Alberto Salazar’s 4-Year Ban is Now Lifted. Does He Start Coaching Overseas?

Do you know where Jakob comes from?

Please link the evidence

Excited to hear about what he does!

I actually got a quote from him via email back in 2019 for $60 per month, “unlimited email contact” and “easy mission” to coach me to my PR goals. He had coached over 300 runners in 4 years and “all had improved”.

Maybe I should do it. Salazar isn’t responding to my emails.

If you aim to run 8:20, 14:20, 29:50, 1:06:00, 2:22:00, JS might be the coach for you. He's a proven quality coach at various levels including sub elites.

Depends.

You know how people are sick of old politicians in office until they die, well running needs fresh faces too.

Hopefully he will stay "retired" or just keep banning him until it sticks.

According to Mary, she was coached by Bill Dellinger in 1996.

She had an elevated T/E ratio -- this can also be due to low E. Some hormonal birth control pills can lower epitestosterone.

According to an 2015 article:

"Mary Slaney "never 'tested positive for testosterone,'" (Duke Law School professor Doriane Lambelet) Coleman wrote. "The (International Olympic Committee) laboratory reports are clear that her testosterone levels were always within her own normal range, which itself was always within the normal, allowable range. Those facts were never disputed."

"She was exonerated by the USATF because of this and because the IOC laboratories were unable to explain why their own internal scientific literature questioned the validity and reliability of the ... test as a proxy for doping, especially for women whose hormone levels naturally fluctuate."

Since Mary's ban, they follow up the T/E tests with a CIR test, no longer relying on the T/E test alone.

I am considered very high functioning, My Psychologist said I am under the Autism umbrella though so your half right

Where does the U.S. Center for SafeSport (the Center) get its authority?

The Center’s authority derives from the bylaws of the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) and the individual National Governing Bodies (NGBs) who have all agreed to be subject to the Center’s jurisdiction and processes. In addition, in 2018, Congress passed The Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017 which mandates that the USOPC eliminate abuse and recognizes the Center’s jurisdiction and authority to fulfill this mission.

Her ban was upheld by the IAAF. If Mary Slaney's lab reports are clear that she engaged in no wrong doing, she should have provided that evidence during her due process instead of walking away and trying to sue.

Also, according to Mary Slaney (I'm not on a first name basis with her like you) she was coached by Alberto Salazar in 1996. Maybe she isn't the most reliable source.

The "sexual assault" was not the "fat shaming" or "public weigh-ins in underwear", but for two instances of after workout massages with digital penetration where the fingers shouldn't be.

Safesport covers organizations and funds connected to the US Olympic movement, according to laws passed by Congress.

Salazar would be free to coach in any context outside of the Olympic movement. I believe this would include 1) non-Olympic athletes within the AAU (Amateur Athletic Union); 2) private coaching; 3) coaching at clubs or schools; 4) coaching in non-US countries; 5) etc.

Most likely the ruling from the court of public opinion (authority?) will prevent him from coaching athletes, and athletes from being coached by him, as it will generate a lot of negative publicity for that athlete.

I suppose at his age, he will retire, or write another book, and perhaps some private coaching.

No name fans are also not a reliable source. To me it just looks like another desparate attempt to somehow link Salazar to doping competing athletes, by pointing to a historic case, long before NOP, of an athlete where abnormally high levels of testestorone were not established as a fact.

There was no ban for the IAAF to uphold. The IAAF retried her "de novo" in April 1998, almost two years after the fact, after the USATF had cleared her -- an instance of double jeopardy that would not be possible today, under WADA and USADA's current rules.

Mary did provide that evidence during her due process, and was cleared by the USATF based on the doubts raised by that evidence.

The IAAF, already back then, applied the controversial standard of "guilty until proven innocent" and placed the burden on the athlete to establish their innocence. This allows convicting athletes without actually requiring to establish, or establishing, their guilt.

The lawyers for Slaney decided not to appear at the final IAAF hearing, objecting to the fairness of the shifted standard of proof and burden. At the time, the USATF supported this decision not to appear at the hearing.

The test used to "convict" Mary would be considered insufficient today, given the unreliability of the T/E ratio tests, especially for women on birth control, and in their late 30's with fluctuating hormones.

Much of the information above can be found here, in this contemperaneous legal opinion of the Doping Control Process (in 2002):

Just do it! You will never regret.He is a fantastic coach who fast get you on the right track to success.And I think he is still low in fee. Good luck!

USATF requires it’s coaches be Safesport trained.

Shut up JS.

Yeah, all had improved except the ones that can be verified.

Magic Scam!