UKC

Anyone else find the daily fails and other outlets trial by media a bit disturbing.?

He has been proven of missing two tests,nothing else.
When you take tests all the time ,missing one is pretty much expected as the testers expect you to declare where you are all the time.

Give the lad a break

In reply to mark s:
He didn't hear the doorbell? Guilty

In reply to mark s:

I think Farah is clean, just my gut feeling, but he needs to be very open to questions and close monitoring, this plus the very serious questions around Salazar does not look good for him.

The Daily Mail may well hate him, but I think the story is legitimate and it is a fairly big deal.

In reply to mark s:

I think hes innocent, but I think he made quite a big deal when the news came out about it,having a press conference trying to distance himself, but it kinda backfired and put him at the forefront instead of his trainer.i think he comes across as a humble,honest guy and it's a shame he's under question for someone else's actions.

In reply to Wsdconst:

Where there's smoke there's fire. He can't plead innocence after 'not hearing the doorbell ring'. Straight out of the Lance book of excuses.

In reply to mark s:


This.

I wouldn't fancy having to tell them where I was going to be, 24 hours of the day, six months in advance. I barely know where I'm going to be one hour in advance...

In reply to Gone for good:

Maybe only time will tell,it would be a shame if it's true.

In reply to captain paranoia:
I'm pretty sure you only have to declare one hour of each day?
Still must be a pain though.

In reply to mark s:

He has a trainer who seems to be very much into the whole doping thing; he's missed a couple of drug tests (even missing one is apparently quite unusual). I'd love to think Mo is clean but sadly I think the circumstantial evidence is looking pretty bad.

In reply to mark s:

He's not helped himself at all. The missed tests were very poor, they were outside his house knocking for an hour.

He's also supposedly lied about when he found out about these allegations. There is some dirt about a prominent UK track star which the UK press won't name.. But everyone knows there has been suspicions about Salazar for a few years.

People weren't complaining Armstrong was subject to a witch hunt.

He's got to be careful now. I Think he should leave NOP.

In reply to captain paranoia:



Not quite, it's a 60 minute period each day, which you are allowed to change.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


I suspect not. They would not be following protocol if they were. 10 minutes I think!

In reply to The New NickB:

Ah ok that was from the mail.

I think one hour a day is no issue for a professional.. With his money he could have bought a better door bell. Just seemed like a poor excuse.

I do think what Salazar is doing is probably technically legal. He takes his athletes right to the boundaries, but the thyroid treatment is strange. TUEs need to be better tested.

The allegations against Salazar aren't too dissimilar too those against lance though.

In reply to The New NickB:

http://www.ukad.org.uk/assets/uploads/Files/2015_Code_Rules_Policy/WADA-201...
http://tinyurl.com/pbsquas

They are meant to arrive at some point within the hour that the athlete has allocated and both knock and ring, then keep trying every 15 minutes or so until the end of the hour, including a final knock and ring at 60 minutes. So I guess if they arrive with 10 minutes to go and you're in the shower or something then accidentally missing it is quite plausible. If they arrived at the start of the 60 mins, much less so. It would be good to know which it was.

In reply to Mark Torrance:

It should also be more transparent who has missed a test and when. Very clearly published.

UKA, GB athletes and UKAD are meant to work together but I dont think that is happening.

Like the recent two failed tests by the welsh athletes, they were on supplements (Mountain Fuel) they had not disclosed to UKA so that they could get them properly tested. With them they were contaminated and led to failed tests. You really have to be carefuul a they did not have control over the manufacture process.

In reply to mark s:
Time for a reality check?

"has been proven of missing two tests"
+
"missing one is pretty much expected"

How do you account for the other missed one? If he had missed the third he would have got kicked out of the London Olympics. Its also worth pointing out that these missed tests happened shortly after he employed the services of Alberto Salazar a coach who has had some very serious doping allegations made against him. Add in the statement from UK Anti-Doping who have stated its "not common for athletes to miss two tests” in a 12-month period" and you begin to see why Mr Farrah has decided to employ a high profile PR company for crisis management.

"Give the lad a break"
People will when its proved he's innocent as nobody likes cheats.

In reply to Indy:

FFS, it's Farah!

In reply to Indy:

How does he now "prove" he's innocent in regard to two historical missed tests?

In reply to The New NickB:


reminds me of "FFS, it's Jimmy Savile!".... before he died!

Farah, is a high profile athlete and he knows the score.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

He can't now prove he's innocent in the same way that he can't be proved to be a drugs cheat either but its quite right and proper that these questions are being asked if only to reinforce to Mr Farrah that a caviller attitude to anti-doping is completely unacceptable.

Looking a bit more closely at the protocols used by UKAD I find it it at the very least suspicious that Farrah is claiming to have not heard his door bell or knocking as the inspectors would have been at his house (the place he reported he was) ringing the doorbell every 10 or 15 minutes and knocking for a FULL ONE HOUR. After a thorough investigation by UKAD found Farrah guilty of negligence in missing the test.

In reply to Dave the Rave:


I'd be straight on to trading standards as the door bell is obviously not fit for purpose.... imagine ringing a door bell for a full hour and not being able to hear it!
OR
maybe there was a small print disclaimer on the box " doesn't work when rung by UK Anti-doping inspectors"

Go figure!

In reply to ACollins:



A requirement that comes with being able to earn £2.5 million..... the absolute tyranny of it!

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

he's had hundreds of tests - all he passed. Does that not suggest he's clean?

watch this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/33211702

I've been an athlete / athletics fan for 35 years and this knee jerk / media witch hunt is pathetic. Get some proof then start accusing.

In reply to Indy:
"Its also worth pointing out that these missed tests happened shortly after he employed the services of Alberto Salazar a coach who has had some very serious doping allegations made against him"

- wrong - only the second was after he engaged with Salazar. see this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/33211702

- and he's had hundreds of tests before & after the missed ones - ALL PASSED.

Still, why let the facts get in the way of the judge jury executioner that some armchair readers have an agenda or have already made up their minds.

Nothing's been proven against Salazar yet, but I have my doubts, certainly about him & Galen Rupp in his earlier years.

In reply to Phil Murray:


Thats got to be the funniest thing i will read for a while.

In reply to Phil Murray:


Wasn't that Lance Armstrongs defence for many years?

In reply to Phil Murray:
"some armchair readers have an agenda or have already made up their minds."

Oh FFS didn't the Lance Armstrong debacle teach you anything?

How many 1000's? of tests did LA pass?
How many people put LA on a pedestal and made him untouchable for years?

Farrah knows the score.... he has chosen to enter a profession that places certain requirements on you. He would have been 100% aware of the implications of missing random drugs test. In my view the " I didn't hear the doorbell" is a piss poor excuse under the circumstances.

I'm not saying Farrah is guilty or innocent what I am saying is that there are questions that need answers if you want to construe that as an accusations of guilt then thats up to you.

In reply to Mikkel:

Show. Me. One. Piece. Of. Evidence. that says Mo Farah has positively been taking banned substances. CIte it. PLease.

If you don't respect the opinion of Steve Cram, who's lived, worked, and breathed athletics since the late 1970s, and prefer your own little conclusion, then I know who I'd believe.

In reply to Indy:

Heh - why don't you start a thread saying Paul Radcliffe's a cheat too? She was as dominant in the Marathon as Lance was in cycling.

In reply to Indy:

Someone knocked on my door the other day. I was downstairs with radio on. Singing along, probably.

They called later saying - where were you!?!?!

Easy peasy.

We're people and all of us make mistakes along the way. Except, apparently , UKC readers. Unacceptable! And of course Mo admits it was his fault! as does the guy in the video I linked to above.

He who has never sinned - let him cast the first stone.

In reply to Phil Murray:





Many pass tests. Lance did.

There was an article recently about a journalist who doped and then took the tests and passed.

In reply to Phil Murray:







That's rubbish. It's been totally overblown that there is a witch hunt.

In Europe the allegations against Salazar have been around for years in the press. The UK press are much more guarded in that they say.

There's loads and load of dirt on Salazar and it's getting very similar to the lance situation.

Very few have said farah dopes but he should leave salazars camp, at least in the short term until this is properly investigated.

Missing the two tests is suspicious.. The fact it wasn't publicized is even worse. We're all 'zero tolerance' on drugs unless it's a British runner when we seek to explain it, like with the two welsh runners.

In reply to Phil Murray:

I found it funny due to how many athletes never to have failed a test that have come out confessing doping after retiring.

Nothing to do with whether i think Mo is clean or not.

In reply to Phil Murray:

Sorry to labour the point but I think your missing the point.....

Farrah would have told UKAD that on say Tuesday between 3pm and 4pm he'd be at home. SURELY as a very high profile professional Farrah would known the consequences to his reputation of missing random drugs test. I don't think it unreasonable that Farrah who earned £2.5 million last year in connection with these random tests should have made absolutely certain that for that 1 hour he was actively aware that UKAD might call and that if they did he'd be ready.

If I tell the wife I'll be back at 4pm my £2.5 million pay and reputation won't be on the line if I get waylaid and turn up at 6pm. If you take the money and fame then you play by the rules and if you don't then you can fully expect people to ask questions and infer that maybe there was a more sinister reason 'you didn't hear the door bell'

In reply to Mikkel:
It's why people dope, there's a general acceptance you won't test positive. Clean tests are sadly not proof of guilt, lance demonstrated that. He had a few positives but generally tested clean.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Totally agree.

In reply to Indy:

The allegations against Salazar aren't random. Kara Goucher is a top runner and has come out with why she left salazars camp, illegal use of weight loss drugs being one..

Anyone in his camp does have the light cast on them and missing tests does not help.

In reply to Indy:


No, just spell him name correctly!

In reply to Phil Murray:


Oh dear, i think perhaps you should go away and do some reading rather than taking that blinkered view.......

>I've been an athlete / athletics fan for 35 years and this knee jerk / media witch hunt is pathetic. Get some proof then start accusing.

I have been a cycling fan for 20 years and understand that drug taking has been and still is going on, its refreshing to see the attention turn to other sports where athletes turn in superhuman performances.....hopefully tennis and rugby will be next and we can understand the full scale of doping in all sports and try and create a level playing field.......all this media and the "witchhunts" can only be a good thing in my opinion, it makes people ask questions and rid the sport of dirty doctors and coaches, whats wrong with that ?

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Whilst overall I agree with you on this subject this particular bit is incorrect.
People were accused of witch hunts against Armstrong for years. Even when the evidence became about as obvious as being tw*tted by a two by four he still had his supporters trotting out the witchhunt/never failed a test line.
I am not sure some have completely accepted his admittance of guilt.

