BBC reports Charlie Francis, White, 61, dead from Cancer. He coached Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Ben Johnson.

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

....Charlie Francis knew that and was honest about it. I have always respected him for that.

For the upteenth time, CF was honest ONLY WHEN HE GOT CAUGHT!!!

Until then, it was lies, deception, cheat, deny.

OK? Did you read my lips that time?

(Yes I know, I'm responding again after saying I'll ignore you after that really pathetic "socio-economic" thing.)

Skuj wrote:

For the upteenth time, CF was honest ONLY WHEN HE GOT CAUGHT!!!

Until then, it was lies, deception, cheat, deny.

OK? Did you read my lips that time?

(Yes I know, I'm responding again after saying I'll ignore you after that really pathetic "socio-economic" thing.)

Skuj,

I enjoy your posts on here so I hope this doesn't turn into something petty. I still believe that meaningful discussion can happen on LR.

Why would CF--or any coach for that matter--be honest about drug use in this culture? But look at others in similiar situation--Trever Graham, for example, has continued to deny any wrongdoing.

Moreover, now that it is more clear that Ben J was indeed sabatoged, wouldn't CF have been vindicated if he had claimed all along that Johnson was clean?

Regardless of how pathetic you may think that my comment was, can we agree that socio-economics play perhaps the largest role in how PED rules are enforced?

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

However, the system we have now is broken

Sure, but that doesn't excuse exploiting any shady loophole within it. We can both recognize the flaws of the system AND recognize the flaws of those who take advantage of those flaws and degrading the sport further for personal gain. Charlie Francis may not be the only person who has ever done that, we just know for sure that he was someone who did that.

doping is divine? wrote:

Sure, but that doesn't excuse exploiting any shady loophole within it. We can both recognize the flaws of the system AND recognize the flaws of those who take advantage of those flaws and degrading the sport further for personal gain. Charlie Francis may not be the only person who has ever done that, we just know for sure that he was someone who did that.

So, in the meantime, what is a talented NCAA 100/200 meter runner to do upon graduation?

Wait for the system to be fixed, stay clean and continually lose (lose races, sponsorships, money, etc.)?

If CF was right, then the only way to be relevant to this discussion is to train your ass off and take a regime of PEDs.

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

So, in the meantime, what is a talented NCAA 100/200 meter runner to do upon graduation?

Wait for the system to be fixed, stay clean and continually lose (lose races, sponsorships, money, etc.)?

If CF was right, then the only way to be relevant to this discussion is to train your ass off and take a regime of PEDs.

That presumes your ego will crumble if you fail to remain "relevant." If you cannot be satisfied with giving your best and letting that be what it is then it's doubtful that cheating to win will really fill that void in your life. If you place your ambition and personal worth apart from and above your personal integrity and love of the sport, then yeah you'll do what you applaud CF for advocating. What did you do upon graduation?

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Do you think that Frank Shorter's medals should be taken away because he "cheated" by taking payments for running?'

Hardly the same thing is it?

How is it any different?

Shorter cheated. He gained an unfair advantage by being paid to train as a professional while pretending to be an amateur. That is cheating.

Its still hardly the same thing, but now you are a moron.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Its still hardly the same thing, but now you are a moron.

You are going to have to explain how it isn't the "same" thing. Is there acceptable cheating and unacceptable cheating?

doping is divine? wrote:

That presumes your ego will crumble if you fail to remain "relevant." If you cannot be satisfied with giving your best and letting that be what it is then it's doubtful that cheating to win will really fill that void in your life. If you place your ambition and personal worth apart from and above your personal integrity and love of the sport, then yeah you'll do what you applaud CF for advocating. What did you do upon graduation?

A couple points:

--Athletes who use PEDs use drugs love the sport as much as you and I do. As I said to another poster, the head of US Anti-drug agency was himself an admitted cheater albeit a different sort of cheater. No one would accuse Frank Shorter of not loving the sport.

--I am all for personal intergrity. This is exactly why drugs should either be legal--so damn the charade ends. (unless you have a plan to prevent their use).

I have to say it over and over again in these debates: I prefer a track world without drugs but that world is gone (just as amateurism is gone).

Mundus Vult Decipi translates to "The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived"

My opinions on his views are mixed. From an ethics perspective he is obviously wrong. Pragmatically he is right on target.

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

what is a talented NCAA 100/200 meter runner to do upon graduation?

The same thing a talented 1500/5000 runner like El G does, or a talented 200/400 runner like Michael Johnson does, or a talented 5000/10000/marathon runner like Geb does: dope, lie and WIN.

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

--Athletes who use PEDs use drugs love the sport as much as you and I do.

NO THEY FVCKIN DON'T, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY FAIL TO COMPREHEND.

They decide to cheat against the rules of the sport. "The sport" is not supposed to be about taking short cuts, or cheating/lying/deceiving/etc etc etc.

Holy fvck I could never trust you with anything, whoever you are. Your integrity is in tatters, but you are rich, so that's ok I guess.....

Nope, WRONG. They love themselves FAR more than they love the sport. They love themselves to the exclusion of loving the sport. Yeah, there's a very simple plan to prevent PED use, I can't even take credit for it. Lifetime ban on first offense and return all winnings. Shorter is a red herring, drop it already.So what did you do upon graduation?

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

A couple points:

--Athletes who use PEDs use drugs love the sport as much as you and I do. As I said to another poster, the head of US Anti-drug agency was himself an admitted cheater albeit a different sort of cheater. No one would accuse Frank Shorter of not loving the sport.

--I am all for personal intergrity. This is exactly why drugs should either be legal--so damn the charade ends. (unless you have a plan to prevent their use).

I have to say it over and over again in these debates: I prefer a track world without drugs but that world is gone (just as amateurism is gone).

paleo plaeo wrote:

The same thing a talented 1500/5000 runner like El G does, or a talented 200/400 runner like Michael Johnson does, or a talented 5000/10000/marathon runner like Geb does: dope, lie and WIN.

Agreed. If we can't stop the doping (which we can't), then at least let's get rid of the lies, right?

Skuj wrote:

NO THEY FVCKIN DON'T, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY FAIL TO COMPREHEND.

They decide to cheat against the rules of the sport. "The sport" is not supposed to be about taking short cuts, or cheating/lying/deceiving/etc etc etc.

Holy fvck I could never trust you with anything, whoever you are. Your integrity is in tatters, but you are rich, so that's ok I guess.....

You do realize that I am advocating for integrity? I despise the charade and lying. I want to restore integrity to the sport by pulling back the curtain.

doping is divine? wrote:

Nope, WRONG. They love themselves FAR more than they love the sport. They love themselves to the exclusion of loving the sport. Yeah, there's a very simple plan to prevent PED use, I can't even take credit for it. Lifetime ban on first offense and return all winnings.

Shorter is a red herring, drop it already.

So what did you do upon graduation?

We can just disagree about the love part. It is a tertiary issue (at best).

Your plan assumes that testing will catch the "cheaters." It won't and it cannot. I have spoken at length with testers, coaches, professionals and officials. The underlying theme is that PEDs are here to stay.

Why is Shorter a red herring?

I coached for 8 years, worked as an agent, went to law school and now practice law. Why does that matter?

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

It is significantly more than a hunch and slightly less than absolute certainty. I have known personally several elite coaches as well as at least a dozen Olympic medalist.

Then why have you not exercised your lawyerly integrity and stepped up with this evidence? We already have the precedence of a non-analytical positive being good enough for the IAAF, so surely your information would be enough or almost enough to enable them to prove the cheating charge and therefore be fair to ALL athletes and clean out the cheaters.

Drugs are part of the sport. A part of me really, really wishes it weren't so but they are. That said, I detest the cover-up more than I detest the sin of drugs.

I have a hard time believing this since you refuse to take any action to enforce existing rules, instead preferring to discourage ethical standards from all those who RIGHT NOW are playing by the rules. Not the sort of thing I'd want from a lawyer.

Mundus Vult Decipi wrote:

Why would CF--or any coach for that matter--be honest about drug use in this culture?

Because he was under oath at the Dubin Inquiry? Judges don't like it when people lie to them under oath - Marion Jones and Martha Stuart come to mind. The penalty they ended up with was greater than that for the sin they were originally charged with.

Missing something wrote:

Because he was under oath at the Dubin Inquiry? Judges don't like it when people lie to them under oath - Marion Jones and Martha Stuart come to mind. The penalty they ended up with was greater than that for the sin they were originally charged with.

The original question was about why CF wasn't honest about drug use before Johnson was busted. My point was that no coach has any incentive to be honest in this culture. That is what troubles me the most.

CF--under oath and otherwise--has been the most honest voice about PEDs in the last twenty years.

Missing something wrote:

Then why have you not exercised your lawyerly integrity and stepped up with this evidence? We already have the precedence of a non-analytical positive being good enough for the IAAF, so surely your information would be enough or almost enough to enable them to prove the cheating charge and therefore be fair to ALL athletes and clean out the cheaters.

Evidence is irrelevant without enforcement my friend. Read the Exum Report and the systematic cover-up of over 100 failed drug tests by US Athletes (by the US Anti-doping offficials).

I have a hard time believing this since you refuse to take any action to enforce existing rules, instead preferring to discourage ethical standards from all those who RIGHT NOW are playing by the rules. Not the sort of thing I'd want from a lawyer.

I am done trying to have the rules enforced. It is not my job. And, I fail to see how I am discouraging ethical standards? If you can't stop the drugs, stop the lies. It's pretty simple to me.