PDA

View Full Version : Hardy Withdrawals From Olympic Team!



USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 12:10 AM
Here we go kids...

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijing/swimming/news?slug=ap-swm-hardy-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns


http://www.nbcolympics.com/blogs/blog=alanabrahamsonsblog/postid=163528.html#hardy+withdraws+from+u+s+team


http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/ViewNewsArticle.aspx?TabId=1&Alias=Rainbow&Lang=en&ItemId=2155&mid=2943

USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 12:21 AM
:bump:

ViveBene
August 2nd, 2008, 01:43 AM
Hi -

It's hit the airwaves on the "Jessica Hardy - [Formerly Amazing]" thread:
http://forums.usms.org/showthread.php?t=11423&page=3

I think it is a good strategic maneuver on her part, separating her from the Katerina Thanous and Floyd Landises of the world and taking into account the pragmatics of the situation. It also turns down the tabloid heat a bit.

VB

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 08:36 AM
I think it is a good strategic maneuver on her part, separating her from the Katerina Thanous and Floyd Landises of the world and taking into account the pragmatics of the situation. It also turns down the tabloid heat a bit.

VB

Huh? What? She was busted, she realized it, there's no way around it. This isn't some strategic move, it's a admission of guilt in a dishonest way. If she had ever intended to do anything for the good of the team she should have started with not taking drugs. My guess is she was told she had two options, go through with further proceedings which would utimately make her look worse or take this route. Either way, the case is closed, another doper goes down.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 09:14 AM
I agree with Geek's thoughts. She took the cowards way out of this by going out the back door. She knows full well she took PED and got caught dead to rights. She also knew she had ZERO legs to stand on before the proceedings and rather then face the music, she slides out the back door still giving us this BS about her innocence.
I think she is a cheater, a liar, a coward, selfish, self centered and now gutless...And, I think her coach knew exactly what she was taking based on his past history!

poolraat
August 2nd, 2008, 09:21 AM
I think she is a cheater, a liar, a coward, selfish, self centered and now gutless...


Don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 09:29 AM
Gosh, I thought I pretty much covered my thoughts ---

This struck a nerve with me because of the terrible injustice this caused to the swimmers denied their place on the US Olympic team ALL born out of JH selfish cheating. The years and years or early AM wake ups and two a day workouts and the thousands and thousands of yards swam were rendered meaningless by a lousy self center, selfish decision to CHEAT--and-- innocent, dedicated, honest, hard working clean swimmers paid the price for JH actions. That is deplorable in my thinking. I intentionally have not sugar coated my thoughts because of the horrible injustice to the clean swimmers that were ripped off by JH---
Two years on the bench is NOT ENOUGH!

USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 09:35 AM
Whenever you cheat, you not only hurt yourself but others... if they didn't find Hardy's PED test until after the Olympics, terrible things could happen like this...


http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/08/02/ioc.medals.ap/index.html


Heartbreaking and disgraceful. It makes me sick.

USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 09:39 AM
Another thought... will Speedo give her the boot?

Rain Man
August 2nd, 2008, 09:39 AM
Agree with most of the sentiment here.

“While some might have chosen to exhaust their legal options to try to force their way into the games, Jessica instead chose to put her team’s interests ahead of her own,” said Travis Tygart, chief executive officer of USADA.

Did he have a puke-bucket at his side so he wouldn't have to vomit all over himself after having to issue that statement? Sounds like there was some behind-the-scenes agreement that USADA will make a statement thanking her for dropping the appeals process and Hardy essentially admits guilt.

But of course they'll stick to their story about how she was one of the unlucky who happened to take a supplement that was tainted with a banned substance. Yeah right, and Barry didn't know the "clear" was a steroid. I feel bad for all the young girls who no doubt looked up to her.

Shame on Jessica, in the court of public opinion, you are guilty as charged. My advice would be to stay away from swimming for a while. Like... permanently.

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 09:51 AM
And a VERY big shame on Mark Shubert and USS for getting the results of the test the day they had to turn in the final team rosters and choosing to not name alternates.

Trichica
August 2nd, 2008, 10:26 AM
How about the day the tests results came back, Hardy says to USA Swimming, I am out--quick get Kirk on the roster--even if she said, do it just in case.

For that move, I would have respect.

As I said to my dad this morning as he showed me the headline, Hardy did not "withdraw"--she got caught doping and was getting booted.

So, so sad for Kirk.:2cents:

Rick
August 2nd, 2008, 10:29 AM
This USA Today column speaks directly to USA Swimming's lack of foresight .....

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/brennan/2008-07-30-swim-comment_N.htm

hofffam
August 2nd, 2008, 10:36 AM
And a VERY big shame on Mark Shubert and USS for getting the results of the test the day they had to turn in the final team rosters and choosing to not name alternates.

Agree 100%. USA-S management and (lack of) planning for this situation was deplorable. Their public statements are completely pathetic - e.g. we are following procedure.

It is no surprise to me from Mark - considering his unethical behavior in the TYR vs. Speedo case.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 10:51 AM
My reading of the reports is that she has only agreed not to contest the validity of the test results. That means she is off the team even if she could conclusively prove that someone slipped her drugs without her knowledge. Her lawyer indicated he is still working on an explanation for the test results. That could have a bearing on the length of her suspension. If reports are true that her supplements are clean it's going to be interesting to see if they can come up with any sort of plausible sounding explanation. It's not looking good for JH, but she'll still get her day in a hearing.

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 10:55 AM
Oh, c'mon Lindsay, it's over and done with. Who care what happens now? She's a doper, she cheated, she denied others a spot, she shamed the sport and her country. I could really care less about what happens from this point on. There is nothing left to tell. She already had her day, many of them as a matter of fact. She's just another in a long line of doping chumps, self-centered and a liar.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 11:11 AM
I tend to think so, but just as in the justice system everyone is entitled to their day in court JH is entitled to her hearing and an opportunity to investigate how it could have happened. Even though I often come to conclusions about legal cases before the court proceedings are concluded, sometimes even started, I wouldn't want anyone to be sentenced for a crime without the opportunity to have their day in court.

Was Kicker V's case all wrapped up before he had the opportunity to prove that his supplements were contaminated? Yes in terms of having his medals taken away, yes in terms of being foolhardy in taking supplements, but I would say no in terms of judging whether he was a low down good for nothing cheater.

FlyQueen
August 2nd, 2008, 11:51 AM
Wow, you all just throw her under the bus along with Salo. First on Salo, Kicker Vencil's supplement was found to be tainted - while Salo can discourage a swimmer from taking a supplement (and claims now he does) he can't watch them 24/7 and make them not take anything.

Ous Mellouli took an ADD med to help him study/finish a project which had NO bearing on his race performance.

As for Hardy - I don't know. I think perhaps her withdrawl is not as selfish as you are all making it out to be. She is the only one that can know with 100% certainty whether or not she did something intentionally wrong.

Also think of the flip side - IF her a sample was found to have a positive test but her b sample came back clear and they found out that her a sample was tampered with and they called Kirk, Jackson, and Weir and told them to come out only to then tell them the next day they weren't on the team imagine the out cry then.

Sometimes it takes something bad to call attention to flaws in the system. HOPEFULLY USA swimming can take a step back after Beijing and find a way (earlier trials) to make sure this never happens again. I still think inviting the 3rd place finishers in every event (sans the 100/200 free) to the camp just in case is not a bad idea. What if someone got injured?

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 12:07 PM
For the record, please take note of these facts - she tested positive on two samples, she left the team. All this crap about her day in court, blah, blah, blah. Don't take supplements, how complicated is that rule to follow? Intentionality is IRRELEVANT, give me a freaking break. What a bunch of whining apologists. She's a doper, plain and simple. Get a grip!

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 12:11 PM
Yea, yea, yea--and OJ's blood sample was doctored by the LA Police dept, his glove did not fit, the Bruno Mali shoes were not exactly like the ones pictured in previous pictures, the LA police intentionally put one of his bloody glove by his gate at his home---Honestly, I believe JH shook hands with someone who must have intentionally put this PED into her system---or, maybe a meteorite slammed through her hotel roof while she was soundly sleeping the night before her race--and it had the PED on it from flying through the atmosphere---and it landed next to her bed and the dust got on her--and the maid cleaned up the mess before she realized she had been infected by the meteorite---Maybe she sat on a toilet seat that someone intentionally doctored with PED powder to make sure she tested + so their swimmer could have a better chance---All are obviously plausible given the fact that no one ever knowingly takes PED.:dunno:

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 12:24 PM
As for Hardy - I don't know. I think perhaps her withdrawl is not as selfish as you are all making it out to be. She is the only one that can know with 100% certainty whether or not she did something intentionally wrong.

