Good for him: Christian Hesch says he should never be eligble for prize money again

Kind of easy to say when it's only $500 here or there that he'd pick up vs. the kind of money Gatlin makes.

Hesch actually did a great interview for an article I wrote--"Generation Dope"--in the new issue of Double Runner. It's on the stands (every Barnes & Noble and newsstands across the country) as of this week. The article also includes interviews with Steve Magness and Dr. Jeffrey Brown on the state of doping in the sport--and on a possible future (and maybe even present) in which gene-doping supplants PEDs. Hesch discusses what it's like to race on EPO and, more importantly, how much it enhanced his ability to get more bang for his training buck.

I too very much appreciate his sentiment. However, it's easy to say when you still have not payed back wrongfully gained $.

While it's not much, Hesch took $600 from a track mile I put on back in 2012 (http://www.heartnsolesantarosa.com/FOM/FOM12.html), and though in October 2012 he said he'd pay the money back to the deserving athletes, that has not yet happened. Hopefully he'll respond to today's email and find a way to pay back those three athletes. While, in this case, these athletes were "only" cheated out of $100-$300, that's still relevant for someone trying to survive as a sub-elite (sub-sub-elite, wanna-be-elite, hobby-jogger, whatever LRC wants to call it). And just as important as the $ itself is the message. I'd be equally upset if it was $60 he owed us as opposed to $600.

Still, it's the right attitude, and I am glad to see that he isn't trying to get into other races and cheat others out of money. Wish more dopers would share his point of view (though of course wish they wouldn't cheat in the first place!).

My guess is that you are on his list to "slowly pay back" or that he doesn't think your 2nd and 3rd finishers were clean either.

^^^This.^^^

1. Pay back the stolen prize money.

2. Then, if you really have to, stay in the spotlight by picking your scabs in interviews about why you were a cheater. (Better still, just pay back what you stole and skip step 2).

I do not see much nobility in admitting you're a cheater only after you get caught, though I suppose it's fractionally better than the cheaters who don't admit it.

lol @ washed up post-grad kids whining about being 'robbed' of $350 for some road race lost. They probably drove a car that their parents bought for them to get to that race, too.

wow..... wrote:

lol @ washed up post-grad kids whining about being 'robbed' of $350 for some road race lost. They probably drove a car that their parents bought for them to get to that race, too.

What a stupid fvcking post.

He was never eligible for prize money. You have to place for that. He was a better triathlete than runner because in triathlons he did not wear knee-long hoop shorts for races. just sayin

Reminds me of this interview

:

"I have a little bit of difficulty flogging myself by looking up and figuring out how to get a hold of the guy who ran 16:55 behind me at a Podunk cherry-pick 5K for 250 bucks or 500 bucks, and I ran 15 flat. And it was in August five months after I had done anything. Then it’s pretty difficult from a physiological standpoint to argue that there is any benefit at that point. Ok, it’s impossible. Now, caveat to that is that of course I’m always a month or a month-and-a-half accelerated in my training, so in reality, I should be a month-and-a-half behind where I’m currently at, so yeah, that is a fair contention, but when I jog 15 flat and I probably could have run 14 flat or 14 point, and the next guy ran 16:55, I’m just like, “Really?” Ok, so maybe if I hadn’t done EPO six months prior, maybe I run, I don’t know, maybe I run 15:10? 15:20? If I choose to run faster, obviously I could have run faster. At what point do I stop flogging myself? I don’t see that [paying back everyone] as absolutely necessary."

Funny how he uses the same terms and amounts in both articles. Since he now considers it "not fair" to take money from a 16:55 guy, does that mean he plans to make amends in situations like this? Does this guy now "deserve" it? If so, who at this point doesn't deserve to be compensated?

You gotta admit that he's probably correct in 8 out of 10 cases, though...

logician wrote:

wow..... wrote:

lol @ washed up post-grad kids whining about being 'robbed' of $350 for some road race lost. They probably drove a car that their parents bought for them to get to that race, too.

What a stupid fvcking post.

As there is nothing currently in the rules about compensating people who finished behind a drug user the determination of who deserves compensation is totally up to whomever decides to do the compensating.

HRE wrote:

As there is nothing currently in the rules about compensating people who finished behind a drug user the determination of who deserves compensation is totally up to whomever decides to do the compensating.

There should be. There needs to be clawback. Race directors should put this in their contracts.

I've always favored fines for drug offenders over suspensions. The whole PED thing is money driven and fines would negate cheating's profitability at least somewhat IF the cheater plans to continue in the sport. But if you're someone like Jeptoo and you've made enough to live out your days very comfortably maybe you just keep the money and retire. If there was a clause in her contract as you suggest I don't know how enforceable it would be if she just retires.

He is/ was a DB that couldn't just run, but always needed all the attention to be on him (push-ups/ board shorts).

Would it be too much to ask him to stay away from the sport altogether?

HRE wrote:

As there is nothing currently in the rules about compensating people who finished behind a drug user the determination of who deserves compensation is totally up to whomever decides to do the compensating.

You are correct. And Hesch is still, and always will be, a great example of someone who's name we probably would not even know if he wasn't a cheater. Who really gives a crap what he thinks.

HRE wrote:

I've always favored fines for drug offenders over suspensions. The whole PED thing is money driven and fines would negate cheating's profitability at least somewhat IF the cheater plans to continue in the sport. But if you're someone like Jeptoo and you've made enough to live out your days very comfortably maybe you just keep the money and retire. If there was a clause in her contract as you suggest I don't know how enforceable it would be if she just retires.

Both. Suspensions also reduce earnings, and palatability to sponsors. Better still follow the lead of Germany and criminalize it, just like other forms of theft.

The problem I see with suspensions is that the people running the sport have no problem suspending Christian Hesches, Martin Fagans, Lisa Hunter Galvins, etc, But there are people in the sport who attract TV contracts, sponsors, sell tickets to meets, etc. who I believe are really "too big" to ban and have a much more free hand to use PEDs. I think it's a good idea if you really apply it evenly to everyone. Criminalizing is useful.