Sun Yingjie fails doping test


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Postby Daisy » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:33 pm

kuha wrote:Not to be TOO cynical, but I can just hope for world peace, global rationality, and truth and justice forever. So we can move on...


Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas derided any potential perjury charge as a "technicality".


edit in source
http://www.thanhniennews.com/worlds/?ca ... wsid=10075
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Sun Fails a doping test

Postby slowcoach » Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:31 pm

Olegi2 wrote:http.://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/comment/0.10083.1600038.00.html

Steve Cram's take on this without mentioning Paula's head.


http://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/c ... 38,00.html

How'd you get so many mistakes in a single url?
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:06 am

From a home-page linked article:

"An American runner who has recently spent time training and racing in China observed that "their efforts are going to make Balco look like kids playing with a chemistry set in comparison."
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Powell » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:16 am

tafnut wrote:From a home-page linked article:

"An American runner who has recently spent time training and racing in China observed that "their efforts are going to make Balco look like kids playing with a chemistry set in comparison."


I noticed that, too, but this quote doesn't make much sense to me. Assuming the Chinese have huge-scale research programs looking for better dope, would they let an American visitor (a potential rival) see them or know about them?
Last edited by Powell on Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby Kevin Richardson » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:23 am

As a Democratic (forgive me), I am not prone to conspiracy theories. However, I see this as China using the athlete as a sacrificial lamb. Offering her up will serve to show their "serious approach" to catching cheaters. Karl Rove would be proud! There is little chance that most of the sport's insiders would be able to consider her marathon/10K double wihtout a few pounds of salt and an armload of asterisks. Color me suspicious.......
Kevin Richardson
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, Alabama

Postby Jon » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:55 am

tafnut wrote:From a home-page linked article:

"An American runner who has recently spent time training and racing in China observed that "their efforts are going to make Balco look like kids playing with a chemistry set in comparison."


The quote comes from Jason Mayeroff on Letsrun.

'Nuff said – ignore it.
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby knockout » Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:23 am

Kevin Richardson wrote:As a Democratic (forgive me), I am not prone to conspiracy theories. However, I see this as China using the athlete as a sacrificial lamb. Offering her up will serve to show their "serious approach" to catching cheaters.


those were my first thoughts too..... scape goat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
knockout
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: London 51°30' N 0° 10' W

Postby bad hammy » Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:36 am

knockout wrote:
Kevin Richardson wrote:As a Democratic (forgive me), I am not prone to conspiracy theories. However, I see this as China using the athlete as a sacrificial lamb. Offering her up will serve to show their "serious approach" to catching cheaters.


those were my first thoughts too..... scape goat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe someone in the Chinese federation doesn't like that straight-arm look either . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Powell » Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:43 am

Damned if they do and damned if they don't... Of course if nobody of note tested positive, everyone would suspect the Chinese are covering up positive tests.
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby SQUACKEE » Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:47 am

I am not prone to conspiracy theories

mrs. smith recalls thinking it odd that day in dallas when she saw a man running from the grassy knoll area with his arms hanging straight down 8)
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Powell » Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:59 am

Just to change the topic slightly - I've been thinking of Sun's marathon/10000 double and whether it really is as unbelievable as everyone thought. It certainly would be if she came close to her 10000 PR the day after the marathon, but the fact is she was nearly a minute off. Maybe it's not that strange after all, especially if she held back a bit in the marathon knowing she had to race again so soon.
I'm pretty sure if you took Paula Radcliffe in her 30:01/2:15 form, she would have been able to run a faster two-day double.
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:34 am

Powell wrote:I'm pretty sure if you took Paula Radcliffe in her 30:01/2:15 form, she would have been able to run a faster two-day double.


But Yingjie isn't a 2:15/30:01 athlete. She came within two minutes of her best in the marathon, and was then just a few seconds behind the OG Champ in the 10km. Yes, it wasn't an amazing time, but you can bet the last couple km were at a hot pace – it would have taken some effort to keep up with that.
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Powell » Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:14 am

Jon wrote:But Yingjie isn't a 2:15/30:01 athlete. She came within two minutes of her best in the marathon, and was then just a few seconds behind the OG Champ in the 10km. Yes, it wasn't an amazing time, but you can bet the last couple km were at a hot pace – it would have taken some effort to keep up with that.


But who's to say she wasn't in the best shape of her life (as the Chinese usually are at the National Games)? Radcliffe wasn't always a 2:15/30:01 athlete, either.
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:43 am

Powell wrote:But who's to say she wasn't in the best shape of her life (as the Chinese usually are at the National Games)? Radcliffe wasn't always a 2:15/30:01 athlete, either.


Her performances throughout the year kinda show that she wasn't in 2:15/30:01 form, let alone the shape of her life. And if she had managed to get into such form within the space of a couple months, then that in itself would have been ban-worthy!

