Don’t know. Don’t care about her. Let the cheater disappear into anonymity
CAS did not convict her for cheating.
Have you bothered to read the rules?
DOES the CAS convict people for "cheating"? Like is "cheating" a conviction that they hand down? Or is this just symantics?
Because this reminds me of the "improbable but not IMPOSSIBLE" argument that only seemed to be made just for Shelburrito. Like, the CAS didn't say impossible, because they literally can't say that anything is impossible for certain. But the nandrolone being ingested from the burrito was so damn improbable that a reasonable person can just determine it's impossible.
You are grasping at certain words or lack thereof. "Well CAS didn't CALL her a cheater!" Um, sure? But they said she has a positive A and B sample for a banned drug sooooo...? "Well the CAS didn't SAY it was impossible!" um, okay? Who cares?
So here is my question for all the Shelby stans. Can you give me a reasonable alibi for Shelby here as to where the nandrolone COULD have come from?
DOES the CAS convict people for "cheating"? Like is "cheating" a conviction that they hand down? Or is this just symantics?
No. No. Yes, just one of their little tricks to deflect/obfuscate. And yes, they could use this "but CAS didn't call it cheating" for all drug cheats, from Armstrong to Baumann to Blake to Decker to Gatlin to Hunter to Jones to Kiprop to Jeptoo to Salazar, to name a few, but most use it only for Houlihan.
CAS gave Houlihan the full four year ban for intentional doping, and explicitly mentioned "intentional" a couple of times. And CAS ruled out that the nandro came from, I cite: "commercial pork" like the food truck evidently used, but, trolls will be trolling.
DOES the CAS convict people for "cheating"? Like is "cheating" a conviction that they hand down? Or is this just symantics?
Because this reminds me of the "improbable but not IMPOSSIBLE" argument that only seemed to be made just for Shelburrito. Like, the CAS didn't say impossible, because they literally can't say that anything is impossible for certain. But the nandrolone being ingested from the burrito was so damn improbable that a reasonable person can just determine it's impossible.
You are grasping at certain words or lack thereof. "Well CAS didn't CALL her a cheater!" Um, sure? But they said she has a positive A and B sample for a banned drug sooooo...? "Well the CAS didn't SAY it was impossible!" um, okay? Who cares?
So here is my question for all the Shelby stans. Can you give me a reasonable alibi for Shelby here as to where the nandrolone COULD have come from?
The CAS doesn't determine cheating. This accusation only comes from fans who know much less than the CAS.
It is more than just "symantics". Cheating suggests fraud and deception for the purpose of gaining an advantage. For those non-haters just sticking with the facts and evidence, none of these elements have been determined for Houlihan, primarily because none of them are required for determining a doping violation.
As the Houlihan case has demonstrated, reasonable persons are easily confused by statistics, and therefore unwittingly susceptible to fallacies.
"Reasonable alibi" is something rather subjective. This raises the question if it is reasonable for a distance athlete to intentionally take nandrolone orally.
Yet, notwithstanding the verdict, the CAS decision gave us several reasons to still think that the unproven/unprovable scenario of accidental and unknowing ingestion by pork burrito, as unlikely as that may seem, could still be a likely source of the nandrolone, if not the most likely as Houlihan argued. Another reasonable alibi is contamination in one of the supplements she couldn't test.
No. No. Yes, just one of their little tricks to deflect/obfuscate. And yes, they could use this "but CAS didn't call it cheating" for all drug cheats, from Armstrong to Baumann to Blake to Decker to Gatlin to Hunter to Jones to Kiprop to Jeptoo to Salazar, to name a few, but most use it only for Houlihan.
CAS gave Houlihan the full four year ban for intentional doping, and explicitly mentioned "intentional" a couple of times. And CAS ruled out that the nandro came from, I cite: "commercial pork" like the food truck evidently used, but, trolls will be trolling.
The case is closed. Drug cheats out!
Calling it "cheating" is more like Orwellian doublespeak designed as a rhetorical device to trigger emotions.
Pointing out the inapplicability applies in every case where any dishonest act for the purpose of gaining an advantage has not been established, including many of the athletes you listed.
Fans with bad faith want to call it "cheating" for their own personal reasons, and they want to believe things like "intentional" when, in this case, the CAS lacks sufficient evidence and could not know. WADA doesn't require the CAS to know, in order to treat the violation as "intentional" for the express sole purpose of deciding the length of the sanction.
