Mark Block given 10yrs for supplying drugs to Zhanna Block

[Alucard]

Presuming she is/has always been clean (and I have no reason to doubt her), just how frustrated would you be if you were Debbie Ferguson? It must hurt. BADLY!

Dont swear for Debbie or anyone else, let us allow it to all unfold HOw can we swear for any sprinter into today situation. Debbie is a changed sprinter, look for some good runs from her this year.

[Flumpy]

... A very simple google search would tell you all you need to know about Mark Block, i would have thought most people would at least want to know the basics about the person who is representing them.

Not sure what you found on google, but there was something that suggested he wasn't a suitable agent, then the IAAF needs to be taken to task for listing him as one of their certified representatives. That should be the gold standard by which athletes make their choices.

Surely since the whole BALCO conflama and his name being all over it the IAAF knew exactly what he was?

Why the IAAF did nothing about it I don't know.

[mump boy]

... A very simple google search would tell you all you need to know about Mark Block, i would have thought most people would at least want to know the basics about the person who is representing them.

Not sure what you found on google, but there was something that suggested he wasn't a suitable agent, then the IAAF needs to be taken to task for listing him as one of their certified representatives. That should be the gold standard by which athletes make their choices.

Common knowledge to anyone who had the slightest interest. All this shows is that many athletes have no interest in their sport.

[mump boy]

i can only count 2 clean and i would bet my house on one of them being as dirty as her training partner

When was Nku banned?

She failed a test in 2006 but there seems to be some confusion over whether she was banned or not. Either way she retired straight afterwards. So she is deffo of my list of clean athletes in that race

[texas_speed]

Debbie is a changed sprinter, look for some good runs from her this year.

How much more can she change at her age? She's been doing this for a long time and has been in tip top shape (at least visually) for the past few years or so.

[gh]

.....

Surely since the whole BALCO conflama and his name being all over it the IAAF knew exactly what he was?

Why the IAAF did nothing about it I don't know.

Because, fortunately, the IAAF doesn't have a lynch-mob mindset and acts on real evidence, not street chatter.

[Flumpy]

I'm not suggesting they should do anything else.

I'm simply questioning why it has taken all this time. Did they start investigating straight away or this a recent occurence?

[gh]

When did who start investigating? If you mean the IAAF, it's completely out of their hands. Partially by design (I repeat, they're out of the penalty business), and partially because the IAAF certainly has no jurisdiction in an investigation launched by U.S. legal authorities and then picked up by USADA.

Is what a recent occurrence? I have no first (or second/third/fourth....) hand knowledge, but since all the transgressions go back almost a decade at this point, obviously the scouring of the BALCO records coughed up all kinds of gems, and they're being prosecuted on a case-by-case basis. And we may well not have seen the end of it.

[Brian]

who can be bothered to work out the implications of Zhanna losing medals?

Does this mean Playboy has to run a picture of her with clothes on--?

.

[Speedster]

An in-depth look at the mess that has become women's championships sprint finals from '97-'04:
http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/med ... th-medals/

This in incredibly sad and has denied a lot of athletes medals and potential earnings.

[7-sided]

...At any rate, I have to agree with what you posted some years back (or was it flump? it's easy to distinguish between you 2 while reading your posts, but after data assimilation, all you 2 ever post runs into a single mental file under "muflmp") - we should skip all the "meddling" and award all golds in 100m & 200m from 1997 onwards to DF.

All gold medals? I sense their frustration [and their gift of hyperbole] but that's overkill. It has been mentioned on this thread already and it bears repeating, I SWEAR FOR NO (WO)MAN! However, I do think the biggest losers are American athletes - who because of American sprint depth - have to walk away from the sport because they don't have the $$ to properly develop; couldn't get the lane in Europe or the contract with the shoe company when they don't make a team.

Back to the immediate ramifications of the thread...if this is like last few years, then USADA will announce 2 - 3 more disqualifications before World Champs with the last being within a month of the Daegu Opening Ceremonies.

[Jon]

An in-depth look at the mess that has become women's championships sprint finals from '97-'04:
http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/med ... th-medals/

I think you've missed one. I believe Inger Miller lost a medal at the 1999 World Indoors after she tested positive for caffeine.

I gave Miller the benefit of the doubt, given that she only received a public warning for caffeine and DQ of that one performance. It's not quite on the same level as those who served a ban for PEDs.

[gh]

They may have flip-flopped yet again, but I believe that by todays' rules Miller wouldn't even have been a DQ.

[Smoke]

Inger wasn't suspended,nor banned. It was caffeine which as subsequently removed from the stimulant list altogether.

[tandfman]

I gave Miller the benefit of the doubt, given that she only received a public warning for caffeine and DQ of that one performance. It's not quite on the same level as those who served a ban for PEDs.

Of course it isn't. But she lost her medal nonetheless.

[tandfman]

Inger wasn't suspended,nor banned. It was caffeine which as subsequently removed from the stimulant list altogether.

Caffeine is not currently on the banned list, but WADA does continue to list it as a stimulant that is being monitored.

[mump boy]

.....

Surely since the whole BALCO conflama and his name being all over it the IAAF knew exactly what he was?

Why the IAAF did nothing about it I don't know.

Because, fortunately, the IAAF doesn't have a lynch-mob mindset and acts on real evidence, not street chatter.

you might call it a 'lynch mob mindset' i call it an accurate assesment of lying, cheating, thieves in track and field. there has not been one athlete caught in the last 10 years who i couldn't have told you about 5 years before

[mump boy]

Oh and can we add another to our list

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/9430384.stm

quelle suprise

(i'd never heard this before so forgive me if it's old news)

[tandfman]

.....

Surely since the whole BALCO conflama and his name being all over it the IAAF knew exactly what he was?

Why the IAAF did nothing about it I don't know.

Because, fortunately, the IAAF doesn't have a lynch-mob mindset and acts on real evidence, not street chatter.

you might call it a 'lynch mob mindset' i call it an accurate assesment of lying, cheating, thieves in track and field. there has not been one athlete caught in the last 10 years who i couldn't have told you about 5 years before

Perhaps, but you probably would also have told us about more than one athlete who was not, in fact, guilty of anything more than being suspicious to you. The IAAF and the anti-doping authorities can't rely on your suspicions or anyone else's. Every suspension must be based on real evidence, and every accused athlete must have a right to a fair hearing. I, for one, wouldn't want it any other way and I think most clean athletes would agree.

[mump boy]

Of course

Flumps point was when all of us know about someone why aren't the IAAF or other authorities doing all they can to actually catch them ?

[Flumpy]

That was exactly my point. I'm not remotely advocating a lynch mob mentality, simply that by the time suspicion has filtered down to the fans surely others in a position to do something about it must have known for a long time.

It just seems odd that so often people that we know are cheats(I would say suspect, but let be honest we know) go about it for years before any progress is made in catching them. Maybe there is loads going on behind the scenes that we don't know about but it usually just looks like a really slow reaction by the authorities.

Sometimes different agencies work together swiftly to catch someone (Dwain) but other times it take forever (Trevor Graham) and then even then it's last minute and messy (Kenderis/Thanou).

I'm not suggesting it's an easy task just that often the reaction seems to be too little too late.

My post was meant as a genuine question rather than an accusation.

[Smoke]

The exact opposite is the case. The rumors lead the facts.

As far as speed of prosecution, it's matter of that athletes country. And if said individual is cooperating. Dwain cooperated so everything went fast. Kelli the same. Others denied and fought and were involved in other cases AND were the sources that led to other bust.

The Greeks are still fighting theirs.

So it's not as clear cut. Rumors are just that.

[Gabriella]

Because, fortunately, the IAAF doesn't have a lynch-mob mindset and acts on real evidence, not street chatter.

Does it? What about the target testing of Krabbe and Breuer, based purely on the lynch-mob mindset of ex FRG officials? I bet you weren't complaining then.

I really do hope Zhanna's medals are nullified. The problem is who they go to. I didn't agree with the Sydney no gold medalist approach before, but then I look at some of the names who would be upgraded and I wouldn't be comfortable with them getting the medals.

I wonder through the years how much these doped athletes have affected the motivation and performance of others? When you're a clean 11.0 woman and you have 3 doped women in 10.7-10.8 form steaming ahead, how much of that affects your form and performance? Remove those 3 dopers and you may have beaten your PB and run a better race. Perhaps it dragged some to better times. Who knows, but the whole race changes. If only the races could be re-run!

I really don't think much has changed in terms of number of athlete taking drugs since random testing was brought in. Indeed, doping seems as rife as ever.

[Flumpy]

The exact opposite is the case. The rumors lead the facts.

As far as speed of prosecution, it's matter of that athletes country. And if said individual is cooperating. Dwain cooperated so everything went fast. Kelli the same. Others denied and fought and were involved in other cases AND were the sources that led to other bust.

The Greeks are still fighting theirs.

So it's not as clear cut. Rumors are just that.

That's not what I meant Smoke. I'm not talking about the individual cases dragging out but the methods used to catch them.

If I remember correctly, once Dwain was suspected the UK authorities were informed and he was specifically targeted soon after. It was a quick and smooth operation to catch a cheat. Kenderis/Thanou had been suspected for years but it was only at the last minute before the Olympics that a concerted effort seems to have been made to catch them which ended up with huge amounts of bad publicity just before the games. Was anyone looking into Trevor Graham before BALCO? The whole world knew what he was up to.

Again this isn't necessarily a criticism of the authorities I'm just wondering why it sometimes take so long to target and catch some of the most obvious culprits.

[Flumpy]

Because, fortunately, the IAAF doesn't have a lynch-mob mindset and acts on real evidence, not street chatter.

Does it? What about the target testing of Krabbe and Breuer, based purely on the lynch-mob mindset of ex FRG officials? I bet you weren't complaining then.

Are you suggesting they shouldn't have been targeted? Were they not drug cheats?

[Gabriella]

Are you suggesting they shouldn't have been targeted? Were they not drug cheats?

Oh no Flump, I absolutely agree with them being target tested. My comment was to gh who thinks the authorities do not (should not) act on with 'lynch mob' mindset and on 'street chatter', yet they did in Krabbe's case (it was the prejudices of some anti GDR officials that started the campaign to target Krabbe...and it worked!)

I absolutely agree with target testing based on rumours and that is what happens in practice. If you had 'real evidence' you wouldnt bloody be hanging around, you'd ban them! The fact is, law enforcements agencies, intelligence agencies and such like, and the IAAF and WADA, ALL act on 'street chatter' because that's where you get the best information and is what helps triggers an investigation - it's not all about dodgey test results. It's a starting point that in the majority of cases is based on fact.

At our primary school we had a little box in the main hall where pupils were encouraged to post concerns. I liked to call it the Snitch Box. I think we should have one in every GP meeting changing room, at every championships. Then it should be someone's job in the IAAF to read through all the accusations....Flump or Mump is my recommendation, then they can target test as much as they want

[Flumpy]

I completely agree.

Suspicious athletes should definitely be targeted even if the information comes from 'street chatter'. This isn't a lynch mob mentality just common sense.

Gary seems to be confusing an investigation with a conviction. No one is suggesting that anyone should be convicted of cheating because of gossip, simply that it's perfectly valid to investigate because of it. If no evidence is found then the case would go no further.

As mump said above there has seldom been a cheat caught in the last decade that we couldn't have named years before. If the authorities did ask us lot for suggestions I reckon we'd have a 90% succcess rate. Off the top of my head I can only think of 2 top athletes from the last few years that I'm 100% certain were cheats and haven't been caught. Everyone else got rumbled sooner or later.

I love your 'Snitch Box' suggestion and would happily take on that job for free

[Powell]

As mump said above there has seldom been a cheat caught in the last decade that we couldn't have named years before. If the authorities did ask us lot for suggestions I reckon we'd have a 90% succcess rate. Off the top of my head I can only think of 2 top athletes from the last few years that I'm 100% certain were cheats and haven't been caught. Everyone else got rumbled sooner or later.

I love your 'Snitch Box' suggestion and would happily take on that job for free

The fact that most of the people you suspected were caught eventually suggests that WADA's informers are as well informed as you But even if you are sure that an athlete is using drugs, you can't realistically expect that evidence sufficient to banning them will be found within a week. These things take time.

[mump boy]

Kenteris is a very good example, he'd been running round avoiding IAAF and WADA testers for years, everyone knew but it took untill the eve of the OG when the IOC got it together to actually go after him.

[Jon]

I absolutely agree with target testing based on rumours and that is what happens in practice

Exactly. I remember looking at USADA's testing figures in the past, and the athletes who are tested most are/were the ones who (most would agree) were most questionable. For example, after '06 they really stepped up in their testing of Marion Jones. The Russian middle-distance runners were also tested a lot more so than some of their opponents. I think I remember Christine Ohuruogu also saying that she was tested a lot more after she returned from her ban. The doping authorities are led by their own suspicions, and rightly so.

[7-sided]

You have to be an absolute IDIOT to think that the IAAF is not acting on innuendo and rumor; the issue is - and it is correct - that you have to have PROOF to remove them from competition. Just because these people were not caught as fast as you (and I) would have liked does not mean that the proper authorities were not trying to catch them. I would expect these types of comments from the occasional track fan, but it is a shock to read knowledgable posters go on about target testing as if it's that easy. Do you not remember Marion Jones' calendars which had her taking drugs on the same days that she was being tested? Do you not remember that BALCO was about UNDETECTABLE drugs? Do you not remember that without Trevor Graham possibly NONE of these athletes would have been banned? All that everyone is bellyaching about came from ONE investigation. Yes, there's more, but who's gonna be the "Trevor Graham" for that one? Come on, guys, you know better! The cheats were ahead of the police. They may always be, but the gap is narrowing. But, it is foolhardy to think that the IAAF does not have a strong stance AGAINST doping.

One more thing: this idea that you are only knowledgeable about our sport based upon who you can accuse of PED abuse/use has to stop.

[Gabriella]

One I found interesting was the EAA's alleged target testing of Nicola Sanders during/after 2007.

Other than my Snitch Box, I would also like to add in the 'Acne Test', the 'Out Of Nowhere Test' (also known as 'Where Did THAT Performance Come From Test') the 'Where Did You Get That New Body? Test' and 'Is That A Moustache On Your Upper Lip? Test'. Though not comprehensive and 100% accurate, these tests, together with the Snitch Box, may help to fight these awful criminals.

[26mi235]

Cycling, for all its problems has been trying to adjust to catch guys. They both target testing and have brought in the Biological Passport, which is essentially following an athlete. As I recall, anomalies in blood specifics lead to them targeting Tyler Hamilton who was then tabbed for blood transfusion, although they messed up the test at the OGs and he kept that tainted medal.

I think that the Contador case will be interesting, since political pressure might have played a role in his receiving no penalty and the appeal to CAS might result in a different result. The Spanish Fed seems to really be in disarray at this point.

[John G]

One I found interesting was the EAA's alleged target testing of Nicola Sanders during/after 2007.

Other than my Snitch Box, I would also like to add in the 'Acne Test', the 'Out Of Nowhere Test' (also known as 'Where Did THAT Performance Come From Test') the 'Where Did You Get That New Body? Test' and 'Is That A Moustache On Your Upper Lip? Test'. Though not comprehensive and 100% accurate, these tests, together with the Snitch Box, may help to fight these awful criminals.

Shame there was no "Why Is That Athlete In His/Her Late 20s/early 30s Suddenly Wearing Braces, Despite Already Having Perfectly Straight Teeth Test" available in the 90s.

[7-sided]

One I found interesting was the EAA's alleged target testing of Nicola Sanders during/after 2007.

Other than my Snitch Box, I would also like to add in the 'Acne Test', the 'Out Of Nowhere Test' (also known as 'Where Did THAT Performance Come From Test') the 'Where Did You Get That New Body? Test' and 'Is That A Moustache On Your Upper Lip? Test'. Though not comprehensive and 100% accurate, these tests, together with the Snitch Box, may help to fight these awful criminals.

Your "tests" are just self-serving. The IAAF already targets athletes once they become top-50 performers. WADA/USADA also takes "tips" (obviously, since that is the way BALCO got started, and how the Russian urine swappers got caught). So, their answer to you would be, "Thanks, but no thanks."