ALBERTO RELEASES STATEMENT

Score Taker wrote:

Al Sal 1

ProPublica/BBC/Gouchers/Mangess 0

Al Sal wins! Written in laymen's terms - great idea. If he has really nothing to hide (and he might) he should sue the lot of them for slander.

Al Sal 1

ProPublica/BBC/Gouchers/Mangess 18+

barry mccockiner wrote:

He still didn't give a reason for hiding what is claimed to be allergy meds in a book. Why did he do that? Why not just ship it like a normal person would?

Read the statement again.

Attorney PR firm shills wrote:

MikeM wrote:

I hope this is false as it would seem completely silly and a waste of $.

How is saving your future income, and the income of your athletes a waste of $. It is absolutely what you would expect when someone is at grave risk of losing the cash cow that feeds them.

Well, it is track and field this is a niche website. How many people that are part of the general running public come on here? Nike generates a lot of revenues from a lot of sports and in running, I don't think track and field gear is what is driving their profit margins. In any case, it is somewhat a moot point as if they do it, they do it. It just seems entirely cost prohibitive as the marginal impact of them coming on here is not going to somehow raise the stakes in profits/revenues for Nike.

This whole thing just reminds me of some hill people blood feud that is not going away. The soap opera that has become track and field. Ha.

Link wrote:

You missed my point entirely. That being that the letter from Brown to Salazar does not contradict anything that Kara said. Kara didn't say it was Brown.

Yeah, I got that. But you also said, "(a guy in Houston is her endocronolgist?!??)." Your phrasing suggests that you find it unbelievable that Goucher would to go to Brown. I find this baffling, given Brown's role in the "many elite athletes need a thyroid tune-up because heavy training induces sub-clinical hypothyroidism" controversy.

I'm with you on the basic point. When I read Goucher's statement, I wondered if she was seeing another endocrine doc besides Brown. I was simply pointing out that your incredulity over the claim that she was going to Brown seem overblown.

KMB,

I've really enjoyed reading your posts on this subject and find myself in agreement with just about everything you have written.

I'm just curious to what extent, if any, has Salazar's rebuttal changed your mind on anything?

Salazer admits to carrying a banned substance with him at all times in order to treat a previously unpublicized medical condition.

He also admits that he has run experiments to gauge how much of this same substance can be used without triggering a positive test. (For some reason, they don't test any other substances than the one that Alberto carries with him all the time.)

Those experiments were run by Dr. Jeffrey Brown, whose emails he relies on to exonerate him on other charges.

He also admits to sending prescription drugs through international mail without declaring them for customs.

Everything else is just smoke. What Salazar admits to here is actually much more telling than what he denies.

and you don't think he can get as much Androgel from a different source as he would need ?

barry mccockiner wrote:

He still didn't give a reason for hiding what is claimed to be allergy meds in a book. Why did he do that? Why not just ship it like a normal person would?

Read the response.

He was worried that the meds would not make it through customs. He also was consulting with Ian Stewart to find a doctor who could prescribe in Germany. No international laws were broken, but it woud not be out of the realm of possibility for the customs office to hold the package for inspection if it looks and feels like a pill bottle.

Could he have shipped heroin to Rupp using the same method? Yes. But he sent Nasacort.

Talk about misdirection wrote:

Link wrote:

You missed my point entirely. That being that the letter from Brown to Salazar does not contradict anything that Kara said. Kara didn't say it was Brown.

Yeah, I got that. But you also said, "(a guy in Houston is her endocronolgist?!??)." Your phrasing suggests that you find it unbelievable that Goucher would to go to Brown. I find this baffling, given Brown's role in the "many elite athletes need a thyroid tune-up because heavy training induces sub-clinical hypothyroidism" controversy.

I'm with you on the basic point. When I read Goucher's statement, I wondered if she was seeing another endocrine doc besides Brown. I was simply pointing out that your incredulity over the claim that she was going to Brown seem overblown.

Fair enough.

I read Alberto's entire response along with the attached articles and emails and believe that serves as a very compelling argument to refute the allegations against Galen, him, and the Oregon Project.

