Breaking: Shalane and Meb react to Galen Rupp's Chicago Win

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

⤴ dude I can't remember two nights ago (apparently I posted incoherently and argued with calculo???) So forget about 15 YEARS AGO, but Alberto in the past said that you can't be in the world's top 5 without being on EPO. Rupp has run the fastest 10,000m in the last 5/6 years.

Four years ago LetsRun wrote an article about the 1999 Salazar quote you mention. They asked Salazar about it given Farah and Rupp's 1-2 finish in the 2012 Olympic 10,000.

"Alberto pointed out that the anti-doping world had changed a lot in the thirteen years since 1999, and the testing was much better so clean athletes could compete in 2012. In 1999, USADA did not even exist. "

wonder whats in that Backpack

Man Overboard wrote:

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

But you know that's not what the lab report said, right?

But you know that Slazar told Magness to talk to Dr. Myhre about the discrepancy, but he never bothered, right? Magness didn't really believe that a 16 year old Rupp was taking testosterone. He seized upon the issue once he was canned from NOP and had an axe to grind..

But we know that testoboost has no effect on testosterone production, yet his chart shows his t levels rising steadily while he is taking what the lab recorded clearly as "testosterone."

My point is not that this is proof of doping. It is that you can't use his high school time as evidence of cleanliness when he had the same coach in high school and some of the most problematic evidence against him from that era, too.

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

But we know that testoboost has no effect on testosterone production, yet his chart shows his t levels rising steadily while he is taking what the lab recorded clearly as "testosterone."

The chart actually show hemoglobin levels rising.

No one is going to prove anything with an ambiguous chart from more than a decade ago.

Produce something meaningful, or find a cause that matters.

actually... wrote:

The chart actually show hemoglobin levels rising.

Looks like the chart covers 6 months and they were tracking the effect of sleeping in an altitude tent on hemoglobin. It went from 750 to 900. I suppose it shows that sleeping in a altitude tent can increase hemoglobin.

Really, this again? That lame excuse was debunked right at the start of this: all runners have to follow the anti-doping rules, no matter how fast or whether or not they are on the USADA watch list. Yes, he was competing, and even placing in small races.

Indeed. And not just with Magness, but also among others with Ritz and Rupp and Tara, who later admitted having lied about it.

Why do you not believe what USADA believes?

Oh come on. Breakdown in communication? That rule is explicitly written in the WADA statutes. No wonder Tara lied about it.

Let's look at the facts. You are, once more, trolling way too obviously.

"The estimated prevalence of past-year doping was 43.6% (95% confidence interval 39.4–47.9) at WCA and 57.1% (52.4–61.8) at PAG."

Ok, 43.6% in Daegu, not 45%, but definitely not 29%.

"procedural errors"? Nope, not included.

And furthermore, before you argue that those numbers are too high: the authors argue in the main part that the actual numbers are most likely higher.

Read and weep:

Finally, how did you get the idea that Americans dope less than the rest? Slaney? Gatlin? Gay? Jacobs? Jones? Because we get fewer medals? Because our leaders (Trump, Clinton) are so honest and lead by example? Because USADA is so tough, and would never fall for lame excuses a la contaminated supplements/beef/kisses?

And then there is that:

actually... wrote:

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

But we know that testoboost has no effect on testosterone production, yet his chart shows his t levels rising steadily while he is taking what the lab recorded clearly as "testosterone."

The chart actually show hemoglobin levels rising.

+100000

New evidence is required wrote:

No one is going to prove anything with an ambiguous chart from more than a decade ago.

Produce something meaningful, or find a cause that matters.

+100000

That's what Armstrong's fans hoped for.

Well, testing below the threshold doesn't get you on that "likely doping" IAAF list (leaked by fancy bears), testing above without a reasonable explanation does. See here:

Rupp is on there of course with 3 stars out of 3, but Hasay is not. Jager has the most suspicious values on that list... Fact is also that the likely doping list is significantly shorter as the actual doping list.

No EPO? Then why are his athletes so often on the likely doping list, which, again, is a rather short list?

No steroids? Slaney was caught with testo, Salazar tested testo on his sons, Rupp had high testo in the buildup of the 2016 Olympics.

Doesn't *seem* like staying away from it.

Listened to an old Runners World podcast where Shalane is giving an interview right before the 2017 Boston Marathon.

They asked her how she would feel if another American (someone like Desi) would beat her to becoming the first woman to win Boston since Rainsberger.

Her response was very telling.

OK, go slow when you read this. It looks like, at worst, she attacks Rupp and Hasay's character for who they associate with, but still doesn't accuse Hasay of taking PED's. Taking thyroid and L-carnitine are not banned PEDs, and infusions greater than 50ml are not PEDs. Maybe she wants to think Hasay is clean, but by staying with a coach and program under investigation, this creates a cloud of uncertainty, and Shalane thinks this damages Hasay's reputation.

Make America Fast Again wrote:

Right. I'll go slower. Read the statement again.

"It's hard to get excited about the performances I'm watching," implies both Rupp and Hasay. Then follows immediately with, "We get to choose which friends and coaches you associate with.. who you choose says a lot about you," further references NOP and the current investigation, and what that says about Rupp's and Jordan Hasay's personal character.

Nike athletes lecturing other Nike athletes about "coach choices" who happen to be Nike employees indicates a complete lack of self-awareness on Flanagan's part. She doesn't understand she's part of the same apparatus.

