Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Chambers, Ohuruogu and how to aviod drug testers

I hope I'm never on trial with some of you lot on the jury "Pffft, who needs evidence - supposition will do just fine!".
 
A lot of silly conjecture about what might have happened three years ago proves nothing.

This thread is made of fail.

You'll notice that I've never asserted that she was on drugs. The thrust of my case has been that the rules should be changed to impose a lifetime ban on those who miss three tests, because, otherwise, the whole testing regime is undermined - people will take drugs and dodge the tests, safe in the knowledge that they'll receive a more lenient punishment than if they had been caught using. I have not siad that's what she did, but merely that he treatment sets a precedent that would facilitate that.
 
I hope I'm never on trial with some of you lot on the jury "Pffft, who needs evidence - supposition will do just fine!".

I don't know if she's a drugs cheat, but she has bought the suspicion on herself by failing to submit to three drugs tests.
 
No we can't; some drugs could have been expelled within that time. See the letter linked in the OP.

The drug mentioned in the letter that could clear the system in 3 days was EPO which is used by endurance athletes, not by sprinters.
 
The drug mentioned in the letter that could clear the system in 3 days was EPO which is used by endurance athletes, not by sprinters.

Err... no. It says "In general terms, explosive strength athletes, such as sprinters, use anabolic steroids, growth hormone, insulin and EPO during the off season. They use these drugs in conjunction with an intense weight training program, which helps to develop a strength base that will serve them throughout the competitive season."
 
The drug mentioned in the letter that could clear the system in 3 days was EPO which is used by endurance athletes, not by sprinters.

There are drugs being used that there are yet no tests for.

There are a wide range of very sophisticated strategies that are employed with aplomb in this "game" and the cheats are in the lead (f'nar, f'nar).

But missing three tests isn't one of those strategies (or wasn't until she was allowed to compete).



Woof
 
Err... no. It says "In general terms, explosive strength athletes, such as sprinters, use anabolic steroids, growth hormone, insulin and EPO during the off season. They use these drugs in conjunction with an intense weight training program, which helps to develop a strength base that will serve them throughout the competitive season."

EPO used in conjunction with steroids. By itself, it wouldn't be worth the risk for a sprinter.

These are the detection times for most steroid/testosterone drugs

http://www.steroidportal.com/s-How-long-do-steroids-stay-detectable-in-your-system-.html
 
Bolt ran 9.69. What would he have run had he not slowed up with what? 10-20m to go.....? Well under 9.59 seconds would be my guess.

Anyhow, interesting article here, and some interesting if unsubstantiated comments at the bottom of it.


Ben Johnson didn't test positive until the olympics. A test only works if they know what they are looking for... i.e. Marion Jones and the designer steriods THG... undetectable until a coach handed in the syringe containing the drug! I'm Canadian... this has nothing to do with nationality... I'm still proud of the fact Ben Johnson is one of the fastest cdn/jamaican sprinters ever juice or no juice. You don't just fall out of bed take steriods and run sub tens.

Johnson made headlines when he ran a 9.79 but his urine test had traces of Stanozolol, an anabolic steroid. Johnson was disqualified and later admitted he was using steroids when he set other records. His coach, Charlie Francis, said Johnson had been using the performance enhancing drug since 1981. It was essentially the end of the Jamaican-born runner.

Undetected steriod use for seven years until the '88 Seoul Olympics... and this was twenty years ago. I'm sure performance enhancing steriods and steriod masking agents have advanced in twenty years to once again become undetectable to Olympic level testing. Usain's run merely points out that athletes can, and always will, maintain a few paces ahead of drug-testing efforts.

I want to believe Usain Bolt's 9.69 is legit, history tells me otherwise. In all the time's posted of Usain Bolt's 200m from 18 to 21 in 3 years he has improved .30 seconds. In a shorter distance 100m in less than 5 races he has improved .30 sec which is impossible if you know anything about sprinting... thanks for the info that proves Usain has more steriods in him then Ben Johnson and an entire Kentucky Derby horse race combined.

http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2008/06/new-100m-world.html

indeed the whole website has some interesting stuff if it takes your fancy....

http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/
 
What's the big deal with the arbitrary "three tests" rule? If it is such a big deal to miss a test, why not ban people for one offence? Or two? And you accept that accidents happen, meaning that it can be OK to miss tests, why not allow somebody four strikes instead of three?