(Re Paula: yes, she got into that shape after years of gradual progression.)
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby slowcoach » Wed Oct 26, 2005 5:58 am

Jon wrote:Her performances throughout the year kinda show that she wasn't in 2:15/30:01 form...And if she had managed to get into such form within the space of a couple months, then that in itself would have been ban-worthy!


Not the type of post I'd expect from a professional Athletics' journalist. Utter rubbish, in fact. Meanwhile, Radcliffe's entire career is brought up to explain how she went from being thrashed in Leiria to WC gold in the space of a few months. Oh, I get it, Helsinki was her main aim. Now what was the year aim of that Chinese runner person?

Consistency, please.

I have to get my inhaler, now. Off for a training run...
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:36 am

slowcoach wrote:
Jon wrote:Her performances throughout the year kinda show that she wasn't in 2:15/30:01 form...And if she had managed to get into such form within the space of a couple months, then that in itself would have been ban-worthy!


Not the type of post I'd expect from a professional Athletics' journalist. Utter rubbish, in fact. Meanwhile, Radcliffe's entire career is brought up to explain how she went from being thrashed in Leiria to WC gold in the space of a few months. Oh, I get it, Helsinki was her main aim. Now what was the year aim of that Chinese runner person?

Consistency, please.


SC, the first part of my post is simple fact – it's obvious that Sun wasn't/isn't in 2:15/30:01 shape this year. The second part of my post was sarcastic and I can't take the blame for you failing to notice that.

I'll ignore your anti-Paula comment, as it's the usual rubbish I've come to expect from you and is not worth answering. If you want to find out what happened to her in Leiria, then read the new chapters in the re-release of her book because I can't be bothered to regurgitate it all here.

Oh, by the way – there's no apostrophe at the end of "Athletics".
There, is that more along the lines of what you'd expect from a journo?
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby slowcoach » Wed Oct 26, 2005 8:03 am

Jon wrote:SC, the first part of my post is simple fact – it's obvious that Sun wasn't/isn't in 2:15/30:01 shape this year.


Sun's never been in 2:15/30:01 form. Ever. But then neither was Radcliffe this year. So if improving within a couple of months is a bannable offence...

Jon wrote:I'll ignore your anti-Paula comment, as it's the usual rubbish...


What "usual rubbish"?

Jon wrote:If you want to find out what happened to her in Leiria, then read...


No thanks. Has Sun got a book to tell us why she isn't in 2:15 shape, or what happened earlier in the season? Would it matter? No, because she's Chinese.
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mojo » Wed Oct 26, 2005 8:38 am

If Sun or any other great Chinese runner wrote a book and it was available in English I for one would snap it up!

I'd love to learn more about their lives, training methods etc.
mojo
 
Posts: 5519
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: at the finish line freezing my butt off

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:09 am

slowcoach wrote:Sun's never been in 2:15/30:01 form. Ever.
Correct.

slowcoach wrote:But then neither was Radcliffe this year.
Correct

slowcoach wrote:So if improving within a couple of months is a bannable offence...
Incorrect (Remember, that comment of mine was tongue-in-cheek and wasn't meant to be taken literally).

Either way, even if Paula was in the shape of her life (2:15/30), I still strongly doubt she'd be able to put together a 2:21/31:00 performance within the space of two days. She's said on many occasions that the day after a marathon, her body is completely beat up and aching, etc, and she just does very light work.

slowcoach wrote:No thanks. Has Sun got a book to tell us why she isn't in 2:15 shape, or what happened earlier in the season? Would it matter? No, because she's Chinese.
I'm still reserving judgement on Sun's case as the results of her B sample hasn't even come back yet. But if she did release a book, or even an in-depth explanation in the press, etc, then yes, I would be interested in reading it.
Last edited by Jon on Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mojo » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:14 am

Why don't you line up an interview with her Jon??? 8) 8)
mojo
 
Posts: 5519
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: at the finish line freezing my butt off

Postby slowcoach » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:34 am

Jon wrote:
slowcoach wrote:So if improving within a couple of months is a bannable offence...
Incorrect (Remember, that comment of mine was tongue-in-cheek and wasn't meant to be taken literally).


Fair enough. Didn't seem like that at the time.
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Powell » Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:53 am

Jon wrote:Either way, even if Paula was in the shape of her life (2:15/30), I still strongly doubt she'd be able to put together a 2:21/31:00 performance within the space of two days. She's said on many occasions that the day after a marathon, her body is completely beat up and aching, etc, and she just does very light work.


After a 2:15, certainly she would be beat up. But assuming she was in 2:15 shape and only ran a 2:20 to conserve energy for the next day, wouldn't you say it would be a different story?
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby Powell » Wed Oct 26, 2005 10:59 am

Jon wrote:Either way, even if Paula was in the shape of her life (2:15/30), I still strongly doubt she'd be able to put together a 2:21/31:00 performance within the space of two days. She's said on many occasions that the day after a marathon, her body is completely beat up and aching, etc, and she just does very light work.


After a 2:15, certainly she would be beat up. But assuming she was in 2:15 shape and only ran a 2:20 to conserve energy for the next day, wouldn't you say it would be a different story?
Powell
 
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:06 am

as a long distance runner for over 40 years i think 26 x 1 mile in 5:25 with no rest in between would take most of the starch out of even the great paula's legs. paula would normally go out for an easy 5 mile jog-run before a championship 10,000 and the 26 x 5:25 would be quite a differant story.
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 26, 2005 11:41 pm

Powell wrote:After a 2:15, certainly she would be beat up. But assuming she was in 2:15 shape and only ran a 2:20 to conserve energy for the next day, wouldn't you say it would be a different story?


Whether you run a 2:15 or a 2:20, your body is still going to be beaten up! The body would have gone through 26.2 miles of quick-paced miles either way.
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Andrea_T » Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:33 am

Jon, I have to agree with slowcoach, you really must think about what you post, now you're the office junior for AW. You represent that magazine, so any tabloid comments like those on Sun should be carefully considered before being posted. I also think you have a conflict of interest here: you did, afterall, design Radcliffe's site, so you're probably not the most objective when it comes to 'our Paula'.

If one woman can run 29:3 for 10k and another woman 2:15 for the marathon, is it so unreal that another woman can run 31:0 & 2:21 within just over 1 day? Doped or not, Sun did actually run those times, so it shows the human body can do it, regardless of what assistance it may have had. I doubt we'd be even debating 2:21/31:0 if it were Paula that had done it, especially you Jon.

It wasnt so long ago that we'd have scoffed at a woman running 2:15 for the marathon...
Andrea_T
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Royal Britannia

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:55 am

Andrea_T wrote:Jon, I have to agree with slowcoach
Translation: "I have to disagree with Jon, because that's what I do"

Andrea_T wrote:you really must think about what you post, now you're the office junior for AW.
Very funny, snide comment. It's 'staff writer', thank you.

Andrea_T wrote:you did, afterall, design Radcliffe's site, so you're probably not the most objective when it comes to 'our Paula'.
Perhaps. Or then again, it could also mean that I'm better informed when it comes to Paula. For example: have you, Slowcoach or Powell read both of her books? Cover to cover? Do you ever let your admiration for HD come in the way of being objective?

Andrea_T wrote:is it so unreal that another woman can run 31:0 & 2:21 within just over 1 day?
I don't know, is it? It's difficult to tell because such a feat has never been done before that I know of.

Andrea_T wrote:I doubt we'd be even debating 2:21/31:0 if it were Paula that had done it
Oh, I can guarantee that people would be talking about it, whoever had done it.

From what many world class marathoners (and Paula herself) have said in the past is that running a marathon completely beats up your body and the most you can do in the days after is very gentle work. Just like many 400m runners have said, whether you run 48 seconds or 51, it's still going to hurt. Likewise, whether someone runs a 2:15 or 2:21, their body would still have taken a hammering.

Taking into account what Paula herself has said about feeling battered the day after a marathon, do you really think she'd be able to put together a 2:21/31 performance, one day after the other?
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Andrea_T » Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:33 am

Oh, jesus, he's read Paula's bio cover to cover :shock: Do you realise how silly that comment makes you look? Impress me with some snippets of info from secret interviews, not a biography that we've all read! ( Quite an interesting read it was too, but it's hardly a definitive account on long distance training)

You dont get it. Being a fan of a particular athlete is not a bad thing and can often mean you're more informed that others. The issue here is that you have a professional relationship with Paula, you designed her website, therefore that goes beyond just being a fan. You are far less likely to be objective than someone with no commercial relationship with her.

I also was agreeing with Slowcoach because, guess what, I agree with him. Dont flatter yourself that I go out of my way to attack you! You are employed by the UK's biggest athletics magazine, therefore you should demonstrate a level of professionalism and thought when writing in public forums.
Andrea_T
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Royal Britannia

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:45 am

Andrea_T wrote:Oh, jesus, he's read Paula's bio cover to cover :shock: Do you realise how silly that comment makes you look?
You've missed the point completely. I didn't mean that just because I've read the book I've become a Paula expert. I meant that I (and anyone else who has read the book) am more likely to know about the things that Paula has said about her training than someone who hasn't read her book. Quite a simple concept, really.