Unless she synthesized the drugs herself she procured them from somewhere, and that somewhere is probably selling them illegally and might therefore cooperate with law enforcement in seeing who their other clients were, so we might see other athletes brought down. The system ought to be set up to undermine the trust between the various parties involved in these transactions so that we'd get more Balcos.

I would have more faith in JH if she were willing to make her denials in a context where there were legal ramifications (e.g. perjury charges or charges of obstructing an investigation) for lying. I don't know if that is legally possible to do. Perhaps USADA could offer $50k to anyone who can prove a PED was delivered to an Olympic athlete. It might be more effective than going purely with testing.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 12:31 PM
Intentionality is IRRELEVANT

This is where we agree to disagree. No reputable justice system ignores intentionality.

gull
August 2nd, 2008, 12:47 PM
This is where we agree to disagree. No reputable justice system ignores intentionality.

The WADA Athlete Guide clearly states that it matters not whether the banned substance was ingested intentionally or unintentionally. The onus is on the athlete.

scyfreestyler
August 2nd, 2008, 12:58 PM
This is where we agree to disagree. No reputable justice system ignores intentionality.

But we are not dealing with felonies, misdemeanors, bailiffs and parole officers either. Intent is not a concern here. Whether or not the drug was taken on purpose, it still yielded (or had the potential to yield) an advantage to Hardy over her competitors. Therefore, any performances recorded while she was on the PED are null and void.

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 01:46 PM
This is where we agree to disagree. No reputable justice system ignores intentionality.

Why do people continue to think this is a criminal case? There are rules, she broke them, she's suffering the consequences. Why continue to give some sort of benefit of the doubt to a proven doper?

You don't like the rules, don't play the game, geez louise. I've never seen such lunacy over something so cut and dried. The system is set up fine, hold that athlete accountable for their actions. Instead you propose giving money to dope narcs? WTH? Yeah, that won't bring out the crazies.

ALM
August 2nd, 2008, 02:17 PM
This statistic was in an article I cited in another thread:


Worldwide in 2007, 174,483 drug screenings were given in Olympic-related sports, turning up 3,375 so-called “adverse” or questionable results (1.93 percent), Wadler said.

“The low number of violations puts into perspective that most athletes are drug-free,” Wadler said. “But you hear about the celebrated doping cases, and the notion becomes that this is a useless battle. Quite the opposite. I think this is all positive in doping reform.”


The article was about the Russian athletes who just got banned. If you haven't read it yet it's pretty interesting - it was a "sting" operation that caught them...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/sports/olympics/01doping.html?_r=2&ref=olympics&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 02:55 PM
I am amazed that people several people here still can't manage to draw a distinction between whether an athlete should lose medals, records, and a place on the team and whether they are an evil no-good bad person. Now that she is no longer contesting the validity of the test the first question is settled. I'll be surprised if any of the regular posters to this thread are willing to argue that she should get a spot on the team at this point.

Please, Gull, Geek, and Matt, do you consider Kicker V and Matt Dumont to be low down dope-cheating scum? They both had positive tests. For the record I don't. The USADA and WADA codes also recognize intentionality in assigning duration of suspensions, which can be zero duration, two years, four years or lifetime bans.

And no, this isn't a criminal case but the criminal law system is designed the way it is to maximize the likelihood of justice, and the same principles can be applied here regardless of whether this is a criminal case.

scyfreestyler
August 2nd, 2008, 03:09 PM
Lindsay, all I am saying is that she clearly had the chemical in her bloodstream at the time of Trials so her performances were illegally aided to a certain degree. I can understand that the intent, or lack thereof, will play a role in the punishment phase. It makes sense that it would. Regarding any athletes who took PED's without their knowledge (Kicker V.), I don't consider them to be dirty scum.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 03:11 PM
The system is set up fine, hold that athlete accountable for their actions. Instead you propose giving money to dope narcs? WTH? Yeah, that won't bring out the crazies.

Given the number of injustices involved with plea bargains, paid informants, the reliability of people involved in doping as witnesses, etc., you are probably right that rewards for people who turn in dopers would not be a great idea.

