LSU women forfeit 2012 team title


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:11 am

nodnarb wrote:Go back and look at any relay picture of an LSU 4x1 relay team with Hackett in it...
I could show that picture to anybody outside the track world and ask them to pick out the runner you would suspect that was not like the rest. Game over Bro
My disappointment is that LSU didn't dismiss her after the first positive test, because it hurts LSU and what the program is all about. I never thought I would ever hear that LSU was in any way involved in cheating...


I can understand your frustration.. But since the authorities of the National Association of Athletics Administrations of Trinidad and Tobago (who conducted the investigation of her first positive test) concluded that the first positive was due to inadvertent use with no intent to cheat, and they thus showed leniency and gave her only the minimum 6 month ban which the IAAF also accepted, then maybe people felt that LSU was warranted in giving her the benefit of the doubt too.

The situation with stimulants isn't always as cut and dried as far as intent goes, when compared to anabolic agents, HGH, EPO, blood doping, etc... As far as WADA and USADA are concerned, having stimulants like methylhexaneamine in your system is perfectly legal as long as you aren't competing in a meet at the time... If you forget to stop taking the stuff far enough in advance of the meet, you're screwed if you're selected for testing during the competition. So it's a lot easier to accidentally test positive for stimulants than it is to accidentally test positive for steroids, HGH, EPO, and lots of other drugs that are banned both in and out of competition. Athletes who use supplements containing methylhex or other banned stimulants during workouts are taking more of a risk though, since they might have a steep price to pay if they forget and ingest the supplement too close to a competition, resulting in a positive test and the sanctions that follow.
Blues
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Pego » Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:58 am

Blues, are you familiar with any studies that conclusively indicate PED benefits of the stimulants? They have been used since time immemorial and "everybody knows" they are PED's, yet everything I have seen uses words like "may", "some think" and similar.
Pego
 
Posts: 10203
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:00 am

Blues wrote:If you forget to stop taking the stuff far enough in advance of the meet, you're screwed if you're selected for testing during the competition. So it's a lot easier to accidentally test positive for stimulants than it is to accidentally test positive for steroids, HGH, EPO, and lots of other drugs that are banned both in and out of competition. Athletes who use supplements containing methylhex or other banned stimulants during workouts are taking more of a risk though, since they might have a steep price to pay if they forget and ingest the supplement too close to a competition, resulting in a positive test and the sanctions that follow.



Don't most stimulants clear the system pretty quickly?
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:24 pm

polevaultpower wrote:
Don't most stimulants clear the system pretty quickly?


Not always as quickly as we'd assume. The effects usually wear off in a few hours, but the drug is still detectable for quite a while longer. Most of you guys know this stuff already but I'll post it anyway... Pego or anyone else can please correct me if needed, or add anything important that I might skip.

Clearance of the stimulant depends on various factors including physiological variations in the user's body, whether chronic use is involved, the dosage used, etc...There's not a lot of published data on the half life of methylhexaneamine, but I've seen figures stating a half life ranging from 4 to 12 hours... I've also seen half lives for other stimulants like ephedrine and pseudoephedrine ranging from 3 to 19 hours, depending on various factors, including the acidity of the user's urine.

A drug's half life is the time it takes for half of the substance to be cleared from the body, so it'll take multiple half lives before a substance is no longer detectable in the urine. (for the type of elimination for most drugs, if the half life is 12 hours and you take a 100mg dose, after 12 hours 50mg will remain, after 24 hours 25mg will remain, after 36 hours 12.5 mg will remain, etc, etc..) An approximation is that it takes about 4 to 5 half lives for the drug to be essentially eliminated from the body, but how long it takes until you no longer test positive for a substance also depends on the sensitivity of the testing, and on how efficiently your individual body metabolizes the drug. I've read articles that suggest that to be safe athletes should make sure there are at least 3 days between their last dose of a stimulant and the start of a competition where they might be tested... I honestly don't know if there's much scientific data on how long stimulant supplements like methylhex remain in the urine, so I don't really know how accurate the 3 day suggestion is, but I've seen it used as an estimate several times.