In reply to Dark-Cloud:




I think Bolt is clean by the way, likewise Paula, why would they dope to that level?

In reply to mark s:

given that microdosing is effective and undetectable, i reckon you can't get to the top without it..

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Because they want to win, why does anybody dope ?

The Jamaicans are terrible, if its not performance enhancing its a masking agent they are testing positive for:

http://news.sky.com/story/1115711/five-jamaican-athletes-fail-drug-tests

In reply to Roadrunner5:

i was going to add you have to be doping unless you're a freak like Bolt or Beamon or Jornet but i'm not sure..
why not if you're surrounded by people who do?

In reply to malk:

There is some exceptional physical examples out there who have a different physical make up, not many though......Jornet would be one for sure.

In reply to Dark-Cloud:

yeah, look what Messner did with his average vo2max
are you suggesting that the likes of Wiggo and Mo are doping?

In reply to mark s:

why wouldn't someone sleeping in an oxygen chamber be into other dubious activities?

In reply to Dark-Cloud:

To that level though?

I know dopers so know why they do but they try to fly under the radar, target races off the IAAF courses which still have good money and win, but not shatter world records. PR was way way ahead of any woman ever..

In reply to Dark-Cloud:




I just bolt is, I know Jamaicans are, but bolt I hope not.

It would kill athletics.

Its been said a few times that Lance never tested positive. That isn't true.

Lance failed tests, the UCI covered it up. He had a positive for corticosteroids four times, three were hidden and one was guven a backdated TUE. He said that he had never tested positive and that has become a recurring meme in all discussions about doping just like here, but it isn't true. He also tested positive for EPO when samples were retested a number of years later but they did not have b samples so he wasn't charged.

In reply to Escher:

Everyone knows there were a few but he tested clean many many times. Testing often lags behind.

Plus the UCI were assisting on keeping him clean.

But this is why UKA and UKAD should publish a list of every missed test, when, who, where, under what circumstances. We need full transparency.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Yeah apart from someone above who said he'd never tested positive, so not everyone. But sure, you can dope and get away with it.

I wish parcelforce would employ ex UKAD!

In reply to Escher:

But he took a hell of a lot of tests.. tbh they were so few you could probably dismiss them as false positives. Top athletes who dope do not think they will test +ve, they spend $10,000's a year on medical adivce and pharma to make sure of that.

It's why I don't think testing alone should be the be all and end all, if it was Lance would be guilty of having a few dodgy samples.

Sky Running is very anto-PEDs.. all their runners test clean. Apart from their world champ who tested positive for an EPO like substance which wasnt fair so gets ignored, instead she took '2 years away from the sport'... it's this inconsistent attitude we need to stop.

Its like in soccer foreigners are accused of diving, brits 'draw fouls', 'play professionally'.

We've got to expect higher standards from our own runners which just isn't happening, 50 tests a year is it missed? Like the two welsh runners taking supplements they had not sent to UKAD to have tested. Even though it sounded like contamination them not declaring it meant it was their fault and they deserved their ban.

I dont think we can be confident of our runners being clean until we have transparency.

In reply to malk:


Fifty shades of Farah?

In reply to malk:


Strange thing to say. If it's a joke then it's over my head, but if not then plenty of athletes do this, including some amateur ones who I'm fairly sure aren't doping.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Many do it but the effects are questionable. It's just tryring to be training at altitude but training at altitude provides long term benefits because of how hard it is, much of the other physiological are lost over a few weeks.

Certainly legal.. The thing is as science advances we find more and more ways of getting advances which are legal for now, thyroxine could be providing other benefits. It's just a typical arms race.

In reply to mark s:

I heard Mo Farah say that he had never TAKEN drugs . Sounds pretty emphatic.

However, I also heard David Mundell say there was an investigation into a leaked report of the meeting with the French ambassador , and IT FOUND no one else was involved except Alistair Carmichael. ( sounded dodgy)

In each case I would have much preferred first Mundell to have stated clearly that HE was NOT involved in the leaking of the report, ( not that no one else was found to be involved) and I would have preferred Mo Farah to have said he had never taken, NOR been ADMINSTERED banned drugs. Both statements struck me as carefully chosen words that the had been told to say.

In reply to Jim C:

He doesnt have to have taken them...

Just been injected with unknowns.. which is how cyclists in the past were included.. just ask no questions.. like 0 hour contracts.. you want to be pro? you take this...

And re Carmichael.. huge huge can of worms.

Nike have paired with him, many friends are coached with carmichael training systems... I cant believe they would sign with his name.. You mean Chris? Nike look filthy at all levels from 100m to 100 mile if you ask me..

In reply to Roadrunner5:

I think Jim C has in mind a rather more local can of Carmichaels.

jcm

In reply to Roadrunner5:


And the penny drops, just like Lance would have killed cycling.................

In reply to Dark-Cloud:


Incomparable..

In reply to Phil Murray:


That'll be all the testosterone presumably.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

That is what I was getting at. Mo's wording that he had not TAKEN drugs, was a bit iffy.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Yep, of the Orkney Carmichael LD species
( it is about to bcome extinct I would guess.)

In reply to mark s:

he's selling Quorn mince. That's a far worse crime than doping IMO.

In reply to graeme jackson:


being a veggie is a good enough excuse to take stuff to boost all the goodness he is lacking

In reply to mark s:

Mo has found himself at the centre of a storm, and there is no way out of it (other than wait for it to blow over). As someone who took more pleasure from his two golds than any of the other medals at the 2012 games, I really hope it's all froth as far as he is concerned (the daily mail does have a tendency to froth).

