Mr. Mike the American wrote:
As Americans, we have only recently taken the low road in sports.
I guess you missed the 1969 issue of Track and Field News calling steroids "The Breakfast of Champions."
Or the 1983 PanAm games, when 13 US athletes left after finding out about newer, more reliable drug tests.
Or the testing of American athletes in the spring of 1984, designed to give dopers a heads-up so they wouldn't glow at the LA Games.
Or...
Harold Connolly from the 1960s. Hammer Thrower. Set the WR in 1956. Olympic Gold medalist in 1956 (Sydney Games). Broke his own WR 6 times. Held the WR for almost 10 straight years. Self-admitted as a anabolic steroid user.
An Athlete With No Illusions About Steroids
In 1991, during a relaxed and lubricated private dinner, I [the author of the NY Times article link in the above post] said to Harold Connolly, winner of the 1956 Olympic hammer throw and a perennial world and United States champion: “It’s all timing. If you’d been born later, taken steroids, you could have won a few more gold medals.â€
He looked at me incredulously. “You kidding? I was using after 1960. We all were.â€
Your excess verbiage is infelicitous. Try being concise.
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Truth behold wrote:Nice side step my friend, we are not here to discuss my remedial english skills, lets focus on the issues at hand. Fact based discussion vs emotional responses. You don't have the slightest idea if the FBI is or not investigating,totally unsubstantiated.
You suggest substantiated details by accusers specific to this case of illegal PED's being used, to your point nothing proven or shown to be illegal to date. Yes ,zero my friend.
Can you please inform us about how much time and effort the USADA is spending on this case, again non public information only expanded on by the British press looking for headlines. You clearly have insider information here please expand factually. Not what you think or have read.
Can you please just say, my knowledge is what I read.Im basing all my posts on my personal theory where there is smoke there is fire.
Your infelicitous grammar is relevant because it makes it difficult to understand exactly what you are trying to say.
But it's clear that you are nothing but a bullshitter trying to hand-wave away mountains of circumstantial evidence. You employ clumsy and trite rhetorical tricks, such as the unjustified use of plural pronouns ("please inform us..." and the accusation that I am motivated by emotions rather than facts.
Sure, I don't have film of Salazar giving banned PEDs to his athletes. You've "got" me there.
What is an undeniable fact -- and I am repeating this only for the benefit of people daft enough to be snookered by your clumsily constructed rhetoric, as I know that you yourself know better -- is that an enormous number of pieces of circumstantial evidence signify the likelihood, nay, certainty, of Salazar's and Rupp's and Farah's guilt.
Would I send them to prison based on what I know or believe? Of course not. Alberto is a slimy douchebag and always has been, but so are plenty of other athletes and coaches and that alone doesn't make them guilty of actual crimes.
But ask yourself again, how often do cases involving just the set of variables now in play for the NOP end well for the people being investigated?
The answer is "they don't." Ever.
So, in a year or less, when the shit really REALLY hits the fan and even the most ardent NOP supporters can no longer deny malfeasance, you'll have to sing a different tune. I am guessing you'll go with "They were just doing what others have always done and are no guiltier than anyone else," a time-honored burst of high-octane lameness favored by scum-apologists the world over.
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Your infelicitous grammar is relevant because it makes it difficult to understand exactly what you are trying to say. .
I cite:
Engs Revising Sentences: The Infelicous, the Ungrammatil, and the Plain Incomprehensible Rver the following sentences. Some of them are just awkward or wordy and cld stand to be rewritten for the sake of clarity and gre; some of them ctain eors, egregious or subtle, of syntax, punctuation, and/or spelli; and some of them mnt something to somebody , though only the author w kws for sure what it was. Diagnose a, where possible, suest rewrites. 1. At the moment of being given this informa, whether to roll this deer into the canyon or t bomes a moral dilemma. 2. The rhyme scheme is simple; three stanzas of rhymed couplets in quatrains. 3. These two characters who suffer from simar mental ailments, crte the minant conflict of the work thrgh their inner conflicts. 4. The play ens with the ironic ne of Dr. Rose; “Stl with m. 5. The em is not told bJennifer herself but by who I presume to be her ni, at the precipice of maturyeciding what she desires from a partnership based on what she has seen. 6. Amy goes almost immediately om a state of nervs collapse to a fully cognizant person pable of physil aco 7. She t her daughter to work as a typist at a corn-ftor’s offi, not buse her wages wld lto mic indepeence, but perhaps a chance to mt a rich businema 8. James Joy’s “The Boarding Hse” is fled with so many ambigues that it is ssible to interpret the text and the characters whin from several unique perspecves. 9. Rich's subtle word choices in the first and last stanzas clearly suprt the idea that the gers are a manifestation of At Jennifers. 10. This lk of comprehension of the other character sets up the scene for even more dramac conflict. 11. The em ªAt Jennifer's Tigersº is about a trapped maiage and a sense of freem. 12. We also know that this female [in ªTo A Lady I Kwº] must be at least of an age to have at e time made comments which the narrator felt were necessary to make a retort. 13. This use of repeon exprees the ets demand of attenon to the wor 14. ewe will just see w high and lofty you are cyr dd,º protres from the speaker's tone. 15. When rding of John Agard's poem, ªListen Mr. Oxford Don,º the most striking fture seems to be the syntax and grammar of the speaker. 16. More often than not, immigrants are viewed by the establishment as of inferior intelligence due to the language and coitiarriers, which in turn crte conflict and animosity towards cultural values and prtices and the sovereignty of cultural freem and individual frdom.
