bennyg wrote:Anybody who does not believe that the Rumanians and Bulgarians have been cheating for the last few decades, also believes in the toooth fairy.
Yes, and those of every other nation on the planet. Period.
bennyg wrote:Anybody who does not believe that the Rumanians and Bulgarians have been cheating for the last few decades, also believes in the toooth fairy.
Yes, and those of every other nation on the planet. Period.
Then, are we supposed to sit back and enjoy this scandalous state of affairs?
just a jokey post ( i hope gh sees the funny side ), but whenever i had to type stambolova, i always initially instinctively typed strombalova, before correcting it
26mi235 wrote:It is not yet clear if this action is for today for for the duration of the Tour.
As of today it's no coverage until Sinkewitz' B-sample is tested. If that comes back positive, no more coverage at all. And the first news commentators are saying that the same standards should be applied to other sports .
So, we will not talk about the fact that the German stations pulled coverage of the Tour today? The news was announced, not leaked, by parties that had authority to announce the test result. It is not a rumor. The "B" might never be tested, although I think that it will in this case, as Sinkewitz professes absolute surprise.
I don't have any concerns about Romanian athletes. I find that their big names compete a lot on the international circuit and are consistent. When there have been doping incidents; Iagar, Beclea, Melinte we heard about them and there were suspensions. Physically I have found only one of their major female athletes "questionable" and the developemnt curves of their biggest names have tended to be reasonable. Romania have also not had disordinate success in the heavy throws.
Admittedly another nation beginning with B does tend to raise my heckles but thats another story....
mark wrote:I don't have any concerns about Romanian athletes. I find that their big names compete a lot on the international circuit and are consistent. When there have been doping incidents; Iagar, Beclea, Melinte we heard about them and there were suspensions. Physically I have found only one of their major female athletes "questionable" and the developemnt curves of their biggest names have tended to be reasonable. Romania have also not had disordinate success in the heavy throws. Admittedly another nation beginning with B does tend to raise my heckles but thats another story....
i completely agree
i don't hink suspisions about these 2 were purely based on thier nationality but more to do with excessive improvement and subsequent injury from one and lack of competition from another
Atanvarno wrote:Read my second paragraph. With three athletics positives this week alone it could become a t&f current events topic sooner than we like it.
There's no athletics on TV anyway so we don't have anything to worry about
mark wrote:I don't have any concerns about Romanian athletes. I find that their big names compete a lot on the international circuit and are consistent. When there have been doping incidents; Iagar, Beclea, Melinte we heard about them and there were suspensions. Physically I have found only one of their major female athletes "questionable" and the developemnt curves of their biggest names have tended to be reasonable. Romania have also not had disordinate success in the heavy throws. Admittedly another nation beginning with B does tend to raise my heckles but thats another story....
Flumpy wrote:I can't remember the last time i was remotely surprised by a drug positive because most of the time those caught have been 'obviously' doped.
Is anyone surprised by these two?
Of course not, because they were 'OBVIOUS'!!!
It's not that hard to understand.
c'mon flumps
are you saying that you thought gatlin was a doper when he ran 10.08ajr/19.86 as a college boy ?
when he turned pro, he won golds, got new coach & his 100 time went to 9.77wr, but his 200 went to 20.01 ?
that struck me as tilting his speed-endurance curve in favor of the 100 & giving up on 200 times
Flumpy wrote:I'm all for targetted testing. They should do more of it, especially for the likes of these two obvious cheats.
It leaves me speechless how people determine that somebody is "obvious" anything.
Being an obsessive athletics fan it is often 'obvious' who the drug cheats are.
I can't remember the last time i was remotely surprised by a drug positive because most of the time those caught have been 'obviously' doped.
Is anyone surprised by these two?
Of course not, because they were 'OBVIOUS'!!!
It's not that hard to understand.
When women started being tested for Barr bodies, a lot of things were "obvious" to a lot of people. The Press sisters, Irena Kirszenstein were "obvious". Guess what? They passed and Irena got married, had a child (what better proof she is a real female?).
The ones that flunked the test (Schchelkanova, Klobukowska) struck everybody as "pretty girls", nobody would predict it.
I may not be surprised, because after Gatlin, hardly anything can surprise me anymore, but to me nobody, absolutely nobody is obvious.
Pego, therein is the challenge: we:re not on the playing field with these people. When other athletes freeze you out and begin making comments, that should be at least cause to stop and ascertain why they may be doing so.
mark wrote:I don't have any concerns about Romanian athletes. I find that their big names compete a lot on the international circuit and are consistent. When there have been doping incidents; Iagar, Beclea, Melinte we heard about them and there were suspensions. Physically I have found only one of their major female athletes "questionable" and the developemnt curves of their biggest names have tended to be reasonable. Romania have also not had disordinate success in the heavy throws. Admittedly another nation beginning with B does tend to raise my heckles but thats another story....
I'm not sure how suspect Romanians are, they are/were more female-dominated than ANY other country, even in Soviet times (the GDR had a VERY good male team...), but other countries (notably Bulgaria) have a MORE female-dominated team than in the old days...
Croatia seem slightly iffy to me, since this small country is suddenly a power in the throws... and some runner who ran 2:21 in the WY (in Debrecen!), despite having a PB of 2:12, improves last year to 2 flat (2:11 - 2:06 -2:04 - 2:00 none of which were regularly run in that year), while never promising such an improvement beforehand.
Pego wrote:When women started being tested for Barr bodies, a lot of things were "obvious" to a lot of people. The Press sisters, Irena Kirszenstein were "obvious". Guess what? They passed and Irena got married, had a child (what better proof she is a real female?). The ones that flunked the test (Schchelkanova, Klobukowska) struck everybody as "pretty girls", nobody would predict it. I may not be surprised, because after Gatlin, hardly anything can surprise me anymore, but to me nobody, absolutely nobody is obvious.
why bring up unfortunate klobukowska? i mean, are you saying she was a "cheat?"
Bergqvist finally at ease -- after 10 years of suspicion:
Kajsa Bergqvist blev både lättad och glad när hon fick reda på att konkurrenten Venelina Veneva åkt fast för dopning med testosteron.
-Jag har misstänkt henne i nästan tio års tid, säger Bergqvist till TT.
-Så som hon har lagt upp sina säsonger och plötsligt dykt upp på mästerskap har jag fattat att det varit något skumt. Att hon äntligen är fast är en oerhörd lättnad men man hade hoppats att det hade skett tidigare, säger Kajsa Bergqvist.
Pego wrote:When women started being tested for Barr bodies, a lot of things were "obvious" to a lot of people. The Press sisters, Irena Kirszenstein were "obvious". Guess what? They passed and Irena got married, had a child (what better proof she is a real female?). The ones that flunked the test (Schchelkanova, Klobukowska) struck everybody as "pretty girls", nobody would predict it. I may not be surprised, because after Gatlin, hardly anything can surprise me anymore, but to me nobody, absolutely nobody is obvious.
why bring up unfortunate klobukowska? i mean, are you saying she was a "cheat?"
I am with you. If you re-read the exchange, I am saying that to say something is "obvious", it usually isn't.
EPelle wrote:Pego, therein is the challenge: we:re not on the playing field with these people. When other athletes freeze you out and begin making comments, that should be at least cause to stop and ascertain why they may be doing so.
I agree. That's what the testing is for. We have seen many accusations thrown at people based on a little more than suppositions. It was suggested for comparison that criminal investigation also does not require "absolute" proof. It is true, but SOME physical evidence is generally required (or, it should be).
Swedish newspapers have the Budapest tests as targeted ones, with Stambolova and Veneva both out-of-competition tested at the same place at the same time away from home. Veneva failed her other test in Sofia. One theory is that an informant tipped testers on the 24/7/365 IAAF informant line which athletes are able to call in order to leave tips.
EPelle wrote:Bergqvist finally at ease -- after 10 years of suspicion:
Kajsa Bergqvist blev både lättad och glad när hon fick reda på att konkurrenten Venelina Veneva åkt fast för dopning med testosteron.
-Jag har misstänkt henne i nästan tio års tid, säger Bergqvist till TT.
-Så som hon har lagt upp sina säsonger och plötsligt dykt upp på mästerskap har jag fattat att det varit något skumt. Att hon äntligen är fast är en oerhörd lättnad men man hade hoppats att det hade skett tidigare, säger Kajsa Bergqvist.
Kajsa became both relieved and glad when she learned that rival Venelina Veneva was caught for doping with testosterone.
"I have suspected her for almost 10 years time," says Bergqvist to TT.
"As [the way] she has set up her seasons and suddenly appeared at championships, I have understood that there was something shady. That she has finally gotten caught is an unbelievable relief, but one had hoped that it could have occured earlier," says Kajsa Bergqvist.
Kajsa became both relieved and glad when she learned that rival Venelina Veneva was caught for doping with testosterone.
"I have suspected her for almost 10 years time," says Bergqvist to TT.
"As [the way] she has set up her seasons and suddenly appeared at championships, I have understood that there was something shady. That she has finally gotten caught is an unbelievable relief, but one had hoped that it could have occured earlier," says Kajsa Bergqvist.
I think we can safely say that Kasja speaks for us all there.
Kajsa became both relieved and glad when she learned that rival Venelina Veneva was caught for doping with testosterone.
"I have suspected her for almost 10 years time," says Bergqvist to TT.
"As [the way] she has set up her seasons and suddenly appeared at championships, I have understood that there was something shady. That she has finally gotten caught is an unbelievable relief, but one had hoped that it could have occured earlier," says Kajsa Bergqvist.
I think we can safely say that Kasja speaks for us all there.
if she'd been doping consistently for many years you woud have at least expected a sustained high-level of performance for a good few years - like ben johnson running 9.95 from '85 onwards ( which was low-altitude wr at the time ) to 9.79 in '88
steroids are supposed to give you a sustained residual effect ( some people argue 2y bans are too short as steroid improvements may last longer than this ) - which is not consistent with jumping 1.90+ in early season & 2.00++ later on - you'd have expected her to have hardly ever dipped under 2.00 if she'd been doping for years
eldrick wrote:if she'd been doping consistently for many years you woud have at least expected a sustained high-level of performance for a good few years - like ben johnson running 9.95 from '85 onwards ( which was low-altitude wr at the time ) to 9.79 in '88
steroids are supposed to give you a sustained residual effect ( some people argue 2y bans are too short as steroid improvements may last longer than this ) - which is not consistent with jumping 1.90+ in early season & 2.00++ later on - you'd have expected her to have hardly ever dipped under 2.00 if she'd been doping for years
Don't be ridiculous. In a technical event like the HJ there are all kinds of reasons that you might not the results you want whether you are doped or not.
Anyway it's not just performances that make some cheats obvious.
