So it is pretty obvious that Waldemar Cierpinski was doping in the 70s and there is concrete proof based on East German Sports Federation documents uncovered after Communism fell. Why do you suppose Frank Shorter hasnt been awarded the gold medal as other athletes have been awarded after the fact when doping has come to light?
Discus
It was a different era, where men didn't throw hissy fits when they lost a race.
Shorter was the second man across the line, so he gets the silver medal. Why does it ever have to be more complicated than that?
Citius. Altius. Fortius.
That's it.
On the other hand wrote:
It was a different era, where men didn't throw hissy fits when they lost a race.
Shorter was the second man across the line, so he gets the silver medal. Why does it ever have to be more complicated than that?
Citius. Altius. Fortius.
That's it.
Ah, but Shorter DID have a "hissy fit" when the evidence about Cierpinski finally came out. Fourth place finisher Don Kardong wasn't happy either.
We pretend Lance Armstrong didn't win 7 Tours and an Olympic bronze medal when many other dopers keep theirs. You don't see the second place finishers claiming those Tour titles, but that's because they were all dopers too.
It is most certainly NOT a different era. It's been the same era since 1968, when we pretend all winners are clean until they're caught and then cry bloody murder.
I always figured first, the IAAF just didn't want to dredge up all the old problems with the East Germans which would mean a ton of results would have to be changed. And second, they didn't have any independent testing evidence to make the charges stick in a court of law which is where it would have landed. Documentation evidence plus testimony for some reason isn't seen as enough.
Frank being a lawyer must have written or been interviewed about this? Does anyone know a link?
run with the wom wrote:
I always figured first, the IAAF just didn't want to dredge up all the old problems with the East Germans which would mean a ton of results would have to be changed. And second, they didn't have any independent testing evidence to make the charges stick in a court of law which is where it would have landed. Documentation evidence plus testimony for some reason isn't seen as enough.
Frank being a lawyer must have written or been interviewed about this? Does anyone know a link?
Here is an interesting article on the IOC's (absense of) response to the revelations on the prevalence of the East German doping program:
http://www.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=joyce%2F080822Here are some excerpts from the article with Shorter's comment
When the documents first came to light in 1998, then-International Olympic Committee president Juan Antonio Samaranch declared that there would be "no rewriting history." The results from the 1976 Summer Olympics look like a dead issue now...
What Cierpinski thinks about the race in 1976 and State Plan 14:25 is still a mystery. He has declined all interview requests over the years. "If I were his lawyer, I'd give him the same advice," Shorter said. "Say nothing."
Cierpinski's name is still in the record book. So are the names of a bunch of the GDR's Olympic champions whose names show up beside numbers in Stasi documents.
As it stands now, the IOC has a statute of limitations on its chase of drug cheaters: eight years. Montreal is 32 years ago and counting...
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts