RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Now if that isn't straddling the fence I don't know what is .. Let's see, most athletes are on something .. Especially those at the top .. But wait .. Those at the very top (the stars) aren't on anything cause they are just freaks of nature !! So we get to accuse everybody, except those we like .. Or at least those whose reputations we don't want to touch .. Amazing the mental gymnastics folks do to try to validate the feeling of everyone (*) is doping ... Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Contopoulos Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 6:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Conway, Although I did not say, nor do I think, you have to cheat to win, I did give why I say that I feel that a large majority of top athletes do cheat. I also gave my criteria for top athlete. I said that I believe that in any given event, in any given year, and that in any given major final, in any given major comp... 60-70% of the athletes are/have been on something. I base this opinion, and that is all it really is, on the fact that so many top athletes have been caught (I gave a list earlier). Given the difficulty of getting caught, and the stupidity of the athlete to get caught, my conclusion is that many more are doing it and doing it correctly. Additionally, to answer your question about individual athletes... here goes. My philosophy is this: the best in the world, the El Gs, Tergat's, Gebreselassie's, don't need drugs. They're already several standard deviations away from the mean. The people most likely to use drugs are the next teir down. They're the guys who are already very fast... ie 13:low naturally. They use it to get the edge on the Gebs, et al. The thing is, the aforementioned people are complete freaks, and no amount of drugs will probably make them, nor anyone else much better. Their systems are so evolved, that drugs have no real benefit. The guys who they would benefit are the 13:00 low guys. Ironically, these are the same guys who are probably in the market for it, have the financial means and the foreign/local help. I also said that when we (America) has 30 guys running 13:10 naturally, you will see many more American dopers. They will be offered it more often and they will see the gap between them and WC or OG medalist not quite so far. In this world, drugs become appealing. Drugs are probably not quite so appealing to someone running 13:30. Especially someone with a college degree who has reasoned out even with the best dope he will still be a mediocre international athlete and a possibly dead one at that. _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com
RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Timely because ?? Just another positive test ... Does that prove he is NOT a freak of nature ??? Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin J. Dixon Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 10:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative How timely. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/athletics/3171878.stm Conway Hill wrote: Now if that isn't straddling the fence I don't know what is .. Let's see, most athletes are on something .. Especially those at the top .. But wait .. Those at the very top (the stars) aren't on anything cause they are just freaks of nature !! So we get to accuse everybody, except those we like .. Or at least those whose reputations we don't want to touch .. Amazing the mental gymnastics folks do to try to validate the feeling of everyone (*) is doping ... Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT Also, it goes back to my original statement about the lack of top level US distance runners. In the world of sprinting and throwing the US has a good number of the very top level elite and the closer you are to the top level elite (world champions/record holders/race winners) the more you are exposed to the fact that doping is a near necessity. 20 years ago the US had a lot of top level elite distance runners and the rumors of drug use was there (Salazar, Slaney, etc). Now, you might not like my opinion or agree with my logic but it does explain the falling off of US distance running as a whole. Whereas US sprinting and throwing has always been at the top in distance running we had falling off (likely due to the less is more, faster not longer late 80s credo) that led to this naive view of the top level. With fewer runners in the very top level there are fewer people exposed to the reality of that top level. Cheaters have been winning medals and races for 100 years and there's no reason to think this has changed. Alan _ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). https://broadband.msn.com
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT The original statement should probably be improved upon to say that: Sprinting and Throwing as sports are dirtier than distance running, at least in the United States. ...Not to imply, of course, that EVERY sprinter and thrower is doping, or that there are NO American distance runners using something like EPO or HGH. RT (dodging a 16 lb shot accidently dropped from an office building)
RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
The original statement that lead to this thread was that the only way to win was to use drugs .. To wit I asked the question as to whether or not that then implied that all finalists at Worlds and Olympics are/were drug users .. And whether or not this then also meant that the likes of ElGuerrouj, Gebresselassie, MJ, Montgomery, Greene, Guevara, Jones, and others were then also implicated as drug users by default ... I've seen no discussion on this point .. Just the constant - most of the athletes are cheating .. If the implication is NOT that these and others are cheating ... Then who is ?? And why is the immediate assumption that if you are elite and producing outstanding marks then you must be a cheat .. Can't have your cake and eat it too ... That is saying that the majority of the world is cheating and that one must cheat in order to win, yet in the same breath assume that those at the top are NOT using drugs ... Or only select ones (those you don't like) .. So what is it ?? Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Treadway Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 10:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT The original statement should probably be improved upon to say that: Sprinting and Throwing as sports are dirtier than distance running, at least in the United States. ...Not to imply, of course, that EVERY sprinter and thrower is doping, or that there are NO American distance runners using something like EPO or HGH. RT (dodging a 16 lb shot accidently dropped from an office building)
RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
The original question was too inclusive. I said as a broad statement that in order to win a major championship you must be doped. That statement is likely wrong, but the general idea remains the same. I'm sure there are a couple athletes out there who are winning and not doped, but they are not the norm in my opinion. Yes, it is likely that many of those you listed either are currently or have doped. If you give me the names of the Olympic gold medalists and world record holders of the past 30 years I would say at least 80% of those were doped. Just one man's opinion. Alan From: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Randy Treadway' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc8-f20.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.156]) by mc8-s11.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:55:13 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc8-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:51:33 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h96JZje9008680for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h96JZj29008675for t-and-f-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h96JZhe9008381for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conway (c-24-127-179-221.we.client2.attbi.com[24.127.179.221]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100619353801100716sie; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 19:35:38 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFOB8xN+aFyHeF2uCobPEPOqiX3+GLMhigQ= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Oct 2003 19:51:35.0293 (UTC) FILETIME=[3F85B2D0:01C38C43] The original statement that lead to this thread was that the only way to win was to use drugs .. To wit I asked the question as to whether or not that then implied that all finalists at Worlds and Olympics are/were drug users .. And whether or not this then also meant that the likes of ElGuerrouj, Gebresselassie, MJ, Montgomery, Greene, Guevara, Jones, and others were then also implicated as drug users by default ... I've seen no discussion on this point .. Just the constant - most of the athletes are cheating .. If the implication is NOT that these and others are cheating ... Then who is ?? And why is the immediate assumption that if you are elite and producing outstanding marks then you must be a cheat .. Can't have your cake and eat it too ... That is saying that the majority of the world is cheating and that one must cheat in order to win, yet in the same breath assume that those at the top are NOT using drugs ... Or only select ones (those you don't like) .. So what is it ?? Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Treadway Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 10:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT The original statement should probably be improved upon to say that: Sprinting and Throwing as sports are dirtier than distance running, at least in the United States. ...Not to imply, of course, that EVERY sprinter and thrower is doping, or that there are NO American distance runners using something like EPO or HGH. RT (dodging a 16 lb shot accidently dropped from an office building) _ Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Conway, Although I did not say, nor do I think, you have to cheat to win, I did give why I say that I feel that a large majority of top athletes do cheat. I also gave my criteria for top athlete. I said that I believe that in any given event, in any given year, and that in any given major final, in any given major comp... 60-70% of the athletes are/have been on something. I base this opinion, and that is all it really is, on the fact that so many top athletes have been caught (I gave a list earlier). Given the difficulty of getting caught, and the stupidity of the athlete to get caught, my conclusion is that many more are doing it and doing it correctly. Additionally, to answer your question about individual athletes... here goes. My philosophy is this: the best in the world, the El Gs, Tergat's, Gebreselassie's, don't need drugs. They're already several standard deviations away from the mean. The people most likely to use drugs are the next teir down. They're the guys who are already very fast... ie 13:low naturally. They use it to get the edge on the Gebs, et al. The thing is, the aforementioned people are complete freaks, and no amount of drugs will probably make them, nor anyone else much better. Their systems are so evolved, that drugs have no real benefit. The guys who they would benefit are the 13:00 low guys. Ironically, these are the same guys who are probably in the market for it, have the financial means and the foreign/local help. I also said that when we (America) has 30 guys running 13:10 naturally, you will see many more American dopers. They will be offered it more often and they will see the gap between them and WC or OG medalist not quite so far. In this world, drugs become appealing. Drugs are probably not quite so appealing to someone running 13:30. Especially someone with a college degree who has reasoned out even with the best dope he will still be a mediocre international athlete and a possibly dead one at that. _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Maybe because he is a little younger and a little less naive. To wit, a timely article: Some ethicists argue that student cheating whether using the Internet to plagiarize or finding a rogue way to ace a classroom exam is the canary in the mine, about the extent of wider cheating now and in the future. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/04/arts/04CHEA.html?th=pagewanted=printposition= Keith Whitman wrote: How the heck would YOU know Alan? I'm not hatin, just wondering...
Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
OK .. Then does that mean that all finalists at the Olympics and Worlds are dirty - since they are the one's in a position to win ?? All of the finalists in the men's 100 this year, for example too turns beating each other all season long ... So the assumption then is that they are all dirty ?? That's part of my problem with the whole drug testing system and attitude ... The attitude is they are all dirty we just have to catch em ... And if they are really good they must be really dirty !! Here's a list of big time winners and medalists .. Is the assumption that they are all dirty ?? Hicham El Guerrouj Haile Gebrselassie Paul Tergat Wilson Kipketer Michael Johnson Frankie Fredericks Maurice Greene Tim Montgomery Marion Jones Cathy Freeman Allen Johnson Jonathon Edwards Are these and others assumed to be dirty since they are/were all top performers ?? I also find it interesting that the majority of those so vehemently against the cheaters are of the distance running ranks .. Not the sprinters and hurdlers, or the field event people ... But predominantly distances .. and even more so American distance ranks who are the only group (in the States) that are not internationally competitive ... Is that why the assumption is that anyone that is competitive must be cheating ??? - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 2:50 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. There are a lot more muscle building illegal drugs out there than endurance building illegal drugs. Your assumption is correct about that list but I wouldn't say ALL of them are dirty, just most. Can't hate a man for having an opinion. It just makes it easier to accept when the ax comes crashing down. Carl freakin Lewis was dirty for christs sakes. Isn't he the saint of US track and field? Alan From: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc4-f37.hotmail.com ([65.54.237.172]) by mc4-s3.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:37:01 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc4-f37.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:35:33 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLme9008962for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h93HLl63008961for t-and-f-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLke9008882for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Conway (c-24-127-179-221.we.client2.attbi.com[24.127.179.221]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id 2003100317214001200hvqlhe; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:21:41 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFPJfdfglUshtr/aOfzuKBht+/V7y0SBoUg= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2003 17:35:34.0788 (UTC) FILETIME=[C03E3440:01C389D4] OK .. Then does that mean that all finalists at the Olympics and Worlds are dirty - since they are the one's in a position to win ?? All of the finalists in the men's 100 this year, for example too turns beating each other all season long ... So the assumption then is that they are all dirty ?? That's part of my problem with the whole drug testing system and attitude ... The attitude is they are all dirty we just have to catch em ... And if they are really good they must be really dirty !! Here's a list of big time winners and medalists .. Is the assumption that they are all dirty ?? Hicham El Guerrouj Haile Gebrselassie Paul Tergat Wilson Kipketer Michael Johnson Frankie Fredericks Maurice Greene Tim Montgomery Marion Jones Cathy Freeman Allen Johnson Jonathon Edwards Are these and others assumed to be dirty since they are/were all top performers ?? I also find it interesting that the majority of those so vehemently against the cheaters are of the distance running ranks .. Not the sprinters and hurdlers, or the field event people ... But predominantly distances .. and even more so American distance ranks who are the only group (in the States) that are not internationally competitive ... Is that why the assumption is that anyone that is competitive must be cheating ??? - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 2:50 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan _ Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
How the heck would YOU know Alan? I'm not hatin, just wondering... At 04:21 AM 10/4/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. There are a lot more muscle building illegal drugs out there than endurance building illegal drugs. Your assumption is correct about that list but I wouldn't say ALL of them are dirty, just most. Can't hate a man for having an opinion. It just makes it easier to accept when the ax comes crashing down. Carl freakin Lewis was dirty for christs sakes. Isn't he the saint of US track and field? Alan From: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc4-f37.hotmail.com ([65.54.237.172]) by mc4-s3.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:37:01 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc4-f37.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:35:33 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLme9008962for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h93HLl63008961for t-and-f-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLke9008882for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Conway (c-24-127-179-221.we.client2.attbi.com[24.127.179.221]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id 2003100317214001200hvqlhe; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:21:41 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFPJfdfglUshtr/aOfzuKBht+/V7y0SBoUg= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2003 17:35:34.0788 (UTC) FILETIME=[C03E3440:01C389D4] OK .. Then does that mean that all finalists at the Olympics and Worlds are dirty - since they are the one's in a position to win ?? All of the finalists in the men's 100 this year, for example too turns beating each other all season long ... So the assumption then is that they are all dirty ?? That's part of my problem with the whole drug testing system and attitude ... The attitude is they are all dirty we just have to catch em ... And if they are really good they must be really dirty !! Here's a list of big time winners and medalists .. Is the assumption that they are all dirty ?? Hicham El Guerrouj Haile Gebrselassie Paul Tergat Wilson Kipketer Michael Johnson Frankie Fredericks Maurice Greene Tim Montgomery Marion Jones Cathy Freeman Allen Johnson Jonathon Edwards Are these and others assumed to be dirty since they are/were all top performers ?? I also find it interesting that the majority of those so vehemently against the cheaters are of the distance running ranks .. Not the sprinters and hurdlers, or the field event people ... But predominantly distances .. and even more so American distance ranks who are the only group (in the States) that are not internationally competitive ... Is that why the assumption is that anyone that is competitive must be cheating ??? - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 2:50 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan _ Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es Keith Whitman Head Coach Cross Country/Track Field Muskingum College New Concord, Ohio http://www.muskingum.edu (740) 826-8018-Office (330) 677-4631-Home (740) 826-8300-Fax John 14:6
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Alan, your comments show a good deal of ignorance and event bias here. Muscle building drugs are also beneficial to non-sprinters/throwers, as evidenced by racewalkers and distance runners getting nabbed for roids. And certain elite distance runners are rumored to have been heavily into HGH. It's unlikely that endurance building drugs such as EPO have any impact on the explosive events, so if anything, the aerobic events could be seen as having more avenues of illegal drug abuse open to them. Dan --- alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. There are a lot more muscle building illegal drugs out there than endurance building illegal drugs. Your assumption is correct about that list but I wouldn't say ALL of them are dirty, just most. Can't hate a man for having an opinion. It just makes it easier to accept when the ax comes crashing down. Carl freakin Lewis was dirty for christs sakes. Isn't he the saint of US track and field? Alan = http://AbleDesign.com - Web Design Custom Programming http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Fantasy TF @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] |\/ ^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ (503)370-9969 phone/fax / / __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
I don't think you even need to throw money into the equation. There are millions of steroid abusers in the U.S. alone who don't compete for any money. As long as the idea is to push your limits, people will push their limits. It's the competition ethic at work. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 10:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 02:38:56.0975 (UTC) FILETIME=[53D5A5F0:01C3888E] Conspiracy theories??? For a sport most could careless about??? Collaboration between some or all 200 federations who can't get along with each other??? And, on Page 2 of the supermarket tabloid ... the IAAF and USATF are actually ruled by Ollan Cassell at his double-secret headquarters at Area 51, near the hanger where the alien spaceship is housed, next to Elvis' office. alan tobin wrote: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc9-f25.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.32]) by mc9-s13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:13:06 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc9-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:04:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HuiIK011974for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h91HuiUO011968for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net (sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HugIK011530for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id 20031001175637016005uf3je (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 17:56:37 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMMSePXohvdfHfvte0BQUfJyVk9xOTiDwY= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2003 18:04:55.0245 (UTC) FILETIME=[84BB1FD0:01C38846] This is why positive A samples should never be released - or leaked - to the public. Now the conspiracy folks are going to have a field day. Michael Contopoulos wrote: http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/general/features/2003/lagat_b_netative_200 31001.html www.trackandfieldnews.com _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com
RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Yes, there are cheats in track and field like any other pro sports. However, it bothers me is that quite a number of people on this list seem to hold the view that you have to cheat in order to be good. Consequently statements such as when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked implies that almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Andrew Owusu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 02:38:56.0975 (UTC) FILETIME=[53D5A5F0:01C3888E] Conspiracy theories??? For a sport most could careless about??? Collaboration between some or all 200 federations who can't get along with each other??? And, on Page 2 of the supermarket tabloid ... the IAAF and USATF are actually ruled by Ollan Cassell at his double-secret headquarters at Area 51, near the hanger where the alien spaceship is housed, next to Elvis' office. alan tobin wrote: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc9-f25.