Genzebe Dibaba Out of Worlds

Baseless insinuations and accusations are ruining the sport.

trollism wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

My attitude is to clarify what are the facts as they stand today. I think my attitude of staying connected to reality is not killing the sport, and by jumping on an emotional bandwagon, it will not save the sport.

People like sports.

You shouldn't ruin sports.

Stop ruining sports.

We changed the corrupt IAAF leadership several years ago.

casual obsever wrote:

We need to get rid of the corrupt IAAF leadership, or nothing will change.

[quote]rekrunner wrote:

Baseless insinuations and accusations are ruining the sport.

[quote]trollism wrote:

Nah, it's the cheats, their Canovas and the people who spend their lives defending cheats that have already ruined the sport.

Pure selfishness on your part.

There is no 'innocent until proven guilty' here. It's obvious Dibaba is a cheat, it's obvious Farah is a cheat. Using semantic arguments to defend them helps nobody except the cheats.

What's with your defense of Aden? You don't think he's suspicious? Better yet - maybe you don't think doping coaches exist in the sport anymore?

Did you know Dibaba's fellow countrywoman Betlhem Desalegn is a convicted doper?

And she's coached by (drum roll)....Jama Aden?

Genzebe Dibaba raced here and there

Genzebe Dibaba suffered a tear

All of Hans’ cattle and all of Hans’ hens

Couldn’t get Dibaba healthy again

Back to Dibaba. How come that doctor's name sounds familiar? Where did I read it before?

Maybe here?

https://academicathletics.wordpress.com/2016/07/06/actovegin-the-unfortunately-legal-performance-enhancing-drug/

And athletes complain about being considered guilty of doping by pundits? How about starting by not going out of their way to consult shady doctors who unashamedly promote dark-grey-area stuff?

Am I defending Aden? I thought I defended the IAAF's actions on available evidence, while repeating the basic facts about the bust which are still the same today, according to all public accounts. But I am really not defending anyone so much as turning common mis-statements into corrected statements, so that future conversations might be more accurate, and less sensational. Here is another example, Betlhem Desalegn is an Emerati, while Dibaba is Ethiopian.

Barrel of Laughs wrote:

What's with your defense of Aden? You don't think he's suspicious? Better yet - maybe you don't think doping coaches exist in the sport anymore?

Did you know Dibaba's fellow countrywoman Betlhem Desalegn is a convicted doper?

And she's coached by (drum roll)....Jama Aden?

Actovegin is not grey area, but white. Dr. Hans Meuller-Wolfhart has never been seriously implicated in any WADA-banned doping.

hobby trail jogger wrote:

Back to Dibaba. How come that doctor's name sounds familiar? Where did I read it before?

Maybe here?

And athletes complain about being considered guilty of doping by pundits? How about starting by not going out of their way to consult shady doctors who unashamedly promote dark-grey-area stuff?

Cheats are also ruining the sport, but "fans" and tabloids are making it worse when pointing sweeping fingers and making baseless insinuations and accusations and generalizations. What may seem obvious to you is often lacking basis in fact. This can not be dismissed as selfishness on my part or as semantic arguments.

trollism wrote:

Nah, it's the cheats, their Canovas and the people who spend their lives defending cheats that have already ruined the sport.

Pure selfishness on your part.

There is no 'innocent until proven guilty' here. It's obvious Dibaba is a cheat, it's obvious Farah is a cheat. Using semantic arguments to defend them helps nobody except the cheats.

rekrunner wrote:

Am I defending Aden? I thought I defended the IAAF's actions on available evidence, while repeating the basic facts about the bust which are still the same today, according to all public accounts.

But I am really not defending anyone so much as turning common mis-statements into corrected statements, so that future conversations might be more accurate, and less sensational.

Here is another example, Betlhem Desalegn is an Emerati, while Dibaba is Ethiopian.

It sounds like you're defending him. Aside from the IAAF's actions - do you have any suspicion of Aden involved with doping of some of his athletes?

And Belayneh is an Ethiopian-born Emerati (Wikipedia). If you were to use her in your "A closer look at EPO-era performances" analysis - wouldn't you classifier her as East African and not Middle-Eastern Arab?

rekrunner wrote:

Cheats are also ruining the sport, but "fans" and tabloids are making it worse when pointing sweeping fingers and making baseless insinuations and accusations and generalizations.

What may seem obvious to you is often lacking basis in fact. This can not be dismissed as selfishness on my part or as semantic arguments.

trollism wrote:

Nah, it's the cheats, their Canovas and the people who spend their lives defending cheats that have already ruined the sport.

Pure selfishness on your part.

There is no 'innocent until proven guilty' here. It's obvious Dibaba is a cheat, it's obvious Farah is a cheat. Using semantic arguments to defend them helps nobody except the cheats.

"Baseless insinuations and accusations"? You sound like OJ Simpson's lawyer. And as credible.

Look, it's perfectly possible to be injured close to the big race of the year; I've had that experience, not at elite level but it's the same problem. you think, rather know, that you are in tremendous shape, surely one more hard session will put the absolute finishing touches to your preparations - and then the world caves in!

Having said that, it is a bit suspicious the number of elite athletes who are pulling out of Doha just before the championships begin. Or am I being too cynical? Or is this the degree of cynicism that the sport engenders these days? If Laura Muir, not having raced for weeks due to "injury", comes out and runs a blinder in Doha what would your reaction be?

rekrunner wrote:

Who ever asks for the link to corroborate that he never failed a test?

