Should LRC Come up With Its Own Record Books That Removes Marks From Drug Cheats Before they Were Convicted?

Test Question:

If it turns out that Paula doped in 03 do we also strike all of her previous times and medals?

But, yes. I believe in lifetime bans, retroactive disqualifications and in aggressive attempts to recoup money. Heck, I believe that prize money should be placed in escrow and distributed only some years after when stored samples are re-tested.

Put all of those things in place and... well, we'd probably still have dopers, but, I'd bet, not nearly as many. Right now doctors and agents get paid right away and, only rarely, suffer any consequences for helping their athletes dope.

The only legit records I can confirm are my personal PRs.

LetsRun.com wrote:

Slaney and Jacobs both got major drug bans. Should we at LRC strike them from our own internal record books?

Where do you draw the line between "major" and "minor" drug bans? And what if any implications will that have for your record keeping.

Link wrote:

But, yes. I believe in lifetime bans, retroactive disqualifications and in aggressive attempts to recoup money. Heck, I believe that prize money should be placed in escrow and distributed only some years after when stored samples are re-tested.

Yes.

yes.

hell yes, but the drug bans have to be confirmed for real, ie: almost everyone thinks Paula cheated, but it has to be proven first. Same for that Chinese 10k womens wr holder.

Jail time is the only deterrent.

Leave it to the nerdy guys with green eyeshades.

Just for starters what about Emma Coburn's fast (but no AR) 3000SC? It's a drug-test related non-ratification of the record without disqualifying the athlete. And it's beginning to look like that might have been Emma's best shot at the (American) record. So who in your opinion sits on the LRC list as the record holder? Simpson or Coburn?

No way. LRC shouldn't create its own arbitrary standards about what races are record-worthy and which aren't. That's asking for a world of confusion, especially if other international agencies do things differently. I think it's totally reasonable to place an asterisk next to their names, but to remove them from the books entirely is a whole different story.

All the records are either proven dirty like Koch or presumed dirty like Flojo. You should remove ALL records from the books and start over.

And in the future anyone who sets a record should be banned for obvious doping.