IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

[gh]

PRESS RELEASE

International Association of Athletics Federations

 
DWAIN CHAMBERS (GBR) – PERFORMANCES ANNULLED

29 April 2004

Monte Carlo - Following expiry of the deadline, under IAAF Rules, for Dwain Chambers (GBR) to appeal his doping offence to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, his 2 years of ineligibility until 6 November 2005 is confirmed.

As a result of Mr Dwain Chambers’ offence, all his performances from the date on which his sample was provided, 1 August 2003, need to be annulled.

The IAAF will officially amend the results from last year’s World Athletics Series as follows:

Men’s 100m Final at the 9th World Championships in Paris 2003:

POS                                                                 NAT                         MARK
COLLINSKim                         SKN                 10.07
BROWNDarrel                       TRI                  10.08
CAMPBELLDarren                 GBR                10.08
MONTGOMERYTim              USA                 10.11
WILLIAMSBernard                 USA                 10.13
ALIU Deji                                 NGR                10.21
EMEDOLUUchenna               NGR                10.22


Men’s 4 x 100m Relay Final at the 9th World Championships in Paris 2003

           
POS                                                                                 NAT                         MARK
UNITED STATES                              USA                 38.06
1383 CAPEL John

1443 WILLIAMS Bernard
1422 PATTON Darvis
1407 JOHNSON Joshua J.

BRAZIL                                               BRA                38.26
164 DE LIMA Vincent Lenilson
162 RIBEIRO Edson Luciano
160 DA SILVA André Domingos
161 SOUZA Cláudio Roberto

NETHERLANDS                                NED                38.87
989 BECK Timothy
982 DOUGLAS Troy
987 VAN BALKOM Patrick
990 DOUGLAS Caimin

NIGERIA                                             NGR                38.89
1012 FASUBA Adetokumbo Olusoji
1006 EMEDOLU Uchenna
1011 MUSA Deji
1005 ALIU Deji

POLAND                                             POL                38.96
1091 BALCERZAK Piotr
1094 CHYLA Lukasz
1092 NOVAK Marcin
1093 URBAS Marcin


JAPAN                                                JPN                 39.05
764 TUSCHIE Hiroyasu
767 MIYASAKI Hisashi
765 MATSUDA Ryo
757 ASAHARA Nobuharu


Men’s 100m at the IAAF World Athletics Final in Monaco:


POS                                                                 NAT                         MARK
WILLIAMSBernard                 USA                 10.04
CAPELJohn                           USA                 10.05
EMEDOLUUchenna               NGR                10.08
GATLINJustin                         USA                 10.12
COLLINSKim                         SKN                 10.13
ALIU Deji                                 NGR                10.18
POWELL Asafa                      JAM                 10.23

[gh]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

Let me also note that while IAAF annuls from date of test, T&FN wipes out the whole calendar year for steroid positives, so Chambers is removed from the No. 5 spot in last year's World Rankings and those below him move up a spot so the current standings are

1. Capel
2. Williams
3. Collins
4. Gatlin
5. Aliu
6. Brown
7. Campbell
8. Greene
9 (and teetering?). Montgomery
10. Emedolu

[EPelle]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

What happens if Montgomery is proven to have received a banned substance from Conte, but doping tests reveal he was clean? How will tfn respond?

[BisonHurdler]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

Maybe it would depend on whether or not anyone (i.e. Tim) comes out and admits he was on it at the time.

Which of course no one will ever hold their breath for.

[tafnut]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

"9 (and teetering?). Montgomery"

Didn't you just violate your own precepts, gh? You just brought his performances into question, without any substantial justification. It's all innuendo now and guilt by association, isn't it?

[Realist]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

Looks to me like there's so much substantial evidence out there that GH may have been kind by using such a nebulous word and adding a question mark to it.

[marknhj]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

Just read about a prosecution memo that was released. When searching Anderson's house they found vials of steroids with the actual names of the drugs written on them (are these people idiots?) and containers of creamy substances. They've used the Baumann excuse, said they were for shampoo and lotion when travelling! Can't wait until they claim someone spiked the shampoo!

[tafnut]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

What am I missing here? I just read the Marion thread on the "Druggie!" Board next door, and I still don't see any substantiation of drug usage. Lots of finger-pointing and name-dropping, but no direct link to MJ or TM. I'm not so naive to think it isn't POSSIBLE, but I thought the rules stipulate that we need real facts before we impugn reputations. MJ deserves that much (cf. Regina's case, which is clear now that she was dirty).

[gh]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

>"9 (and teetering?). Montgomery"

Didn't you just violate your own
>precepts, gh? You just brought his performances into question, without any
>substantial justification. It's all innuendo now and guilt by association,
>isn't it?>>

I thought long and hard before adding that caveat. I don't think it's unwarranted, given the information in front of us, to note that his career is hanging by a precarious thread, even if he has tested negative. The "guilt by association" thing is now perhaps enough to get him bounced. The alphabet soup boys are playing by a new set of rules these days.

[tafnut]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

"The alphabet soup boys are playing by a new set of rules these days."

I'm unclear what that means. Would IAAF/USATF hang someone with circumstantial evidence?

edit: did this just change boards?!

[Realist]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

USATF/IAAF don't do the hanging anymore: USADA and WADA do and from what I've read they sure seem to be leaning towards circumstancial evidence convictions. And if they're not, McCain is?

[marknhj]

Re: IAAF Annuls Chambers Marks

Garry, I'm more than a little surprised at what you wrote above. Are you party to other info that has yet to be released? Seems like it's a, "he said this" - "no he didn't", situation. Conte's lawyers said the report was BS and since the interview wasn't recorded how can they prove it? Do you think there's some plea bargining going on behind the scenes where he gets a lighter sentence for grassing on the athletes? That's all I can read into it; they've had an offer that isn't acceptable and publically denied it to apply leverage to get a better deal.