No doubt wrote:
Answer me this wrote:
How many times, exactly, have NOP athletes tested positive for PEDs?
I would say about as many times as Lance Armstrong.
And Jenny?
No doubt wrote:
Answer me this wrote:
How many times, exactly, have NOP athletes tested positive for PEDs?
I would say about as many times as Lance Armstrong.
And Jenny?
vvnemeke wrote:
Swame wrote:
What a load of crap. TUE is not remotely the same as having a coach banned for breaking anti-doping regulations.
I don't know if she has a TUE, I just assumed. I'm more curious about why Lewis confronted her, and why she responded the way she did. Brojos, what does it hurt to ask her? Let's have an open discussion. She points fingers, so she has to be open to the same scrutiny.
There is so much more to this story!
I don't understand why Engels is being so nonchalant about his coach being banned. If it were me, I would be pissed! Jenny also has a right to be mad, cheating should enrage us all! it's ruining our sport. Jenny has had cheaters beat her and get caught later her whole career, it's no wonder she had such a visceral reaction.
Engels reaction is weird and doesn't sit right as genuine with me. If I were a clean athlete, I would be mad as hell....his reaction makes me even more suspicious of him because he is relying on character assassination as a defense, instead of also agreeing that "cheaters should be banned for life" and that cheating is absolutely wrong. He's deflecting the attention away from himself by vilifying someone else, and not really addressing the main issue (an easy tactic to see through). There's some big inconsistencies with his emotional response to this.
these are the worst threads on letsrun, where everyone picks a side and then flings sh*t. not gonna watch either of your long ass interviews lol.
a bloo bloo wrote:
these are the worst threads on letsrun, where everyone picks a side and then flings sh*t. not gonna watch either of your long ass interviews lol.
+1
I live it when they conclude that everyone is cheating, so don't blame Alberto and NOP
You are correct when you say "I don't understand ". That is obvious
Armstronglivs wrote:
If Salazar wasn't doping his athletes then what he did was merely a technical infringement and doesn't affect anyone. But that isn't "orchestrating prohibited doping practices" (the description used by USADA) that would merit a 4-year ban. I think Simpson and quite a few other athletes (Willis, et al) get that. And now the IOC wants more answers to the question of whether Salazar's athletes were involved.
Reasons Salazar received a 4-year ban:
1. L-Carnitine – Administration – Magness Infusion
"The Panel finds that USADA has met its burden of proof to show that there was: 1. A
Prohibited Method, an infusion over the applicable limit; 2. Mr. Magness was an Athlete;
and 3. Respondent, specifically and aggressively, facilitated and otherwise participated
in Mr. Magness’ Use of the Prohibited Method. Respondent has committed a violation
of Article 2.8."
2. Tampering and/or Attempted Tampering - L-Carnitine
"Respondent thus positioned the infusions as injections and forcefully instructed the NOP
Athletes not to disclose them. Respondent’s argument that no doping controls actually
occurred and thus there was no instance where the instructions were followed is of no
relevance to the analysis. The Panel must determine whether Respondent engaged in
what he considered to be intentional or fraudulent conduct to alter results or prevent
normal procedures from occurring."
"A majority of the Panel finds that Respondent did deliberately engage in intentional
conduct to alter results or prevent normal procedures from occurring. He was clearly
operating under the impression that the NOP Athletes could be asked about infusions and
a majority finds he tried to prevent the normal procedure from occurring by instructing
the NOP Athletes that no declaration of use of LCarnitine was required and that they
should deny they had the L-carnitine infusion when asked about infusions when getting
drug tested in or out of competition."
Salazar's emails to Shelly Rodemer regarding the distinction between infusions and injections:
Jan 5, 2012 1:17 pm
Hi Shelly, this Globaldro link and the WADA link regarding
injections and infusions. From reading both of these we will
proceed with the following understanding: As long as an injection
into a vein using a standard needle or butterfly needle is under 50
ml and contains no banned substances, the athlete does not have
to apply for a TUE and should not consider it an infusion, and
should answer “NO”, if asked by drug testers if they’ve had an
infusion in the previous six months.
Is this correct? Thank you! – Alberto Salazar
Jan 5, 2012 2:53 pm
Hi Shelly, I just found this old email where Amy Eichner answered
my earlier question to you regarding whether an injection of under
50 ml should be declared when an athlete is asked when drug
tested. She says below that it’s not necessary so unless USADA’s
stance on this has changed, you don’t need to answer me back.
