Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Wilson Kipsang handed suspension

2

Comments



  • skyblue46 wrote: »
    Elite athletes would expect to be tested about 15 times a year. There is a 10 year statute of limitations. There are quite conceivably 150 of Farah's samples being held. We can assume that at least 10 are from 2012. I can't see any reason why one could not be released for retesting.

    But none of us know what was actually requested from what set of samples or from what quantity of samples or for what tests to be done. Maybe they requested all samples. How does the retesting get done in terms of selecting what to test in what samples from when?

    We don't have enough information to say one way or the other if it was a reasonable request or not, but the UK anti doping said it wasn't reasonable and US anti doping didn't seem to be complaining too much about being denied. Just that they asked and we're told no, presumably they would have said no to the opposite request being made to them so decided to not kick up over it as it's fairly standard procedure between the various authorities.

    But we don't know, and that is a problem because we are all just left making guesses and inventing conspiracy theories.




  • robinph wrote: »
    But none of us know what was actually requested from what set of samples or from what quantity of samples or for what tests to be done. Maybe they requested all samples. How does the retesting get done in terms of selecting what to test in what samples from when?

    We don't have enough information to say one way or the other if it was a reasonable request or not, but the UK anti doping said it wasn't reasonable and US anti doping didn't seem to be complaining too much about being denied. Just that they asked and we're told no, presumably they would have said no to the opposite request being made to them so decided to not kick up over it as it's fairly standard procedure between the various authorities.

    But we don't know, and that is a problem because we are all just left making guesses and inventing conspiracy theories.


    But the athlete has given permission to test them also




  • But the athlete has given permission to test them also

    Which is great, but don't see how that changes anything in relation to the releasing of samples that are potentially limited in number from the dates in question, not that we know what date tests it is that might have been requested/ rejected. The athlete clearly being someone with an interest in the results coming out negative, how does that fit with the theory that UK anti doping are protecting them somehow? Or that US anti doping are going to find something in the tests? Or that UK anti doping not releasing the samples for testing is some proof of something?

    Or does the theory then become that the athletes only say to release the tests because they know that they won't be released?

    Yes, more testing should be done. Yes, old samples should be tested for new things. No, you don't just re-run the same tests again for no good reason.




  • robinph wrote: »
    Which is great, but don't see how that changes anything in relation to the releasing of samples that are potentially limited in number from the dates in question, not that we know what date tests it is that might have been requested/ rejected. The athlete clearly being someone with an interest in the results coming out negative, how does that fit with the theory that UK anti doping are protecting them somehow? Or that US anti doping are going to find something in the tests? Or that UK anti doping not releasing the samples for testing is some proof of something?

    Or does the theory then become that the athletes only say to release the tests because they know that they won't be released?

    Yes, more testing should be done. Yes, old samples should be tested for new things. No, you don't just re-run the same tests again for no good reason.


    But they aren't rerunning the same tests. They are running the latest test that have already caught people 6 years on from 2012 olympics.




  • But they aren't rerunning the same tests. They are running the latest test that have already caught people 6 years on from 2012 olympics.

    Who is the "they" in this instance. Is it not UK anti doping running the new testing for the 2012 Olympics?

    Why is US anti doping required to run tests? Or is this now a new theory that UK anti doping are not running retesting on UK athletes?

    As you said retests are being done and people are being caught so not sure where the problem is.


  • Advertisement


  • Some slightly clearer quotes from a few people in this story:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/51196920

    Sounds like the story is probably:
    USADA say give us everything.
    UKADA say what for?
    USADA go to the press and complain about not being given everything, because they are USADA and everyone should do as they say.
    UKADA say we'll give samples for testing if we know what and why and that make sense.
    Press re formats that quote as "UKADA won't give samples for testing".
    Some athletes, whose opinion in this is irrelevant as once they provide the sample it's absolutely nothing to do with them what happens next, give some quotes about "They should just test everything, I've got nothing to hide".
    UKADA get asked why are they still not giving up the samples for testing.
    UKADA say, well nobodies asked us yet except for the USADA and they have no authority over us and just wanted everything and wouldn't state why or what. When WADA come calling they can have whatever they like, just like the way it's meant to be.

    WADA wake up from a snooze and say, "Huh, us? Were we meant to be doing something?".




  • robinph wrote: »
    Some slightly clearer quotes from a few people in this story:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/51196920

    Sounds like the story is probably:
    USADA say give us everything.
    UKADA say what for?
    USADA go to the press and complain about not being given everything, because they are USADA and everyone should do as they say.
    UKADA say we'll give samples for testing if we know what and why and that make sense.
    Press re formats that quote as "UKADA won't give samples for testing".
    Some athletes, whose opinion in this is irrelevant as once they provide the sample it's absolutely nothing to do with them what happens next, give some quotes about "They should just test everything, I've got nothing to hide".
    UKADA get asked why are they still not giving up the samples for testing.
    UKADA say, well nobodies asked us yet except for the USADA and they have no authority over us and just wanted everything and wouldn't state why or what. When WADA come calling they can have whatever they like, just like the way it's meant to be.

    WADA wake up from a snooze and say, "Huh, us? Were we meant to be doing something?".

    The opinion of other athletes is not irrelevant. It's their sport that is getting a bad reputation and they care for it.




  • The opinion of other athletes is not irrelevant. It's their sport that is getting a bad reputation and they care for it.

    Nope, I meant their opinion on if their samples should be retested is irrelevant and they should get no say in that decision. More testing is good and athletes saying that is good. But athletes giving a quote around some potential drug bust story that they don't mind their samples being re-tested is a waste of a quote.

    They don't get to decide if their samples get tested again so it's a pointless comment.




  • Ceepo wrote: »
    You may well be right, but it cast's a dark shadow over his previous results and times.

    100%

    Last mile in New York 2014 which was 4:2*
    https://youtu.be/ZxFyROS8420?t=8460

    Same race idiot cop nearly runs yuki kawauchi off the road
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxFyROS8420&t=4955s




  • Good video about doping in Kenya and European Athletes there also doping. They basically said 3 brits are doping on EPO when training in Kenya. Didn't release the name. Think video was shared by Ewan McKenna. Probably be on bbc some stage.


  • Advertisement


  • Being suggested to be something new from the posts on Twitter:

    https://twitter.com/EwanMacKenna/status/1220335946236907521

    But the video is at least three years old:

    https://vimeo.com/182051302

    Is this actually something new? Presumably the unedited version has been handed over to other authorities and media in the last three years?




  • robinph wrote: »
    Being suggested to be something new from the posts on Twitter:

    https://twitter.com/EwanMacKenna/status/1220335946236907521

    But the video is at least three years old:

    https://vimeo.com/182051302

    Is this actually something new? Presumably the unedited version has been handed over to other authorities and media in the last three years?


    It was handed over to the Kenya authorities but the guys in the video said they were joking etc. Think the pace maker lost out on a lot of races.




  • It was handed over to the Kenya authorities but the guys in the video said they were joking etc. Think the pace maker lost out on a lot of races.

    ...and the other countries with involved athletes that the film makers have details of?

    Just seems odd if they stopped after the Kenyan authorities did nothing when they had names of others from other countries. If it is the name that people are wanting it to be, then why are the film makers being so coy about it and bleeping out the name?

    There isn't really even any threat of being sued by the suspected athlete as you just release the unedited version, the athlete says "nothing to do with me", the film makers say "we've handed everything we have over to WADA, speak to them".

    Of course maybe they did hand everything over three years ago and they are just releasing teasers as a threat to WADA to pull their finger out and do something before they publish anyway.




  • robinph wrote: »
    ...and the other countries with involved athletes that the film makers have details of?

    Just seems odd if they stopped after the Kenyan authorities did nothing when they had names of others from other countries. If it is the name that people are wanting it to be, then why are the film makers being so coy about it and bleeping out the name?

    There isn't really even any threat of being sued by the suspected athlete as you just release the unedited version, the athlete says "nothing to do with me", the film makers say "we've handed everything we have over to WADA, speak to them".

    Of course maybe they did hand everything over three years ago and they are just releasing teasers as a threat to WADA to pull their finger out and do something before they publish anyway.




    Or maybe its not a high profile athlete and to get viewers they just leave it hanging




  • Really wish the journalists would go to papers other than the DM to print their articles. Feel myself dying a little bit inside every time I have to click one of their links.




  • robinph wrote: »
    Really wish the journalists would go to papers other than the DM to print their articles. Feel myself dying a little bit inside every time I have to click one of their links.

    When questioned as to whether they had followed up on the video UKAD posted that link as their response. They never approached the journalist to get the name redacted in the clip. He has verified this.




  • robinph wrote: »
    Really wish the journalists would go to papers other than the DM to print their articles. Feel myself dying a little bit inside every time I have to click one of their links.

