Are you disappointed in Salazar and the ethics of US running?

All-Sports wrote:

Very British of you, chap. Did you crack one off while typing that?

Did you learn that at the troll school for perverts?

Wolf Spritzer wrote:

I always liked Rudy Chapa better, and was kind of disappointed at the beginning when AlSal won NCAA XC in 1978 and then NYC in 1980. Went wow when he got thumped in Rotterdam, and jumped up and down cheered when the relatively unknown/unhearalded Pete Pfitzinger outkicked him in the USOT trials in 1984.

That said, yes disappointed in the allegations although not terribly surprised--the stuff has been just under the surface for over a decade. And when you think about the Mary Slaney case, he skated passed that rather sleazazarly didn't he?

Loathed what he did at US indoors in 2014.

Ethics of the sport in the US. Not great when the boundaries of the gray area are pushed to the fullest extent. And beyond.

You really don't know Chapa, ha!

Now a Coach wrote:

Ethics haven't changed. Most of the USS 1984 and 1988 Olympic squads were doping.

We need a Truth Commission for former athletes.

More than we need out of season testing in Ethiopia and Kenya?

Let's get that done first.

Really Chapa? wrote:

Wolf Spritzer wrote:

I always liked Rudy Chapa better, and was kind of disappointed at the beginning when AlSal won NCAA XC in 1978 and then NYC in 1980. Went wow when he got thumped in Rotterdam, and jumped up and down cheered when the relatively unknown/unhearalded Pete Pfitzinger outkicked him in the USOT trials in 1984.

That said, yes disappointed in the allegations although not terribly surprised--the stuff has been just under the surface for over a decade. And when you think about the Mary Slaney case, he skated passed that rather sleazazarly didn't he?

Loathed what he did at US indoors in 2014.

Ethics of the sport in the US. Not great when the boundaries of the gray area are pushed to the fullest extent. And beyond.

You really don't know Chapa, ha!

That's true: just the image from decades ago, and some articles from back then.

I do know some Eugene insiders from back in the day and had discussion not long ago. The info, moreso than less, corroborates the AW scene that has been discussed here over the past few years.

That's really funny wrote:

All-Sports wrote:

Very British of you, chap. Did you crack one off while typing that?

Did you learn that at the troll school for perverts?

It was put there to illicit a response from a Brit. Tally Ho, Brit.

Outed yourself wrote:

That's really funny wrote:

Did you learn that at the troll school for perverts?

It was put there to illicit a response from a Brit. Tally Ho, Brit.

But thanks for outing yourself as a pervert.

Sadly, I view todays Track&Field as a PEDS OPTIONAL sport.

I remember years ago dating a girl who was the bookkeeper for a supermarket. They had a $2 tolerance for cash register shortages. She told me one cashier was always 2 bucks short and suspected the cashier was stealing two bucks a day- this was when cashiers got a buck an hour-. I must admit I found that ingenious not insulting-- or at least my teenage self did (and when it was not my cash).

Not so with drug use today. The spirit of the rules is not to dope up and not 'you can dope up to a certain point'. The thresholds are purposely set high so even those that are naturally extreme outliers pass. Taking advantage of that is breaking the spirit of the rules.

I'm willing to give mechanical assists like altitude tents a pass because they mimic 'train high race low' that you can do with your frequent flyer mileage but chemical intervention especially with a prescription drug smacks of that 'quack like a duck' saying.

__________________

"Sadly, I view todays Track&Field as a PEDS OPTIONAL sport."

More concerning, I suspect the possibility of it being PED OPTIONAL, but WITH CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS, depending on who the athlete (be it country or sponsor) is competing for, as a result of the absolute power afforded the sponsors (one in particular) in shift-shaping the production presented to the viewing public. So it is not just about provide a marketable performance to the general TV consuming public (as discussed in this post:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6595892

), but it also becomes an issue of what percentages of marketing and control are provided to the various sponsors.

But admittedly, it is my concern for ASICS sponsored Ryan Hall that leads me to suspect he has been "leaned on".