When you look at the photo, it is clearly recorded as "testosterone medication".While it is "clearly recorded" the meaning is ambiguous. T-supplements could be interpreted as "medication for testosterone".

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

... what the lab recorded clearly as "testosterone."

Thank you for responding to the question. I never saw that discussed (or maybe I forgot). In that case, given Magness' whistleblowing role and cooperation, the WADA statutes also allow for a significant reduction in the ban, far less than the 2-4 years you think the WADA statute requires. Lance's teammates got 6 months for admitting their doping and turning informant, as per WADA statutes.

Because I'm not a mindless sheep? I think I explained rather well what is needed for me to begin to entertain the question and form a belief.

You failed to understand the concern. If it's clear in the WADA statutes, and given Alberto's expressly stated instruction to find a way to infuse that is "of course, WADA legal", how did it transpire that a "WADA illegal" infusion could have occurred? What were the sequence of events that caused the intention to stay "WADA legal" to fail, and who was responsible for this failure? Why do you blame Salazar? Magness was expressly tasked by Salazar to find a "WADA legal" way to infuse.

Again you fail to understand. The point was that by changing populations, we get significantly different prevalence results. The Pan Arab games values are consistently 15 percentage points higher than the World Championship. We have seen other prevalence results, where countries like Russia had 30% "abnormal values" while countries like Great Britain only had 4%. We have seen that in events like the 1500m, abnormal values were responsible for 54% of medals, while for the marathon, only 11%. So we cannot use the global prevalence statistics of the WCA and PAG, comprised of many events and nationalities, to talk about likelihoods for Rupp, Jager, and Farah in any meaningful way with high confidence.

Again, you fail to understand, despite the clear example I gave. A failure to consistently update whereabouts, would also be a breach of anti-doping rules, and therefore require a "yes" answer to the question included in the survey, yet technically not doping, or triggering an ABP threshold.

I argued that they are not representative for American and English distance runners, like Rupp and Jager and Farah.

I clearly indicated American and English male distance runners, as a hypothetical example. For the reasons expressed above, I expect the prevalence for sprinters, and distance runners to be different, as well as Americans and British from the general population, where other prevalence figures show countries like Russia, Turkey, Greece, and Morocco leading the statistics.

Sounds like you have your own reasons why you do not believe USADA.

What do all these doping cases from other sports say about American and British doping prevelance in distance running?

rekrunner I appreciate your thoughtful comments. It is informative for the rest of us, but likely falls on the deaf ears of "casual obsever".

I hope casual observer is not rojo trolling. This board needs more substantive discussion and less yelling.

Thanks. "casual obsever" is a lost cause. I'm sure he would say the same about me.

No, I just don't buy your statement as an argument. The solution is simple: Salazar just pretended to not want to break any WADA rules. Just like he didn't mind breaking customs, USATF, and prescription rules.

If the 29% (which were wrong) weren't your point, why did you - mistakenly - mention it?

That the PAG values were higher, is irrelevant for my argument regarding the 44% of the Daegu dopers. So I understood, but considered it pointless.

I understood you the first time, but you were simply wrong with your "clear example". Now that you repeated your wrong statement despite my polite correction, I have to say that you are plainly lying again. As per usual. Again, read the study. The question was not just about any "breach of anti-doping rules", but it was, I cite directly from the study I linked earlier for your convenience (which you ignored of course):

"Have you knowingly violated anti-doping regulations by using a prohibited substance or method in the last 12 months?"

And a "failure to consistently update whereabouts" is obviously not a breach by using a prohibited substance or method. Stop making up all this nonsense.

You came up with a "hypothetical example", yes, but it is exactly that, so not exactly an argument.

As for how realistic that is? It is a fact that 3/4 of the Americans on IAAF's likely doping list were male distance runners. Try working with facts for a change, not hypotheses or lies.

One German was on there, no French, no female American, no American mid-distance runners, no female Brit, no female German and so on.

"Russia, Turkey, Greece, and Morocco leading the statistics"?

On that list:

Russia: 0

Turkey: 1

Greece: 1

Morocco: 1

UK: 1 (Mo Farah, i.e. a male distance runner)

USA: 4 (including 3 male distance runners)

And the most suspicious of them, according to the IAAF scale, is an American male distance runner. So again, your hypothesis that American and British distance runners are particularly clean is not based on facts.

Word of advice: instead of making up stuff again, just look at the evidence.

another data point wrote:

rekrunner I appreciate your thoughtful comments. It is informative for the rest of us, but likely falls on the deaf ears of "casual obsever".

I don't have deaf ears, but I don't fall for rekrunner's obvious lies and irrelevant, unrealistic hypotheses. As explained above. With evidence.

another data point wrote:

I hope casual observer is not rojo trolling. This board needs more substantive discussion and less yelling.

I don't yell. I also didn't insult your ears, to put it mildly.

As for rojo, look at our preferred times and grammar, not to mention what we wrote about Paula and Jager.

rekrunner wrote:

When you look at the photo, it is clearly recorded as "testosterone medication".

While it is "clearly recorded" the meaning is ambiguous. T-supplements could be interpreted as "medication for testosterone".

The Nike Androgen Project wrote:

... what the lab recorded clearly as "testosterone."

Assume for a second that he is doping today. Would you agree then that there is no reason to think that he was clean in high school.

That was the extent of my point, directed to the guy who felt that his high school success proves his innocence today.

You are getting needlessly defensive.