    A piece of paper in Kenya is not substantiated evidence to proof that someone doped. It's Kenya. It could be altered to just support them and make the sell. They know that too. I could make a similar piece of paper that said X athlete doped with X being anyone you wanted in 10 mins.

    The same goes for the international bodies. There is little they can do with a page other than testing that athlete more than they are currently. But the current testing is not working also so they are just p1ssing against the wind.

    https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/athletics-kenyas-kipsang-provisionally-suspended-for-anti-doping-violations-2020-01-10


    "It is disappointing to hear another Kenyan, and a top one at that, becoming a victim of the doping scourge," Barnaba Korir, Athletics Kenya Executive Committee member and Chairman of the Nairobi Region, told Reuters.

    It is not in Athletics Kenya best interest to catch dopers and when you have someone making a statement like that it's very clear.

    Current Kenyan law stipulates jail terms of up to three years for support staff found guilty in connection with doping, but not for athletes. This law is just to keep it underground. This law was only created to stop them getting banned before Rio. How many have been convicted by this law?




  • https://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/51671615

    There's no doubt that the VF and Next% has shaved some time off records and personal best but it might not all be from the runner's




  • Ceepo wrote: »
    https://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/51671615

    There's no doubt that the VF and Next% has shaved some time off records and personal best but it might not all be from the runner's

    But it never has all been from the runners. Doping is about and has been about. The mean times for elites has improved even though many doped before and after the shoes introduction.

    Speaking of which...Ruth Jebet. How in the name of God can she keep her Olympic title and status as a former world record holder? Is it even remotely plausible that she won the Olympics and held a world record clean and then decided to start doping?


  • Advertisement


  • skyblue46 wrote: »
    Speaking of which...Ruth Jebet. How in the name of God can she keep her Olympic title and status as a former world record holder? Is it even remotely plausible that she won the Olympics and held a world record clean and then decided to start doping?

    Asbel Kiprop got to keep his gold medal from Beijing 2008 to, a medal he was only awarded after the original winner Rachid Ramzi, was banned himself for testing positive for a banned substance.




  • skyblue46 wrote: »
    But it never has all been from the runners. Doping is about and has been about. The mean times for elites has improved even though many doped before and after the shoes introduction.

    Speaking of which...Ruth Jebet. How in the name of God can she keep her Olympic title and status as a former world record holder? Is it even remotely plausible that she won the Olympics and held a world record clean and then decided to start doping?

    Absolutely no doubt that peds play a huge part in a lot of the performances that we are seeing now.....




  • Imagine it can't end well when a police officer is arrested.

    Wilson Kipsang arrested for after-hours bar lock-in during coronavirus curfew




  • Daniel Wanjiru banned now. 2016 Amsterdam and '17 London winner. How long will Kenya avoid a Russia type ban?




  • skyblue46 wrote: »
    Daniel Wanjiru banned now. 2016 Amsterdam and '17 London winner. How long will Kenya avoid a Russia type ban?

    While not trying to paint them all with the one brush, it's really hard to believe in any of the results over the past years... unfortunately.

    I also think the agent and coaches have a lot to answer for. Some of these athletes are only the pawns !! Imo...




  • WILSON!!

    I was very disappointed to hear of Wilson's indiscretions in recent years following a most noteworthy career. However, I like the rest of you will always remember his burst for home during the Olympic marathon of 2012 splitting a 5k in 14.11. The crowds in London provided the greatest marathon spectacle on earth and Wilson may have reacted to the cauldron of chaos and let a then young Stephen Kiprotich strike for home against a faltering Wilson to claim Olympic immorality for the nation of Uganda. An epic race and one for the ages that will live long in the memory of those fortunate to watch either in person or on the television over a seasonal brunch on a sweltering Sunday in Summer.

    As I sit here with a little taste of Spring, I lift my glass to Wilson, to Stephen, to the marathon and runners everywhere among this virtual universe to where I now reside




  • WILSON!!
    ... Olympic immorality...

    Freudian slip?




  • Fake photos & makey-uppy landslides, not a good defence! It makes me sad to see more & more of the African runners getting caught & of course makes you wonder about the rest :(

    Kipsang hit with four-year ban for fake photo and violating anti-doping rules


  • Advertisement


  • opus wrote: »
    Fake photos & makey-uppy landslides, not a good defence! It makes me sad to see more & more of the African runners getting caught & of course makes you wonder about the rest :(

    Kipsang hit with four-year ban for fake photo and violating anti-doping rules




    There is massive concerns for the welfare of Wilson at the moment. He seems to be going off the rails totally.


Advertisement