When the Heck are they going to start saving the samples


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.

When the Heck are they going to start saving the samples

Postby donley2 » Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:12 pm

Since the drug board is open, I will make my periodic plea for saving samples. I personally consider awarding new medals without saved samples totally ridiculous. To even consider awarding new medals they need to run the latest and greatest (CIR testorone test,THG, Norbolethone, latest EPO) tests on saved samples. Otherwise the whole process is a farce.
donley2
 
Posts: 2060
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Postby b_johnson_fan » Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:38 am

I don't think that's fair to athletes like flo jo and michael johnson who set spectacular records and passed all the required tests of the day. You want to go back 20 years later and wipe these performances out? You would need to have stored samples from all competitors. Another issue is how long they can be reliably stored.
b_johnson_fan
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:40 am

Postby Mats Nilsson » Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:48 am

b_johnson_fan wrote:I don't think that's fair to athletes like flo jo and michael johnson who set spectacular records and passed all the required tests of the day. You want to go back 20 years later and wipe these performances out? You would need to have stored samples from all competitors. Another issue is how long they can be reliably stored.


Naive...naive...naive...naive....What is the likelihood of these people being clean? Storage is good for basically eternity at -80 degree C.
Mats Nilsson
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:20 am

Postby b_johnson_fan » Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:54 am

I'm assuming that they were not clean. People probably don't want the truth.
b_johnson_fan
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:40 am

Postby donley2 » Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:41 am

Part of my point here is that if the governing bodies insist on attempting to rewrite history (at least 8 years worth), that doing so only when people like Ben Johnson, Tim Montgomery or Marion Jones are FORCED to admit the truth and others are not is stupid. At least retesting old samples could add at least a tiny bit of assurance that those who pass the retests (in order to receive the new medals) MIGHT have been clean. I think the current cat and mouse game with respect to designer steroids and the like could be potentially slowed down with the saving of samples also.
donley2
 
Posts: 2060
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Postby Mennisco » Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:57 am

Mats Nilsson wrote:
What is the likelihood of these people being clean? .


A picture is worth a million p-values?

Image
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:06 am

Mats Nilsson wrote:
b_johnson_fan wrote:I don't think that's fair to athletes like flo jo and michael johnson who set spectacular records and passed all the required tests of the day. You want to go back 20 years later and wipe these performances out? You would need to have stored samples from all competitors. Another issue is how long they can be reliably stored.

Naive...naive...naive...naive....What is the likelihood of these people being clean? Storage is good for basically eternity at -80 degree C.

bjf did not say they were clean - he said it's not fair to single out one guilty party when they might have all been dirty (or not). And I'm totally sure that WADA wants to start saving every vial of pee from every competitor from every major competition FOREVER at
-80C. :roll:

The hard fact I had to face with the East German women was that although they were dirty, they passed the same tests everyone else did, and we have ZERO proof that the others were indeed clean, so it's pointless to take away the EG medals because you could just as easily be giving them to another dirty athlete.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:22 am

tafnut wrote:The hard fact I had to face with the East German women was that although they were dirty, they passed the same tests everyone else did, and we have ZERO proof that the others were indeed clean, so it's pointless to take away the EG medals because you could just as easily be giving them to another dirty athlete.

That applies to everyone who's ever been found guilty by means of circumstantial evidence, not just the East Germans. Couldn't Marion Jones have said, "I passed the same tests that Thanou and Pauline Davis passed. How do you know they're clean?"
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Mennisco » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:00 am

tafnut wrote:

it's pointless to take away the EG medals because you could just as easily be giving them to another dirty athlete.


Hardly. Particularly when you go back to Munich 1972 and Montreal 1976. Anyone want to tell me that Kathy McMillan should not be the legitimate 1976 Olympic Long Jump champ, or that Raelene Boyle was ripped off of 2 sprint golds in Munich, or that Rosalyn Bryant ran a 49.7 anchor leg for the US in Montreal and that she and some of her relay mates were just as likely to have been doped as the Fräuden? :roll:

The proposition that odds are even regarding who was doped at these 2 Olympics is ridiculous. Odds reached level playing field by 1984, still no reason why they shouldn't lose every one of their stinking medals.
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:15 am

My point is:

a. we have drug tests
b. everyone is subject to them (or face consequences)
c. you either pass it or fail it

At some later date, we find out that Athlete X actually had taken PEDs and gotten away with it. At that time people get in an uproar and demand punishment. That is all well and good. But the problem is "what about everybody else that was dirty that passed the test at the time, but have not found themelves in a situation where their guilt is revealed"? Why do THEY deserve the medal? NO ONE can say POSITIVELY that Athlete Y was definitely clean. ONE athlete whom we can say was clean was Joan Benoit. Loved her!! What if she had finished second in LA and just now we find out the winner was dirty? EVEN then, I would not ask that Joannie get the Gold, because I can't PROVE she was clean, I just know in my heart of hearts she was. I hate giving in to the cheats, but don't we all realize now just how pervasive the PEDs use was, going all the way back to the 60s, when it actually wasn't illegal?