Recall the mythical claim is that "Lance never failed a test". This part of the mythology that Lance built around himself, that people still repeat today.

If you know your history, it is public knowledge that Lance failed 4 cortisone tests in July 1999, and 6 EPO tests in the 2004 French retests of his urine.

That's 10 failed tests linked to the 1999 season alone.

The 2004 retests also found two more tests, which were suspicious to the trained eye, but did not meet the criteria, as well as the 2001 (?) Tour de Swiss, also suspicious but did not meet the criteria.

Be thorough with your info wrote:

Link rekrunner? (other than the corticosteroid positive that was backdated with a TUE for saddle sores).

Armstrong escaped the 1999 test failures because of his doctor's backdated prescription - which is enough to cause serious concern about how the system can be manipulated - but the reality is also that in a decade of his cycling there was no unambiguous test result that would have resulted in sanction against him. For someone who protests a concern for "accuracy" you are careless of the stark fact that it was not failed tests that brought Armstrong to account.

However your insistence on maintaining that Armstrong was a proven serial doper because he had failed drug tests - despite the fact the "proof" wasn't enough to convict him - is transparent; you are trying to maintain that athletes who haven't failed a drug test (that we know of - and we didn't know of Armstrong's failures till much later) must be regarded as clean, and to say otherwise is "baseless insinuations and accusations" - despite used EPO syringes in the garbage. The overwhelming greater number of athletes that dope than are caught shows that the accusations are far from baseless - except to a tediously repetitious apologist like yourself.

rekrunner wrote:

I think you are confused as to what evidence is available to the IAAF.

Several corrections are in order:

"Her training group" was not caught red-handed. Only the Saudi-physio Ouarid Mounir and athlete Musaeb Balla were caught in possession of EPO. Aden was caught with injectable vitamins, and Dibaba was tested and tested negative.

Only the Belgian physio Willy Voet was caught in posession of EPO. And he was in car travelling IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRY over 500 miles and 2 sea crossings away from the location of the Festina cycling team. Richard Virenque and the other Festina riders were tested and tested negative. Therefore, by your logic (which is in line with that of the IAAF), you could potentially sue the 1998 Tour de France organizers for unjustifiably throwing the Festina team out of the 1998 Tour de France. By your logic they had no grounds to do such a thing and they should have only banned Willy Voet.

rekrunner wrote:

Who ever asks for the link to corroborate that he never failed a test?

Recall the mythical claim is that "Lance never failed a test". This part of the mythology that Lance built around himself, that people still repeat today.

If you know your history, it is public knowledge that Lance failed 4 cortisone tests in July 1999, and 6 EPO tests in the 2004 French retests of his urine.

That's 10 failed tests linked to the 1999 season alone.

Nope you are totally misrepresenting what happened in order to convey the message you want to convey. NONE of those test results were official fails.

As said on this thread several times now the cortisone test results were explained by the use of a cortisone cream for saddle sores:

From the article:

"Controversy first erupted during the race when the newspaper Le Monde reported that traces of a banned corticosteroid had been found in his system, although not enough to meet the threshold of a positive test. Armstrong said he was using a cortisone cream to treat saddle sores, and produced a prescription; cycling authorities backed Armstrong."

As for the positive EPO tests on urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France, investigators were all over the procedures used by the French laboratory that carried out the retests of the 1999 urine samples:

From the article:

"The report, commissioned late last year by the International Cycling Union, cleared the record seven-time Tour de France champion of allegations that he used performance-enhancing drugs during his first win in 1999.

It said tests on urine samples were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything." "

Even more funny from the same article:

"That Wednesday's report exonerated Armstrong came as no surprise to his longtime coach, Chris Carmichael.

"He's the most tested athlete that's probably walked the face of the Earth and he's never come up positive," Carmichael told Keteyian."

rekrunner wrote:

Cheats are also ruining the sport, but "fans" and tabloids are making it worse when pointing sweeping fingers and making baseless insinuations and accusations and generalizations.

Are you aware that Ethiopia is on the IAAF's "most likely to dope" watch list? (along with Kenya, Ukraine & Belarus).

Since Russia has received the death penalty, should we call these countries the "Big 4?" ?

And yet another thread rekrunnered. Baseless insinuations? Rhat's actually a good one, Reckie.

rekrunner wrote:

Actovegin is not grey area, but white.

Dr. Hans Meuller-Wolfhart has never been seriously implicated in any WADA-banned doping.

Yeah sure. INJECTING prescription substances that are illegal to import in several countries is totally respectfull of the spirit of the sport and hence totally white area.

You know what? Gray area actually means technically legal but not complying with the spirit of the law. Routinely injecting stuff is gray area. Testing unapproved medicine out of what they are recommanded for outside of an autorised experiment is very dark gray area, even "supplementing" using pills on a regular basis to reach and maintain higher than normal concentrations is grey area.

You really might want to check your eyes if you see them all white. And my feeling is that your attitude does only blurs the lines and is part of the real problem, which is most athletes do think unhealthy behaviours are mandatory to perform. It isn't even a question of does it work. It is a question of considering it acceptable.

And yes, I also have the same gripe against doctors who prescribe unneeded nsaids to patients who tell them they actually can deal with the pain.

Di Bye Bye.