zxcvxzcv wrote:
Why?
Because you can only get punished for offenses/crimes that you committed beyond reasonable doubt. Part of the basic human rights.
Since there is - at this moment - not enough evidence that Coleman doped in 2019, Kipsang in 2013, Kiprop in 2008, Ramzi in 2005, Baumann in 1992, Lewis in 1984, Decker in 1983, or Salazar in 1982, all these cheats sadly keep their wins.
casual obsever wrote:
zxcvxzcv wrote:
Why?
Because you can only get punished for offenses/crimes that you committed beyond reasonable doubt. Part of the basic human rights.
Since there is - at this moment - not enough evidence that Coleman doped in 2019, Kipsang in 2013, Kiprop in 2008, Ramzi in 2005, Baumann in 1992, Lewis in 1984, Decker in 1983, or Salazar in 1982, all these cheats sadly keep their wins.
Err..you throw allegations of doping around like confetti but you think that it's not beyond reasonable doubt that Kiprop was doping in 2008 running 10 seconds faster than when he got caught. Lol.
You're mistaking criminal law with the rules and decisions of a sporting body.
You've accused Nick Willis of doping, but you think there is sufficient doubt as to whether a convicted doper was doping to let him keep his medals (including the gold he robbed Wilis of)?
So you think Armstrong should have kept his titles?
wejo wrote:
Gladwell has said LetsRun is his favorite website and
Legitimately disappointing to know that he's a fan of alt-right ideologies and conspiracies.
Coevett wrote:
Err..you throw allegations of doping around like confetti
Err... no, that's your modus operandi.
Coevett wrote:
You've accused Nick Willis of doping
You sure? Source?
Coevett wrote:
So you think Armstrong should have kept his titles?
No. Source?
Coevett wrote:
If Lance Armstrong - who never failed a single test - could have all his titles taken away, why can't the same thing happen in athletics
He is known to have failed at least one test (A sample) but paid off the head of the UCI to sweep it under the rug.
*Epo test
Also the cortisol steroid positive that they retroactively backdated a saddle cream TUE. Which the UCI accepted.
He also tested positive for corticosteroids during his very first TdF win, but was let off with a backdated TUE against the rules. Had UCI followed the rules back then and banned him in 1999, the whole Armstrong story would never have started.
TylerH wrote:
*Epo test
Also the cortisol steroid positive that they retroactively backdated a saddle cream TUE. Which the UCI accepted.
^This. Our posts overlapped.
I listened to the bit where he mentioned 30 thousand people at a track meet in Europe.
I don't know how well meets are attended in the US.
It seems bigger meets like the Pre Classic and Milrose Games (when it was in MSG) would attract large crowds. Penn Relays and others come to mind as well.
In Canada, aside from the 2001 Worlds in my hometown, I've never seen a track meet with more than a few thousand in attendance.
For 'track to be back' people need to actually care. Right now the sport seems to be scattered around. It's interesting how if you are for example the 10th best shot putter in the world, you might earn (a guess off the top of my head) a six figure contract while if you are the 10th best player in the NFL you are earning a great deal more. If you're the 100th best shot putter, you are still damn good but you likely earn less than the 10th best guy. If you're the 100th best NFL player you're still payed very well.
Track doesn't have enough enthusiasm. Who thinks running is cool?
I do, kind of. I love to compete. Training isn't fun if you're out of shape but gets better when you improve.
Lots of people don't think running is cool or just don't consider it.
Who the f_ _ _? is malcolm galdwell
casual obsever wrote:
Coevett wrote:
If Lance Armstrong - who never failed a single test - could have all his titles taken away, why can't the same thing happen in athletics?
Because USADA considered it proven that he had doped during all his TdF wins.
More like, Lance admitted he doped in every Tour de France! Yet there are others who keep their wins. Bjarne Riis for instance. Ullrich also finally admitted he doped, but I don't recall if he admitted to doing it in '97... anyway ...
Regarding the interview, I agree with his views on Nike's influence, but not about most of the other stuff.
It is a WEAK argument to use the "better responder" to the shoes between person A and person B. Why? Because that is true for EVERYTHING an athlete does...it's just that most other things there is no way to quantify most things.
For instance, regarding training, we never actually KNOW whether someone has reached their potential. Maybe 20x400 works really well for A but not B, but how would you quantify that? Diet, supplements, sleep ... all of these things are not the same for all athletes, and if they were, it would be reasonable to expect that some would respond better than others, but we cannot prove it nor measure the effects.
Also, regarding the 4 guys surely not being better than Kamworor...while I would tend to agree, isn't it blindingly obvious that there is a logic gap here? Kam wasn't in that race, at the same time, in those same conditions. Whos to say he wouldn't have run 57:20, beating all those other guys?
Finally, I think Gladwell is the person that started the "in the year 2027..." about Colt Goucher!
I really did not like how he said he wanted to see more from NOP and BTC. There's no point in having these elite, exclusive groups if everything they do is out there for all to see on the internet, then every wannabe Rupp can go and copy some form of his schedule, which is in my opinion one of the worst things that happens to the sport besides doping, when elite runners have what makes them elite released to the masses. Once everyone is elite, then no one will be, as the Incredibles says best.
I think you forgot to ask him about his trolling article where he said that people who listen to music while running are not real runners.
"listening to music while running is soft".
How could you forget this most important topic.
Convenient about face on NOP and doping. Gladwell has written multiple fawning pieces on Salazar and the Oregon Project before the fall. This guy has a platform and can turn a phrase, but does not have any special insight into the sport.
I liked his suggestions about field events moved out of stadium. They do tend to get lost during other track events. We saw this in Athens where the Shot Put was put on in the ancient ruins. Some Pole Vault stuff has been held in more intimate places as well.
Q: Are teh shoes bad?
A: Shoes bad, omg what is a record even anymore
Q: How should we improve the sport?
A: Tracksmith will save us all from the evil shoe companies
Q: You're racing Lebron?
A: GIVE ME THE SHOES
Hey don't forget, Malcolm is also the co-founder of the excellent Broken Record podcast with producer Rick Rubin. Highly recommended!
He came across extra bogus/pompous. He faked his way through a couple of questions, was an ass asserting Jamaicans are not dopers, and out of his mind thinking Lebron could run a 5 minute mile. So glad Rojo took a pass.
RE: Doping.
One thing the Nikes of the world should do is include a clause in all their athlete's contract that forfeits all of their money for that contract if they fail a doping test .
I'd they have a 5 year contract worth $100,000 per year and they fail a test they forfeit the entire $500,000.
If the financial penalty for cheating is high enough it will go a long way towards stopping it. No athlete should dope ever. Full stop.
Greg wrote:
It's interesting how if you are for example the 10th best shot putter in the world, you might earn (a guess off the top of my head) a six figure contract
Maybe if you include the digits to the right of the decimal point.