Thanks for all your help and have a great week! — Alberto
The email Salazar sent to his athletes which has resulted in him being charged with Tampering:
HI Dathan, Alvina, and Galen, For your interest. When asked
about an infusion, you are to say no. LCarnitine and Iron in the
way we have done it is classified as an injection. So no TUE’s and
no declaration needed, not online and not when asked about
infusions when getting drug tested in or out of competition..Thanks
– Alberto
3. Trafficking and/or Attempted Trafficking of Testosterone – Testosterone Experiment
"In any event, even reading the rule as the parties have done, the Panel does not find
Respondent’s conduct of an experiment using his two sons to be such an “acceptable
justification.” Respondent is an Athlete Support Person bound by the provisions of the
Code, the experiment was conducted at the lab of his employer, where his purpose is to
act in his capacity as an Athlete Support Person. In that capacity, there is no acceptable
justification to give any third parties a Prohibited Substance so he can conduct a test
related to his job."
"While it does not appear to the Panel that the Respondent was trying to intentionally
circumvent the applicable Code provisions, he is subject to a high standard under the Code, especially as a coach and an example to his athletes and the Athletics community.
Unfortunately for him, under the plain meaning of the relevant Code provision, as an
Athlete Support Person, Respondent is strictly prohibited from trafficking in testosterone
by giving it to third parties. The Panel therefore must find that he has violated this Article
in the context of the testosterone experiment."
"Here, the Panel found the following violations of the Code:"
See items 1-3 above
"Accordingly, the Panel finds that the period of Ineligibility shall be four years from the
date of this decision."
To your point about Salazar promoting doping and/or directly doping his athletes:
"...the evidence was that once Respondent had contacted USADA on
December 3, 2011 to seek approval of his “research” and Dr. Fedoruk responded very
specifically on December 6, 2011 that the limit of any infusion should be 50 mL,
Respondent instructed Dr. Brown and Mr. Magness that the infusions should in the future
be a maximum of 50 mL. All the contemporaneous email exchanges thereafter indicate
that the original plan was altered and the intention was to comply with the Code."
"There was plenty of credible testimony about Respondent’s intent concerning
athletes at the NOP not having any anti-doping rule violations or taking any
prohibited performance enhancing drugs."
"A majority of the Panel finds that no substantial step was taken by Respondent with
respect to an anti-doping rule violation (i.e. the Use of a Prohibited Method/over volume
infusion) for the NOP Athletes and in fact, Respondent was explicit at the time in taking
whatever steps were necessary to avoid any such conduct."
"A majority of the Panel finds that USADA has not met its burden of proof with respect
to the Attempted Administration charge as it relates to the NOP Athletes."
"...the record as it involves Respondent is clear that he was trying not to have the NOP
Athletes commit an anti-doping rule violation. Rather than assisting, encouraging or
covering up, the record is very clear that Respondent was trying to have the L-carnitine
infusions after Mr. Magness’ be done in compliance with the Applicable Rules."
"a majority of the Panel found the infusions given to the NOP
Athletes were not a Prohibited Method. Respondent was specifically not assisting,
encouraging, aiding or abetting an anti-doping violation,"
https://drive.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.usada.org/wp-content/uploads/Salazar-AAA-Decision-1.pdfWhat an absurd thought.
Her coach wasn’t banned for cheating so she isn’t open to the same scrutiny.
Nice try at distracting from the real issue though: these NOP fanatics don’t know that cheating is bad, or worse they don’t care what Salazar was doing.
Did you read the report?
I did.
That was wild. If I was an athlete there and I saw half those things going on I would have left. Partly out of fear of being associated with that going to the edge/out of bounds of the rules, partly bc it’s just plain wrong.
Get real, and stop lying to yourselves!
San vicente wrote:
What an absurd thought.
Her coach wasn’t banned for cheating so she isn’t open to the same scrutiny.
Nice try at distracting from the real issue though: these NOP fanatics don’t know that cheating is bad, or worse they don’t care what Salazar was doing.
Did you read the report?
I did.
That was wild. If I was an athlete there and I saw half those things going on I would have left. Partly out of fear of being associated with that going to the edge/out of bounds of the rules, partly bc it’s just plain wrong.
Get real, and stop lying to yourselves!
No you wouldn't have. Quit pretending you have some kind of moral high ground and stop lying to yourself.
LetsRun.com wrote:
LRC note: Our story is now up on this here
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/10/craig-engels-defends-himself-nop-teammates-responds-to-jenny-simpson-people-have-a-moral-compass-besides-her/Craig Engels just came through mixed zone and it was the most raw / entertaining interview of the Championships.
Worth listening to the whole video below as he likes Jenny and says 'she's been a great role model. She just needs to chill in front of the camera.' Engels clearly didn't like that they had breakfast together and she was nice to him and then blasted the group on camra. "Jesus Christ jenny what do you have against me?" he says.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB-AXOQpqH8Update:
Jenny has responded
https://youtu.be/5AVy_iAFniA
Wow, after actually listening to both interviews through (and to Jenny's from yesterday), I have to say I'm pretty damn impressed with both athletes.
Jenny's statements (yesterday *and* today) are careful, thoughtful, balanced, wise, principled, and generally pretty Goddamn great. She's got *nothing* to apologize for, and plenty to be proud of.
