Salazar

[Tuariki]

The Russians must be enjoying the release of the USADA report on Salazar.

[26mi235]

It has been a year so it seems to me that the main possibility is this. There must not be more than smoke that can be relied on or they would have proceeded. Thus, they seem to be depending on getting records from the doctor to show that something that they can prosecute.

As I understand it they are going to test some of the samples from the group using the newest techniques.

[Juicy News]

The FBI is now involved in this case.

[guru]

Yep. S**t's getting real now

[cubehead]

The FBI is now involved in this case.

Oof....maybe it will be another Waco....a shootout at the Beaverton Campus.

[ExCoastRanger]

Speaking of "fake news," I don't see anything in this article other than the newspaper's say-so that the FBI is on the case. USADA and FBI declined comment.

[guru]

USADA and FBI declined comment.

As I've said here before, the time to worry for those under scrutiny isnt when USADA is talking - it's when they're not. I suppose the same could be said of the FBI lol

[ExCoastRanger]

Of course that is so true, guru.
I merely note the article linked on the front page doesn't even have an attributable source, not even an anonymous one.

[26mi235]

As I've said here before, the time to worry for those under scrutiny isnt when USADA is talking - it's when they're not. I suppose the same could be said of the FBI lol

Well, with Armstrong they talked and talked and talked, so I am not sure that is an accurate characterization.

Do they have to have 'probable cause' to rest samples? Do they announce the results of a retest if they (continue) turn out to be negative?

When it is hard to determine if a line has been crossed (and it has taken them a year or two or more) then it is not really a big case, it is a marginal one.

Interesting that no one has mentioned Wiggins on this board, and the trouble at Sky that may see the departure of Brailsford.

[polevaultpower]

Well, with Armstrong they talked and talked and talked, so I am not sure that is an accurate characterization.

Do they have to have 'probable cause' to rest samples? Do they announce the results of a retest if they (continue) turn out to be negative?

When it is hard to determine if a line has been crossed (and it has taken them a year or two or more) then it is not really a big case, it is a marginal one.

Interesting that no one has mentioned Wiggins on this board, and the trouble at Sky that may see the departure of Brailsford.

USADA and WADA can retest samples any time, they do not need probable cause. Of course there is a limit to how many times you can retest a sample, and it costs money, so it's not done on a whim...

And no, negative results are not announced.

[Tuariki]

While I have no time for Salazar and his methods as reported, I do hope that re-testing finds nothing incriminating re Farah and Rupp.