There does seem to be a lot of dotted lines that suggest that Salazar likes to stretch the rules to say the very least, and it's very easy to say that Mo should switch coach. The flip side of that argument is that it was Mo who approached Salazar, he probably considers Salazar a friend and there is a strong case for standing by your friends. Plus the fact is, if Salazar was to go down, if it transpired he did break the rules, then Mo's reputation would be damaged and switching coach now would still tarnish those two golds. Even if all the rule breaking took place before Mo went over to the US (has there been any allegations that are more current that 2005? genuine question), then Mo would be guilty by association.

I don't think the missed tests in themselves mean anything. The number of athletes who have come out and admitted they have missed tests demonstrate how easy that is. Christine Ohuruogu received a year ban for missing three in quick succession, but that ban is now seen as unreasonable harsh.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/33182207

In reply to mav:

Ohuruogu's 1 year ban isn't seen as unreasonbly hash, in fact it would be a 2 year ban now, but that was 2006 and it was acknowledged that changes needed to be made to the system to help athletes adhere to it, Farah's missed tests were as part of the new system.

I find that article by Southerton poor, usual whining Southerton.

In reply to The New NickB:

as you probably know, I was using the article as my source of how the ban was seen. But the fact that the changes were made to help athletes did strengthen her case. But all I was trying to point out was that missing a test isn't proof that you take drugs, which is how some people seem to be taking it.

In reply to Phil Murray:


In her case that seems to be more to do with the rather poor standard of women's marathon running generally. Paula's record performance for a women's only event is exactly where you would expect it to be for distance running (about 12% longer than the men's equivalent). Her only unusual result is her world record, which was set in a mixed event and is more likely to be down to being able to use male pacemakers.

In reply to BarrySW19:

It's an interesting one that, the men have male pace makers as well. The percentages are pretty constant, we have the added problem that nearly all of the women's records are suspect. That said, I am confident Paula is clean and that 2:15:25 is one of the greatest athletic achievements of all time.

In reply to mav:
That ban wasn't harsh at all.

Ferdinand got 8 months for a single missed test, wasn't it?

Testing doesn't work unless it is enforced and not avoided. If we just tick athletes off for missing tests then they will just dope and miss tests.

As long as it's consistent and transparent I've no issues.

In reply to Roadrunner5:



Jeez, how often does that one get trotted out. Ferdinand was told the testers were waiting for him and he left the building by a back entrance. Huge difference to Ohurughu who turned up at her usual training venue and found it was being used for a school sports day.

With Farah it might have been that he was lying on the floor hiding, as Armstrong did when he was "glowing". But far more likely that his doorbell wasn't working, or his kid was crying, or someone had the TV on too loud. Ever had those "We tried to read your meter" cards pushed through the letterbox when you've been at home ? Missing a test is not the same as evading one, or failing one.

In reply to Chris the Tall:
She missed three tests...

If testing is quite routine of course you can forget. It can be 20-30 minutes later and you forget and drive away.. He was stupid for sure but I don't think we know for sure he evaded..

She missed three in quick succession.. After two you should be paranoid as hell.. So converted stadium bollox or not she was equally if not more stupid hence the longer ban.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

If reading my meter risks my 2.5 mill job yeah I'd turn down the TV... It's for one hour. It was very suspicious. I thought farah was clean now I'm not certain at all.. The thyroxine is right on the boundary of what's legal, if the TUE is just a cover then it's illegal and we have strong evidence from Goucher AS uses thyroxine illegally...

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Do the testers not have No Farrahs mobile number? And would it completely invalidate the test for them to take the sample later that same day ?

Just curious about the protocol really

In reply to mark s:

In the endurance disciplines, microdosing works wonders. Thus, it is essential to hold athletes to their preagreed schedule, not because you necessarily catch them in these tests, but because it limits the time windows available for micrososed doping!

Missing two tests while associated with a trainer known to push the boundaries of what is legal is therefore suspicious to say the least.

Same as the Italian biathletes consulting Dr. Ferrari. Nothing to do with profiting from his experience with EPO microdosing for cyclists, of course, but only discussing training periodization!

Anyone who buys either of these stories will also believe in Santa.

CB

In reply to Andy Hardy:
I think so but no they only try for that hour then move on. You still missed the test. Ferdinand was tested the next day but it was still a missed test.

In reply to cb294:



One of Farah's missed tests was before he joined up with Salazar. It's not good, but it might at least be useful to be precise in the reporting of the events.

In reply to tony: Is that true?

I thought it was two in close succession to trigger a ban with a third?

In reply to Andy Hardy:



Heard Michael Rimmer talking about the testing process on the radio last Friday, evidently the testers aren't allowed to phone; they return at 15 minute intervals for up to an hour.

In reply to Hat Dude:

I was thinking more if they knocked on the door first, then get no reply they could try the mobile, not phoning beforehand.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

But it's one hour every day of the year. Which is why so many athletes have missed one or two tests. And the fact that Farah hasn't missed one since would suggest he has learned his lesson

Though I agree AS is very dodgy and has lied over his connection with Slaney/Decker. And may well have exploited the the TUE system with Rupp and probably Farah as well.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


I think with Ferdinand it went down as a refused test, rather than missed. Same with Viktor Troicki.

