A lot of it's difficult for mere mortals like me to understand, as an example Carl Lewis tested positive 3 times at the olympic trials but offered up a defence that he accidentally consumed banned substances. Some months later he won a number of golds at the Olympics.

This is from memory - not from google, but as I read in a book, at the time of the positive tests on Carl Lewis, Strict Liability rules were not in place, so mitigating circumstances could be taken into account and a ban would not be automatic. That's what happened. If the tests had been done under today's rules, then the amounts detected were so low they would not have been positive results.

I'm not saying Lewis never doped, but with regard to the failed tests, it's best to understand the circumstances.

seb coes 800m world record must be the most dodgey of all time

You're right Degs, I looked on google for that however I do think that if possible they should have just one system of testing (I'm sure that's how it's intended to be).

Lee, it was largely because there were so many cases where excuses would be given (and accepted) that they brought in the strict liability rules, where athletes are responsible for whatever is found in their samples. That's how it's supposed to work anyway, but ban lengths can still vary with circumstances I think.

Altitude for Beamon?

sofiakenny
Joined: 02 Apr 05
Replies: 17641
    10 Aug 16 14:58   

roger Florence Griffith Joyner never failed a test..do you honestly believe she was clean??

I don't know as I'm not familiar with the American testing system, certainly not as it was back in her day.

Certainly her early death and change in physique are indicators (though no more than that and certainly not evidence) of something suspicious. Unless anything comes to light from colleagues or an autopsy (and how ghoulish do you want to get on this?) or reevaluation all these years later of samples, we will never know, will we.

She is American of course and not British.

Unfortunately we've got to a stage where the cynics will always look at a great performance and accuse the person of drug taking. Sadly, people love to be negative and bring people down. I know well two British competitors in Rio who have both won Olympic medals in previous Olympics and I would bet my life on them being clean. I would also suggest that the vast majority of athletes are clean and that in the UK we have very good drug testing procedures. I find it very insulting to my friends that they are automatically seen as drug cheats if they win.

Amongst those mentioned in the thread I'd be pretty sure that Paula Radcliffe was clean. There is nothing in her performances to suggest otherwise. She was always world class at shorter distances but anyone could see that a step up to the marathon was going to be the making of her. Of course there have been a large number of drug cheats particularly amongst the sprinters, most of which have been caught at one time or other and a few which may not have tested positive but whom were almost certainly guilty. It is very unfair to tarnish everyone with the same brush.

As for Lizzie Armistead she is also almost certainly clean but shouldn't have been allowed to compete for her 3 missed tests.

he says he is xmoneyx,surely that's good enough?

yeh she had her phone switched off when expecting a call,got sports new mr fixit lawyer to sort it for her

The cynicism is well placed. All Bolt's rivals have posted positive tests yet can not get near his time 9.58 so it takes a stretch of the imagination to think he is 100% clean.

And what about Linford eh? Just the once towards the end of his career the script goes...

Christie tested positive for the stimulant pseudoephedrine at the 1988 Seoul Olympics, but he escaped sanction after the International Olympic Committee's disciplinary committee voted by a margin of 11 to 10.[16]

At the 1994 European championships staged in Helsinki, where British team captain Christie won his third European 100 m title, he was caught up in a doping controversy after Solomon Wariso, a 400 m runner making his international championship debut, tested positive for the stimulant ephedrine. Wariso revealed that he had used an over-the-counter pick-you-up called "Up Your Gas", which Christie had bought at a Florida pharmacy.[17]

In 1999, Christie was found guilty of using the performance-enhancing drug nandrolone following a doping test after an indoor meet in Germany. He was found to have more than 100 times normal levels of the metabolites of nandrolone in his urine. Various explanations were offered to explain the results, including eating avocado, or using nutritional supplements.[18][19][20]

The IAAF rejected that explanation and gave Christie a two-years ban from athletics, despite UK Athletics feeling that there was reasonable doubt whether the drug had been taken deliberately, a decision which ignored the usual drug testing principle of "strict liability".[21]

English athletes do cheat as well.

Absolutely British athletes cheat too. David Jenkins and Alan Wells were interesting situations in the 70's/80's. There was also Dwayne Chambers and I'm sure a number of others. The point is that one person failing a test shouldn't lead to us believing that everyone is cheating.

I find it incredible that anyone can think the womans marathon record is probably clean
3 minutes!!!!

No doubt whatsoever about Paula.

Has to be remembered that most testing is carried out by a nation's governing body of the sport - they have no interest in exposing cheats.

therapeutic use exemptions are another scandal -  would be interesting to know how many top sports stars are using medication for terrible medical conditions. we won't be told though all confidential -  except when Sharapova forgot her meds were no longer exempt

roger will require proof!

sofiakenny
Joined: 02 Apr 05
Replies: 17644
    10 Aug 16 18:33   

roger will require proof! 


Amazing!

Start a thread on here extolling the virtues of religion or Christianity and you can't move for folks laughing at the naivite of belief in something and demanding proof one's God exists.

But drugs cheats?

Well they're everywhere, because....because...well, they are aren't they? Everyone knows that and the World Record has been smashed by an individual who is x seconds better than everyone else (I thought everyone was on PED's - or is it just those who are far better than anyone else? Still, proof and clear thinking isn't a strong suit here), oh and now we'll take a thread about British Athletes and bring in examples from the rest of the World and....and...)

Like I said, I'm not trying to convince those in the opposite corner to me. I know what I know and you believe what you believe.

But if Vicky Thornley and Kath Grainger get a medal tomorrow, or whenever they race, then I hope anyone who has followed this thread will know for certain they have won it clean and won it on bags of talent, hitting tougher work schedules than you or I can dream about, missing key events in friends and families lives, having a restricted social life and being utterly committed to their sport and to winning.

Drugs don't and never have entered into the equation.

we can't know for certain who is clean because the testing is inadequate. but rowers are more likely to be clean than a lot of others because the money involved is peanuts

There are those who will want to think the worst of foreign athletes, it is an agenda they have and a mindset.

missing key events in friends and families lives, having a restricted social life and being utterly committed to their sport and to winning.

The auld Chinese could learn a lesson or two on that sort of thing