Is Ledecky clean?

To say that people are doping are lazy is absurd. People dope so that they can recover faster, train

Longer and build endurance.

The ones that train all the time and not breakdown physically are the ones Iook at. The designer drugs will come up eventually. The are testing samples from 8-12 years ago.

I think everyone understands that genetics is why they are in Rio and we are at home.

Karma Police wrote:

And in any case - we're back to the "she's good so she must be dirty" argument - as I said, the argument's as stupid as those baselessly using it.

Just like those who accuse Ye Shiwen and Katinka Hosszu, who have never tested positive. If you're fast, you're either American or doping.

Raadle wrote:

Yeah and a family with 100s of millions of dollars, sports connections, and basically unlimited resources.

\

You're all a bunch of cynical pinheads. Idle speculation with no basis in fact. My suggestion is to let the testers do their jobs, watch the Olympics and wish you had the talent and drive to either have been there, or were there. Then STFU.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Raadle wrote:

Yeah and a family with 100s of millions of dollars, sports connections, and basically unlimited resources.

You're all a bunch of cynical pinheads. Idle speculation with no basis in fact. My suggestion is to let the testers do their jobs, watch the Olympics and wish you had the talent and drive to either have been there, or were there. Then STFU.

You are right. In america no one should be free to think or question. We should just marvel at wonders.

Ledeckys records will fall soon as transgender swimmers find acceptance and success.

This is the swan song for women's swimming.

"Exactly. If you're wealthy, you probably didn't get there by chance. You have to be willing to do what others won't."

This is completely absurd BS, depending on what level you consider "wealthy".

Her family wealth is not a reason to suspect her of doping. Neither is it compelling evidence that she is clean.

Same thing if she and her family seem nice.

I don't think she dopes but I think she could be intersex.

Has USA swimming ever had a big-time champion caught doping? I don't think there's ever been anything systematic in USA swimming but you'd think a couple of athletes over the years would have doped on their own.

Why does the USA dominate this sport (and has for a long time), which is a fairly niche sport? I thought about this.

Schools have pools. A lot of kids learn to swim. Not everyone, of course, but a basic introduction is available for a lot of kids.

Big youth swimming infrastructure - club, YMCA, high school.

And, most importantly, college swimming. No other country has sports/education mix like the USA, and elite college swimming in the USA is basically elite swimming period. Training and facilities for college swimming are excellent. If you're a DI NCAA champ (or even just Top 3), your times are going to be competitive on a world stage, generally.

Thurston Howell IV wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

You're all a bunch of cynical pinheads. Idle speculation with no basis in fact. My suggestion is to let the testers do their jobs, watch the Olympics and wish you had the talent and drive to either have been there, or were there. Then STFU.

You are right. In america no one should be free to think or question. We should just marvel at wonders.

Ledeckys records will fall soon as transgender swimmers find acceptance and success.

This is the swan song for women's swimming.

Question when there is suspicion, based on evidence.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Thurston Howell IV wrote:

You are right. In america no one should be free to think or question. We should just marvel at wonders.

Ledeckys records will fall soon as transgender swimmers find acceptance and success.

This is the swan song for women's swimming.

Question when there is suspicion, based on evidence.

so after there is evidence, then it is okay to have suspicion, and after suspicion then question ..... Okay ....

Thurston Howell IV wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Question when there is suspicion, based on evidence.

so after there is evidence, then it is okay to have suspicion, and after suspicion then question ..... Okay ....

The point is that just because someones parents have means, or that someone that has a history of swimming (or any other sport) at an elite level, holds a WR etc, that there should be suspicion of PED use. If some kind of evidence surfaces that suggests that it may be the case, then by all means go at it. Huge drops in times, over and above what one would expect might be one. In the case of Ledecky, her performance improvements, while outstanding do not rise to that level. Her previous WR in the 400 was set 2 years ago, and her current one in the 400 is only a couple seconds faster. That's the point. Her hairline would also not be a valid reason to consider PED use. I'd like to see pictures of some of the posters on here, now THAT would be something to discuss and pick apart.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Raadle wrote:

Yeah and a family with 100s of millions of dollars, sports connections, and basically unlimited resources.

You're all a bunch of cynical pinheads. Idle speculation with no basis in fact. My suggestion is to let the testers do their jobs, watch the Olympics and wish you had the talent and drive to either have been there, or were there. Then STFU.