Download this pdf
Engs Revising Sentences: The Infelicous, the Ungrammatil, and the Pla PDF document - DocSlides
Click below link (As may be) to download this pdf.
Download Note - The PPT/PDF document "Engs Revising Sentences: The Infelicous..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agrement
Sorta pregnant wrote:
Retired Rupp wrote:I expect Rupp will retire if the hammer comes down. I always thought Salazar was grooming him to take over NOP. Not sure what Rupp would do if coaching NOP was not possible because it would likely be disbanded.
If Nike drops NOP, they will drop Bowerman TC as well. CLEAN HOUSE. Jerry has been a finger pointer for years but if you think he doesn't utilize the same lab at Nike headquarters you are nuts. Besides Nike will not be happy when they find out everything that Jerry has shared with the investigation.
Yeah it seems a stretch that they don't have access to the same lab.
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:
Sorta pregnant wrote:If Nike drops NOP, they will drop Bowerman TC as well. CLEAN HOUSE. Jerry has been a finger pointer for years but if you think he doesn't utilize the same lab at Nike headquarters you are nuts. Besides Nike will not be happy when they find out everything that Jerry has shared with the investigation.
Yeah it seems a stretch that they don't have access to the same lab.
Jerry's guys just use vitamins. You know, the stuff Salazar lied and said his guys stick to.
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Truth behold wrote:You must be in the know beyond all others with a given a hard held fact documented that I would assume you have submitted to the investigating powers to be to prove your absolute truth of knowledge. We we would like to see it please.
Remove your emotions and base this on facts vs " I think" or " I feel" or " I heard"or " I know" or use the term no way these people can run this fast as I know a lot about running. Sorry that doesn't hold water in court.
If you personally can provide hard evidence that is 100% black and white ,meaning this illegal drug PED was used and can show documented evidence that is prosecutable in a court of law I will pay you $500 or donate to your charity of choice.
If you really have an extra $500 sitting around, I strongly suggest that you invest it in remedial English lessons. Good Lord, son.
But even if you could write up a Shakesperian storm, you'd still be a fool because you're among the countless mental inadequates who cannot see the world in realistic terms. You honestly cannot or will not acknowledge that de facto knowledge can in fact exist outside the ream of 100% verified established documented photographed time-stamped absolute proven truthy PROOF. You may be among those who doesn't believe that evidence for biological evolution exists because no one has a film of a fish turning into a kitten or something.
I'll put it this way for you: How many times in the history of sports (or anything) do you think something has reached this scale -- almost countless accusers with very specific allegations, many details of which are already substantiated -- and turned out to be benign, with the accused person(s) absolved of serious wrongdoing?
The answer is zero, my friend.
The FBI getting involved is all the evidence you or anyone should need. They would not be wasting their time if they didn't have good reason to investigate. USADA has obviously been spending a lot of time and resources on this. If you want to regard this as mere noise and not something worth treating as de facto evidence, that's your choice and obviously it's no skin off anyone's buttocks.
I'm in no way a backer of denigration; but that's some excellent writing, boyo.
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Truth behold wrote:The interesting thing at this point when you look at the hard facts no one, not a single person in the group has been busted for anything
Another interesting fact is that only people with a legitimate mental disorder can believe Salazar hasn't broken any serious rules, that Galen Rupp ran 26:44 because Salazar is a genius and Rupp is just that much better than Virgin, Nenow et al. from earlier eras, and that people like Rowbury who show up after plateauing at the world-class level for years drop significant amounts of time thanks to legal methods alone. And on and on and on.
All of the smoke must just be smoldering resentment from AlSal's detractors and not an indicator of a massive conflagration, right?
No one has seen Trump's tax returns, so we can assume based on his upstanding personality in other areas that he has nothing to hide and is just a private person, right? "Interesting"!
Rupp is that much better than virgin.