Andrea_T wrote:You are far less likely to be objective than someone with no commercial relationship with her.
And what subjective things exactly have I posted on this thread about Paula? I've merely repeated what she has said herself about how she feels after a marathon.

Andrea_T wrote:Dont flatter yourself that I go out of my way to attack you!
So why all the fake aliases on the IAAF forum and this one, Steve?
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:46 am

Andrea_T wrote:Oh, jesus, he's read Paula's bio cover to cover :shock: Do you realise how silly that comment makes you look?


I don't get that either. :? I think it just means he's read her book.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:24 am

tafnut wrote:
Jon wrote:cover to cover

I don't get that either. :? I think it just means he's read her book.


Quite a common phrase on these shores:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22book+ ... o+cover%22

107,000 results

:wink:
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 27, 2005 5:39 am

Oops - the misunderstandings grow - I DO know what 'cover-to-cover' means, I did NOT understand Andrea's criticism. Why does reading a book c-to-c make someone look silly? It would look sillier if he (Jon) had NOT read it and purported to know about her.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby slowcoach » Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:33 am

Jon wrote:For example: have you, Slowcoach or Powell read both of her books? Cover to cover? Do you ever let your admiration for HD come in the way of being objective?


No, I haven't. If I did, would I believe everything therein? No.

Jon, Do you ever let your admiration for PR come in the way of being objective?
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:04 am

slowcoach wrote:Jon, Do you ever let your admiration for PR come in the way of being objective?
Sometimes, perhaps I might. But I can't see where I'm being objective on this thread. All I've said about Paula on here is that, according to what she has said about her state the day after a marathon, I don't think she'd be able to pull off a 2:21/31 2-day double.

Now, does anyone disagree with that? If not, let's move on.

slowcoach wrote:No, I haven't. If I did, would I believe everything therein? No.
If anything, that quote shows that you yourself are being subjective. Without even picking up her book, you'd approach it with the mindset of "I'm not going to believe everything she says" – you're letting your dislike of her get in the way of being objective.
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby slowcoach » Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:23 am

Jon wrote:If anything, that quote shows that you yourself are being subjective. Without even picking up her book, you'd approach it with the mindset of "I'm not going to believe everything she says" – you're letting your dislike of her get in the way of being objective.


How could I declare anything else about a book I haven't read?
I always approach a book with an open mind. But the probability of everything one says about themselves being true is virtually 0.
slowcoach
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby SQUACKEE » Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:29 am

even if it was the other way around 31:00-2:20, which is far easier, it would be hard to believe
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Andrea_T » Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:46 am

tafnut wrote:Oops - the misunderstandings grow - I DO know what 'cover-to-cover' means, I did NOT understand Andrea's criticism. Why does reading a book c-to-c make someone look silly? It would look sillier if he (Jon) had NOT read it and purported to know about her.


You dont get it tafnut? :roll:

Jon is effectively employed by Paula, therefore he simply cannot be objective because of his relationship with her. His defence that reading her biography means infact he may just be better informed and actually objective I found silly and almost absurd.

You cannot quote the reading of your employers biography as just being better informed and not subjective, it's ridiculous.
Andrea_T
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Royal Britannia

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:54 am

Jon was enamored with PR's running LONG before he became her 'employee'. As a big fan of hers, of course he would have read the book. He is also under no obligation, even as a professional journalist, to be 'objective' about her talent. NO ONE can be 'objective' in that sense - it's ALL opinion - and he has had, has now, and will continue to have great admiration of her (can anyone blame him?). I still don't understand what the issue is here, and why Jon's mentioning of the book makes him look stupid. This is NOT an attack on you - I simply don't see that he was out of line.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Andrea_T » Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:08 am

tafnut wrote:Jon was enamored with PR's running LONG before he became her 'employee'. As a big fan of hers, of course he would have read the book. He is also under no obligation, even as a professional journalist, to be 'objective' about her talent. NO ONE can be 'objective' in that sense - it's ALL opinion - and he has had, has now, and will continue to have great admiration of her (can anyone blame him?). I still don't understand what the issue is here, and why Jon's mentioning of the book makes him look stupid. This is NOT an attack on you - I simply don't see that he was out of line.


No issue, other than you not seeing why I found the book thing silly and me not seeing why you cant see it! :?
(I would add though, that obligation or not, a journalist with any sense would not criticise their employer in public, but rather stick up for them! :wink: )

Maybe we should move on from this now.

BTW, I greatly admire Paula too.
Andrea_T
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Royal Britannia

Postby Daisy » Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:23 am

Jon wrote:
slowcoach wrote:Jon, Do you ever let your admiration for PR come in the way of being objective?


Sometimes, perhaps I might. But I can't see where I'm being objective on this thread.


Jon, that's what they've been saying all along! :wink:
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest