Dominique Blake...wasn't her father that Mr Blake who was supposedly involved with a certain Posse that allegedly was involved in a different type of drug trade?
On the "Things Not T&F" forum, there's a Tyler Hamilton thread started by bambam that I would recommend which gives some insight on how athletes stay ahead of the drug testers, and the consensus is that modern-day drug tests are really de facto IQ tests, because sophisticated dopers do their own in-house testing and only the stupid get caught nowadays.
shivfan wrote:Dominique Blake...wasn't her father that Mr Blake who was supposedly involved with a certain Posse that allegedly was involved in a different type of drug trade?
Yes this is her second violation and yes her father is/was that Mr Blake ...... so she's looking at a life ban and the other athlete a possible 2 yr ban.
shivfan wrote:Dominique Blake...wasn't her father that Mr Blake who was supposedly involved with a certain Posse that allegedly was involved in a different type of drug trade?
Yes this is her second violation and yes her father is/was that Mr Blake ...... so she's looking at a life ban and the other athlete a possible 2 yr ban.
shivfan wrote:Dominique Blake...wasn't her father that Mr Blake who was supposedly involved with a certain Posse that allegedly was involved in a different type of drug trade?
Yes this is her second violation and yes her father is/was that Mr Blake ...... so she's looking at a life ban and the other athlete a possible 2 yr ban.
2 years for pseudoephedrine ?
Well, it's UP to 2 years, but my guess is that it'll be more like 6 months or less... I read he tested "marginally higher" than the allowable levels of pseudoephedrine that would occur from the recommended medical dosages of the popular nasal decongestant...
I think Dominique Blake's worst case scenario may also seem like overkill to some people, at least to those who feel that the penalties for stimulants may be excessive at times... She faces a possible lifetime ban for first testing positive for ephedrine in 2006, and, according to the Jamaica Gleaner, testing positive for the stimulant methylhexaneamine this time..
Blues wrote: I think Dominique Blake's worst case scenario may also seem like overkill to some people, at least to those who feel that the penalties for stimulants may be excessive at times... She faces a possible lifetime ban for first testing positive for ephedrine in 2006, and, according to the Jamaica Gleaner, testing positive for the stimulant methylhexaneamine this time..
Yes, it would be a minor infraction resulting in excessive punishment; that also takes credibility away from the fight against doping.
I wonder when the Jamaican authorities found out about Dominique Blake testing positive at the Jamaican Senior Championships/Olympic Trials in late June, since she still went to London as a 4x4 alternate in August... I also wonder if the fact that she didn't run in the London 4x4 heats was pure luck and would have happened anyway, or if it was an intentional decision by the Jamaican coaches because they'd been made aware of her positive test result... Had she run in the heats I assume Jamaica's 4x4 bronze would be at risk.
shivfan wrote:Dominique Blake...wasn't her father that Mr Blake who was supposedly involved with a certain Posse that allegedly was involved in a different type of drug trade?
Yes this is her second violation and yes her father is/was that Mr Blake ...... so she's looking at a life ban and the other athlete a possible 2 yr ban.
The other athlete Cunningham apparently declared the medication he was taking on the relevant form (T.U.E.). Supposedly the only reason that this has registered as an A.A.F. is because the level was found to be just over the expected maximum (ie he took a slightly higher dosage, 2.5 Tbsp instead of 2) for pseudoephedrine and JADCO is being careful and following procedure. I've heard that the expectation is a public warning, since the medication was declared before competition.
Blues wrote:I wonder when the Jamaican authorities found out about Dominique Blake testing positive at the Jamaican Senior Championships/Olympic Trials in late June, since she still went to London as a 4x4 alternate in August... I also wonder if the fact that she didn't run in the London 4x4 heats was pure luck and would have happened anyway, or if it was an intentional decision by the Jamaican coaches because they'd been made aware of her positive test result... Had she run in the heats I assume Jamaica's 4x4 bronze would be at risk.
Jamaica's bronze would have been at risk had she run.
Interestingly, she has a bronze medal even though she didn't run. For whatever reason, LOCOG gave all six medals to the team after they finished third, and the team members that ran gave Blake the sixth medal because she was in the relay pool and had been upset about not being allowed to run in the semi-final. On her official website there is a picture of her biting the medal.
I've read conflicting reports about the substance that triggered her A.A.F. but either one is enough for a ban period which means that she is looking at a lifetime ban having served nine months for an A.A.F. six years ago.
Blues wrote:She faces a possible lifetime ban for first testing positive for ephedrine in 2006, and, according to the Jamaica Gleaner, testing positive for the stimulant methylhexaneamine
This is equivalent to hanging a serf for stealing a loaf of bread. Welcome to Middle Ages.
toyracer wrote:Interestingly, she has a bronze medal even though she didn't run. For whatever reason, LOCOG gave all six medals to the team after they finished third, and the team members that ran gave Blake the sixth medal because she was in the relay pool and had been upset about not being allowed to run in the semi-final. On her official website there is a picture of her biting the medal.
