Re: t-and-f: F%*# Baseball!!!
If that makes you happy, what is going to happen if they show more than 30 seconds of the race? You'll probably do back flips. I would brace yourself for a split screen, you might have the big one. What would you do if they showed the rabbits and the Americans? I suggest that you tape the show in case it is more than you can handle. Wish him the best! HR From: John Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: John Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: F%*# Baseball!!! Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:11:21 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who gives a rat's ass about baseball! Okay, the issue of steroids in the sport is somewhat connected to track field, but I could care less if baseball is in bad financial shape. It's the national pastime and will always be around. What we need to worry about is track, a sport that is in lousy shape at all levels. Collegiate teams are getting cut, meets are dying in Europe and we're all fiddling while the Golden Gala burns. We had a fantastic meet at Portland and now it's only three days before Pre and there's been no discussion whatsoever! The men's shot is going to be incredible once again. After one of the greatest three-way battles ever last week in Portland, all the major players are back. Can Nelson throw even further? Sure. The conditions in Portland, where several hundred spectators surrounded the shot area, can only be matched in this country by Eugene's fans. Something special could be on tap. Then there's the men's mile. Lagat versus El G. One of only a handful of times the top two ranked athletes in that event will meet this year. I know sub-3:50 is tough mid-day in May, but it's possible. I didn't see the men's 5000 entries on the Pre site, but if all goes well, the Ethiopians will be there, including Kenisisa Bekele in his first track race since killing the fields in both races at World Cross. This could be the heir to Haile's throne. Also, great fields in every other event. I'll be at the pub Sunday night to watch it on ESPN2. You'd better be watching too, and not discussing Barry's biceps. sideshow A better way to look at this situation. The list seems to focus on bad news. There was no discussion that I can remember about Bonds when he broke the HR record. The fact that there is little discussion on this list about track and field must indicate that our world is full of good news and we just don't want to talk about it. I'll be happy if they don't lose my sons' entry, they can find his hip number, they can pronounce his name properly, they can introduce him with more than another miler from Stanford, and he doesn't go to sleep between 700 and 900 yards into the race. Real happy! John _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
t-and-f: Leaders have no vision
This might start another thread: With track being the largest sport in terms of participation among high school athletes, why is there so little interest among the public? -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. One might look at the last Indoor Championship Meet at the Armory in New York for indicators of bigger problems in our sport. From concept to execution the USATF continues to throw in some left hand turns that prevent it from reaching an appropriate conclusion. Consider the following items; 1. The USATF brought in Maurice Green to make some appearances at the meet. OK. On the first night of the meet, they sent him to a basketball game instead of the meet. 2. The USATF made announcements concerning the 40th anniversary of Jim Beatty breaking 4 minutes in the indoor mile and that he would be honored at the meet. OK. They honored him at the end of the meet, after the last event, while people were filing out of the Armory. There was no mention of the event on the TV coverage. 3. The improved press coverage was one of the reasons used for the decision to move the meet from Atlanta to New York. OK. Where was the coverage, it certainly was not in the Times.One already needed to know about the meet and know where to find it before they could read it. Maybe it was covered somewhere else in New York and I couldn't find it. 4. Even bringing in the high school kids did not sell out the meet. 5. The TV program had 92 seconds to cover the false start in the men's' 400, 32 seconds to cover the story of a splinter, but 31 seconds to cover the men's mile. The mile had the second fastest championship time in over a decade and had the highest number of sub 4 minute runners ever. 6. The TV ratings that we read about are good. OK. The information comes from the USATF. If the ratings really are accurate, why does the USATF pay to get TV time? Is the coverage a source of income or an expense? HR _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
Re: t-and-f: There goes all chances of USATF indoors getting good coverage inthe NY press
Walt, Was the coverage what you expected it to be? HR From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: There goes all chances of USATF indoors getting good coverage in the NY press Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 06:58:03 EST Dragila's withdrawal hurts, but the meet will still get decent coverage, if only because it's back in New York and it's at the Armory. I can assure you the meet will get far more coverage in NY than it ever got when it was in Atlanta. Walt Murphy _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp;
Re: t-and-f: Inexcusable coverage
It's OK to bitch. Who makes the decisions as to what events and what graphics are to be shown? Who would make the decision NOT to show an American record in the 800? HR From: Michael J. Roth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael J. Roth [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TF Listserve [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Inexcusable coverage Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2002 17:35:58 -0500 Sorry to bitch, but to not even show the results to both race walks in the USATF Champs show the Masters Women's 400 time (not a championship event) is just F'ing ridiculous. No number of corporate studies and the like are justifiable. These people train just as hard as everyone else in the Meet, and get shit on once again. How many times did we have to relive the other GST events? You mean to tell me that there wasn't 20 seconds of screen graphic time available? MJR _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: t-and-f: Reuters version of USATF-Rogge story
This self pontificating idiot had the gall to sit on the Today Show this morning (Monday, Feb 11th) and say that an athlete MUST know everything about any vitamins or supplements they take, even if the label does not indicate that a harmful substance is in it. How are most athletes, who are living on the ragged edge supposed to be able to afford to investigate every supplement they take? When they call the manufacturere and the manufacturer states unequivocally that it does not contain banned substances, what more can most athletes afford to do? Gerald, I agree with your position. But, the official position that the IAAF and the USOC takes is even stronger. An athlete must know the contents of the food as well. This includes the food eaten at restaurants, where food does not need to be labeled by law. If an athlete can prove that the food eaten at a restaurant contained a banned substance, IT IS NOT A DEFENSE. Harold _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
t-and-f: Pound this, Dick
Dickey Boy, All other issues aside. What are the big boys doing with the money that they are not paying out? Does the money go back to the meet organizers? the sponsors? the paying customers? I picture this conversation: Hey Guys, after the fallout of the Salt Lake City scandal, our bribery revenues are down. What shall we do? I know, we'll nail the athletes and make it look like it's their fault. In the US, when the pro teams fine the athletes, they give the proceeds to a charity not their own travel fund. Harold _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane
I think that you missed the point.Rotich ran 3 all out races in a short time, unless you think that he eased up. He'll run another one on Saturday. The way some coaches think, this is a whole season inside of 3 weeks. I think that a runner learns to compete by competing not running a cazillion miles and entering one race. Harold From: James Dunaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: James Dunaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: John Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 11:32:52 +0100 Don't we, perhaps, respect the four-minute mile a little too much? After all, a 3:57 mile is somewhat equivalent to a 1:48 800 meters, which wouldn't exactly blow anyone's mind if it were done thrice in 7 or 8 days (in fact, if he were a Kenyan, you might think he had mono). Sometimes I think that the mystique of four minutes is a hindrance to American milers, since they think that once they have broke 4:00 they are world class runners. They ain't. In fact, them days is long gone -- like, maybe, thirty years jim dunaway At 07:11 AM 2/6/02 -0700, you wrote: Those who like to argue (discuss) the topic of racing too much might want to look at what Rotich has done in the last 2 weeks. He ran the mile in the Boston indoor meet. Then, less than a week later, he ran at Milrose winning the mile in 3:57. The next day he went to Arkansas and won the mile in 3:57. Next, he is scheduled to run the mile at the Nebraska meet on February 9. John Lunn _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
RE: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane
Was this type of schedule unusual for Scott? Do you know if he did this outdoors as well? Harold From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'John Lunn' [EMAIL PROTECTED], trackfield server [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 13:50:37 -0500 Consider this: On a Feb 13/Feb 14, Steve Scott ran 3:56.8 in Toronto and 3:59.4 in Ottawa. On Feb 20/Feb 21 Scott ran 3:51.8 (career indoor PR) in San Diego and 3:59.4 in San Francisco. And for good measure on Feb 27 he ran 3:57.3 at national indoors in New York City. That was 21 years ago, 1981. (Of course, this can never be duplicated since there aren't five North American meets in three consecutive weekends that even have miles any more.) -Original Message- From: John Lunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 9:11 AM To: trackfield server Subject: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane Those who like to argue (discuss) the topic of racing too much might want to look at what Rotich has done in the last 2 weeks. He ran the mile in the Boston indoor meet. Then, less than a week later, he ran at Milrose winning the mile in 3:57. The next day he went to Arkansas and won the mile in 3:57. Next, he is scheduled to run the mile at the Nebraska meet on February 9. John Lunn _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane
You make a good point,Mike. If he is in fact making a payday out of his speed work days, he is thousands of dollars smarter than the runners watching the meet on TV. I heard Marion interview Rotich after the Wanamaker Mile, but didn't understand a word that he said, maybe Lagat will interpret. Harold From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Harold Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 10:43:36 -0600 But, we don't know that Rotich isn't also running a cazillion miles. He could be doing 20 milers on most of his other days and running 3:57s for time trials/speed work. Will any writers here be at Saturday's meet? If you get the chance, can you ask Rotich what his winter workout schedule is like? I think he's turning his speed work into paydays. Harold Richards wrote: I think that you missed the point.Rotich ran 3 all out races in a short time, unless you think that he eased up. He'll run another one on Saturday. The way some coaches think, this is a whole season inside of 3 weeks. I think that a runner learns to compete by competing not running a cazillion miles and entering one race. Harold From: James Dunaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: James Dunaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: John Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Human Hydroplane Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 11:32:52 +0100 Don't we, perhaps, respect the four-minute mile a little too much? After all, a 3:57 mile is somewhat equivalent to a 1:48 800 meters, which wouldn't exactly blow anyone's mind if it were done thrice in 7 or 8 days (in fact, if he were a Kenyan, you might think he had mono). Sometimes I think that the mystique of four minutes is a hindrance to American milers, since they think that once they have broke 4:00 they are world class runners. They ain't. In fact, them days is long gone -- like, maybe, thirty years jim dunaway At 07:11 AM 2/6/02 -0700, you wrote: Those who like to argue (discuss) the topic of racing too much might want to look at what Rotich has done in the last 2 weeks. He ran the mile in the Boston indoor meet. Then, less than a week later, he ran at Milrose winning the mile in 3:57. The next day he went to Arkansas and won the mile in 3:57. Next, he is scheduled to run the mile at the Nebraska meet on February 9. John Lunn _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
Re: t-and-f: Ban USA Track?
Does anyone know what Pound wants? That is, does he want the names of A positives?, B positives?, names of athletes who have been cleared after they have gone through the approved proceedures? Where does he get his numbers? Harold From: Kelley Halliburton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Kelley Halliburton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: track and field listserv [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Ban USA Track? Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:11:05 -0800 (PST) I came across this link on the front page of ESPN.com: http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/winter02/gen/news?id=1322628 = Kelley Halliburton Trade Marketing Manager Human Kinetics Publishers Champaign, IL __ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: t-and-f: NYT - U.S. Athletes Must Guess on Supplements
Chris, The hypocracy goes deeper than just the USOC. We have Runner's World featuring a story on the cover to run farther with a banned drug. The best known coffee shop sells tea containing a banned substance. Watch out for your Mac-N-Cheese, it may be next. Harold From: Christopher Goss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Christopher Goss [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Worldwide Track Field Listserv [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: NYT - U.S. Athletes Must Guess on Supplements Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:42:26 -0500 From today's New York Times... U.S. Athletes Must Guess on Supplements American Olympic officials send their athletes contradictory and, to some critics, hypocritical messages about nutritional supplements. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/30/olympics/30OLYM.html?todaysheadlines _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: t-and-f: USATF Advertising idea...
Wow! I think that you are on to something. Let's start WWT. We'll capture their interest with the wacked out stuff and then once they catch on we'll have them for the real stuff. I can picture something like the roller derby 400. Helmets, shin guards,elbow pads-all included. The mile team race could take on a whole new meaning. The fans could have dart guns and try to hit the pole vaulters. Acuff could wear the same outfit that she had in Rolling Stone. I can't wait. Harold From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: USATF Advertising idea... Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:16:33 -0500 Alan, I can't disagree with you more... on just about everything you said. To begin with, being a northerner, I can tell you that NASCAR is beginning to bridge the gap between the redneck south and north. I work at a Hedge Fund, full with people who drive porche's, not a '75 Corvette propped up on blocks, who are going home, I think tomorrow, or maybe Friday, to watch NASCAR. In addition, many of my friends in college have started watching it as well. I went to a northern university and many of these friends are New Yorkers. Second, perhaps the first reason people ever watched NASCAR was to see a crash. Once popularity builds, and you understand the drivers, the cars, the rivalries, it becomes more about the race and the competition between the athletes and their machines than witnessing a wreck. A perfect example of this is me. I'll give NASCAR a chance, as my friends did, not because I want to see another Dale Ernhardt catastrophe, but because I see my boys getting amped at the competition and rivalry. A crash is the last thing on my mind... if anything I hope they DON'T happen. Who wants to see Booby Labonte out of the race on the second lap because of a crash. Its like seeing El G go down in the last lap of the 1996 Olympic Final. NO FUN! As for running. We need less fluff pieces about all the hardships runners endure, and more action. What would you rather see... Tim Broe talk about how he lost his cat in 5th grade and that's why he decided to start running? Or 7:39 seconds of dueling it out with Leonard Mucheru... changing leads and splitting 4:01 for the last mile? The announcers should have bios on each athlete and let them talk about those interesting tidbits as the race goes on... no reason to pull away from the action. And if you think John Q Public will go away feeling cheated cause Broe got outkicked by Mucheru, you're crazy. No way, no how. Same with when BK took the lead in the Olympic 5k... I don't think any American would really come away from that race thinking it sucked. My non-runner friends hate watching track BECAUSE of all the downtime where there is no action. Show 1-2 hours of races and end it. No more FLUFF! Mike _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
t-and-f: Know what is in your body
Every athlete in our sport knows that he/she has the responsibility to know what is in their body. Ignorance is no excuse. Everyone makes a leap of faith every day. You trust the water in most areas. You trust the milk on your cereal. You trust the hot dog. Do you trust your multi vitamin? Do you trust the brand name grocery store protein drink? Where does it get grey? Harold _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Fwd: Re: t-and-f: National Indoor
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: National Indoor Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:55:11 EST Harold, The seating capacity will be just over 5,000. Thanks, Lou Vazquez Director of Operations Armory Track Field Center _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: t-and-f: National Indoor
This response from Mr. Contopoulis was part of an answer to three questions that I had about the Armory. Many people responded to me off list in addition to the responses which hit the list. All of the respondents said that the area was safe and that there were adequate places to warm up. The differences in the replies were to the question concerning seating. The range in the answers was a capacity of 1000 at the low end and 10,000 at the high end. My conclusion is that the seating capacity will be between 3,000 and 5,000. Harold From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: National Indoor Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 00:02:45 EST In a message dated Fri, 4 Jan 2002 2:10:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I ran MANY night meets at the Armory in college. The area is very safe. I never once felt unsafe warming up or cooling down for a meet at the Armory. If people aren't coming for that reason... well... they need to get over their fears and realize that per capita, NYC is one of the safest places to be in the country... at any hour... in nearly any neighborhood. Not to pick on NYC, which is one of my favorite cities on the planet, but you natives need to realize not only that ALL big cities are intimidating to much of the populace, but also that New Yorkers' unparalleled rudeness coefficient (I guess they'd call it survival) and brusque manner rarely leave an outsider feeling particularly welcome. (Hey, I don't mind, just paint a target on me!) gh _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
t-and-f: National Indoor
I have some questions about the national indoor championships at The Armory in New York: 1. What will be the seating capacity? 2. Where will the athletes warm up for the running events? 3. Is that area of town safe? I have heard that some of our athletes will skip this event because of the conditions. Harold _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
Re: t-and-f: 1500: ain't we got fun?
What are the arguements against having a rabbit for the race? HR From: Ed and Dana Parrot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Ed and Dana Parrot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: \Athletics\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 1500: ain't we got fun? Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 13:29:01 -0800 Maybe something to consider for the future is the following. Now this isn't my idea, it was brought up by Jamey Harris and Louie Qunitana at the Calif. Community College XC state meet back in November. I feel it has merrit. They felt that having the USATF outdoor standard set at roughly the same level as the NCAA standard did not set the expectation of our post collegiate athletes to strive for that next level of performance. Basically it sets the expectation that once you've made the NCAA standard, you've made it in the US. Their idea was to set the USATF automatic outdoor standard at the midway point between the NCAA standard and the World standard. So in this case where we have a roughly 3:35 world standard and a roughly 3:41 NCAA standard, the Harris/Quintana standard would be set at 3:38 for the auto qualifier. And this would reduce the fields in most events, allowing the possibility of another idea that would help stimulate U.S. track and field - have 30-50% of the fields at nationals come from 4-8 regional meets rather than having it all time based as it is now (sounds like the NCAA). In a field of 24, ~12 should qualify on time, and the rest should come from regional meets. This would increase the emphasis on head-to-head competition while still ensuring that the top dozen people in each event would get in on time. Many of the other individual sports do some varaition on this. I don't think it would fly with the athletes, plus it would require some money for the regional meets. But if done right, I think the net result would be more and better competition opportunities for those coming up through the ranks. To ponder gh's original thought on how we are going to get the winner under the A standard in 2003, that's a good question. If I can just knock 20 seconds off my 1500 time and qualify for nationals, I'll volunteer to rabbit the race at 3:33 pace! - Ed Parrot _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
t-and-f: What are we really saying?