In reply to tony:

I stand corrected.

CB

In reply to Roadrunner5:


The first was missed in early 2010, the second in February 2011. He announced he was joining Salazar in February 2011 - not sure when he actually first went to Portland.

In reply to Andy Hardy:


Sorry I wasn't very clear; from what I gathered Michael Rimmer was saying, they can't phone at all.

In reply to tony:
It's a shame that those making pretty obviously libelous statements on UKC are not held up to anything like the standards our athletes are. What on earth motivates people to make such incorrect statements in a public arena (cheating is sports is way more understandable)?

In reply to Offwidth:


A touch OTT perhaps? Not everyone reads the news with as much interest as you and I might do. Not every mistake is libellous - sometimes it's just a case of not knowing any better.

In reply to Hat Dude:


Weird. You'd imagine if the athlete had forgotten his tetst might be then and he'd nipped out for a pint of milk he'd scoot back PDQ if they phoned him.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


Refused is considered the same as a fail.

In reply to Offwidth:

. What on earth motivates people to make such incorrect statements in a public arena

Probably a never ending stream of sports heros subsequently found out to be cheats after endless denials and implausible excuses. There comes a point where the sensible thing to do is assume everyone is a cheat unless shown otherwise, unfortunately.

personally i think let them take what they want,that way everyone is equal and we will know who is the best.
the best performances to watch are the super human ones,rijjs on hautacam is the best TDF visually to watch

also a medical benefit for the general public as new medicines and drugs will be created that can no doubt help us all.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

covered here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tomfordyce/2011/07/life_on_the_uk_anti-doping.ht...
'testing cannot be done without a warning if your phone alerts you first'

In reply to Andy Hardy:

I believe the idea is not give them any warning. I remember people claiming that Team Sky had chosen their Tenerife hotel carefully, so that they could see the testers cars from a distance, and the extra few minutes was vital.

In reply to Offwidth:

Oh get a grip for God's sake, this is the internet after all.

In reply to MG:
Also If athletes want people to speak the truth.. Be open. This is the fault of uka and mo. Just list when and where tests were missed and why. We should have databases easily accessible which lists who failed, refused, missed tests...

In reply to Roadrunner5:

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jun/23/alberto-salazar-claims-steroid...

It's now 17 or so witnesses, former employees at NOP or runners have come forwards with claims or reports of what they saw.

In reply to Offwidth:

Whatever you do, don't ever look at The Clinic forum on Cycling News of the content of this thread worries you!

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Its the internet so you can just do a search on who has been sued already. Sure the ones who got sued often took on rich powerful men (or better still a lawyer! ) but not always.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/0/22718822
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sue-scheff/the-cost-of-internet-defamation_b_...
http://www.chris-moody.com/blog/marketing/sued-over-blog-post-learn/
https://frankpetaluma.wordpress.com/2010/05/01/your-internet-posts-can-get-...

....and on and on.... near endless examples.

In reply to thermal_t:


A hateful place, I note a few regulars on these forums dwell there!

In reply to The New NickB:

They do? To save me from a walk with Virgil give us some clues.

In reply to The New NickB:


I very much dislike the "throw enough mud and some of it will stick" vibe over there. The painful thing is that I suspect they are mostly correct when it comes to how widespread doping is.

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Nice; may I use that?

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Funnily enough, I've been reading some Dante recently. The ones using the same user names for a start, but I'm sure there are others.

In reply to The New NickB:

Elish McColgan (GB) tweeted last night in response to Martyn Rooneys blog in support of the latest non GB born runners gaining eligibility to compete.. She said they should live most of the time and pay tax in GB...

.. I got the feeling this was a Farah jab..

In reply to Roadrunner5:



I've got a feeling Farah might be moving back to the UK fairly soon. Could equally be a jab at the woman who took most of her mother's British Records!

In reply to thermal_t:

I actually think doping is widespread in any sport where lots of money is around. There are lots of hints about football, never mind cyclimg where the genie is out of the bottle. What I don't like to see is people using this malaise as an excuse to effectively make shit up (or put themselves at risk through the retweet problem: The sucessful Lord McAlpine suits were illuminating including that against Sally Bercow who just said "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *innocent face" ).

UKC is a small site and a big libel hit could screw up my favorite web playground.

In reply to Offwidth:
It is interesting that The Clinic (to my knowledge) has never been hit with a libel claim, and they have threads on virtually every high profile athlete you can think of.

In reply to thermal_t:
Their risk and no excuse. In any case how would you know: many of Lord McAlpine's pursued retweeters agreed to settle privately. Just look at what Sally Bercow actually tweeted and compare it with common views on what typical forum participants think is acceptable in terms of internet censorship.

In reply to Offwidth:

Largely down to fear and lack of cash vs the might of a well resourced and amply funded law firm on behalf of McAlpine one would of thought; the U.K. in world renown for its imaginative libel justice. And favour of establishment nonces. Would of been interesting to see how that case would of played out in court.

D

In reply to Dauphin:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McAlpine_v_Bercow

In reply to mark s:
Salazaar's response

http://nikeoregonproject.com/blogs/news/35522561-alberto-open-letter-part-1
http://nikeoregonproject.com/blogs/news/35523713-alberto-open-letter-part-2

not had a chance to read, and I'm heading out, but thought it might be of interest to some

In reply to GrantM:

Cheers - fascinating, assumed they'd settled out of court. Bit silly of her to concede his innocence prior to the hearing, but never the brightest flame.