You talk as if three tests is some natural law of the universe -- miss two tests and you are hunky dory but *three*?! My goodness!
 
Or, if she was using drugs, got off very lightly.

I and most rational people don't go by "ifs" and "maybes" though.

If the system is at fault fine, someone should look at changing it, perhaps to a "three strikes you're out" rule.

But Ohuruogu can't be blamed for a flawed system, some are assuming guilt on supposition and guesswork, which is a rocky road.
 
From the BALCO man.......

I have no evidence of doping by any of the winners of medals in Beijing, but when times begin falling like rain, questions arise, especially when the record-setters are from countries such as Jamaica and other Caribbean nations where there is no independent anti-doping federation.In the women's 100 meters, for instance, four of the eight finalists in the event were from such countries. Jamaican women swept all three Olympic medals: Shelly-Ann Frasier's winning time of 10.78 seconds is blazing fast, and reflects a drop from a best of 11.31 in 2007 to 10.78 in 2008, an improvement of more than five-tenths of a second in a single year and about five meters faster than before.
 
If the system is at fault fine, someone should look at changing it, perhaps to a "three strikes you're out" rule.

That is exactly what I am saying.


But Ohuruogu can't be blamed for a flawed system, some are assuming guilt on supposition and guesswork, which is a rocky road.

That is why I've been at pains to say that I don't know that she is guilty.
 
What's the big deal with the arbitrary "three tests" rule? If it is such a big deal to miss a test, why not ban people for one offence? Or two? And you accept that accidents happen, meaning that it can be OK to miss tests, why not allow somebody four strikes instead of three?

You talk as if three tests is some natural law of the universe -- miss two tests and you are hunky dory but *three*?! My goodness!

Yes, I would ban for even one missed test.
 
What's the big deal with the arbitrary "three tests" rule? If it is such a big deal to miss a test, why not ban people for one offence? Or two? And you accept that accidents happen, meaning that it can be OK to miss tests, why not allow somebody four strikes instead of three?

You talk as if three tests is some natural law of the universe -- miss two tests and you are hunky dory but *three*?! My goodness!

Nah, mate.

You know better than that.

The regime is the regime and the three-strike rule sets a balance that, effectively, allows for a warning (with no penalty,) and a final warning (with no penalty).

If, after a final warning, you are still not interested in complying with the rules then you commit a doping violation.

What possible reason, after all the time and effort put in, would any athlete fail to ensure that they stuck to this rule?

Oh. Apart from that :hmm: , I mean.


The other 300 odd athletes managed it. Nobody else was stuck with a doping violation and a ban.

Only her.

:)

Woof
 
Yes.

:confused:

She was banned for her doping violation.


You certainly don't seem to that's of any relevance here though so......


*shrugs*



Woof

She was banned for being a testing violator! We've already established there's a difference earlier in the thread.:)

TBH, I'd much prefer to talk to you about the real reason you are so pissed off by these games. You definitely have more of an argument/reason to be.
 
Jessie...stop this now! :(
She was proved to be a testing violator not a doping one. :)

Please see post 137.


Failing a test, missing three tests or tampering with a sample means that you are proven to be a doping violator. Passing any number of tests does not, unfortunately, mean that you are clean. Some of the most famous drug cheats there are passed a huge number of tests, remember.

:)


Woof
 
That is why I've been at pains to say that I don't know that she is guilty.

And that's the problem.

We don't know who is guilty.

But given what we know of history and the likely advancements in cheating technology (which is always one step - or several - ahead of the testers), we would be foolish not to be suspicious, especially of proven doping violators or of those from countries without accredited O-O-S testing who are setting world records with times that are astonishingly better than anything previously achieved by even themselves.


The whole thing is corrupt and the Ra Ra Ra merchants are naive.


In my opinion.


:(


Woof
 
Back
Top Bottom