My Runner's World, January 2002, tells me how to perform better with drugs. So, I'm wondering what we really believe about the use of performance enhancing drugs. Are we telling our youth to take drugs, just not too much?If caffeine is OK, what about ephedrine? If these two are OK, what about using both at the same time? I read in the news that Floyd Heard tested positive for ephedrine and said that he should have read the label of the package of tea that he drank. Ato tested positive for ephedrine from an OTC cold medication, according to the news. We lost an 800 woman runner in the national indoor meet because of a positive test due to a cold medication. Inger Miller lost her bronze medal at the World Championships for a positive of caffeine from a soft drink. So, what is the message? Some is good(Runner's World), more is bad(USADA)? Do we send the message that female athletes should know their testosterone/epitestosterone limits and take enough supplements to touch the limit but not go over the line? What do we really believe? Harold _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: What are we really saying?
Something is missing here. I am not talking about ads in a magazine. I am talking about an article which is featured on the front page. Yellow letters. Run Farther With Caffiene ( I think that they meant to say Faster.) What about another article featured on the front page, Sniff This, Run Better? Harold BTW You jumped me for reading Runner's World and you admit to having this issue for some time. What's this? From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Harold Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: What are we really saying? Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:01:20 -0600 Maybe read the fruit cake and eat the subscription. I've had this issue for some time. My kids (11, 9, 7) see these ads for supplements and read that there is a quick and easy way to the top. So why not take a little pill that will make me better? There is a great story in yesterday's Chicago Tribune about being nice to your pharmacists because the reason it takes a while to fill a prescription is because he/she is so busy. Aren't we a society that believes that everything can be made better by taking a pill? To Mr. Dunaway: I think most of the content of Runner's World preys on the unsophisticated level of its readers. Maybe some of the editorial content is slanted to appease all the diet supplement advertising. Harold Richards wrote: Easy! The subscription comes each year at Christmas in the same package as the fruit cake. The question to you remains the same, What are we saying?. Harold From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Harold Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: What are we really saying? Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 14:14:39 -0600 I think the first questions is, why do you still have a subscription to Runner's World? Harold Richards wrote: My Runner's World, January 2002, tells me how to perform better with drugs. So, I'm wondering what we really believe about the use of performance enhancing drugs. Are we telling our youth to take drugs, just not too much?If caffeine is OK, what about ephedrine? If these two are OK, what about using both at the same time? I read in the news that Floyd Heard tested positive for ephedrine and said that he should have read the label of the package of tea that he drank. Ato tested positive for ephedrine from an OTC cold medication, according to the news. We lost an 800 woman runner in the national indoor meet because of a positive test due to a cold medication. Inger Miller lost her bronze medal at the World Championships for a positive of caffeine from a soft drink. So, what is the message? Some is good(Runner's World), more is bad(USADA)? Do we send the message that female athletes should know their testosterone/epitestosterone limits and take enough supplements to touch the limit but not go over the line? What do we really believe? Harold _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: t-and-f: Message from Craig Masback
Mr. Masback, Thanks for the reply. Your response is testimony to your ability to take a portion of the information, give it a half twist,and attempt to divert the discussion. When you leave this job, you might consider going to Washington to explain statements like, I did not have sex with that woman. . He bases his premise of a massive conspiracy These are not my words. I believe that it is YOU. You took a system, put a half twist on it and made it better for the USATF and the USOC. One important point - except to clear up a handful of cases that existed prior to October 2, 2000 So, I haven't been doing that since October 2000. Exactly, I'm only speaking to the issues prior to this date. 1. I know the Indy lab was grossly incompetent based on my work defending pro athletes. Sorry, I had no dealings with and knew nothing about the Indianapolis lab from my previous career as a lawyer. Indianapolis IOC lab. Graig, these were your words. You spoke of your experience defending professional athletes, not just NFL,in a cell phone conversation-no I don't have a recording. You said that you could talk all afternoon about the incompetent lab at Indiana University. To be a good liar, one needs a good memory or as in this case, no witness. 2. I contracted with the American Arbitration Association to hear cases and thus distance USATF from the proceedings. This is true, but the idea that the world's leading arbitration regime would agree to a contract that handcrafted them and prevented them from making the decisions which they want to make is absurd. Absurd? Really? The AAA awarded damages to the athlete in question. Where is the money? Put your money where your mouth is. I understand that USATF has the position that it did not allow the AAA to make such a ruling. 