Engels actually impressed the hell out of me with his forthrightness, and willingness to stand there for ten minutes and answer every question in a fairly open and good-natured manner.
He really does seem like a decent, honest, and likeable kid.
The problem, though, is that he's still kind of an idiot to utterly *fail* to recognize that *choosing* to associate yourself and your career with someone like Alberto --with his decades-long record of bending, and playing with, and certainly sometimes breaking the rules-- *guarantees* that you will have to deal with the fallout of that association at some point.
Even if Craig, and Clay, and Jordan, etc. are clean as a Goddamn whistle, and have never been asked to anything dirty, and have never even *seen* anything dirty (which I'll stipulate IS possible), it doesn't change the fact that they CHOSE to affiliate themselves with this guy with this record of all this dirty, or (at minimum) semi-dirty, or *incredibly* questionable stuff.
Craig *admits* that Alberto's explanation of the testo-cream 'test' sounds *ridiculous*, but then tells us he basically chose to just accept it anyway.
Why would he do that? Cuz he wanted into the fanciest, most famous, most prestigious, most privileged, and (arguably) most successful group in the country.
He looked at all those guys have, and said I want some of that for me. He dreamed 'maybe *I* can be like Rupp and Mo and Centro,' and he *loved* the sound of that.
So he *chose* to overlook all the dirty history, all the ridiculous 'explanations,' all the taint, and all the *risk*.
Now he can't overlook it anymore, cuz it's (rightly) getting shoved in his face. After 3, 4, 5 times of having to do interviews like this one, he'll get really tired of it, and today's charm and forthrightness will turn to anger and frustration.
But it'll be his own fault. He needed to think it through honestly 2 years ago, and he didn't.
These guys all made their own beds, and now they've got to lie in them.
Craig seems like a good guy --and maybe he *is*-- but he chose to get himself into this, and he's gonna have to deal with the consequences.
In the next year, I'm guessing a bunch of these people will get really sick of what they've set themselves up for, and will quietly look to move elsewhere, and forget they ever knew the NOP.
That may not work out so great either, cuz a lot of top groups may not want them.
I'm sorry, Craig --I really am. But you *bought* this,... and now you *own* it.
Ripping Jenny S for telling the truth ain't gonna make it go away.
He's a man with a mullet, which means nothing much is going to bother him.
Post all the Information and emails that Alberto provided. Are you kidding me, this is the one side only. lol
Engels sounds like a kid. Jenny was perfect in her response. Engels' argument is still basically the Nike talking points. He's young, he trains with Pete, he didn't know what was going on, it didn't pertain to him, etc. & that might all be true but he's still making a choice to not condemn Salazar. He still made a choice to join the group. He's complicit. He had his feelings hurt b/c Jenny is a nice person who ate food with him & then had more guts to say that dopers have no place in sport. I'm with Jenny. Craig needs to grow up & maybe think about how what he says might not really help the sport move forward.
jfndmvvkv wrote:
Hey Brojos, if Jenny is so passionate about clean sport, ask her about her TUEs and using an inhaler for "asthma." Lewis Johnson asked her point blank about it on a live broadcast a few years ago and she visibly blanched when he confronted her with it. Is Jenny completely innocent with regard to working the gray area? Pot, kettle, Jenny.
https://www.usada.org/spirit-of-sport/education/what-athletes-need-to-know-about-inhaled-medications/
Check out her neck and shoulders.
That's what the IOC is asking for. They're not convinced that Salazar's athletes are not involved.
Awww, Craig EPOngels and his girlfriend SHGHelby HoulihANDROn are getting a bit nervous....
Salazar wrote:
HI Dathan, Alvina, and Galen, For your interest. When asked
about an infusion, you are to say no. L-Carnitine and Iron in the
way we have done it is classified as an injection.
"You are to say . . . "
Some notable things about what he is ordering his athletes to say about infusions is that he strangely omits any reference to the allowable volume of the "injection." Is that because they might know that they exceeded it? Instead he calls it "the way we have done it."
Also of note is that he claims to be basing his orders on a non-response to an email in which he says "no need to respond if I'm right," because he claims to have found another email (not provided) that gives him the green light to call an infusion an injection.
Engels on Simpson:
“Are you saying they’re not capable of running what you are because you’re clean?”
Uh... yeah, if you’re doped up and not beating Jenny then you surely can’t beat her clean.
Engels’ forced laughing and facial expressions, along with his awkward hand movements “scratching” his ear make me think the man is DIRTY.
Great reply, thanks. I appreciate Engels standing there in front on the cameras but he clearly has some blinders on.
C'mon Craig and the Nike apologists. We all know the only reason that Salazar's sunstantiated rule-breaking predates many current Nike athletes' pro careers is because none of their current athletes have the ethics to say no and blow the whistle.
What Dathan and Kara were saying years ago about AlSal's l-carntitine, thyroid, and testosterone "experiments" guaranteed that anyone joining NOP after that was okay with that kind of program.