Once was fast wrote:
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:If you really have an extra $500 sitting around, I strongly suggest that you invest it in remedial English lessons. Good Lord, son.
But even if you could write up a Shakesperian storm, you'd still be a fool because you're among the countless mental inadequates who cannot see the world in realistic terms. You honestly cannot or will not acknowledge that de facto knowledge can in fact exist outside the ream of 100% verified established documented photographed time-stamped absolute proven truthy PROOF. You may be among those who doesn't believe that evidence for biological evolution exists because no one has a film of a fish turning into a kitten or something.
I'll put it this way for you: How many times in the history of sports (or anything) do you think something has reached this scale -- almost countless accusers with very specific allegations, many details of which are already substantiated -- and turned out to be benign, with the accused person(s) absolved of serious wrongdoing?
The answer is zero, my friend.
The FBI getting involved is all the evidence you or anyone should need. They would not be wasting their time if they didn't have good reason to investigate. USADA has obviously been spending a lot of time and resources on this. If you want to regard this as mere noise and not something worth treating as de facto evidence, that's your choice and obviously it's no skin off anyone's buttocks.
I'm in no way a backer of denigration; but that's some excellent writing, boyo.
To each his own, I guess.
I find such pontificators dogmatic and boring
Harold Connolly 1960s wrote:
Harold Connolly from the 1960s. Hammer Thrower. Set the WR in 1956. Olympic Gold medalist in 1956 (Sydney Games). Broke his own WR 6 times. Held the WR for almost 10 straight years. Self-admitted as a anabolic steroid user.
Thanks for posting the link to that article. It's a forgotten classic.
Life is so much simpler when it's all about the East Germans.
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Truth behold wrote:Nice side step my friend, we are not here to discuss my remedial english skills, lets focus on the issues at hand. Fact based discussion vs emotional responses. You don't have the slightest idea if the FBI is or not investigating,totally unsubstantiated.
You suggest substantiated details by accusers specific to this case of illegal PED's being used, to your point nothing proven or shown to be illegal to date. Yes ,zero my friend.
Can you please inform us about how much time and effort the USADA is spending on this case, again non public information only expanded on by the British press looking for headlines. You clearly have insider information here please expand factually. Not what you think or have read.
Can you please just say, my knowledge is what I read.Im basing all my posts on my personal theory where there is smoke there is fire.
Your infelicitous grammar is relevant because it makes it difficult to understand exactly what you are trying to say.
But it's clear that you are nothing but a bullshitter trying to hand-wave away mountains of circumstantial evidence. You employ clumsy and trite rhetorical tricks, such as the unjustified use of plural pronouns ("please inform us..." and the accusation that I am motivated by emotions rather than facts.
Sure, I don't have film of Salazar giving banned PEDs to his athletes. You've "got" me there.
What is an undeniable fact -- and I am repeating this only for the benefit of people daft enough to be snookered by your clumsily constructed rhetoric, as I know that you yourself know better -- is that an enormous number of pieces of circumstantial evidence signify the likelihood, nay, certainty, of Salazar's and Rupp's and Farah's guilt.
Would I send them to prison based on what I know or believe? Of course not. Alberto is a slimy douchebag and always has been, but so are plenty of other athletes and coaches and that alone doesn't make them guilty of actual crimes.
But ask yourself again, how often do cases involving just the set of variables now in play for the NOP end well for the people being investigated?
The answer is "they don't." Ever.
So, in a year or less, when the shit really REALLY hits the fan and even the most ardent NOP supporters can no longer deny malfeasance, you'll have to sing a different tune. I am guessing you'll go with "They were just doing what others have always done and are no guiltier than anyone else," a time-honored burst of high-octane lameness favored by scum-apologists the world over.
A self proclaimed grammar expert thats a frustrated teacher trying to disassociate himself from the facts with an abusive cloud of rhetoric,sad.
Circumstantial evidence in a court of law means nothing, yes nothing.
Its rhetoric, verbal vomit that is constructed by assumption vs credible actual hard black and white facts.
You clearly do not know Mr. Salazar nor the athletes involved but have formed an opinion I assume on hatred of something you cannot control. It sounds like you don't trust anyone in the sport, sad. Yes that shows through with your frustration in my grammar. Lack of trust, paranoia over grammar, extreme hatred for things that don't fit in your box of thoughts. Ill give up my grammar lesson dollars to get you some help.
When the dust clears and the goose chase ends I cannot wait to see how you will frame it.
Nike must have paid them off. The USDA phone was tapped by the NOP that helped them hide the evidence. The FBI could not find the rest of the emails.
"touché"
Harriet Beecher Tubman wrote:
Shakespearean Storm wrote:Shakespearean.
Shame on you.
Touchay. Good catch.