Great NY Times Piece on Mary Cain: Mary Cain is Growing Up Fast

4-minute-maraton wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgRe5Lar4Nk&t=395

Here's the race in the article, just at beginning of Cain's anchor leg. Your welcome.

Good job finding that. 2:03 on her own after 300!

Here is a classic as well: Cain v. 2xPenn Relays champ Angel Picirillo (and what was likely Ajee Wilson'r last mile ever?):

Author of piece on twitter...

Noah Gallagher Shann

@noahgshannon Great @nytimes on Cain but confused Y @lizweil mentions doping, Slaney, Salazar, but not that Salazar coached Slaney during failed drug test

Reply Retweet Favorited

‏@lizweil

@noahgshannon @nytimes I really should have. Earlier drafts had much more about doping. Hoping to write more about that someday.

@noahgshannon

@lizweil @nytimes It was of course much later in her career, & with much arbitration, but you say Slaney around track nerds and ears perk up

@lizweil

@noahgshannon @nytimes and she gets a pass too often. The short film about her, Runner, makes no mention either.

records check wrote:

reader of the forums wrote:

It seems to be pretty common knowledge to everyone in this thread except you.

So? The statement was "common knowledge", not " common knowledge to everyone in this thread" (which was only 2 people so far I think, hardly "everyone"). Even in your smaller context, which is stronger: the findings of the IAAF or the the unfounded opinions of 2 people on an internet forum?

Context is provided in a couple paragraphs of the subject article that addresses the suspicions surrounding the Chinese record and suggests that the clean record is Dibaba's 3:55.17. Perhaps you should read it before commenting further.

I agree the article was wierd. One thing thar struck me was the author seemed to have a creepy fascination with Cain's body and how it looked. Or a lot of comments about what she wore at races.

As a side note, I saw Cain race in Boston indoor last year and my 1st thought was her body didn't look like a 17 YO runner.

4runner wrote:

1. Let's assume you are right. No god...

2. It is kind of an unhappy way to go through life, isn't it?

First of all, I neither wrote nor implied in any way that there is no god. I merely expressed a personal opinion on the action. My only implication (which also happens to be my belief) is that it's unlikely god/God intervenes in our lives in the mystical and magical way believed by so many people who participate in organized religion.

To your second point, I wouldn't know. I am quite happy and at spiritual peace. You, however, give the vibe of unhappiness by virtue of your confrontational aggressiveness.

Bro - Mama wrote: So, just like you are spouting your opinion of them right now? If someone feels a religious, social, personal (or whatever) connection to someone, it is valid. What is your problem?

I knew a vacuous and superficial response such as yours was coming.

No, it is not "just like (me) spouting (my) opinion." Had Cain's mother not brought God into the equation and I responded to the article by writing "Boy, I sure am glad she didn't mention her faith in God" then it would have been very hypocritical. But in reality, I only responded to the issue...I didn't initiate it.

I've already stated the problem, so I'm not going to rehash it because your reading comprehension is lacking.

I think there are a couple reasons Slaney is not always called a doper -

mainly, the issues are scientific and legal and hard to piece out factually with clarity. They actually banned/changed the test that popped her, right? So you have to go into science to try to decipher things - that is hard.

I mean - this wikipedia entry - hard to decipher, plus there is a legal technicality:

In June 1997, the IAAF banned Decker from competition. In September 1999, a USATF panel reinstated her.[14][15] The IAAF cleared her to compete but took the case to arbitration. In April, 1999, the arbitration panel ruled against her, after which the IAAF – through a retroactive ban, even though she was cleared to compete – stripped her of a silver medal she had won in the 1500 meters at the 1997 World Indoor Championships.[16]

In April 1999, Decker filed suit against both the IAAF and the U.S. Olympic Committee which administered the test, arguing that the test is flawed and cannot distinguish between androgens caused by the use of banned substances and androgens resulting from the use of birth control pills.[17] The court ruled that it had no jurisdiction, a decision which was upheld on appeal.[citation needed]

Who the heck and come to a clear conclusion after that? only people very comfortable with the science and legal issues.

and yeah, she has a special place in the USA TF pantheon - hard to knock her off that.

The irony of Slaney's "bust" was that she was getting beat by a Russian 40-year old, Jekaterina Podkopayeva, whose doped-to-the-toenails masters records will pollute the books forever since they were pre-EPO testing. This caricature of a human being was running 9 seconds faster at the same age than Ruth Wysoki in #2, who was a legitimate US Champion and Olympian.

4runner...Bro Mama -

Forget it. I apologize for my comments. To each his own. Great article; big fan of Mary Cain; hope Salazar does right by her. OUT.

Immoral Minority wrote:

4runner wrote:

1. Let's assume you are right. No god...

2. It is kind of an unhappy way to go through life, isn't it?

First of all, I neither wrote nor implied in any way that there is no god. I merely expressed a personal opinion on the action. My only implication (which also happens to be my belief) is that it's unlikely god/God intervenes in our lives in the mystical and magical way believed by so many people who participate in organized religion.

To your second point, I wouldn't know. I am quite happy and at spiritual peace. You, however, give the vibe of unhappiness by virtue of your confrontational aggressiveness.

"Happy," "at spiritual peace," and "nauseated."

Quite a collection of emotions that you got there...

the priesthood wrote:

4runner wrote:

"Nauseated???" Really???

You can't understand how the mother of an extremely talented teenage girl would feel "profound relief" when a world class coach who at least claims to prize the same ethical and belief system as you do offers to coach your daughter?

Would you let a Catholic priest mentor your son?

Of course. I'd also let a Buddhist monk, a Jewish Rabbi, a feminist, a Marxist, and-- heck-- even a good auto mechanic mentor my son.

When you start becoming nauseated by things you disagree with, you become narrow minded and small.

4runner wrote:

Heck-- the mere existence of the word "fate" in different languages suggests that humans are hardwired to ascribe random events to a higher power.

The word "fate" has nothing to do with a higher power. The rest of your post is similarly incorrect and nauseating.

sick stomach here too wrote:

4runner wrote:

Heck-- the mere existence of the word "fate" in different languages suggests that humans are hardwired to ascribe random events to a higher power.

The word "fate" has nothing to do with a higher power. The rest of your post is similarly incorrect and nauseating.

yeah and a rose by any other name would smell as sweet

when a high school team has a boy running way faster than anyone else, like my high school team, they don't say, oh we cannot train him, and in the past he wouldn't say, oh they can't train me. He just does harder, faster workouts ahead of or separate from everyone else. The article, like many about Salazar, claims that all the technology really makes a difference. I don't think most of that stuff is anything other than high-tech placebos. Look at who is best in the world and how and where they train.

agip wrote:

Who the heck and come to a clear conclusion after that? only people very comfortable with the science and legal issues.

and yeah, she has a special place in the USA TF pantheon - hard to knock her off that.

Really? What's confusing.

She was busted, appealed to arbitration. Arbitration held up the ban --> affirms the validity of the positive test in order to sanction Slaney.

Later, she appeals in legal court. Legal court says that it's not their job.

That's it.

clerk wrote:

agip wrote:

Who the heck and come to a clear conclusion after that? only people very comfortable with the science and legal issues.

and yeah, she has a special place in the USA TF pantheon - hard to knock her off that.

Really? What's confusing.

She was busted, appealed to arbitration. Arbitration held up the ban --> affirms the validity of the positive test in order to sanction Slaney.

Later, she appeals in legal court. Legal court says that it's not their job.

That's it.

the question of jurisdiction - USATF says she clean, IAAF says no...the retroactive ban that said she could keep racing, that it ended with a whimper on a legal technicality, the seeming lack of scientific comment on Decker's claim that it was her birth control pills...

Plus, it's not in that wikipedia quote - but the part about the test that caught her being cancelled would need to be addressed.

journos have to cram a lot into a usually fixed amount of words - having to explain the decker affair in a story that is not even about Decker is hard and a space eater. How do you fit a fair summary of it into one or two sentences? You can't, so you leave it out or be vague.

I'm just saying it's hard to be concise and fair about decker - not that it can't be done.

ONe other thing about the article that wasn't my favorite. It talked a lot about how much faster HS girls are than 2001 nd said that was cause of Title IX and this changed ID not making them skinny and strong.

Well boys track is a ton faster. I think it's all related to the Internet. Coaches all across the globe can learn how to coach and HSers know instantly where they stand in terms of their time. When I was in HS, my buddy had to wait 3 weeks until TFN came out to see if he was still top 10 in the country.

4runner wrote: "Happy," "at spiritual peace," and "nauseated."

Quite a collection of emotions that you got there...

Just for future reference, nausea is not an emotion. (Neither is spiritual peace, really, but I can understand how the line might be blurred.)

Stick with eharmony wrote:

Honestly who the fvck cares?! Cain and Al Dopezar are overrated hacks.

Actually, in the real world, lots and lots of people care quite a bit about Cain and Salazar.

NO ONE cares even a TINY bit about the opinions of a low-life, basement-dwelling douchebag like you.

No one.

Now that I've educated you a little, you can go back to your full-time occupation: wanking in mommy's basement.