imbalances, diarrhoea and nausea. A long-time resident in Longmont, Colorado, Pippig had a unique arrangement with the DLV whereby all her out-of-competition urine samples were sent for analysis to Kreischa, the IOC-accredited lab near Dresden in the former East Germany, and it was to it, eventually, that she turned for information on all her test results in the four years leading up to her positive. The figures were shocking.15
For a start, her usual T:eT ratio was not 1:1, it was 3:1, so relative to her normal, Pippig?s 9.2:1 ?positive? was really only a 3.1:1 ratio, well inside the IOC?s 6:1. And her epitestosterone levels, as distinct from the maximum of 200ng/ml the IOC allowed, were 5.8, 5.5 and 4.9ng/ml in her three OOC tests in 1994, but only 1.9 and 0.4ng/ml in the two in 1998. With testosterone levels in those two tests of less than 12ng/ml, it was no wonder that she was very ill. True to its usual, badly informed practice, my daily newspaper had reported16 that her test ?showed abnormal and unnatural levels of the male hormone testosterone? and that ?it will reinforce the public view that most Olympic athletes use [banned] drugs?. It should not need emphasizing, but Uta Pippig was disgraced before her fellow athletes and deprived of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of sponsorship and prize money, not because she had too much of ?the male hormone testosterone? in her system for the IOC?s liking, but because she had too little, less than ¹/100 of what it allows but less than ¹/300 of the epitestosterone permitted.
In its ?fight against doping? which it says is ?spreading at a terrifying rate? ? positives in over 3000 tests totalled a miniscule nineteen, 0.6%, in Sydney ? the IOC writes the Rules, its acolytes are the detectives collecting and analysing the evidence of alleged wrongdoing and in their own courts they act out the charade of being prosecutors, juries and judges. The IOC denies athletes their rights contained in Articles 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration On Human Rights. The ?burden of proof? it requires is no more than ?to the comfortable satisfaction? of the IOC-type court.
The Uta Pippig story had an unusual ending. She appealed to the Deutscher Sport-Bund, the arbitration court the German Sports Federation. The tribunal that day was chaired by Eike Ullmann, who happens also to be a German Supreme Court judge. After hearing the evidence, all four expert witnesses ? including the one engaged by the defendants, the DLV ? sided with Pippig. Judge Ullmann concluded that ?de facto there was a ban, but its existence has not been legally justified.?
He told the DLV to strike her conviction from the record: it did.
Until the IOC withdraws its ban on athletes taking doping cases to civil courts, athletes should not risk losing their livelihoods by competing in the Olympic Games or ?participating in the Olympic Movement? at all. In its ?fight against doping? which it says is ?spreading at a terrifying rate? ? positives in over 3000 tests totalled a miniscule nineteen, 0.6%, in Sydney ? the IOC writes the Rules, its acolytes are the detectives collecting and analysing the evidence of alleged wrongdoing and in their own courts they act out the charade of being prosecutors, juries and judges. The IOC denies athletes their rights contained in Articles 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration On Human Rights29. The ?burden of proof? it requires is no more than ?to the comfortable satisfaction? of the IOC-type court.
The Uta Pippig story had an unusual ending. She appealed to the Deutscher Sport-Bund, the arbitration court the German Sports Federation. The tribunal that day was chaired by Eike Ullmann, who happens also to be a German Supreme Court judge. After hearing the evidence, all four expert witnesses ? including the one engaged by the defendants, the DLV ? sided with Pippig. Judge Ullmann concluded that ?de facto there was a ban, but its existence has not been legally justified.?
He told the DLV to strike her conviction from the record: it did.
Until the IOC withdraws its ban on athletes taking doping cases to civil courts, athletes should not risk losing their livelihoods by competing in the Olympic Games or ?participating in the Olympic Movement? at all.
Riddle me this: she has not come anywhere close to her pre positive test results in competition? Why?
That's nice.
What was there previous dwelling?
A cave?
B0b
sounds like she, too, trained her guts out, resulting in abnormal hormone levels. Not unusual to see female runners change them from intense training, I know one or two myself. If she was exhausted, and mentally/emotionally tired from the fight, how easy would it be to recover? She had a great run, sure would be nice to see her in the Masters ranks someday.
van wrote:
Living with new boyfriend but Deiter Hogan lives in house as well.
She's double dipping?
O those crazy Europeans...a civilized menage anyone?
To rightrightright
In August 2000 the Deutscher Sport-Bund had cleared Uta Pippig of her so-called ?doping violation? and the DLV had been forced to erase that false conviction from its records.
She had been either ill or very ill with extreme hormone imbalances for 2 years and then suspended for another two by that time, so it was just not on for her to return to top flight racing at the age of 36. She ran in a few 10ks in the Denver area ? winning one and coming second or third in others ? and maybe a couple of times in her beloved Falmouth 7, but never faster than 5:30 miling, equivalent to only c. 2:30 for a marathon.
As the Boston threepeat winner and double Olympian she had nothing to prove except possibly medalling in the 2004 Games in Athens, but the IOC had extinguished that old sparkle and the stunning, winner?s smile which went with it.
Like it did to hundreds of other fine, world-class athletes in the past 15 years and which WADA now intends to continue with, cheered on from afar by those who in the fullness of time will themselves become its victims, unless it is forced to abandon that evil work by those very athletes joining together to stop it.
I use the word ?victim? deliberately, because it was used by Michele Verroken, the long-time Head of the UK?s Drug-Free Sport Programme ? which for some unknown reason does not ban Aspirin, Bicarbonate of Soda and Creatine, all well-known to be performance enhancing drugs ? at a meeting in London on Friday, December 11th.
In the space of less than 10 minutes she uttered such heresies as "Governments are not Signatories to any Code"; "doping is a matter of professional misconduct, not a criminal act"; "Athletes are the obvious victims of the System"; "Far too many drug-testing programmes are in the hands of those who have vested interests"; "You have to give right to appeal: how the hell ? yes, that was the word she used!! ? can you say this is an offence but that isn't"; and lastly, perhaps the pièce de résistance, "Sport is meant to be a partnership".
Sitting next to Michele on the platform on that memorable occasion was one Richard. W. Pound, QC, the President of WADA, who earlier in that day had been the guest of her boss, the Minister of Sport, and he had addressed Members of Parliament on the need for Government support for his precious but, alas, invalid and illegal Code.
She was sacked three days later on the following Monday, the news of which broke on the Tuesday.
Just two weeks after that, Pound was asked about Michele?s departure by an astonishingly well-informed interviewer on BBC Radio, to which he replied ?It was a surprise to me. I had been at a Conference in London in early December and on a Panel with Michele and then just three days later ? yes, the very words ?three days?, I have it on audio tape ? I read in the media that she had stepped down or been ordered to walk the plank. I don?t know what has led to this, but I assume that there will be somebody in that position who will carry on the good work in the UK against doping in Sport?.
Hmmm!!