The CAS also lacked sufficient evidence to "rule out that the nandro came from ... "commercial pork"". Even the AIU experts did not rule it out completely. Again, WADA doesn't require that, for the CAS to reach a determination that "not intentional" was not proved to the required standard by Houlihan.
Has she run yet? If I were Shelbo, just say eff it, get on that nandralone baloney train full send and see how many WRs I could smash. Non-sanctioned events of course but who cares?
Example: Who hit the most home runs in history? Barry MF Bonds. Who was #2? No one knows. No one cares.
Has she run yet? If I were Shelbo, just say eff it, get on that nandralone baloney train full send and see how many WRs I could smash. Non-sanctioned events of course but who cares?
Example: Who hit the most home runs in history? Barry MF Bonds. Who was #2? No one knows. No one cares.
Has she run yet? If I were Shelbo, just say eff it, get on that nandralone baloney train full send and see how many WRs I could smash. Non-sanctioned events of course but who cares?
Example: Who hit the most home runs in history? Barry MF Bonds. Who was #2? No one knows. No one cares.
Yeah sounds like she ran last night. No word on the time yet.
Other then her 3+ mile 24 min run yesterday evening then a random post of a run 1.3 mile run at 10:30pm, she’s just got a longer run later this morning of 6.5 miles in around 49 min. If any time trial this weekend, she hasn’t posted and could be keeping that private , certainly if it didn’t go well. No where did I see it actually posted by Shelby or company she was doing any time trial, besides wild speculation form posters here
Has she run yet? If I were Shelbo, just say eff it, get on that nandralone baloney train full send and see how many WRs I could smash. Non-sanctioned events of course but who cares?
Example: Who hit the most home runs in history? Barry MF Bonds. Who was #2? No one knows. No one cares.
Yeah sounds like she ran last night. No word on the time yet.
Has she run yet? If I were Shelbo, just say eff it, get on that nandralone baloney train full send and see how many WRs I could smash. Non-sanctioned events of course but who cares?
Example: Who hit the most home runs in history? Barry MF Bonds. Who was #2? No one knows. No one cares.
Oh wow, that’s really not a good example. Because anybody who likes baseball knows the answer.
No. You do. You are the only one here who talks about it. Such a lonely little lunatic.
I have not posted racist terms and you have and you admitted it.
So prove you are not a racist and the racist terms you used where accidental or your handle was sabataged. Come on prove it.:
I have proved it previously but you cannot read. I have said your stupidity has nothing to do with your race. But because your stupidity is without limits you will keep asking the same unremittingly stupid question.
No. No. Yes, just one of their little tricks to deflect/obfuscate. And yes, they could use this "but CAS didn't call it cheating" for all drug cheats, from Armstrong to Baumann to Blake to Decker to Gatlin to Hunter to Jones to Kiprop to Jeptoo to Salazar, to name a few, but most use it only for Houlihan.
CAS gave Houlihan the full four year ban for intentional doping, and explicitly mentioned "intentional" a couple of times. And CAS ruled out that the nandro came from, I cite: "commercial pork" like the food truck evidently used, but, trolls will be trolling.
The case is closed. Drug cheats out!
Calling it "cheating" is more like Orwellian doublespeak designed as a rhetorical device to trigger emotions.
Pointing out the inapplicability applies in every case where any dishonest act for the purpose of gaining an advantage has not been established, including many of the athletes you listed.
Fans with bad faith want to call it "cheating" for their own personal reasons, and they want to believe things like "intentional" when, in this case, the CAS lacks sufficient evidence and could not know. WADA doesn't require the CAS to know, in order to treat the violation as "intentional" for the express sole purpose of deciding the length of the sanction.
The CAS also lacked sufficient evidence to "rule out that the nandro came from ... "commercial pork"". Even the AIU experts did not rule it out completely. Again, WADA doesn't require that, for the CAS to reach a determination that "not intentional" was not proved to the required standard by Houlihan.
And here we have the rekrunner/Houlihan equivalent to the argument that Russia hasn't invaded Ukraine, it is merely conducting a "special military operation".
So maybe 72 pace (30:00 10k target), had a camera guy, keeping it secret and releasing the video eventually
Prediction: She ran between ~29:55 and ~30:15 for 10k based on the camera guy's activity 1. He starts his watch around the gun 2. Alternates between walking around and running down the homestretch and backstretch to film 3. On his last run down the homestretch he slows down 29:55 into the activity, though he's behind the finish line
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.