D

In reply to Offwidth:

Go over to letsrun a vicious running site... They have been after Salazar for years. It's full of ex US college runners who were excellent (sub 15 5k) now just slag the running world off.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

I really don't care what people do on other sites. What I do care about is people on UKC making factually incorrect statements against famous people when the law, if tested, finds against mere irony (like in the Sally Bercow case).

In reply to mark s:

I see today Frome talks about a missed test where the hotel wouldn't let the testers in, which seems plausible to me. But it made me wonder: Is there an army of testers who buzz around the world following athletes on holiday, wherever they may be? If hypothetically an athlete was also a climber, could they give their location as some remote mountain and expect a call from testers?

In reply to MG:

Making oneself hard to reach has long been a strategy: Mexico to get one's teeth fixed....

In reply to Offwidth:


Just out of interest, who on this thread do you think has made libellous comments?

In reply to tony:

I was wondering that, although the second post, read straight, I imagine might count. Offwidth has a fair point, there is clearly a danger of libel with online content and the boundaries are not that clear. However, not discussing these matters also has dangers - would Armstrong's doping have come to light if discussion of his doings had been (even more) restricted?

In reply to mark s:

http://road.cc/content/news/155077-chris-froome-admits-missing-out-competit...

Another athlete admitting to missing drug tests.

In reply to balmybaldwin:

You have to hand it to these guys, the novelty of their excuses is amazing. But Chris Froome on a romantic break in a posh hotel ? Incroyable.....

<removes tin foil hat>

Meanwhile, back in the real world, it really does show just how difficult it can be to comply with the whereabouts system, particularly if the testers aren't allowed to contact you by other means. And why we shouldn't read too much into one or 2 missed tests.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

I'd have thought that it suggests otherwise, that the whereabouts system can be complied with so long as one wants to do so. Froome's excuse is as credible as Farah's is not and it doesn't take a detailed knowledge of the many and varied ways that USPostal avoided positives (or Michelle Smith's less successful attempt...) to see why contacting by other means is a very poor idea.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

I'm not sure what difference ringing from the front door or hotel reception to say we are here you need to be here within 5 minutes, would have. Maybe it is important, but not like they will be checking the mini bar for blood and EPO.

If you know better, it would be interesting to know why that 5 minutes would make a difference.

In reply to mark s:

https://twitter.com/modoorbell

class!

In reply to Offwidth:

I think you are being way too precious..

This thread is very tame and just repeating what is in the news.

In reply to Chris the Tall:




Maybe not but when your coach is Salazar people will read into missed tests.. I don't think many in here how long the rumours and accusations about Salazar, doping and illegal use of TUEs have been going on for.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


But is it really the case the the TUEs have been used illegally? If, as Salazar claims, there have only been 4 TUEs for NOP athletes since 2011 and 6 NOP athletes have not had a TUE in that time, it doesn't suggest widespread use of the system. It would be useful for USADA to confirm or deny this.

In reply to tony:

Its the thyroxine that needs explaining.. I don't know if they have been used illegally, its why I said rumours and accusations.

I suspect Salazar is to clever to be caught out by this.

In reply to The New NickB: > If you know better, it would be interesting to know why that 5 minutes would make a difference.

Five minutes is sufficient.

Not enough time to dilute the blood with plasma but plenty of time to get in the shower and force soap up the urethra and contaminate the test as Armstrong did once or, to fill the bladder with something as Michelle Smith, perhaps not whisky this time though.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Again, Salazar's claim is that only 5 of his athletes have been diagnosed with hypothyroidism which would require thyroxine, which again hardly suggests systematic abuse.

In reply to tony:

You could say that as over half... whats their current roster? 8?
Actually says 7 here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_Oregon_Project#Athletes

In reply to Roadrunner5:


5 out of the 55 he's coached in all the time he's been a coach. It's all available in his statement.

In reply to tony:

What's the general rate of this? Over 10% for any disease seems very high to me.

In reply to tony:

We'll see, maybe Goucher is lying then. One of them is. But Goucher is very insistent that Salazar suggested she use a thyroid medication..

"Goucher said that after she gave birth to her son, Colt, Salazar wanted her to lose pregnancy weight. He ordered her to take Cytomel — a synthetic thyroid hormone given for people with underactive thyroids — even though she didn’t have a prescription. In fact, her own endocrinologist, whom she consulted after Salazar’s instruction, expressly told her not to take it because she was already taking another thyroid hormone, Levoxyl, which had been given to her before her arrival in Oregon to treat a thyroid problem caused by Hashimoto’s disease. Taken at high doses, such medication can often actually lead to weight gain.

Goucher said that Salazar told her to acquire the drug from Galen Rupp, one of the project’s longtime runners and the silver medalist in the 10,000 meters at the London Olympics.

“Just ask Galen for some of his. He has a prescription for it,” Goucher said Salazar told her, according to the report. Kara Goucher denied she took any of the drug."

http://blogs.denverpost.com/sports/2015/06/03/kara-goucher-left-nike-oregon...

In reply to MG:


Thats what they don't know.. are runners more susceptible to thyroid issues because of over-training.. and also if there are other benefits that we don't know that NOP do.

