Number 2: Regina Jacobs

[MJD]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

PLEASE tell me
>you were being sarcastic when you said that!!
>It's not like it's much of a shock that she's
>tested positive now, is it?

The letsrun boys handled the story in their usual low-key understated fashion:

www.letsrun.com

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

From ESPN.com:

http://espn.go.com/oly/news/2003/1022/1644609.html

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

I'm a little confused on the accusing protocol? They don't have to wait till the B sample is tested? If it is negative, isn't that the end of the matter? And if so, didn't they just ruin her rep for no reason? She may well be dirty, but I just wanted to know what the protocol is.

[Asterix]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

>However, this story would have a lot more
>credibility if the names of the "track
>sources" were made public.

Names are public: Dr. Don Catlin of the USOC accredited laboratory in LA has developed and implemented the test for THG.

Also, why did it
>take an un-named "high profile" track & field
>coach to get the ball rolling???? I smell
>something rotten here.

So it might be a jealous coach. Does that alter what Dr. Catlin has done or discovered?

Any athlete who knew
>about this mess and also remained silent should
>look in the mirror and ask themself why they did
>not go public with what they knew.

In the past, unless you had a double teflon, bullet proof case, going public would doom you to lawsuit city. We're in a new era where you only have to tip off the authorities and they can uncover the definitive proof themselves.

I only
>hope that in this process of outing the athletes
>we don't lose sight of the fact that USATF
>officials new about the positive tests and did
>not do anything ab out it until they were forced
>to admit it.

Which positives are you talking about? The THG ones discovered by Dr. Catlin were passed on to USOC, USATF and the IAAF. As per their procedures, names are not officially released until after B sample positives and athlete appeal. No one was going to 'admit' anything until USADA got all their legal and scientific ducks in a row and led the public disclosure, which they did last week.


As
>we speak I have to believe that new and
>undetectable drugs have been/are being developed
>that will stay one step ahead of the testers.

You share that belief with Dr. Catlin and others. But that still does not alter the reality of the THG situation.

>Having retro-active penalties is a good stand
>d to take, but unless the insiders (athletes and
>coaches) step forward and speak up we will see
>this situation appear again and again in the
>future.

Which situation? The current one where coaches are apparently stepping forward and passing information to the proper authorities? Wouldn't it be nice to see that happen again and again (at least until the sport is cleaned up)?

[ZZrunZZ]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

>Dr. Don Catlin of the USOC accredited laboratory in LA has developed and implemented the test for THG.<

Did I miss something or did Catlin name Jacobs? Amy Shipley (Washington Post report who wrote the article) did not mention Catlin or anyone else by name.

"Washington Post: Regina Jacobs, a 15-time U.S. national champion middle-distance runner and five-time world medalist, is among the five track and field athletes who have tested positive for the designer steroid tetrahydrogestrinone (THG), according to track sources."

>>So it might be a jealous coach. Does that alter what Dr. Catlin has done or discovered?<<

Who cares what the motive was. And Catlin was only able to "do/discover" what he did as a result of a "high profile coach" sending in the sample and syringe. He did not do this on his own.

>>In the past, unless you had a double teflon, bullet proof case, going public would doom you to lawsuit city. We're in a new era where you only have to tip off the authorities and they can uncover the definitive proof themselves.<<

What is the proof that a lawsuit would be/was filed by the person being named? Hell anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone over anything (ain't Ameerica great?). My point is, if other athletes knew what was going on why wouldn't they come forward? If they knew they were right then all of it would have to come out in a court of law. This is where it think the USATF has fallen short. They SHOULD be the safe harbor for the athletes. Clean athletes should get the full support and cooperation from the national governing body when it comes to crap like this. Obviously they fell asleep at the wheel for a long time. The failed to create an environment where athletes could step up in confidence to the USATF and get some help.

>>Which positives<<

Go back and do your homework. It shouldn't take you long to find numerous reports about "un-named" athletes testing positive and were somehow let off the hook.

>>You share that belief with Dr. Catlin and others. But that still does not alter the reality of the THG situation.<<

I'm not sure I understand your point here.

>>Which situation? The current one where coaches are apparently stepping forward and passing information to the proper authorities? Wouldn't it be nice to see that happen again and again (at least until the sport is cleaned up)?<<

The situation where the USATF is being reactive rather than pro-active. Coaches? I've only heard of one "self described high profile coach" stepping forward. You yourself indicated that it was perhaps jealously that made him/her do it. How many other coaches have/are stepping forward to turn in their or anyone else's athletes? This is where naming names (of the outers) would lend credibility to these stories.

Hey, was agree that the sport needs to be cleaned up, and that process has now begun, but this needs to be a permanent mindset of the national governing bodies not only here but throughout hte world. This is far from over, nor should it be.

Thanks goodness.

[Asterix]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

Did I miss something or did Catlin name
>Jacobs? Amy Shipley (Washington Post report who
>wrote the article) did not mention Catlin or
>anyone else by name.

I wasn't aware you were referring to the specific Jacobs case. As you've pointed out, names that come out before being "officially" released, are entirely up for debate. I guess reputability of the Post to publish something they have not substantiated is between them and their readers.

