Plus, Gault's "key thing to know" is utter nonsense; even team Houlihan didn't go that far.
As is his "why not take the extra step?", as discussed in wejo's pharmacokinetics thread.
Plus, Gault's "key thing to know" is utter nonsense; even team Houlihan didn't go that far.
As is his "why not take the extra step?", as discussed in wejo's pharmacokinetics thread.
as again that matters not a bit to whether you are taking or ingesting banned substances or not.
your continued focus on this shows you just how forgiving and sentimental this culture is that you build in the propaganda right into the story
Excellent article by JG!
Regardless of stance the objectivity here is pointing all at Testing.
Endogenous and Exogenous tests are available she took the Endogenous and actually tested positive for having Nandro derived from an organic(animal source) her test though revealed she was 1% away from being in the exogenous territory (oral synthetic supps) so despite having exogenous test available they subjectively ruled endogenous test as exogenous?!
That's a major technicality may as well grab all athlete x,y, and z's positive A sample and rule guilty despite having Negative B sample.
north korean TV gives you key things to know as well
north korean TV gives you key things to know as well
It's telling that in the face of clear, incontrovertible evidence that Shelby is a doper presented by experts who actually know what they're talking about, the great journalist John "Team Shelby" Gault recommends that we go read a blog by some clown named "twoggle". smh.
this is it wrote:
It's telling that in the face of clear, incontrovertible evidence that Shelby is a doper presented by experts who actually know what they're talking about, the great journalist John "Team Shelby" Gault recommends that we go read a blog by some clown named "twoggle". smh.
She doped. Get over it. Career over.
Time for her to open a burrito truck. I'm voting for the first menu item to be the "Boarrito."
Guilty or Not Guilty: A 30 for 30 special hosted by Howie Mandel.
Any explanation for why USADA declined to get involved? Would they have been able to take jurisdiction and make the final ruling?
It's always interesting to see what people's integrity is worth. For Gault, all it's worth is the sense of being an "insider" sitting at the cool kid's table. Pathetic.
what do you mean ‘why they declined to get involved’?
how do you think USADA outranks the WADA exactly?
it’s whoever is granting access.
if you’re granting access youre getting the benefit of the doubt. insular, standoff ish, foreign, youre treated with immediate suspicion
this is it wrote:
It's telling that in the face of clear, incontrovertible evidence that Shelby is a doper presented by experts who actually know what they're talking about, the great journalist John "Team Shelby" Gault recommends that we go read a blog by some clown named "twoggle". smh.
This is the most embarrassing part of it all
Esp when someone points out the guy is insider who follows 5 ppl and is followed by himself on an alt acct.
Good intrepid work though. letsrun is like the Wash Post: you never know what page the front page story is going to be on
Yes, Rojo, but you seem to attack those you are less friendly with, and defend folks like BTC’s Houlihan and Paula Radcliffe. Both seem to have had huge unusual improvements that in other cases my you more suspicious. I think she dodged the shoes as her times would improve more and seem even less believable. Maybe innocent, but somewhat hard to believe for many of us. And she would not be the first distance runner on nandrolone. Which her coach, more involved in track than I, claims to have not heard of? Dieter Baumann rings no bells? Really?
losmateo2 wrote:
Any explanation for why USADA declined to get involved? Would they have been able to take jurisdiction and make the final ruling?
Drug testing of Houlihan and the rest of the world's top athletes is controlled by the AIU, not by national authorities.
The reason is obvious from your question. Imagine the sort of nonsense that would follow if the national doping authorities had control over the testing of their country's best athletes.
You can see who is in the WA Registered Testing Pool here:
https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/know-the-process/registered-testing-poolthis is it wrote:
take a minute to reflect wrote:
A driver kills a couple of children driving drunk. The police make him do a breathalyzer test ( he blows over) and even do a blond test, and it also confirms that the driver has levels illegal levels of alcohol in his blood. Are all of you know insisting that the onus shouldn't shift to the drunk driver to explain the level of alcohol in his blood? Maybe his drink really was spiked and he didn't know it. But no - you think the police should have the additional duty to prove how/when/etc. he consumed the alcohol and be required to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the drunk driver drank alcohol on purpose, including the all the details of the consumption?
You really don't think it's ok for a court to make the presumption that the alcohol in the drunk drivers blood got there by voluntary consumption? You think the law needs to change and the police actually need to prove the voluntary consumption of alcohol? That should end road blocks and every drunk driving conviction in the world. Increase your tax dollars as police will now have to sit in bars and conduct surveillance on each and every person... not sure how they would do it for home parties etc. So, really, you would advocate to abolish drunk driving laws with the logic being exhibited by your Shelby deniers.
You guys are too much.
Thank you. These "Team Shelby" guys are just ridiculous at this point and it's a little surprising to see Gault and Rojo going down the same road. I thought this site was supposed to be hard on drug cheats.
They are. They're hard on non-American drug cheats.
Tastes Like Chicken wrote:
losmateo2 wrote:
Any explanation for why USADA declined to get involved? Would they have been able to take jurisdiction and make the final ruling?
Drug testing of Houlihan and the rest of the world's top athletes is controlled by the AIU, not by national authorities.
The reason is obvious from your question. Imagine the sort of nonsense that would follow if the national doping authorities had control over the testing of their country's best athletes.
You can see who is in the WA Registered Testing Pool here:
https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/know-the-process/registered-testing-pool
This isn't entirely true but because Houlihan tested positive from a sample collected by AIU and not USADA it's entirely out of USADA's control.
dullard wrote:
this is it wrote:
Thank you. These "Team Shelby" guys are just ridiculous at this point and it's a little surprising to see Gault and Rojo going down the same road. I thought this site was supposed to be hard on drug cheats.
They are. They're hard on non-American drug cheats.
And don't forget Galen Rupp. That overachieving American whose coach prescribed too many LEGAL vitamins.........to an assistant coach!!!
Right, right. Whatever scraps of access Schumacher granted paid off in spades for him, certainly. He gets the total package of servile, fawning, apologist 'journalist' sychophants.
I bet he had some good chuckles about that while planning out his athletes chemical cycles.
This guy Jordan Beckett is having a meltdown all over Instagram this past 24 hours. He claims to be Shelby's room mate and is DMing people aggressively if they suggest the findings of the report are correct and that Shelby is a doper.
Also, he's posting about the half life of nandrolone like he's a scientific expert.
Yet his room mate and her coach had never even heard of it.
Lol