By saying and believing this you forget or justify the NUMEROUS people across all sports that have passed the test and then later got admitted, many not actually caught to using. So that is evidence that there is a MASSIVE problem while not being able to pinpoint a person.And why pepole speculate about the performace. And there have been numerous articles written in published jounals as well as books on the subject matter.

Olympic Truth wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

You're all a bunch of cynical pinheads. Idle speculation with no basis in fact. My suggestion is to let the testers do their jobs, watch the Olympics and wish you had the talent and drive to either have been there, or were there. Then STFU.

By saying and believing this you forget or justify the NUMEROUS people across all sports that have passed the test and then later got admitted, many not actually caught to using. So that is evidence that there is a MASSIVE problem while not being able to pinpoint a person.And why pepole speculate about the performace. And there have been numerous articles written in published jounals as well as books on the subject matter.

I don't forget or justify anything, and we're discussing swimming (and the US swimmers specifically) not track, cycling, weightlifting etc. The structure of USA swimming these days and the USA Swimming club structure makes it next to impossible to get away with anything. You likely have the occasional issue, IE Jessica Hardy but those are few and far between. I can't comment about swimmers in other countries just what I know about the structure of things here in the US.

Fair enough in that I do not know swimming like I know track. But there is a common sense aboout drug use in sports that cannot be ignored and cannot be explained away saying our sport organization is so superior to others. That's just not realistic. and a little condesending

Olympic Truth wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I don't forget or justify anything, and we're discussing swimming (and the US swimmers specifically) not track, cycling, weightlifting etc. The structure of USA swimming these days and the USA Swimming club structure makes it next to impossible to get away with anything. You likely have the occasional issue, IE Jessica Hardy but those are few and far between. I can't comment about swimmers in other countries just what I know about the structure of things here in the US.

Fair enough in that I do not know swimming like I know track. But there is a common sense aboout drug use in sports that cannot be ignored and cannot be explained away saying our sport organization is so superior to others. That's just not realistic. and a little condesending

Well, be that as it may, and what I know about the USA Swimming structure and integrity of the coaches and orginazation, that's my assessment. I stand by it.

Why can't we all agree that intuition and circumstantial factors are not reliable to determine clean vs dirty? We don't really know unless an athlete has already failed a highly specific test unambiguously. At the same time, there is reason enough to be skeptical about dirty athletes evading positive tests based on history. I wish the conversation would shift to what changes would effectively clean up sport and remove this ever present corrosive uncertainty.

I see 2 fundamental requirements:

1. Punishment so severe that no reasonable athlete would accept the risk of doping or even taking a supplement of unclear composition. This would entail a lifetime ban for first time offenders and storage of samples for retroactive testing and implementation of penalties for athletes even after they are retired.

2. Testing reliable enough so that false positives are exceedingly exceedingly rare to avoid the harsh punishment of non-offenders.

Perhaps this is a pipe dream, or perhaps it would be so expensive to implement such that governing bodies would never do so. I just don't see this as an area where compromise will work.

Yes this is not realistic. From a track standpoint. PED use has been going on since the 80s, so a clean sport would be slow I mean really slow. This does not fit both the what the public wants and how the org.promote. Its not that difficult to change to test to be less drug specific and more indicator specific to have strong cause that the athlete is doping. But not a test for a specific drug, so while it would be possible for the indicators to be wrong, it closes the door to that method. so your saying there's a chance.

The punishment will not work, people have everything to gain so its worth the risk of a lifetime ban.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Olympic Truth wrote:

Fair enough in that I do not know swimming like I know track. But there is a common sense aboout drug use in sports that cannot be ignored and cannot be explained away saying our sport organization is so superior to others. That's just not realistic. and a little condesending

Well, be that as it may, and what I know about the USA Swimming structure and integrity of the coaches and orginazation, that's my assessment. I stand by it.

That just makes you look worse. Lance Armstrong said the same thing. And your stance further makes me think I'm right. Such a blind view of an organization, that is having problems world wide, but YOU think USA swimming is above it. YOu cannot possibly know even a large majority of people well enough to make that claim, much less spend time with them day in and day out How across the US. I stand by my view which is of course they use, but everyone does so the best still win.

Not that I can remember, other than Rick Demont for taking prescription asthma medication--something that he had previously applied for but the IOC sports body and medical wing didn't agree on the paper work or something. He was later cleared to compete, but never got his gold medal back either.

Have heard second hand that an American medalist from a ways back was a doper, but who knows how reliable the source to my source was.