Who cares
>what the motive was. And Catlin was only able
>to "do/discover" what he did as a result of a
>"high profile coach" sending in the sample and
>syringe. He did not do this on his own.

No one exists in a vacuum. Nearly all breakthroughs in science are the result of something outside getting the ball rolling on the behalf of the discoverer. I think this sets the precedent that others, whether they are motivated by jealousy (jealous that people are cheating their own athletes?) or fair play, can see that they have a mechanism to help clean up the sport.

What is the proof that a
>lawsuit would be/was filed by the person being
>named? Hell anyone can file a lawsuit against
>anyone over anything (ain't Ameerica great?).

Whether entirely justified or not, there is a real fear for anyone to make insinuations of cheating that they will be sued up the wazzoo. You said yourself, anyone can file a lawsuit in America and there are numerous examples of plaintiffs winning over juries in ridiculous suits.

>My point is, if other athletes knew what was
>s going on why wouldn't they come forward? If
>they knew they were right then all of it would
>have to come out in a court of law.

But the court of law is held to a very high standard of proof (to say nothing of a very high standard of funding a legal defence). So much easier to let the name brand organizations with deeper pockets gather the proof and conduct the charges.

Go back and
>do your homework. It shouldn't take you long to
>find numerous reports about "un-named"
>athletes testing positive and were somehow let
>off the hook.

I thought you were talking about the current case involving THG and potentially BALCO, not the endless previous cases of USATF complicity, hence why I asked "which positives?".

>>You share that belief with
>Dr. Catlin and others. But that still does not
>alter the reality of the THG situation.<<

I'm
>not sure I understand your point here.
>
Dr. Catlin, and others, are of the belief that 'designer' drugs have been available for a while, but remained undetected. Whether there are more of them does not change the fact that they have discovered THG and can test for it.

>The situation where the USATF is being
>reactive rather than pro-active.

USADA is the organization conducting tests. They are the ones who should be proactive. Not being in the testing business anymore, it is hard for USATF to be proactive. They can only get involved when notified one of their athletes has tested positive.

Coaches? I've
>only heard of one "self described high profile
>coach" stepping forward. You yourself
>indicated that it was perhaps jealously that
>made him/her do it. How many other coaches
>have/are stepping forward to turn in their or
>anyone else's athletes?

Granted, it has been just one coach so far. Buut it has been a grand total of one week since the USADA release. Care to wager whether any other coaches/athletes will surreptitiously break ranks in the coming months?

This is where naming
>names (of the outers) would lend credibility to
>these stories.

Credibility is obtained by proper testing of samples by recognized labs, eg USADA. When they (and not anonymous news leaks) announce names, you can have greater assurance as to their veracity. Of course, if you have an issue with whether a media organization has properly checked up on their 'unamed source', then you are free to take it up with them.

Hey, was agree that the
>sport needs to be cleaned up, and that process
>has now begun, but this needs to be a permanent
>mindset of the national governing bodies not
>only here but throughout hte world. This is far
>from over, nor should it be.

Absolutely. Looks like many international types are getting on board. Even the Greeks have announced they will be retesting samples from meets held there.

Thanks
>goodness.

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

>Oh yeah and THG is injected under the tongue if
>anybody cares.>>

It's "delivered sublingually" but that doesn't mean a needle, if that's what you're trying to say. Using a syringe (which can be defined as a graduated tube designed to contain a marked amount of a liquid substance) it's simply squirted under the tongue, not "injected" in the penetrate the skin sense.

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

With all these accusations flying and talk of witch hunting, this episode could take on some amazing similarities to Arthur Miller's The Crucible.

Cast:

Some IAAF guy as: Judge Danforth

Victor Conte as: Tituba

The Anonymous Source: Abigail


Danforth, to Tituba: “Did you sign your name in the Devil’s book?”

Tituba, to Danforth: “We was only dancin, sir”

Abigail, to Danforth: “I saw Dwain Chambers with the devil! And I saw Kevin Toth with the devil! And I saw Regina Jacobs with the devil! …”

[Zat0pek]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

Does anybody know if there is a sample left that could be re-tested from her indoor WR? I'd love to see her stripped of the record if that's possible.

[Utah]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

If there is a way she should definately be stripped of the Indoor WR.

I always figured she pulled out of the Sydney Olympics because of EPO testing.

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

I know that this is
>a legal practice here in America but I don't like
>the idea of an anonimous accuser. He/she should
>reveal his/her identity to be doing this kind of
>accusations.>

Regina wasn't caught because of the anonymous accuser. She was caught because she was using a substance which is not permitted under the rules of the IAAF.

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

Now...Now...you know we can't go back and test the samples of the anybody thats set a WR...They would have to wipe the books clean without a doubt....

[Guest]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

What I wanna know is, who the hell is leading "A" positives? I'm sure they're correct, but let's learn from the Bernard Lagat debacle. They should wait until after the "B" sample is positive to announce anything, shouldn't they?

[Powell]

Re: Number 2: Regina Jacobs

If stories didn't leak out to the press, no US drug positive would ever get reported.