In reply to MG:


According to Wikipedia:
"In Western countries, hypothyroidism occurs in 0.3–0.4% while subclinical hypothyroidism, a milder form of hypothyroidism characterized by normal thyroxine levels and an elevated TSH level, is thought to occur in 4.3–8.5%. "

5 out of 55 is 9.1%, so the Salazar proportions do seem to be on the high side, but I've no idea if it's more prevalent in athletes than in the general population.

In reply to Roadrunner5:



Whereas Salazar claims that he was acting on the instruction of Goucher's endocrinologist, and he shows the email trail with the instructions:
"Alberto,
When did she get those injection? She should immediately start on the cytomel 5 micrograms twice a day. the 1st dose she should take with her levoxyl and the next 12 hours later and so on.
Jeff"

Jeff being Jeff Brown, Goucher's endocrinologist.

Have you read Salazar statement? It addresses quite a lot of the points you're raising. I'm not saying there aren't more questions to be asked and answered, but simply rehashing old stuff without reference to Salazar's statement seems a bit pointless.

In reply to Mike Highbury:


OK, fair enough!

In reply to tony:
yes I have.. as I said one is lying..

The statement from Dr Brown to Alberto happening to recall exactly what he said 4 years ago is very odd... it all reads like it is very staged.

Rather than harking on maybe you should have just linked the letter... people can read it themselves..
http://nikeoregonproject.com/blogs/news/35522561-alberto-open-letter-part-1
http://nikeoregonproject.com/blogs/news/35523713-alberto-open-letter-part-2

I don't think it answers that much to be honest. So all 18 witnesses have made it up...

In reply to Roadrunner5:



It's not 'happening to recall' ... It's taken directly from the email trail, dated August 20, 2011, as you'll know from your careful reading of the Salazar open letter.

In reply to tony:

So a Dr gave him permission.. well that's all OK then.. we don't have doctors with questionable ethics in sport do we..

and we'll see what else comes out from the other sides. I suspect there are more emails which may have been missed out..

And no this was in the letter from the Dr to AS.. the 'as I recall...' uts as staged as hell.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Did I say that? No, I didn't. All I'm saying in this case is that there are different interpretations of the story - Goucher has her version, Salazar has his, and he's got an email trail which suggests he might be right.


I'm sure there are, and the more that is revealed, the better.


I have no idea what that means.

In reply to Indy:




To be fair, if I was up in my bedroom I'd not hear anybody banging on my door, as has happened when I've been startled to find my joiner (who has a key to my front door) and his plasterer mate chatting in my bathroom when I've gone down my attic stairs. He has a hefty knock and I didn't hear a thing. 'I was knocking for ages, Tim'

In reply to tony:

it's because you havent read the letter and attachments.. the dr clearly uses the phrase 'I recall"... so yes it was very strange.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


No, it's because according to usual standards of the English language, it's gibberish.

The quote:
"Alberto,
When did she get those injection? She should immediately start on the cytomel 5 micrograms twice a day. the 1st dose she should take with her levoxyl and the next 12 hours later and so on.
Jeff"

is just that - a quote - taken directly from Brown's email of August 20, 2011 (Exhibit 22, if you're interested.)

Are you suggesting this email exchange did not take place?

In reply to tony:
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jun/25/alberto-salazar-defence-doctor-magness-emails

You've quoted something else..

I'm Talking about the letter sent to AS dated June 2015 when the Dr Brown recalls a precise version of what happened and even the day it happened, 4 years ago in 2011..

It's all in this open letter you obviously haven't so carefully read.

I don't know if those emails occurred.. They are easy to forge but that would be foolish. We'll see. Already those involved are disputing ASs version of events, even Dr Brown.. We'll see.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

He possibly would't be the first athlete to trust his doctor to only give him things which are legit, though?

In reply to mark s: have you or any of your athletes been tested Ian? How often?

In reply to Timmd:


If I don't hear my doorbell, it's because I'm hiding from the ringee

In reply to Timmd:


Its not that, its that dodgy dr's will sign off anything..

In cycling they often had no idea what they were taking, just that they were given injections, dont ask questions..

I doubt salazar is stupid enough to use anything on the banned list but suspect they use TUE's well..

In reply to wbo:


I didn't, I've just missed it a few times but it is common in any IAAF/WMRA race. I think this time none of us got tested but last world champs in Wales Jo Z was. It's pretty rare in trail, mountain running outside of major internationals to get tested but a recent sky running world champion tested positive for an EPO like substance, her husband in one of the top Italian Runners, de Gasperi, so it makes me question the whole italian set up.

I think any sport with money will attract such people.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Generally (if it is the Ian I think) I really respect your opinions on running related stuff and your posts, but in this instance you do seem to have very strong confirmation bias.

You believe Salazar and his set up is guilty and you are viewing all the information in that light.
I'm not saying he isn't, but it is still very open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Confirmation_bias

In reply to ClimberEd:
You've got that wrong..

I've said many times he's probably not illegal, highly unethical... Probably but then I think a lot of top level sports are.

But we need to be more transparent.. He's not.. We also need to have a better control of TUEs and independent Drs...

I think the UK have been largely caught by surprise on this but this has been in the press elsewhere for a long time.

18 witnesses have come out...

In reply to mark s: hmm. I got tested after a road race in the UK and rather surprisingly got randomly tested after training at the track. I'm surprised you've avoided it.

There were people saying bad things about Salazar 20 years ago and they were pretty old then. I think they've been there since he first emerged

In reply to Timmd:

I think you've massively missed the point. I'd agree that your average person not expecting a call might very well miss an average caller BUT Mo Farrah isn't your average person and nor are UKAD an average caller.