3. We hired pro bono attorneys. Yes, this is true, but to imply that this meant we were less effective as a result is silly. To have a group of highly trained lawyers, many of them partners at leading American law firms, arguing cases for USATF was an achievement, Highly trained? At what? Your lawyer could not even pronounce the word ephedrine. One member of the AAA even asked him if he was talking about another drug. A competent lawyer would not have taken the case. Second, the attorneys could only be as effective as the facts of the cases allowed them to be - if the evidence from the IAAF, USOC, or IOC-accredited lab was weak, they did the best they could under the circumstances. Weak is an understatement. Try no case. If it was real world or if he was on a %, he would not have taken the case. Your lawyer introduced inappropriate tests into evidence, made after the fact, that were torn apart in cross examination. Is this really the best they could (do)? This was even more difficult where athletes hired lawyers and experts who did their jobs and combed the rules and science looking for the slightest bit of evidence to exonerate the athlete. Your use of the word slightest is interesting. It is not slight if it is on your side. any athlete testing positive was and is guilty until proven innocent. it seems like a grossly unfair process, and it's expensive. But, it is part of the price we pay to be part of an international sports system committed to fighting doping in sport. Price we pay? Who is we? The athlete still owes the lawyer $24,000. Why? Not for the process of fighting doping, but for the process of fighting the system that YOU tweaked. - Craig A. Masback CEO, USA Track Field Hopefully, former CEO. I know that the IAAF can not remove USATF as the NGB, but it can pressure the US by not allowing them to compete. You made this system work in the manner that I have described. You should be held accountable. You should resign. Harold Richards _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Runner's World Article
I encourage everyone to go to the Runner's World website (www.runnersworld.com)and read the article by Joseph de Pencier. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Support for resignation
I have had many responses supporting my request for the resignation of Masback. So far the response has all been private. Somehow we need to create a board that people can sign. Ideas? Harold _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Masback resignation
The time has come for track and field enthusiasts in the United States to step forward and demand the resignation of Craig Masback. If Masback does not resign, we should appeal to Arne Ljundqvist to start whatever procedures are necessary to remove the USATF as the national governing body of track and field for the United States Of America. These are my observations and my opinion on what Masback has done: In much the same fashion as BASF advertises on national television, We didn't make the (insert product), we made it(stronger,softer,tougher,whatever).,Masback didn't make the drug testing program, he made it function better for the athletes who cheat. He took a system which was in place, and with the help of an Ivy League education and a charming personality put the finishing touches on a program which allows the big cheats to prosper. The program which was in place is fairly well known. The USOC designates a laboratory to do the testing of the athletes and actually enters into a contract with the lab. The USATF must serve as the judge and jury and use the evidence presented by the lab.. Masback,as an attorney, knew from his previous career in defending professional athletes that the Indiana University Laboratory was grossly incompetent.He knew that as long as the USOC continued to use the Indiana University laboratory, or any other incompetent laboratory,the athlete could hire an attorney who would tear apart the evidence presented. Then, he contracted with the American Arbitration Association to hear the cases and thus distance the USATF from the proceedings and give the procedure the appearance of impartiality. To represent the USATF, he hired lawyers who would work at a reduced rate or pro bono. Then, with his legal skills well honed, he confused everyone with the conflicts between US statutes, international law,and IAAF procedures. His number one skill, one which is complained about by the IAAF, and one which was undoubtedly learned at Yale, is to stonewall. All is not as it appears. It looks like an independent lab,an independent lawyer to prosecute the case which is heard before an impartial panel. What we HAVE is information handled by a lab(which has since been dismantled) known to mishandle specimens,follow inappropriate procedures, and manipulate data. The case is handled by a lawyer who is working for free.