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.32]) by mc9-s13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:13:06 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc9-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:04:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HuiIK011974for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h91HuiUO011968for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net (sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HugIK011530for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id 20031001175637016005uf3je (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 17:56:37 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMMSePXohvdfHfvte0BQUfJyVk9xOTiDwY= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2003 18:04:55.0245 (UTC) FILETIME=[84BB1FD0:01C38846] This is why positive A samples should never be released - or leaked - to the public. Now the conspiracy folks are going to have a field day. Michael Contopoulos wrote: http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/general/features/2003/lagat_b_netative _20031001.html www.trackandfieldnews.com _ High-speed Internet
RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan From: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from frank2.mtsu.edu ([161.45.193.32]) by mc7-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 2 Oct 2003 11:27:22 -0700 Received: from frank2.mtsu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])by frank2.mtsu.edu (8.11.1 (Revision 1.5+JAGae91741) /8.9.3) with ESMTP id h92IPtM08035;Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from AndrewOwusu ([161.45.235.85])by frank2.mtsu.edu (8.11.1 (Revision 1.5+JAGae91741) /8.9.3) with ESMTP id h92IPqB07963;Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:53 -0500 (CDT) X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc46QR/ssR9vYDLTvQR5valP Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 18:27:24.0957 (UTC) FILETIME=[D3A294D0:01C38912] Yes, there are cheats in track and field like any other pro sports. However, it bothers me is that quite a number of people on this list seem to hold the view that you have to cheat in order to be good. Consequently statements such as when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked implies that almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Andrew Owusu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 02:38:56.0975 (UTC) FILETIME=[53D5A5F0:01C3888E] Conspiracy theories??? For a sport most could careless about??? Collaboration between some or all 200 federations who can't get along with each other??? And, on Page 2 of the supermarket tabloid ... the IAAF and USATF are actually ruled by Ollan Cassell at his double-secret headquarters at Area 51, near the hanger where the alien spaceship is housed, next to Elvis' office. alan tobin wrote: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc9-f25.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.32]) by mc9-s13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:13:06 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc9-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:04:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HuiIK011974for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h91HuiUO011968for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received
Re: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Is Malmo the only one on here who is speaking with a clear head? Malmo has been there and done that in the world of elite track and field so he has an insight that 90% of this board does not. In fact I would even wager that he has an insight into the dirty world of track and field and road racing that even most of today's US elite do not have. That's simply because in his day his times were competitive on an international scale and more US runners in general competed on an international scale. Today there are fewer US runners who truely are world elite and thus there are fewer US runners with the right insight into top level dealings. I'm not trying to kiss your ass Malmo, just trying to make a point to the board. Many of the top US runners from 20-30 years ago would share ther same insight that is lacking in today's US runners. You can't see the man behind the curtain if you still at the front door. Alan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED],'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from out009.verizon.net ([206.46.170.131]) by mc12-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:27:50 -0700 Received: from out009 ([192.168.129.59]) by out009.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc6QAZB0A2DqAGffxIghXBL0 X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.10 (webedge20-101-190-20021211) X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out009.verizon.net from [192.168.129.59] at Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 20:27:52.0069 (UTC) FILETIME=[A7545B50:01C38923] You've INFERRED that I'm not shocked... is the linguistic equivalent to almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Wrongly. I think that those who have uttered the phrase I'm not shocked... on this forum would let me speak for them when I say, I'm not shocked... IMPLIES that many (more than you want to believe) top runners...are dirty Am I correct shocked track fans? malmo Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds? Louis (Police Inspector): I'm shocked - shocked - to find gambling is going on in here! Croupier: Your winnings, sir. Louis (Police Inspector): Oh, thank you very much. From: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2003/10/02 Thu PM 01:25:52 CDT To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Yes, there are cheats in track and field like any other pro sports. However, it bothers me is that quite a number of people on this list seem to hold the view that you have to cheat in order to be good. Consequently statements such as when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked implies that almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Andrew Owusu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003
Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Who says he's clean? The European Aristocrats at the IAAF who make the rules say he's clean. NOT U.S. courts. NOT Johnny C. or any other hotshot U.S. attorney. NOT world sports arbitration. No lame defense. No sex, cheap wine, rock N' roll, or toothpaste. Can't blame USATF. Just the IAAF rules in plain black and white say he's clean. Cut and dry. Move on. alan tobin wrote: Who said he was clean? One test said he was dirty, the other said clean. So which is it? Why don't we take a 3rd test? Best two out of three...like rock, paper, scissors... Alan >From: "B. Kunnath" [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative >Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 00:17:43 + >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Originating-IP: [24.58.161.241] >X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Received: from 24.58.161.241 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Thu, >02 Oct 2003 00:17:43 GMT > _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 00:17:43 + From: "B. Kunnath" [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From Alan on Sept 4th re Lagats positive A Sample: Am I the only one not shocked? Once we all realize that most of the top athletes in the sport are on something then we all will cease to be shocked. Track is like Cycling. In order to be a champion you have to be doped on something. Alan Today: >Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or>that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is >always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. > >Alan Alan, Are you just as shocked that hes turned out to be clean after all? Does this negative test make that drugtakers iceberg seem a little smaller now? Too many people want to believe the worst without even waiting for the full facts to come out. bob
Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
This is why positive A samples should never be released - or leaked - to the public. Now the conspiracy folks are going to have a field day. Michael Contopoulos wrote: http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/general/features/2003/lagat_b_netative_20031001.html www.trackandfieldnews.com _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Lagat lost a lot of money from this -- probably close to 100k. I'm glad that he was cleared.He probably would have medalled -- even a bronze is worth 20k. When you medal you usually trigger a shoe contract (as well as other sponsors) bonus. So he probably lost another 40-50k there. Plus he lost out on any post WC appearances and prize money. Kebba Tolbert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) = Head Coach -- Portland State University Track Field/Cross Country GO VIKS!! www.goviks.com From: Mike Prizy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Mike Prizy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Michael Contopoulos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 This is why positive A samples should never be released - or leaked - to the public. Now the conspiracy folks are going to have a field day. Michael Contopoulos wrote: http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/general/features/2003/lagat_b_netative_20031001.html www.trackandfieldnews.com _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month*. Click here. *Depending on the local service providers in your area.
Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Conspiracy theories??? For a sport most could careless about??? Collaboration between some or all 200 federations who can't get along with each other??? And, on Page 2 of the supermarket tabloid ... the IAAF and USATF are actually ruled by Ollan Cassell at his double-secret headquarters at Area 51, near the hanger where the alien spaceship is housed, next to Elvis' office. alan tobin wrote: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc9-f25.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.32]) by mc9-s13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:13:06 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc9-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:04:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HuiIK011974for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h91HuiUO011968for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net (sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HugIK011530for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id 20031001175637016005uf3je (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 17:56:37 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMMSePXohvdfHfvte0BQUfJyVk9xOTiDwY= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2003 18:04:55.0245 (UTC) FILETIME=[84BB1FD0:01C38846] This is why positive A samples should never be released - or leaked - to the public. Now the conspiracy folks are going to have a field day. Michael Contopoulos wrote: http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/general/features/2003/lagat_b_netative_20031001.html www.trackandfieldnews.com _ High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com _
Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
From Alan on Sept 4th re Lagats positive A Sample: Am I the only one not shocked? Once we all realize that most of the top athletes in the sport are on something then we all will cease to be shocked. Track is like Cycling. In order to be a champion you have to be doped on something. Alan Today: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan Alan, Are you just as shocked that hes turned out to be clean after all? Does this negative test make that drugtakers iceberg seem a little smaller now? Too many people want to believe the worst without even waiting for the full facts to come out. bob Get MSN 8 Dial-up Internet Service FREE for one month. Limited time offer- sign up now!
