Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kotova Positive

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gh
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Flumpy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Which one can attribute (complimentarily!) to a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat the tests. Britain is not fundamentally cleaner than ANY West Bloc First-World country.
    Are you seriously suggesting that Britain has 'a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat tests' than the US or Russia???
    no, we're suggesting (very strongly) that you quit casting stones where it's not required. Persist in this foolishness and you're gone.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Flumpy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Which one can attribute (complimentarily!) to a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat the tests. Britain is not fundamentally cleaner than ANY West Bloc First-World country.
    Are you seriously suggesting that Britain has 'a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat tests' than the US or Russia???
    Except for a handful of athletes is there much of UK track anyways?

    Leave a comment:


  • Flumpy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Marlow
    Which one can attribute (complimentarily!) to a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat the tests. Britain is not fundamentally cleaner than ANY West Bloc First-World country.
    Are you seriously suggesting that Britain has 'a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat tests' than the US or Russia???

    Leave a comment:


  • Flumpy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    What's David Jenkins got to do with anything???

    I'm talking about the last decade and the samples that are now being retested.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by Flumpy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Flumpy
    I'm getting tired of all these retrospective Russian +ives.
    Could we please have some American's busted.
    or some . . . uh . . . Brits . . .
    That would be absolutely fine as well, but historically and statistically we all know that if RUS have had a dozen or so retroactive busts in the 6 months it's completely unbelievable that the USA doesn't have at least as many cheats who are yet to be caught.

    Yes Britain may have some too, but we have nothing like the PED history of either of those countries.
    Only because there was no WADA or USADA around when David Jenkins got busted.
    Or when Tom Simpson had his fatal day in the mountains.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Flumpy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Flumpy
    I'm getting tired of all these retrospective Russian +ives.
    Could we please have some American's busted.
    or some . . . uh . . . Brits . . .
    That would be absolutely fine as well, but historically and statistically we all know that if RUS have had a dozen or so retroactive busts in the 6 months it's completely unbelievable that the USA doesn't have at least as many cheats who are yet to be caught.

    Yes Britain may have some too, but we have nothing like the PED history of either of those countries.
    Only because there was no WADA or USADA around when David Jenkins got busted.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Flumpy
    Yes Britain may have some too, but we have nothing like the PED history of either of those countries.
    Which one can attribute (complimentarily!) to a more sophisticated understanding of how to beat the tests. Britain is not fundamentally cleaner than ANY West Bloc First-World country.

    Leave a comment:


  • Flumpy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by mump boy
    Champs 2 weeks later in '07 so she may technically qualify depending on date of retrospective ban. Don't how that works as she wouldn't have qualified :? :?
    Don't understand this sentence at all??? :?

    Leave a comment:


  • Flumpy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by mump boy

    What total nonsense

    Should police not investigate crimes if they don't catch someone a the scene ?!!
    Exactly. This also gives out the message that even if someone gets away with it at the time they can very easily be found out in the future which will hopefully act as a deterent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Flumpy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Flumpy
    I'm getting tired of all these retrospective Russian +ives.
    Could we please have some American's busted.
    or some . . . uh . . . Brits . . .
    That would be absolutely fine as well, but historically and statistically we all know that if RUS have had a dozen or so retroactive busts in the 6 months it's completely unbelievable that the USA doesn't have at least as many cheats who are yet to be caught.

    Yes Britain may have some too, but we have nothing like the PED history of either of those countries.

    Leave a comment:


  • mump boy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by Dave
    I know I'll get flamed for this because I usually do....

    IAAF needs to test as vigorously as the technology allows up to the day of the competition. The winner on that day is the winner(pending normal appeals filed within the normal periods).

    This business of changing results years after the event is ridiculous.
    What total nonsense

    Should police not investigate crimes if they don't catch someone a the scene ?!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    I know I'll get flamed for this because I usually do....

    IAAF needs to test as vigorously as the technology allows up to the day of the competition. The winner on that day is the winner(pending normal appeals filed within the normal periods).

    This business of changing results years after the event is ridiculous.

    Leave a comment:


  • mump boy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    New Medal Positions

    WI 06
    1 315 Tianna MADISON USA 6.80 PB
    2 207 Naide GOMES POR 6.76 NR
    3 83 ConcepciĆ³n MONTANER ESP 6.76 SB

    WC 07

    1 823 Tatyana LEBEDEVA RUS 7.03 +0.3
    2 816 Lyudmila KOLCHANOVA RUS 6.92 -0.3
    3 761 Naide GOMES POR 6.87

    Champs 2 weeks later in '07 so she may technically qualify depending on date of retrospective ban. Don't how that works as she wouldn't have qualified :? :?

    Leave a comment:


  • nevetsllim
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    I'm glad they're weeding out cheats but I hope the IAAF/WADA etc are re-testing the samples of athletes beyond Russia, Belarus, Ukraine. Sadly I fear they might choose to steer clear of re-testing some as the outcome probably wouldn't look great for the sport's image.

    I always quite liked Kotova but I can't say the news comes as a huge surprise at the same time.

    Leave a comment:


  • mump boy
    replied
    Re: Kotova Positive

    Originally posted by KDFINE
    Maybe at the World Championships (and Olympics) they should give out the re-arrangesd medals. They could hold a double ceremony when the medals are handed out for a particular event. With a double ceremony at least the athletes who had been cheated are feted in the presence of their peers. It can never make up for not being honored at the time but it might be the next best thing. Make it a condition of granting any championship.
    Totally agree but IAAF prefer to sweep things under the carpet and pretend that haven't happened. They certainly wouldn't want to sully their flagship champs with acknowledgement of drug taking !!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X