Tweet
Kelli White B sample is positive. Anybody taking odds on the USADA decision?
(Pls don't pull this post. its a legitimate q!)
(Pls don't pull this post. its a legitimate q!)
-
-
Re: What are the odds now?
Huh? It's a "legitimate" question, but, no offense, a relatively pointless one. White admitted from day one that she had taken the substance. She has never contested that.
What she is contesting is the legitimacy of the IAAF decision to classify Modafinil as a performance-enhancing drug. And also if it's fair for her to be punsihed for taking something that wasnt' on the banned list when she took it (even though there is a "related substances" clause). Those are the issues that USADA has to play with. -
Re: What are the odds now?
i dunno, but it seems to me that IAAF announced earlier this year that Monofidil was to be added to the banned list next year. In fact, IAAF very recently (just the other day) announced monofidil was officially added to banned list, if memory serves me. So arguing why they are banning Monofidil after the athlete comes positive for it is an exercise in silliness. The argument might have carried if the contest was joined prior to the positive test, and even better for KW, if the contest was brought to the table by a narcoleptic before KW positive test!!!
I understand the legal position (tho shameless) is to dispute the legitimacy of the stimulant properties of Monofidil. Good Luck. Especially when the military uses Monofidil as a benedril substitute.
My odds are 10-1 she gets sanctioned.Comment
-
Re: What are the odds now?
Hell What a surprise! I didn't know that narcoleptics were so well represented in Track and Field! and at the elite level, inundated by narcoleptics! Phillips is one too! Who'da thunk it...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... DT0161.DTLComment
-
Re: What are the odds now?
Could you please repeat that? I'm afraid I nodded off while you were talking...Comment
Comment