I would still like to see the law ask JH where she got her drugs so that she would be faced with possible prosecution if she lied. Failing that, USADA or WADA ought to have a regulation that says if you impede their investigation by lying, and it is proven that you did, you will get an automatic lifetime ban. But then I would support a lifetime ban for any doping that can't be shown to be inadvertent (ala cold meds or trace amounts of non-PED, etc.).

Matt: as I suspected we are in basic agreement, I'll be interested to see if Geek will address the Kicker V case.

tjburk
August 2nd, 2008, 03:16 PM
I still say I will reserve my final opinion until after the appeal.

gull
August 2nd, 2008, 03:32 PM
Lindsay, I posted this on the Jessica Hardy-Amazing thread. I will post it again, as you may have missed it. If not, then perhaps you can explain to me what it is that you find unclear or ambiguous in the wording.

From the WADA Athlete Guide:

Athletes should know that, under the Code, they are strictly liable whenever a prohibited substance is found in their bodily specimen. This means that a violation occurs whether or not the athlete intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly, used a prohibited substance or was negligent or otherwise at fault. It is very important therefore for athletes to understand not only what is prohibited, but also what might potentially cause an inadvertent doping violation...


Extreme caution is recommended regarding supplement use. It is WADA's position that a good diet is of utmost importance to athletes. The use of dietary supplements by athletes is a concern because in many countries the manufacturing and labeling of supplements may not follow strict rules, which may lead to a supplement containing an undeclared substance that is prohibited under anti-doping regulations. A significant number of positive tests have been attributed to the misuse of supplements, and taking a poorly labeled dietary supplement is not an adequate defense in a doping hearing.

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 03:43 PM
Why do people continue to think this is a criminal case? There are rules, she broke them, she's suffering the consequences. Why continue to give some sort of benefit of the doubt to a proven doper?

You don't like the rules, don't play the game, geez louise. I've never seen such lunacy over something so cut and dried. The system is set up fine, hold that athlete accountable for their actions. Instead you propose giving money to dope narcs? WTH? Yeah, that won't bring out the crazies.

Not only is the system set up fine and ANY top level athlete in the world over the last 20 years knows VERY well what the rules are, but people tend to forget that "failing" a drug test means you have to have "X" amount of that substance in your system.

This is important to think about, many athletes have had levels below the "LINE" that is set (relatively high in many cases) and PASS. To FAIL you have to have an EXCESS amount of said substance in your body...twice.

I love the dreamers who want to live in a fantasy world full of conspiracy theories....its good reading. But the truth is cheating has been increasing as have the number drugs available to cheat with...testing is playing catch up and has a tolerance level that a well "coached" athlete can test substances like Clen, HGH, EPO, Testosterone, etc. and know exactly how far they can go before they reach the threshold to hit the positive reading.

And if they fail I would like to see a lifetime ban.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 03:55 PM
Paul Smith---a CLEAR voice of reason, truth and understanding in a rather absurd fantasy world full of conspiracy theories---
Dead on target there Paul!

USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 04:22 PM
Not only is the system set up fine and ANY top level athlete in the world over the last 20 years knows VERY well what the rules are, but people tend to forget that "failing" a drug test means you have to have "X" amount of that substance in your system.

This is important to think about, many athletes have had levels below the "LINE" that is set (relatively high in many cases) and PASS. To FAIL you have to have an EXCESS amount of said substance in your body...twice.

I love the dreamers who want to live in a fantasy world full of conspiracy theories....its good reading. But the truth is cheating has been increasing as have the number drugs available to cheat with...testing is playing catch up and has a tolerance level that a well "coached" athlete can test substances like Clen, HGH, EPO, Testosterone, etc. and know exactly how far they can go before they reach the threshold to hit the positive reading.

And if they fail I would like to see a lifetime ban.

This is so true... I'm sure Hardy isn't the only one... she's just the one who got caught... what a sad day for swimming. I'm sure we'll have more days like this in the future.

FlyQueen
August 2nd, 2008, 04:32 PM
I think there is zero tolerance in Clenbuterol, meaning even if trace amounts were in her system it would yield a positive result. I absolutely will feel differently if it all comes out and she took Clenbuterol (as opposed to got it out of a tainted supplement or if the test was somehow screwed up).

My point is just because she got caught holding the gun does not mean she actually pulled the trigger. I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

What I hope comes out of this is a new plan by USA-Swimming and some sort of formal and public apology to Tara and Lara. It really sucks the most for them.