( You draw the conclusion)The A.A.A.has a contract with the USATF to hear the cases, but is handcuffed, by contract, from making the decisions which they want to make. It is obvious from the results of the hearings that Masback pursues cases of ephedrine and caffeine in order to make it look like he is doing something.What a terrific con: go hard on the little stuff so that the big stuff can slide by. The world does not believe that our only drugs are Nyquil,Starbucks, and whatever Marion's ex did. At this point in reading my demand, one might ask how I can say such horrible things about such a nice guy. The answer is first hand experience. I watched a close friend go through the entire procedure, I sat in the hearing room, I watched the representative from the Indiana lab.,I listened to the USATF lawyer, I heard the decision of the A.A.A. panel. I saw the legal bills. I hope that the women distance runners do well in their pursuit of proper testing. I wouldn't expect an answer from Craig. Keep in mind that we were informed that this group of women existed by a foreign newspaper. If we don't have the necessary resolve, then go get him, Arne! Harold Richards Ever since the Sydney Olympics, the imperfections of the drug-testing systems within USATF, the American athletics federation, have been the subject of considerable disapproval from the IAAF, the world governing body. Meanwhile, Arne Ljungqvist, senior vice-president of the IAAF, is back carrying the fight to USATF. It remains the case that there was one member of the American track team who competed in the Sydney Olympics despite having failed a drugs test and Ljungqvist has still not managed to squeeze out of the USATF either the identity of the athlete or the reasons behind this athlete's exoneration. They simply do not respond, he said. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Athletes fighting their own battle on drugs
I have a mixed reaction to the announcement of the positive test for caffiene on Miller. I realise that she has been in the sport long enough to know the rules, but her story is plausable. At least the ingredients were listed on the can and were no surprise to her. A more unfortunate situation, and one which should not happen,is the manner in which she was treated by the drug testing procedure. Imagine that for more than 2 years she got up each day to train not knowing if this would be the day that she got a return phone call, if this would be the day she would find out what rules apply, if on this day the USATF would be the prosecutor or the advocate, if on this day the USATF would be in charge or would it be the IAAF, if on this day ANYTHING would happen. The fact that she could keep her spirit during this time is remarkable. The wait and the uncertainty was as painful as the announcement. Whatever this letter to Masback says, I applaud it. The vision and the courage of these athletes is as important as the content of the letter. Who better to initiate change than the athletes? Imagine the power of these athletes if they would boycott the championships if testing was NOT done.What is this, the '60's? HR From: Eamonn Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Eamonn Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: \Athletics\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Athletes fighting their own battle on drugs Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 17:29:48 -0700 The Electronic Telegraph Sunday 21 October 2001 Owen Slot THE DRUG-testing regime in athletics in the United States is shortly to come under further attack, and this time from a group of its own athletes. Ever since the Sydney Olympics, the imperfections of the drug-testing systems within USATF, the American athletics federation, have been the subject of considerable disapproval from the IAAF, the world governing body. There was a brief period of detente at the World Championships in Edmonton in August but the goodwill established there, according to the IAAF, has now evaporated. The news last weekend that Inger Miller, the American sprinter, had tested positive for caffeine has hardly eased the situation given that the test took place in 1999 and it had taken 2.5 years for the news to become public and any penalties to be applied. Yet even before the news about Miller broke, a group of American athletes had been planning to take action of their own in order to press USATF to improve what they view to be an inadequate system. A petition is being circulated among a group of elite, female middle and long-distance runners which is soon to be sent to Craig Masback, USATF's chief executive. The petition will request that blood and urine tests for EPO, the illegal blood-booster, be incorporated into future national championships. The crucial line in a polite, well-worded statement is that: We feel that, in the past, abuse has taken place. The action being taken by these Americans is a small but significant step towards cleaning up the sport. They hope that what they have started will snowball, but it is the image of athletes battling to improve the drug-testing system - rather than benefiting from its loopholes, as is commonly perceived - that is so important. The same battle is being waged by Paula Radcliffe in Europe; indeed it was Radcliffe who inspired the Americans. Paula started the ball rolling, said Jim Harvey, the coach to the American runner Amy Rudolph, who is co-ordinating the petition. There's always been a conspiracy of silence, but now there has to be action. Paula was the catalyst. Very few athletes at the height of their profession, like she is, would have the courage to make a stand like hers. We admire her tremendously. We want to speak out, said Sarah Schwald, the 1500m runner. I don't feel like sweeping it all under the carpet. It's frustrating when you see incident after incident - really odd patterns of elite performance. Meanwhile, Arne Ljungqvist, senior vice-president of the IAAF, is back carrying the fight to USATF. It remains the case that there was one member of the American track team who competed in the Sydney Olympics despite having failed a drugs test and Ljungqvist has still not managed to squeeze out of the USATF either the identity of the athlete or the reasons behind this athlete's exoneration. They simply do not respond, he said. Do the good relations between the American federation and the IAAF, that were established in Edmonton, remain? Not any more, I'm afraid, he said. They said in Edmonton that they wanted to talk about the future, but we cannot establish normal relations until we have put this incident behind us. Jill Geer, spokeswoman for USATF, said: We're not aware of his having contacted us on any particular issue since Edmonton. We have kept him informed of our activities on the topics we discussed in Edmonton, and we look forward to further helpful dialogue. Eamonn Condon www.RunnersGoal.com