If the Jamaican team received six medals, that would had to have been the result of a clerical error or misunderstanding on someone's part. Since they ran only five different runner (one sub in the final), they should have received only five medals--the four presented to the finalists on the podium, plus one for the woman who ran the semi but not the final.
toyracer wrote:Interestingly, she has a bronze medal even though she didn't run. For whatever reason, LOCOG gave all six medals to the team after they finished third, and the team members that ran gave Blake the sixth medal because she was in the relay pool and had been upset about not being allowed to run in the semi-final. On her official website there is a picture of her biting the medal.
If the Jamaican team received six medals, that would had to have been the result of a clerical error or misunderstanding on someone's part. Since they ran only five different runner (one sub in the final), they should have received only five medals--the four presented to the finalists on the podium, plus one for the woman who ran the semi but not the final.
Agreed. But the fact remains that they did receive six from LOCOG and the five who actually ran in the relays gave the sixth medal to Blake.
That may be. But the fact remains that she is no more a bronze medalist than I would be if I bought a bronze medal from some athlete who was selling it on eBay.
That may be. But the fact remains that she is no more a bronze medalist than I would be if I bought a bronze medal from some athlete who was selling it on eBay.
Again, agreed. Officially she isn't listed as one anywhere credible (probably only on her own website).
Blues wrote:She faces a possible lifetime ban for first testing positive for ephedrine in 2006, and, according to the Jamaica Gleaner, testing positive for the stimulant methylhexaneamine
This is equivalent to hanging a serf for stealing a loaf of bread. Welcome to Middle Ages.
I could be wrong, but I think the chances are pretty good that she won't end up with a lifetime ban... IAAF's rules for second offense penalties are tiered, as shown if we scroll to page 77 in the link below... I don't know if her 9 month ephedrine penalty in 2006 fell under the category of "Reduced Sanction" or of "No Significant Fault", but there's still room for a significantly more lenient sanction than a lifetime ban, depending on what the facts behind her most recent positive test turn out to be.. And even if neither of her offenses were/are deemed to be worthy of reduced santions by the involved authorities, the penalty for a second offense can still be as little as an 8 year ban, although 8 years would still probably end most elite athletes' careers..
That may be. But the fact remains that she is no more a bronze medalist than I would be if I bought a bronze medal from some athlete who was selling it on eBay.
Again, agreed. Officially she isn't listed as one anywhere credible (probably only on her own website).
Surely you're not questioning Penn State's credibility....
"Blake, a member of Penn State's NCAA Champion 4x400 in 2008, also had a successful London experience, earning a bronze medal as a member of Jamaica's 4x400 relay pool."
EDIT- I just noticed that tandfman already mentioned this yesterday regarding Penn State in the Things Not T&F thread, but I'll keep it in this thread too since it's relevant to the previous discussion.
That may be. But the fact remains that she is no more a bronze medalist than I would be if I bought a bronze medal from some athlete who was selling it on eBay.
Hey, there is one on sale now! Of course I was only 2 when it was awarded, so I don't think anyone will believe me, but what the hey...
Blues wrote: "Blake, a member of Penn State's NCAA Champion 4x400 in 2008, also had a successful London experience, earning a bronze medal as a member of Jamaica's 4x400 relay pool."
There is always: "...he also serves who only stands and waits.." However, in this case her standing and waiting (being available) would not have availed them.
However, for two relatively minor infractions she might get an overly large penalty.
toyracer wrote:Interestingly, she has a bronze medal even though she didn't run. For whatever reason, LOCOG gave all six medals to the team after they finished third, and the team members that ran gave Blake the sixth medal because she was in the relay pool and had been upset about not being allowed to run in the semi-final. On her official website there is a picture of her biting the medal.
If the Jamaican team received six medals, that would had to have been the result of a clerical error or misunderstanding on someone's part. Since they ran only five different runner (one sub in the final), they should have received only five medals--the four presented to the finalists on the podium, plus one for the woman who ran the semi but not the final.
Dee Dee Trotter wound up with a Beijing 4x4 gold without running.
She may have had them in her hand, but were they hers? It doesn't say that in the instagram thing, her USATF bio doesn't suggest that she won a medal in Beijing, and there's nothing about it on her own website.
That photo was apparently taken at an event where there could have been other medalists there. I think I'll need better evidence than that before I believe she actually received a medal for an event she didn't run (although that apprently did indeed happen with Blake in London).
She may have had them in her hand, but were they hers? It doesn't say that in the instagram thing, her USATF bio doesn't suggest that she won a medal in Beijing, and there's nothing about it on her own website.
Considering she didnt run, I wouldnt expect her, or USATF, to exactly advertise that she got one. But the fact is the US only ran five in 2008, and it's possible they gave her the sixth medal, if it slipped through the cracks in the same manner as Blake's did this year. It's certainly conceivable since Trotter did check in to run the prelim, and was a last-second scratch.
I suppose anything is possible, but she clearly is not shown in the official results of the prelim. If she did get an medal somehow, it would have been an error, just as Blake's medal was the result of an error. In any event, this is the first I've heard of that,