Is Aden dirty? The last I heard he was being tried in Spain for pushing non-doping vitamins.
fred wrote:
Hey Rekkie, why Mo?
If it doesn't bother you to associate with this guy we can only assume that you were dirty too.
Is Aden dirty? The last I heard he was being tried in Spain for pushing non-doping vitamins.
fred wrote:
Hey Rekkie, why Mo?
If it doesn't bother you to associate with this guy we can only assume that you were dirty too.
Or Salazar (USADA still can't catch him or his athletes after 5 years of trying and 19 cooperative witnesses), or Mo?
rekrunner wrote:
Or Salazar (USADA still can't catch him or his athletes after 5 years of trying and 19 cooperative witnesses), or Mo?
it's comments like this and the one above RE Aden that make clear that you are a highly persistent troll, not Gary. I actually like your style. Dont stop please.
Smoke and mirrors wrote:
Ugh...Radcliffe...farah...when will we be rid of these parasites?
+1
As long as we have Youtube, I guess we will never get rid of Farah.
I spent months trying to help separate facts, evidence, science, and logic, from insinuation, sensation, faith, prejudice, and logical fallacies. The IAAF gave a laundry list of reasons, with a bunch of science behind, why blood values before 2009 should not be taken at face value. Despite all the iterations of non-expert interpretations, these reasons still stand, because the science still applies, and the history hasn't changed. I was actually defending the science behind the IAAF's annotated and footnoted rebuttal, because it's the science that should help us interpret the few facts we know, with the best perspective. Paula was really only incidental to that. I do essentially the same thing on EPO/performance threads, Salazar threads, and even Aden threads -- asking "what do we really know?" versus "what do we believe?"
stating the very obvious wrote:
Barney Rubble wrote:
So rekrunner is Gary Lough?
Well, yes. Google Gary rekrunner letsrun Radcliffe evidence or something like that. Gary spent months of his life trying to defend her, while the evidence is more than clear. Starting from a 2:15 that alone may be enough evidence, going to a 22% "dehydration" after a half marathon in the low 70's that she won in 2003, moving past a couple of other violations, and ending with a blood passport violation with a 16.2 Hb value at altitude in 2012, while she normally had well documented values below 14 at altitude. Guess she got too desperate in the end (2012), and then the IAAF finally forced her into retirement. Of course Gary will tell you those are either coincidences or measurement errors.
Ah, and her frozen samples have disappeared...
Throw shade
It's really pathetic to mimic trendy phrases that teenagers us.
You are not even using it in the right context either.
rekrunner wrote:
No.
Barney Rubble wrote:
So rekrunner is Gary Lough?
I didn't think so. Just because your stalker and Paula's stalker is a nutjob, it doesn't follow that you are Paula's husband.
rekrunner wrote:
Is Aden dirty? The last I heard he was being tried in Spain for pushing non-doping vitamins.
fred wrote:
Hey Rekkie, why Mo?
If it doesn't bother you to associate with this guy we can only assume that you were dirty too.
In a room paid for by Aden, there were ~60 pre-loaded syringes of epo as well as steroids. He was seen walking circuitous routes through Sabadell to discard syringes and associated paraphanelia. He has all but disappeared from the athletics scene. His 3:30/13:15/1:42 man now gets destroyed over the last lap in 3:39 races. His 3:50 girl can't even run 1000m at the same pace. He no longer coaches for Qatar. He has had 2 athletes associated with him come up positive for doping. If you still think he's some innocent bystander, you're not paying attention.
The IAAF also decided to do NO DOPING TEST on Liliya Shobukhova before her 2011 Chicago marathon win in 2:18:20 (which made her the second fastest female marathoner ever in history behind Paula at the time).
Lamine Diack was running the IAAF in 2011 and 2002.
It looks like favors, very strange decisions on NO DOPING TESTS for certain athletes, and corruption goes way back for the IAAF.
Paula should be more careful with who she hangs out with. Associating too closely with liars and frauds like the IAAF and Dr. Martial "Plan B" Saugy could reflects poorly on pristine Paula's absolutely clean, clean, clean reputation.
This seems highly irregular that the IAAF decided to do NO DOPING TEST on Paula leading up to the 2002 Chicago marathon where she set a world record of 2:17:18.
It was as a favor to just Paula. None of the other female athletes at the race were going to receive the same favor. The IAAF deemed testing Paula as POINTLESS!
Radcliffe is a multi millionaire to prove it.
She has, this year, definitively laid to rest the reputation of gallant British loser.
Radcliffe rose to a breakfast of porridge, just as her Scottish idol, Liz McColgan, once used to fuel races. Radcliffe cooked it in a microwave at her hotel, before adding bananas and honey. Her high-profile anti-drugs stance gives her reason to feel paranoid about the prospect of food being spiked, and Ndereba's manager had ignited Radcliffe's wrath with pre-race innuendo. That was silenced as Radcliffe and her husband, Gary, took the initiative.
Ndereba headed Radcliffe by a second as the course twisted to the five kilometre mark in 16:26, with the temperature at around 43 degrees, but chaperoned by US minder Weldon Johnson, who kept celebrity-stalkers at bay, Radcliffe went on the rampage, covering the second half faster than the first.