t-and-f: distance development
After watching many of the young talented runners in Boulder at the Shootout, several of us old school runners were talking about the usual topics concerning the development of the prospects whom we had just observed. One idea which held some interest was the creation of an Olympic Development (for lack of a better title)division in all , or most, of the road races with the bulk of the prize money awarded to this group of runners. Then, in much the same fashion as the Bowl games for college football, have certain races act as regional championships as well as national championships. The USATF could take a leadership role in talking to the road race organizers and developing a schedule. Ideas? _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: the wussy patrol strikes again
I would suggest the following explanation: The coaches do not believe that the runners are mentally tough and believe that their fragile egos will never recover if they lose. If I were still in school, I would be offended if the coach didn't let me run against the best. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: the wussy patrol strikes again Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 13:45:40 EDT I can see that collegiate coaches continue to abdicte their responsibility to actually provide competitive opportunities for their athletes, and at the same time deprive fans of meaningful competition. In the spirit of the same people who are fighting against regionals in track (hey! why compete when you can just advance to nationals in set-up races?), note that Colorado and Stanford men will be in SEPARATE SECTIONS at the pre-NCAA race this weekend. How @#$@#% lame is that? Heaven forbid that races actually mean something. Getting to nationals is obviously far more important than competing well. gh _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Barry's pedigree
Therefore I call for an allowance of 5.479% for altitude. From: Kurt Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Kurt Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Barry's pedigree Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 19:58:40 Better yet! There needs to be an * next to this record to indicate an altitude allowance for the number of home runs hit in Denver against the Rockies. Four of the 73 homeruns were hit at Coors Field Kurt Bray _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Ritz
It was a real treat to see Ritzenhiem in his first race as a freshman. He handled the course very well and although, according to the newspaper, he was instructed to keep his effort at 90%, his stride lengthened toward the later stages of the race and he looked to be giving more than 90%. Also impressive was the effort of the young Severy. Richards _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Banned substance????
Mike, I hope that you are recovering well. I know someone who had a cup of tea at a restuarant and tested positive. Take care of yourself. Richards From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Banned substance Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 15:20:34 -0400 For those that contended that you basically had to be a moron to get caught for something ilegal in your system... read this brief article. This list includes items such as Vitamin's that are unregulated (Mega Man is a popular one). Imagine taking a vitamin and getting caught for a banned substance. I know of someone who this happened to... M _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Banned substance????
Paul and others, Here is something that may be more helpful. Pick your favorite search engine and type in two words: starbucks and ephedrine. I know of an Olympic hopeful who paid an extreme price for a cup of tea. Richards From: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Track list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Banned substance Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 14:41:35 -0600 (MDT) This article isn't too helpful really: 1) it doesn't say what positives can occur (ie. maybe just ephedrine). 2) the only reference to steroids is that some athletes have blamed supplements. They have to blame something don't they? 3) the popular media has been particularly horrible when it comes to drugs reports. Evidence the hysteria int he media on dieretic supplements after the deaths of a couple college football players this August. On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Michael Contopoulos wrote: I guess the link to the article would be helpful, huh? http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport/hi/english/athletics/newsid_1566000/1566845.stm From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Banned substance Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 15:20:34 -0400 For those that contended that you basically had to be a moron to get caught for something ilegal in your system... read this brief article. This list includes items such as Vitamin's that are unregulated (Mega Man is a popular one). Imagine taking a vitamin and getting caught for a banned substance. I know of someone who this happened to... M _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