Let's move on. What's done is done. Let's look at today and the future to see what we can do to PREVENT more sad situations like the one we find ourselves in now.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Mennisco » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:23 am

Taf, you gotta know that in MY heart of hearts, I know Raelene and Kathy were no way dirty. And I feel very differently - they SHOULD get their golds. We all know the East Germans were doped. The IAAF needs to send a message to the world that is consistent, loud, powerful and does not confuse people. Returning medals would be the requisite reparations to say to the world "Something wrong was done, it is being corrected as far as we are able." How is this any different from making compensation to indigenous peoples who are successfully staking legitimate claims for wrongs and accepting compensation for what they suffered?
Please do not give me the "they're only ATHLETES" response, not just tafnut, anyone. Pouring your heart and soul into the achievement of such a noble dream only find the dream dead in polluted waters must be a sickening thing.
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada

Postby tafnut » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:30 am

Mennisco wrote:Please do not give me the "they're only ATHLETES" response

Not at all. I completely understand where you are coming from and the hurt you feel when 'your' athlete gets beat by a cheater, but this problem is exactly the same as the 'Millennium Records' issue. WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHO WAS CLEAN AND WHO WAS DIRTY IN THE PAST (or sadly, even in the present), and it would be ludicrous (IMO) to start handing out medals to people who were 'probably' just as guilty as the newly busted one. You can think of MANY examples of athletes who 'should' inherit medals, that were guilty themselves. Since we can't pick and choose which athletes DO get a pass, sadly, none do. Even though your (and my) heart of hearts knows they deserve it.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby Jack Slocombe » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:35 am

Simple answer........statute of limitations. Set up a rule, "you're on the hook for x years". After that, you're home free. I would suggest 10 years.

Also, everybody talks about medals, come on......cash is the big driver to use PEDs. Dirty..........give back the cash. Gonna be real fun redoing all those old tax forms. The dirty jock has two choices: pay back all the cash or go to jail for fraud for 10 years. This could be the start of the "Prison Olympics". The USA would dominate as usual with the Russkies and Germans challenging.
Jack Slocombe
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Groveland & Sunnyvale CA, & Poulsbo, WA

Postby Andrea_T » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:36 am

Anyone that thinks it was just the GDR winning medals doped in Munich and Montreal is, well, a bit naive to say the least.

The evidence against the GDR is too patchy and not conclusive enough - not all the athletes that won medals are mentioned in the Stasi document so do you wipe their medals off too? If we wipe off every east german's mark because some were mentioned in documents, do we wipe off every american woman sprinters mark because 8 out of 10 championship entrees have been doped too?

The opportunity was missed when random testing was brought in. Since then we see dirty athletes winning medals in often better times than the GDR (Marion Jones) or not quite as good (Natalya Sadova) so what good was it to remove all GDR performances? Marks may or may not be down, but the drug use certainly isnt. Until we get to a stage where every country randomly blood tests it's athletes (and even then the athletes will still probably be one step ahead) it's pretty futile to wipe out one nations athletes and leave others on record.
Andrea_T
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Royal Britannia

Postby Mennisco » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:36 am

Well I won't keep arguing that Ruth Fuchs' confession - replete with the slap in the face that she didn't feel sorry or that she'd done anything wrong - serves as well as any other confession [Issajenko, Jones] as proof that we KNOW who was dirty in the past, if only by confession - but I know there is no point in pressing the issue.

Someday soon there will be a huge love-in at some stadium called the Heart of Hearts Hero Homecoming, and a bunch of ancient white-haired/bald people in walkers - many with Alzheimer's - will be showered with confetti as they receive accolades from their biggest fans. Giant posters of the cheats will be coated with an orchestrated shower of pigeon shit - kind of like when they release the doves at the Olympics.
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Mennisco » Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:42 am

Andrea_T wrote:Anyone that thinks it was just the GDR winning medals doped in Munich and Montreal is, well, a bit naive to say the least.

.


If you refer to me, then you should feel silly for extracting such a silly "conclusion" from what I posted. I spoke of this:

Odds that DDR beyotches were doped = 100% and odds that others were doped in Munich equals what, maybe 10%?? not counting the Soviet "women". Tell me who you think might have been doped behind Stecher in the 100. I can think of maybe 2 others. And if you think Boyle was doped, please lighten up on the hydroponics....sorry, don't light up, never mind. Tee-Hee-He! :D

Of course others were doped in Munich. And far more were duped.
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest