Goucher releases statement: Further evidence will only be shared with USADA.

Alright.... wrote:

Let's assume there really is more evidence. She was talking a big game about sharing it before, right? So why the change?

Ummmm, sharing means with the USADA. Sharing does not mean with YOU.

Learn to think, fool!

Am I right? Well? Am I? wrote:

This is the perfect exit strategy for Kara. Taking this position allows her to walk away from the Nike shitshow without any further repercussions.

This is not a Nike sh!tshow. This is an Oregon Project sh!tshow. Alberto owns the Oregon Project, not Nike. Got it?

Kara keeps trying to make it seem like there's more evidence than there actually is

NOP is going to make it out of this fine

Alright.... wrote:

This seems like an odd change in tactics, and honestly, at first glance, in my eyes, it lends credibility to AlSal. She was so eager to share before, but she didn't say a single new thing in that message; everything in there was already said weeks ago. I guess we'll just have to see how the presumably ongoing usada investigation pans out.

Exactly. She's the one that helped Epstein/ProPublica/BBC and is all of a sudden shutting her mouth.

It looks like Salazar's response really delivered the KO.

I'm sad and relieved. Sad because I've always looked up to the Gouchers, and this whole saga has tarnished that respect. Relieved because it looks like the NOP is likely clean after all. If insiders like the Gouchers and Magness don't have evidence, there's a high probability there is no evidence.

jewbacca wrote:

I'm sad and relieved. Sad because I've always looked up to the Gouchers, and this whole saga has tarnished that respect. Relieved because it looks like the NOP is likely clean after all. If insiders like the Gouchers and Magness don't have evidence, there's a high probability there is no evidence.

Yeah, I began to believe that all of NOP was clean when Salazar submitted proof that he tested testosterone on his sons to find out exactly how much could be taken without triggering a positive test. He said it was to avoid sabotage, and that really clinched my beliefs because historically no dirty athletes who have tested positive have ever claimed that they were sabotaged.

Alwrong.... wrote:

Alright.... wrote:

Let's assume there really is more evidence. She was talking a big game about sharing it before, right? So why the change?

Ummmm, sharing means with the USADA. Sharing does not mean with YOU.

Learn to think, fool!

She told the press she would "most definitely give all of her evidence in the coming days"- she did not. She can not remain credible by saying she has more evidence and then not provide it.

It's also clear that she was referring to providing evidence to the press and public, bcause 1) She was talking to them; and 2) She supposedly provided all of her evidence to USADA years ago and they did nothing.

I no longer believe or "like" this woman. She promised way more than she delivered- she promised "evidence in the coming days" and she actually delivered nothing at all. In my book she is a fraud.

I should compare some of the choice things being said about the Gouchers (particularly Kara) with things that were said about the Andreus (particularly Betsy). We could play the game, was THIS mean thing said about A or B?

Sometimes whistle blowers aren't perfectly polished or "ready for the big stage" like those they are accusing, who have teams of PR agents, lawyers, marketers, and who have so much to lose if the accusations are proven true. Sometimes the whistle blowers are very easy to toss under the bus, to label as nuts, or liars, or vindictive, or jealous, or has-beens looking for a last moment in which they matter.

I feel like I've watched this movie before and I know the conclusion. It's a really long movie though.

And Mike Rossi cheated.

asdfasfsdf wrote:Well so much for that. Seeing as USADA knew about all of these problems since 2011 and did exactly....NOTHING, I guess that's what we should expect in the future.

I am not sure the USADA did NOTHING. The USADA is designed around catching drug cheats through drug tests. Since 20111, Rupp has been one of the most tested track athletes. In 2013 & 2014, he was tested more than any other track athlete. In 2013, only one American athlete, the boxer Floyd Mayweather, was tested as often as Rupp.

(The USADA data base does not include tests done by any other testing agency, so it is likely that Rupp was tested even more often over the last few years since he ran overseas fairly often.)

So far, these tests have found no evidence that Rupp is doping. As we all know, this does not prove Rupp is clean. It could simply mean that he is following a sophisticated doping program designed to get around the existing testing regime.

It will be interesting to see if the USADA follows the lead of the cycling, and starts testing athletes at night out of competition. This sort of testing is designed to foil micro-dosing.

The USADA athlete test history data base is here:

I doubt Nike dropped Kara just for childbirth

If anything maybe cut her pay, but drop her altogether, not so sure about that, especially with Salazar (Nike's star coach) wanting to keep her

Montano was out all of 2014 then came back as US Indoor Champ in the 600m and US Outdoor Champ in the 800m already running 1:59 low

Fleshman and many other female runners weren't half bad in their comeback either

I'm not even sure if Kara left because of her suspicion, but hey, that's just my opinion

From what I was getting from the last Einstein article I think Adam was the main reason why the couple departed and it seems reasobale too

Kara/Salazar had a great relationship while Kara was there, Adam was always the problem

You are wrong! Got it? wrote:

This is not a Nike sh!tshow. This is an Oregon Project sh!tshow. Alberto owns the Oregon Project, not Nike. Got it?

Fair enough.

FWIW, I know that Alberto does not own Nike!

Don't-Get-It wrote:

"Out of respect to my fellow runners celebrating their USA meet and teammates racing overseas, I delayed talking about this subject a couple weeks so that more positivity could be focused on the amazing track performances in the US and abroad that deserve full attention."

When you read the rest of the statement, you realize how silly this supposedly altruistic person is. She is still delaying talking about the subject. Had she released this non-statement the day after AS, it would have made ZERO difference.

Out of respect to my fellow runners celebrating their US meet and teammates racing overseason, she delayed talking about it for weeks?

And we got on to Salazar for not releasing his statement for a couple weeks, let alone this statement compared to Salazar's gave us no information

She used her teammates celebration and international completions that she wasn't even a part of as an excuse, but Salazar coaching 12 world class athletes along w/ taking care of his family isn't an excuse?

What-EVER wrote:

2. Nike did not suspend her for being pregnant. This statement alone makes me think she is not an honest, but is a spiteful, person. In this day and age, and living in California, every company with over 5 employees would know this is completely illegal and creates huge (as in HUGE) liability. IMO This is simply not true. If it were true, Kara would be a millionaire now and not out social media-ing her middle aged women's clothing sponsor.

Athletes aren't employees of their sponsors. They are independent contractors, so not subject to the same labor laws.

Kara's interview at USA's was misleading as she came back with nothing more to say! I hope this attention gives her the satisfaction she was looking for.

If Kara Goucher was a man then she would be called a liar or worse by the public for the accusations she has made with zero evidence. It's not a coincidence that she slyly reminds us all that she is a mom every chance she gets. She is good at reaching for that easily manipulated female sympathy.

NOP Skeptic wrote:

Out of respect to my fellow runners celebrating their US meet and teammates racing overseason, she delayed talking about it for weeks?

And either someone should tell her that her "teammates" are still racing overseas, or she should let them know the European track season is over.

This. NOP Skeptic rightfully questions the double-standard. We should apply universal standards of accountability/evidence. Hell might freeze over, as LRC displays fairness and rationality.

My point wasn't that NIKE dropped her b/c of childbirth. I am also not sticking up for Kara, I used to be a fan, but have been turned off by her lack of good performances and ample self promotion over the last few years.

However, that being said, I do think there is a case to be made that perhaps female athletes that have children while still competing could use some more support. The point is that the amount of time having a child takes out of a running career is much more than another non running career. Thus, as female runners tend to peak fairly late and can extend competitive performances into their mid to late thirties in some cases, it forces women to choose between career and child. This is already a difficult choice, but contracts could generally make it easier by supporting female athletes compensation wise. (Not talking making as much as they would make normally, obviously, and I really have no idea what the status quo is, but this is an issue that has been voiced by multiple female runners, not just Kara or Lauren.)

Oh my. This is a bit sad, actually. She delayed releasing the kind of statement she just released because she thought that by doing so "more positivity" could be focused on performances by United States athletes. Really? This statement? Does she think that had she released this statement, or any other for that matter, that the "amazing performances" of US athletes might not have received their proper due, or perhaps even that these performances might have suffered as a result of an earlier release?

This, however, may be the most amazing remark of her statement: "What prevented me from coming forward in 2011 was fear of further retribution after already being suspended by Nike for giving birth to our son." If you take this literally, she is categorizing "being suspended for giving birth to our son" as "retribution". Retribution for what? Even if she were "suspended"--how would that involve retribution? But was she suspended? Suppose there were performance clauses in her contract. Suppose she was unable to meet them. Suppose she suffered financially as a result. All of this is perfectly possible: one would have to not what the typical Nike contract is like (or if there were any clauses KG or Nike insisted upon in this particular case). But none of this involves being "suspended". So I'd be interested to know exactly what she's talking about.

Also, it's worth remembering that in her interview following USAs she said that she was going to be working with "reputable" news agencies to share her story, presumably about why her husband and Salazar did not get along. She says that she doesn't want to share any evidence publicly, so "any new knowledge" will have to be shared with USADA alone. But what does that have to do with the AG AS business?

And to add the usual caveat, nothing that she says or doesn't say in and of itself exonerates the Nike Oregon Project of Salazar

Rojo--maybe you can weigh in on KG's statement.