Ritzenhein finally speaks out and says USADA made right call to ban Salazar: "I stand behind the findings of the panel."

Just stopAlready wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

As I said, I have accepted the AAA panels findings, their decisions, and their reasoning, and used the correct terms to describe the violations.

I have refused to accept mischaracterizations of what can be found in the AAA Panel report, and refused to accept several things not found in or supported by the AAA Panel report.

It’s really no use arguing with these people. They hate Salazar and Nike so much it could have been a jaywalking citation and they would call him a criminal. Unless you’re a conspiracy theorist, if you have read the report it’s obvious that there was zero doping of athletes.

If that was so the IOC would not be requiring a WADA investigation of the NOP athletes. I wouldn't call the IOC conspiracy theorists.

Just stopAlready wrote:

It’s really no use arguing with these people. They hate Salazar and Nike so much it could have been a jaywalking citation and they would call him a criminal. Unless you’re a conspiracy theorist, if you have read the report it’s obvious that there was zero doping of athletes.

LOL - another "factual" drug cheat apologist.

Armstronglivs wrote:

If that was so the IOC would not be requiring a WADA investigation of the NOP athletes. I wouldn't call the IOC conspiracy theorists.

No use to use logic with a drug cheat apologist.

I would not interpret what he said for anyone, but refer them to read it for themselves, as I have done many times with you. What seems to be lacking with you is the ability to establish real world truths, providing bases in reality. Maybe you had this ability in the 1970s. Sorely lacking this ability, most of your posts are tearing down poorly built scarecrows, or personal attacks.

Armstronglivs wrote:

The slithering has begun. It is a relief that ZatOpek is at least understandable because if anyone depended upon your interpretation of what he said they would be at a complete loss. But that is the effect of the intellectual contortions you engage in to evade the unpalatable - for you - content of his views. There are many different ways of avoiding the truth and saying nothing meaningful is one of them. You have mastered it.

rekrunner wrote:

I would not interpret what he said for anyone, but refer them to read it for themselves, as I have done many times with you.

What seems to be lacking with you is the ability to establish real world truths, providing bases in reality.

Maybe you had this ability in the 1970s.

Sorely lacking this ability, most of your posts are tearing down poorly built scarecrows, or personal attacks.

Cool personal attack while complaining about getting personally attacked. Rekrunner at his finest.

personal attacker wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I would not interpret what he said for anyone, but refer them to read it for themselves, as I have done many times with you.

What seems to be lacking with you is the ability to establish real world truths, providing bases in reality.

Maybe you had this ability in the 1970s.

Sorely lacking this ability, most of your posts are tearing down poorly built scarecrows, or personal attacks.

Cool personal attack while complaining about getting personally attacked. Rekrunner at his finest.

Personally, I don't mind the personal attacks in a forum full of anonymous nobodies.

I'm complaining about the lack of ability to affirmatively support arguments with observations in the real world.

rekrunner wrote:

Personally, I don't mind the personal attacks in a forum full of anonymous nobodies.

Obviously, because you love to dish it out.

rekrunner wrote:

personal attacker wrote:

Cool personal attack while complaining about getting personally attacked. Rekrunner at his finest.

Personally, I don't mind the personal attacks in a forum full of anonymous nobodies.

I'm complaining about the lack of ability to affirmatively support arguments with observations in the real world.

You must have been looking in the mirror when you wrote that.

You would be a classic case study for Psychological Projection.

rekrunner wrote:

You would be a classic case study for Psychological Projection.

You are slow on the predictable comeback. But you seemed to miss that I already said that about you. Maybe just "slow".

Ritz 12:57 5K PR has to be one of the most suspicious race results of all time.

Never ceases to amaze me how those simple principles and examples can be so difficult for some people to understand or accept.