One of the hardest things I was having trouble with was believing in the Oregon Project's innocence when there were more and more former athletes/trainers, etc. speaking against the Oregon Project. After reading Alberto's response my concerns are diminished. Very few people have brought forth evidence that is concrete, and if they have brought forth "so called" concrete evidence it has been refuted in Alberto's response.

You are correct in a sense when saying that the interviews and blog posts from Magness and Goucher do not provide a "smoking gun" answer, but it seems you fail to acknowledge their place in this situation. They are somewhat circumstantial but they do provide evidence to Alberto's argument. I thought Goucher's emails were very illuminating in fact. Same with Magness' interview, it is odd that Magness spoke so highly of the program and highlighted the very essence of the Oregon Project numerous times in the interview and then now is in a position that is extremely contrary to that of the interview provided.

Overall, I am keeping an open mind in this investigation and have been following it very closely, but Alberto's response is very convincing. I still have concerns about the number of athletes and such that have spoke against the Oregon Project but these are somewhat dispelled in my mind as they often provide little to no evidence that is anything but circumstantial.

Wow! Really! wrote:

and you don't think he can get as much Androgel from a different source as he would need ?

Salazar obtains a lot of things by using stealth means. You will never find the records because they either erased long ago, or epic house cleaning occurred that need Farah to fly over from Europe to get the cleaning done.

As far as I'm concerned, AlSal showed his true colors when he pushed USATF to find "enhanced footage" to DQ Grunewald in the Women's 3k and then taking a few swings at Jerry Schumacher over Ryan Hill in the men's 3k, (for which Bumbalough was DQ'd amazingly). So sad that "guilty until proven innocent" is the law of the land as far as doping cases go in this day and age, but really hard to believe anything he says at this point.

Salazar also never mentions Mo Farah's missed drug test and never explains how Rupp received his weekly allergy injections-- if Salazar himself did it, if it was under the care of a doctor, etc.

By the way, this just as much an indictment of USATF and IAAF as anything else, just as the cycling scandals were an indictment of UCI. They allowed an incredibly well-known coach of elite athletes to travel with a banned substance. I have no idea how that happens.

barry mccockiner wrote:

He still didn't give a reason for hiding what is claimed to be allergy meds in a book. Why did he do that? Why not just ship it like a normal person would?

He most certainly did and referenced it in emails to Galen and Ian Stewart. Read the emails and his statement.

row row rowbury your boat wrote:

some dude wrote:

In track and field, cycling and swimming, I feel there is no gray area in terms of what's fair and ethical. It's black or white; you're a druggie or you're not. It's as simple as that. Some people are in a dark gray area. Say 50 is the threshold for illegality: They're going to do everything in their means to be at 49.999. They're always trying to find something new to give their athletes an edge. They called it innovation; I called it cheating

This is why Vern Gambetta lasted 6 months in the NOP, wright?

Iron supplement: cheating or not?

WTF does that have to do with anyting? Of course not.

Anybody who felt the BBC/Epstein story was a slam dunk is now confused and disappointed. This is a point by point rebuttal. There's certainly room for continuing rumor and innuendo in between the lines of Salazar's manifesto, but I doubt that the "revelations" we've heard thus far will lead to sanctions by USADA or any track and field governing body.

Also. The comments about Magness are devastating. I'm waiting for his defenders to appear (we'll see if there are any).

AttyForAlSal wrote:

If an attorney wrote like this, he would be out of a job.

It looks like Salazar's own words from beginning to end, handed over to a "copy editor" located on the Portland Craigslist but based in Mumbai and working on he extreme cheap for obvious reasons. I realize that Alberto's job isn't to impress anyone with his writing skills, but it wouldn't have taken a competent person more than ten or fifteen minutes to make the thing look at least remotely professional.

At least this answers one question, though -- he's clearly been reading this message board.

The Gatlin justification for testing Androgel on his kid is laughable, but everyone is giving him a pass for admitting to cutting out pages of a book to mail meds overseas. Where AlSal couldn't call someone a liar, he cops with lame excuses and "evidence".

No mea culpa required from Pro Publica or LRC, selective and heavily redacted evidence in large quantity does not make a slam dunk defense.

On the bottles for Alpha Male and Tribex it actually says to not take if you are 18 years old or younger, female, or on any anti-depressants or asthma medications.