Nderba was gracious, and conceded Radcliffe: ''did a great job'', but is unlikely to be high on Radcliffe's Christmas list. Her manager, Lisa Buster, had complained because the world body had decided not to subject Radcliffe to a dope test on the run-in to the race.
The IAAF thought they were DOING HER A FAVOUR, because she had already been tested so often this year, and deemed it pointless.
Though a fierce anti-doping campaigner, Radcliffe has been scurrilously treated by the French media, and spent much of Thursday and Friday demanding that such a test be done on her, to give no further opportunity for unwarranted slurs.
She was delighted when doping analysis was eventually arranged before the race.
''I was trying to hold it back in the first half and one or two US guys trying to get their times was a help,'' said Radcliffe.
ha ha ha
Shortly after her dramatic collapse three-and-a-half miles from the finish of the Athens Olympic marathon, Paula Radcliffe went out for a run in the mountains of Flagstaff, Arizona.
But as Paula pounded the forest trails, doing what she enjoyed most in the crisp mountain air, she suddenly found herself sobbing uncontrollably. It was not the memory of the Athens marathon that had suddenly intruded on her thoughts but the post-race vitriol that had been heaped on her by certain sections of the media. And what hurt her most was the cruel accusation that she was a quitter.
"It did really, really get to me," Radcliffe said. "I went around saying 'it doesn't bother me', but it really did.
"I had just read something before going out for my run and I started crying so much while I was running that I had to stop and sit down.
But Flagstaff was a turning point...
The consequence is that seven days before the race gets under way in Tiananmen Square, Radcliffe is not only determined to be in the starting line-up but insisting that she could even win it.
"You think about it as any other race and in any race that I go into the aim is to go in and win the race," she said on her arrival at the Team GB training camp in Macau last Monday.
Actual result for Ms. Paula Radcliffe at 2008 Olympic Marathon:
Finish place = # 23 for Ms. Paula Radcliffe with a time of 2:32:38 = a lot more crying for Ms. Paula Radcliffe.
There were a lot of tears.
Hey Paula.
The IAAF never should of allowed you and Liliya to compete in the 2008 Olympic marathon at all.
Oh boy.
Hey Paula.
Please stop it.
All very interesting, but several questions remain: Did Aden cause the EPO to be in the rooms Aden paid for, either directly or indirectly? Did Aden, after his circuitous walks, discard syringes that were used for EPO, or any other banned substances? Did his athletes perform well because of EPO, then perform because of no EPO? Did Aden cause, either directly, or indirectly, the doping positives of his athletes? I don't know. Do you? How? I'm only interested in facts and knowledge. While you give an impressive list of seemingly damning circumstances, the fact remains that after, and despite, two police raids, there is still no direct evidential link between Aden, and EPO for his athletes -- no receipts, no "training plans" from laptops, no emails, no first-hand whistleblower athlete testimony. This isn't a question of what I "still think", but more a question of the strength of the collected "evidence" that has been made public -- can we conclude that Aden is dirty? What I "still think" is, you can only conclude that Aden is dirty, from all of these facts, if you already assumed he was dirty without them.
Now in Ethiopia? wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Is Aden dirty? The last I heard he was being tried in Spain for pushing non-doping vitamins.
In a room paid for by Aden, there were ~60 pre-loaded syringes of epo as well as steroids. He was seen walking circuitous routes through Sabadell to discard syringes and associated paraphanelia. He has all but disappeared from the athletics scene. His 3:30/13:15/1:42 man now gets destroyed over the last lap in 3:39 races. His 3:50 girl can't even run 1000m at the same pace. He no longer coaches for Qatar. He has had 2 athletes associated with him come up positive for doping. If you still think he's some innocent bystander, you're not paying attention.
You missed out the bit where she won the world championships marathon the year after her Olympic dnf
It turns out that Ms. Paula Radcliffe had another "HIGHLY ABNORMAL" blood test result at the 2005 World Championships.
Paula had an OFF score of 92 on Aug. 5, 2005...which increased by 19.4%...in ONLY ONE DAY to an OFF score of 109.87 (with an above normal range Hb value of 15.1 g/dL) on Aug. 6, 2005.
That is a very large magnitude change of 19.4% in OFF scores from Paula's blood test results ...in a very short amount of time (= 1 day)...at the World Championships...AGAIN.
This is because Paula did another autologous blood transfusion at the 2005 World Championships.
There were a few news stories about these multiple "HIGHLY ABNORMAL BLOOD TEST RESULTS FOR MS. PAULA RADCLIFFE.
There were a lot of tears flowing when the blood test results were LEAKED...and then Paula called her blood test expert Dr. Martial "Plan B" Saugy to make it go away.
http://i4.irishmirror.ie/incoming/article6915888.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200/PaulaMain.jpg
It is not a big surprise.
ha ha ha
"Oh.boy.Paula.Not.Again.com", and "Paula.is.crying.again.com", I usually ignore these long cut and paste posts, often not connected to the threads in which the appear. But it's Xmas.