Athletes need to remember that drugs can be detected long after they're no longer therapeutically active, because the levels of the drug (and the drug's metabolites) still in the blood are below the minimum level needed to cause the therapeutic effect of the drug, but are still being eliminated by the body into the urine... So in that case the banned substance won't do anything for performance, but can still result in a positive drug test and sanctions. Depending on various factors, that could very well be the case if a pre-workout stimulant supplement that may only have a duration of action of a few hours is inadvertently taken prior to practice a day or two before a meet. WADA has threshold levels for pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, methylephedrine, and cathine, where certain sub-therapeutic levels during a drug test are permissable, but that isn't the case for methylhexaneamine and other in-competition banned supplements.
Last edited by Blues on Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby polevaultpower » Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:41 pm

Thanks Blues!
polevaultpower
 
Posts: 4533
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: A Temperate Island

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby preston » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:16 am

gh wrote:to tell the truth, I have no idea if the NCAA shares its testing results with anybody else. I can easily imagine their citing "privacy concerns of a student-athlete" and not doing so. I'm unaware of their being signatories to any USADA/WADA agreements.

if that's so (and I repeat that I have no idea if it is), then I wonder if USADA/WADA could legally do anything without more evidence than just reading that the NCAA had taken such an action. What if all the chain-of-custody requirements don't come up to snuff?


What would it matter? If USADA can ban Chryste Gaines and Tim Montgomery on Kelly White's say so and other athletes on emails, and Lance Armstrong on even weaker evidence then it would seem that "custody" would be of lesser concern. Also, Shaver obviously knew, yet she was allowed to run at the Olympics. At what point does someone who has served as a coach for USATF have an obligation to the IAAF family to report that one of his athletes has tested positive in another jurisdiction? Didn't this used to happen in the past where an athlete was banned for IAAF but able to compete in NCAA...how is this different? Doesn't Trinidad have a responsibility in this as well and countries should be just as liable as athletes when something like this happens.

This girl should be a looking at a life ban (though I could see her arguing in for 4 years since a precedent was set with Gatlin)! This sport does NOT need someone like her.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:12 am

If the Trini federation knew and let her run anyway, then they're incompetent beyond belief.

As to Shaver, my guess is, given the NCAA's obsession with privacy for its athletes, that so long as the outcome was a matter of debate (which Shaver is quoted as saying earlier in the thread), then his obligation was to follow the rules of his school first, before worrying about any outside group. (no matter how noble or righteous their cause might be)

Indeed, I'd go so far as to guess that if Shaver outed her before the process was done that it might be grounds for termination. Not an easy place for a college coach to be put.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:52 pm

Legal requirements as such a hassle; do we really have to follow them or can we do what we think ....
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby dj » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:34 pm

26mi235 wrote:Legal requirements as such a hassle; do we really have to follow them or can we do what we think ....


Sorry, but you MUST follow the requirements. If you don't and you're repudiated, everything else you've done can be brought into question.

I that a gamble you're willing to take?
dj
 
Posts: 6200
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:35 pm

Sorry, I thought that the italicized portion (following the previous remarks) would indicate that I am not in disagreement with dj's comments.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby dj » Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:35 am

26mi235 wrote:Sorry, I thought that the italicized portion (following the previous remarks) would indicate that I am not in disagreement with dj's comments.


My error. I mistook your itals as emphasis, not sarcasm.
dj
 
Posts: 6200
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby gh » Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:33 pm

The NCAA has apparently decided to leave the national title as "vacated"; no promotion of Oregon to the top spot.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby sprintdoc » Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:10 pm

To not award Oregon the title is yet another example of NCAA lunacy. Unlike in a "team" sport like football or basketball where the contributions of one person can not be specifically determined, in track you can and its easy. If this is the result then why drug test? The athletes in the individual events need their proper respects as well as they need to be moved up just like with international medals. By not rewarding Oregon the title it is penalizing Oregon and others for playing by the rules and essentially saying LSU is still the champ since theirs was vacated. By not moving athletes into the vacated individual spots they are sending the wrong message.
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby sprintdoc » Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:20 pm

Let me add. This is a policy that needs challenging in court and perhaps Oregon will pursue it in that manner. I am sure a certain UO alum would be happy to provide legal services to fight this issue. Certainly if I were an athlete or athletes in relay impacted I would do what I could legally to get what I won.

To make matters worse the damn NCAA's own website STILL shows pic of LSU team and all sorts of headlines on their title, etc! This is insane!
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby ATK » Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:38 pm

Well I guess Oregon can boast that they are literally second to none...

:?
ATK
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:00 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Blues » Thu Mar 07, 2013 10:54 am

sprintdoc wrote:To not award Oregon the title is yet another example of NCAA lunacy. Unlike in a "team" sport like football or basketball where the contributions of one person can not be specifically determined, in track you can and its easy. If this is the result then why drug test? The athletes in the individual events need their proper respects as well as they need to be moved up just like with international medals. By not rewarding Oregon the title it is penalizing Oregon and others for playing by the rules and essentially saying LSU is still the champ since theirs was vacated. By not moving athletes into the vacated individual spots they are sending the wrong message.

