Salazar Responds to USADA

Rupp and Mo need to give back those olympic medals..

}|{ wrote:

USADA is not a government agency and it doesn't license doctors. Why would Dr. Brown care what USADA "charged" him with? He's not an athlete and his athlete patients are probably just a small part of his practice.

By banning him from WADA-sanctioned sports. Meaning, if an athlete goes to see him while participating in a WADA-sanctioned sport, they could be sanctioned.

Given this is Nike, USATF, IAAF the only losers in this are the athletes. I predict no sanctions for Salazar.

Bullet_Proof wrote:

rojo wrote:

I haven't read this thread jus the first post. But this is real simple.

Let's see the evidence. How do you raise your levels that quickly without taking more than 50 ml?

The burden is on YOU to prove they cheated, buddy.

You want to make claims that they CHEATED? And you've got no smoking gun evidence?..

The burden of proof is on rojo? No wonder no one ever gets sanctioned.

I think rojo's point is that since Alberto specifically stated that USADA should review data that he has that would exonerate him, he should by all means still share it. He hasn't even been suspended yet!

}|{ wrote:

USADA is not a government agency and it doesn't license doctors. Why would Dr. Brown care what USADA "charged" him with? He's not an athlete and his athlete patients are probably just a small part of his practice.

Ahem, you have no clue about how enamored Brown is with helping athletes win at all costs. He loves showing the special plaques he gets from them.

Dr Browncare wrote:Ahem, you have no clue about how enamored Brown is with helping athletes win at all costs. He loves showing the special plaques he gets from them.

That's nice and I'm sure he likes being able to talk about patients who are minor celebrities, but I doubt a USADA ban would actually have any significant effect on his medical practice.

SalazarResponds! wrote:

"As I have noted repeatedly, the successes my athletes have achieved are through hard work and dedication. I believe in a clean sport and a methodical, dedicated, approach to training.

"I've done more than any coach to continuously disprove false allegations where no violation has occurred. I fully cooperated, voluntarily answered USADA's questions under oath and provided thousands of documents.

"Lastly, the Oregon Project and its athletes have nothing to hide and are hiding nothing. I fully support their exercising of their rights under the WADA Code and IAAF rules to protect themselves from these improper intrusions. I find it particularly disturbing that athletes' personal medical records are being aired publicly. There is no excuse for it. USADA has failed these innocent athletes."

Lance said the same thing.

Last Lee wrote:

SalazarResponds! wrote:http://www.oregonlive.com/trackandfield/index.ssf/2017/05/nike_oregon_project_coach_albe.html

"Lastly, the Oregon Project and its athletes .. "

Hmmm, the Nike part of the name is missing. Interesting.

Good catch Last Lee. It's the first time I've seen the Nike part of NOP removed. That is suspicious for sure.

Dr Browncare wrote:

}|{ wrote:

USADA is not a government agency and it doesn't license doctors. Why would Dr. Brown care what USADA "charged" him with? He's not an athlete and his athlete patients are probably just a small part of his practice.

Ahem, you have no clue about how enamored Brown is with helping athletes win at all costs. He loves showing the special plaques he gets from them.

https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/PJ-BN601_SP_THY_G_20130409190122.jpg

Dude is straight out of the Simpson's.

Ironic since I'm Alberto's manifesto he had no problem publishing emails that contained Goucher's medical stuff. This guy is a POS. Current NOPers should leave.

Goucher was not mentioned by Dr Brown and Salazar. They used the all encompassing "that/the athlete." A blank check from Dr Brown to Salazar.

Two faced wrote:

Ironic since I'm Alberto's manifesto he had no problem publishing emails that contained Goucher's medical stuff. This guy is a POS. Current NOPers should leave.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Stack the evidence wrote:

Thank you for posting.

This would have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Given what we have seen in released docs its all purely assumptive.

The standard for a doping arbitration is "Comfortable Satisfaction" not "Beyond a reaonsable doubt"

A sanction would be challenged and end being tried in a court of law with several levels of litigation to be tested.

Comfortable Satisfaction will loose its value.

Their Twitter handle is just OP. Was it ever Nike OP? https://mobile.twitter.com/oregonpjt?lang=en

Stack the evidence wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

The standard for a doping arbitration is "Comfortable Satisfaction" not "Beyond a reaonsable doubt"

A sanction would be challenged and end being tried in a court of law with several levels of litigation to be tested.

Comfortable Satisfaction will loose its value.

"loose its value"???

Your spelling is exactly like rojo-wejo.

Try posting to yourself with proper spelling.

For example:

The standard for a doping arbitration is "Comfortable Satisfaction" not "Beyond a reaonsable doubt"

Read more:

Buy your shoes from LetsRun and save 20% everday

"reaonasable doubt"??? from Mr. Obvious.

= rojo-wejo has a spelling problem

Stack the evidence wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

The standard for a doping arbitration is "Comfortable Satisfaction" not "Beyond a reaonsable doubt"

A sanction would be challenged and end being tried in a court of law with several levels of litigation to be tested.

Comfortable Satisfaction will loose its value.

No it wouldn't. It is appealable through CAS. U.S. courts are not going to get involved. It's been tried before.

}|{ wrote:

What would Ritz sue Dr. Brown for? Is there really any evidence of medical malpractice that caused harm to Ritz? I didn't see any in the report. Maybe if he came down with cancer and could prove it was linked to calcitonin but that hasn't happened.

Did Nike do anything that harmed Ritz? I didn't see anything in the report. Maybe if Ritz was retroactively suspended by USADA and got sued for recovery of appearance fees? That hasn't happened either.

If Ritz gets a doping offense he sues Dr. Brown for doping him (violating doping rules) when he specifically said he wanted to do only things that were legal by USADA. He sues him for damages to his permanent reputation and being branded as a cheat when he said he wanted to follow the rules. He sues for future loss of income due to his tarnished reputation.

He also sues Dr. Brown for falsifying his medical records when he handed them to WADA.

He sues Alberto and Nike for essentially the same things and throws in the fact he felt forced to do risky medical procedures because of his job. Not sure you can do anything with evidence after the fact but then he also cites how after evidence came out that Alberto Salazar was violating prescription drug laws, to the best of my knowledge, Nike let him continue in his role, which to me shows they don't have a problem with his past behavior.

An Olympian suing saying he was branded a doper against his will and that "Nike" (Alberto) put his health at risk I assume a suit like that would be quickly settled. What does Nike have to gain by fighting that?

The win at all costs attitude by Nike will only stop when it affects the bottom line and I think a lawsuit like that might affect it. Ritz would have to get someone to take it on a contingency basis. There are a lot of ifs here as we're assuming also Ritz gets charged for violating anti-doping rules against his will.

I just think it's not that crazy an idea that Alberto is putting Nike at some risk here. I think any other employee with what he has done would be terminated from their job. Maybe technically he's a contractor or something but I'm not sure how well that holds up as he's got an office at Nike HQ. Is there a building named after him too?

At some point Nike needs to give a sh**. A great company overall but they bring up the rear when it comes for advocating for clean sport.

They could start by saying Alberto Salazar will have nothing to do with the the supplements or medical procedures of his athletes.

Anyone see Centro Sr is stepping down from coaching at AU and will take more of a presence coaching his son?

wejo wrote:

If Ritz gets a doping offense he sues Dr. Brown for doping him ...

He also sues Dr. Brown for falsifying his medical records ...

He sues Alberto and Nike ...

Anyone see Centro Sr is stepping down from coaching at AU and will take more of a presence coaching his son?

http://www.aueagles.com/sports/c-track/2016-17/releases/20170519idk6me

The people Ritz would sue would likely have to be through Civil Court. There a a lot of attorneys would love to dig deep into Nike's pocket books.

Re: Centro Sr -- Yes, that was a thread on LRC a week or so ago. Centro Sr must smell blood in the water. Also, he must think that Jr can do okay on his own far away from Salazar. Centro Sr has been doing a lot of coaching for Jr anyways. Leaving Salazar won't be enough to save Centro Jr. It will likely get a suspension which could be reduced if he signs to the USADA. Keep your eyes out for signing Centro Jr.

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

Bullet_Proof wrote:

The burden is on YOU to prove they cheated, buddy.

You want to make claims that they CHEATED? And you've got no smoking gun evidence?..

The burden of proof is on rojo? No wonder no one ever gets sanctioned.

I think rojo's point is that since Alberto specifically stated that USADA should review data that he has that would exonerate him, he should by all means still share it. He hasn't even been suspended yet!

Yes, since all of you are into rules, I'm creating a new rule: whoever makes a slanderous allegation is obligated to back it up with hard evidence. Especially The brojos.

Regular Poster wrote:

My first thought was that this sounds just like Lance firing back for all those years. Nobody who lashes out that vehemently could possibly be guilty, right?

So, so, true.