You seem to think that the IAAF was handing out "favors" by not testing Shobukhova before the 2011 Chicago marathon, and similarly, that it was "highly irregular" Paula wasn't initially selected for blood testing before the 2002 Chicago marathon (in the end, she was tested at her own repeated insistence, to put that story to rest).
This ignores certain practical realities.
Since anti-doping resources are not infinite, it is not "highly regular" to test all athletes, before and after, competition. An anti-doping unit must use some kind of intelligence targeted testing to use limited resources to maximal effect. This can mean avoiding testing which can bring no new information.
In the case of Shobukhova, by October 2011, the IAAF anti-doping group had already started an ABP investigation against Shobukhova, and in November 2011, it reached the stage where a panel of three experts concluded that her ABP was abnormal, requiring an explanation from the athlete. Since they arrived at that decision in November without the pre-2011 Chicago sample, it hardly seems plausible that a decision to not test Shobukhova pre-2011 Chicago (assuming that this really happened) was a "favor" from the IAAF, or would have accelerated that decision, but rather would have been superfluous, a waste of limited resources, bringing no new information.
In the case of Paula, pre-2002 Chicago, a similar observation can be made, that a pre-test would have brought no new information, in light of the known fact that they had several recent samples from her already. Recall, in 2002, there was no ABP, and no rules allowing sanctions based on blood tests. The IAAF was gathering blood, as indicators of where to intelligently test (using more expensive urine tests), and in the long term, the broad set of blood data was used to develop a more intelligent ABP that can allow detection of doping, in cases that previous tests could not. Again, it's hard to see how missing collecting a pre-race sample could be construed as a favor, since their could be no consequence.
You also take another opportunity, to malign the integrity of the IAAF and Dr. Martial Saugy. The scope of the IAAF extortion, bribery attempts, and attempts to avoid sanctions, have been well documented in detailed reports from the WADA IC, and the IAAF Ethics Commission. This includes the actors, the triggers, findings, recommendations, and sanctions. Nothing supports claims that anti-doping corruption (especially blood based) existed as early as 2002, or generally that the IAAF and Martial Saugy are "liars and frauds".
You conclude with one final comment, that the "IAAF never should of (sic) allowed (Paula) and Liliya to compete in the 2008 Olympic marathon at all", again ignoring several realities:
- In 2008, the IAAF had no reason or basis to ban Paula; specifically, the much discussed two "suspicious points" did not violate the suspicion thresholds used at that time, nor in 2008
- In 2008, blood could not be used as a basis to ban athletes, and urine tests for both athletes had always been negative
- Finally, the IAAF does not decide who can enter the Olympic marathon -- this is determined by the IOC and the respective national federations
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck. Guess what? It's probably a duck. I'd really encourage you to cease being complicit to the drug problem. It honestly doesn't sound like you want anything changed regarding dirty sport. Am I being too presumptuous in ascertaining that?
The IOC does not have a very good record.
Let's take a look at the IOC decision to allow ONLY ONE RUSSIAN TRACK AND FIELD ATHLETE TO COMPETE AT THE 2016 RIO OLYMPICS.
All other Russian Track and Field athletes were banned from the Rio Olympics because of the Russian doping scandal.
The only athlete allowed to compete at the Rio Olympics had a previous doping test result with a testosterone/epitestosterone ratio of over 8:1.......Wow......That is really high...........
The name of the athlete is Darya Klishina:
https://pics.wikifeet.com/Darya-Klishina-Feet-2297596.jpg
The IOC made the decision that...there is "no case to answer" for Darya.
(It turned out that it was the correct decision by the IOC.)
It looks like Aden used injectable vitamins, and everyone is calling that a duck. After a three year anti-doping sting operation, and two police raids, and a one year criminal investigation, Aden is on trial for pushing injectable vitamins. This looks, walks, and sounds like Aden used injectable vitamins. I promise to take your encouragement under advisement, if ever I start to be "complicit to the drug problem". Meanwhile, I'd encourage you to stop using quack logic. I'm all for changing dirty sport -- in a targeted, intelligent way. You are not so much presumptuous as plain wrong -- again jumping to conclusions with limited basis.
Now in Ethiopia? wrote:
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck. Guess what? It's probably a duck. I'd really encourage you to cease being complicit to the drug problem. It honestly doesn't sound like you want anything changed regarding dirty sport. Am I being too presumptuous in ascertaining that?
rekrunner wrote:
You also take another opportunity, to malign the integrity of the IAAF and Dr. Martial Saugy.
Malign what? Bahahaha. But seriously, could you at least stop the trolling for Christmas? Thank you, and Merry Christmas.
rekrunner wrote:
I'm only interested in facts and knowledge.
Facts? You? Bahahaha. But seriously, could you at least stop the trolling for Christmas? Thank you, and Merry Christmas.
Seriously Rek, you've got to concede defeat on the Jama Sabadell case, he might get off, but only on a technicality. You don't have some of the world's best athletes in one room and the room adjacent full of EPO & testosterone, that apparently belongs to the group's masseuse or physio by coincidence, especially when they are forbidden from taking the stuff. What are the chances? Amazingly their careers gave gone downhill since, what are the chances?