Firstly Farrah would have specifically told UKAD that he'd be at home at that time. He'd already missed a previous drugs test which under the circumstances isn't good. Secondly, to my mind it's not unreasonable for him to make absolutely certain that for the times he's nominated his whereabouts he's 100% aware that he might be called apon to provide a sample so choosing to be in a place that you can't hear the door bell is odd to say the least and downright suspicious if your even a bit cynical. Thirdly, UKAD aren't your average caller as how many of your friends and family or workmen/trades people would spend over an hour knocking and ringing your doorbell to see if you were in?

I'm sorry Farrah might be innocent but if he is then he has nobody but himself to blame for the current sh*tstorm of supicion around drugs.

Via smartphone

In reply to Roadrunner5:
What about the numbers Ian? I don't follow athletics that closely , but surely you can look at his stats over his career and make some guesses. Ive got to say that the 10,000 metre win at the Olympics looked pretty incredible. How much extra juice did the boy have over the best in the world?

D

In reply to Indy:

Who is Mo Farrah?

In reply to Dauphin:

The 10,000m panned out exactly as expected, Farah bossed the race, there were people in that race who could possibly run 10,000m faster than Farah, but not run a 53 second laps off 24 laps at fastish 10,000m pace.

Farah's PB is well off the world record, but he has a specific set of skills that wins championship races.

In reply to The New NickB:

Sticking with Salazar according to the BBC website. So bang at it then.

D

In reply to wbo:
It's why I don't think trail and mountain running is clean.

But we don't go on the testing panel of runners unless you regularly compete at that level. I know Emma C and Jo Z are tested now, or were recently.. But the rest is just at very specific races when it's well advertised you risk being tested...

I know guilty by association isn't exactly the best way but we have runners who's wife dopes, whose brother was a top cyclist banned, it makes you question them especially when the testing is so rare and well publicized.

In reply to The New NickB:

I don't see how someone can dislike your post.. UKC is odd.. But that's spot on.

I never understood why they didn't attack from the start in that race. His strategy is pretty standard now, run fastish and blast the last few laps. I know we've lost a few greats at the 10k in the last few years but I still thought some would go off at a fast pace and try to take that finishing speed off him. I still thought there were runners in the race who had quicker prs.

He was 1:15 off wr pace with a number in the field who have run sub 27.. If not sub 26:45.

But that's the beauty of championship racing, many are won in comparatively slow times

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Why are they? I don't get it. Why don't people run as fast as they have done elsewhere, just when it matters?

In reply to mbh:
I think it's just a gamble to go off at WR pace, especially in the marathon, kiprotich has won s number of major marathons, world and Olympic gold yet is a 2:07 marathoner, he's 'just'a great tactician.. Obviously 2:07 is rapid but 3-4 minutes off the top world times.

They can gamble when it's just another race but few will at championships.

If you get the chance watch the last mile or so off the world champs in 2013 or so when kiprotich just dominates and runs all over the road snaking his competitor.. The guy was just chasing his heels. Probably on you tube.

But with racing Mo you'd think they'd gamble because he will blast off the final few laps.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Has is it a gamble? Too difficult to judge the fastest pace you can do?

In reply to Roadrunner5:

How much advantage can you gain from slip-steaming ? I know it isn't anything like as much as with cycling, but I don't believe its negligible either. Plus there's the psychological benefit of having the runner ahead of you, and the fact that you don't have to keep turning your head to see where they are.

I'm guessing that distance records tend to come in more low key events, where you can get a mate to do the pace setting and run to a strategy regardless of the result. And then get a nice bonus from the promoter if it all goes according to plan

Ps - any idea what race was going through Langdale today, looked like a serious ultra marathon? I was going the opposite way, not far from the finish, and some were very friendly and cheerful, others looked quite miserable !

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Probably the 110k ultimate trails maybe but there's certainly a 110 and 55k race on. GB runner KimCollison won the 110k.

Re slip streaming it's largely mental unless there's wind, certainly much less than biking but I think it's a mental big help to sit in a group.

I don't know how much of a rush of is at 10k too hard, at the marathon it's hard to run the perfect race. Slight things can make a big difference.

Having had a life the past 3 days & frankly not had the time to keep checking back on tis thread, where I've been declared "blinkered", perhaps (or are they also blinkered / have vested interests? I should know, I've been reading / buying AW for over 30 years, but I'm sure that won't count for anything in the Opinions of the UKC Forums judge, juries & executioners - despite - ah! - still no evidence that Mo has taken anything).

http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/perspective-needed-over-missed-tests-26...

Oh and I think someone else mentioned that comparing Mo to Lance is hardly fair - Lance had covered up some (I think the backdated TPE for steroid "cream") were blatantly ways to cheat the system & clear his name at the time, using well paid doctors. Very suspect & I was highly suspicious at the time.

But generally I really don't have the time or inclination to debate this matter with people who will never agree with me, so I'm off outside .

In reply to Roadrunner5:


I was at the Ultimate Trails 110k and 55k this weekend. My girlfriend ran the 110 and various mates ran the 55. I saw Collison out on the course and at the finish, he was pretty amazing.

I'm always pretty surprised how quickly the standard drops off at these events. At the 55 all of my 6 mates were in the top 100, 4 in the top 40, out of 400+ starters, I think the fastest of them has a 3:19 marathon and he was 27th.