I understand, but in an NCAA meet, the fairest thing to do would be to redo all the scoring in events that the illegal participant participated in, which could result in a lot of final standings being altered.. Unlike in 2012, if the third place team was close to the second place team, and the DQ of the athlete in certain events would have allowed the third place team to pass the second place team to win the championship, might that be an issue? And what if the second place team ran a suboptimal team in the final relay event, based on the fact that they felt they had 2nd place sewn up but couldn't catch the first place team, and then, months later due to a DQ, they found out that doing that cost them the team title? I think this issue might be a little more complicated than a DQ in football or basketball...
Blues
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby Tuariki » Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:07 am

This Wazzu-ite who still enjoys seeing the Ducks TnF'ers getting their just desserts from the Cougs, even if rarely these days, hopes the Ducks takes the NZAA to Court to have the title awarded to the rightful winner; presumably the Ducks. Although Blues has it right and the scores should all be recalculated.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby sprintdoc » Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:47 am

Blues you are right that ALL the results must be adjusted and rescored but that happens at a meet when someone is DQ'd for interference or a hurdle violation or such. There is testing at the meet and someone in violation should be removed from the meet and if the 4th place person gets to move to third then they deserve their award, etc.

While I get your point regarding the relay choice that is a choice and teams could consider a potential violation and trust me usually teams are trying to use max effort to even be 2nd or 3rd as there are big bonus checks tied to these spots for most coaches and the obvious pride to place as high as possible. I would agree if it were just to move from 24th up to 18th where there is no bonus involved. Most bonuses stop at top 10 team finishes.
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:09 pm

It's my understanding that the NCAA told LSU that even if Hacket hadn't scored a single point, they still would have had to forfeit the title. The rule is that every athlete that a school brings to the meet must pass the drug tests, regardless of how they perform.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:18 pm

They should do the same thing when they removed UTEP from the team championship in XC. In football, it would have been some other team that they would have had to beat but in T&F and XC, the only things that you cannot control to an extent is for those that did not make the event or the event final. In XC it will not have much of a differential impact on the scoring relative to the size of the scores and all the teams would have their scores decrease by about the same amount. Track there are many more 'non-neutral' changes.

It's my understanding that the NCAA told LSU that even if Hacket hadn't scored a single point, they still would have had to forfeit the title. The rule is that every athlete that a school brings to the meet must pass the drug tests, regardless of how they perform.


Is the drug test that was failed one from the NCAA or was it administered elsewhere? I am guessing from this that it was the NCAAs test at the meet.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:39 pm

26mi235 wrote:Is the drug test that was failed one from the NCAA or was it administered elsewhere? I am guessing from this that it was the NCAAs test at the meet.

Yes, she flunked a test that was administered after the 4x100 relay final.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby CookyMonzta » Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:50 pm

gh wrote:The NCAA has apparently decided to leave the national title as "vacated"; no promotion of Oregon to the top spot.

Which smacks of abject laziness and cowardice all around. They have no justification to deny the Ducks what is rightfully theirs, and no way of explaining their way out of refusing to award them the title. So they strip the title from LSU, and go hide under the bed.

Reminds me of what the NARAS did after they stripped Rob and Fab of the New Artist Grammy; that is, they vacated the award, rather than (1) give it to the real vocalists and musicians of Milli Vanilli, or (2) give it to the artists who finished 2nd in the final tally. To say nothing of the 2005 Heisman Trophy situation.

Cowardice. Plain and simple.
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:13 pm

The NCAA did the same thing when Arkansas was stripped of their titles.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby sprintdoc » Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:24 am

Jazzcyclist with Arkansas it was an academic ineligibility that led to their stripping of their titles. Totally different than a test tied directly to the championships themselves.
sprintdoc
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: LSU women forfeit 2012 team title

Postby dj » Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:40 am

sprintdoc wrote:Jazzcyclist with Arkansas it was an academic ineligibility that led to their stripping of their titles. Totally different than a test tied directly to the championships themselves.


Perhaps in the track world, but not in the eyes of the NCAA, which views a failed doping test as a matter of ineligibilty, the same as an academic ineligibility.
dj
 
Posts: 6200
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], mcgato, nztrackfan and 9 guests