USMSarah
August 2nd, 2008, 04:37 PM
What I hope comes out of this is a new plan by USA-Swimming and some sort of formal and public apology to Tara and Lara. It really sucks the most for them.

Don't forget Amanda Weir. They should send them all to Beijing for the games - all expenses paid and have them be a goodwill ambassador or something along those lines.

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 04:54 PM
And no, this isn't a criminal case but the criminal law system is designed the way it is to maximize the likelihood of justice, and the same principles can be applied here regardless of whether this is a criminal case.

First, not a criminal matter. Second, not a civil matter. Third, governed by entirely different set of rules that the swimmers know up front for years and years and years. The rules are clear UP FRONT. She could have avoided the whole thing by not taking the stuff, period, end of story, go home, that's all folks.

Flyqueen - you want to give her the benefit of the doubt? What doubt is left? She tested positive, she left the team. What possibly could change you mind at this point that she is a doper?

Have you people lost your mind? She doped, she was busted and yet now you want some sort of full story as concocted by her attorneys? Where is the accountability?

And now Lindsey wants to ask the lying cheating Hardy to turn in her lying and cheating dope suppliers.

Inadvertent doping? Give me a break. What lying doping cheating scumbag is going to fess up and say it was intentional if they know that by saying "inadvertent use" they will be penalized less? Oh yea, let's make it an honor system because we know after they have lied to their friends, family, coaches, teammates, investigators and country they are suddenly going to be truthful about their true intentions.

david.margrave
August 2nd, 2008, 05:06 PM
that brought a movie to mind.



Athletes should know that, under the Code, they are strictly liable whenever a prohibited substance is found in their bodily specimen.

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 05:12 PM
I think there is zero tolerance in Clenbuterol, meaning even if trace amounts were in her system it would yield a positive result. I absolutely will feel differently if it all comes out and she took Clenbuterol (as opposed to got it out of a tainted supplement or if the test was somehow screwed up).

My point is just because she got caught holding the gun does not mean she actually pulled the trigger. I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

What I hope comes out of this is a new plan by USA-Swimming and some sort of formal and public apology to Tara and Lara. It really sucks the most for them.

New plan? The plan seemed to work just fine here don't you think? She got busted, that's why they've had a program in place testing and warning for the last 20 years.

She bought the gun, she bought the bullets, she aimed, and fired....on two separate occasions....benefit of the doubt? I live you Fly...but I REALLY am glad your not a homicide detective or DA!

The only new plan is to fire Shubert and let him deal with the lawsuits that are coming. Scheduling Trials to late and not taking action to name alternates after the positive test(s)...even Geek isn't that stupid.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 05:16 PM
Geek, as with Mr. Smith, you are so dead on with your last post. Why can't people see this for what it is? JH is a liar, cheater and self-centered young lady who took PED to have an illegal edge. CHEATING at the basic form of the word---CHEATER....Sad, but no one is to blame but JH.

david.margrave
August 2nd, 2008, 05:16 PM
I'm confused. I thought no vacancies from her departure were unfilled, that others would fill in her spots.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 05:19 PM
Paul Smith Wrote:
"The only new plan is to fire Shubert and let him deal with the lawsuits that are coming. Scheduling Trials to late and not taking action to name alternates after the positive test(s)...even Geek isn't that stupid.":rofl:

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 05:23 PM
...even Geek isn't that stupid.":rofl:

Don't put it past me.

I propose Lindsey and Flyqueen tomorrow morning take their kids or nieces or nephews to a zoo. Go to the duck exhibit, watch the ducks quack, watch them swim, watch a duck expert feed them, notice their duck feathers and nasty little duck neck wattle thing. Then, go home and wait for an attorney to show up a few weeks later and tell you what you saw was a giraffe. Then, go back to your kids and tell them it was a giraffe and see their reaction.

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 05:25 PM
David:
Ms. Kirk did/will not go to China due to USA Swimming sitting on their hands for a long period of time which left her OUT due to the deadline passing for USA entrance forms....Incompetence to the MAX by USA Swimming coupled with cheating by JH denied Ms. Kirk her deserved place on the USA Olympic Team!

knelson
August 2nd, 2008, 05:30 PM
that brought a movie to mind.

I agree. This is definitely a Communist conspiracy to impurify all our precious bodily fluids. :)

david.margrave
August 2nd, 2008, 05:34 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clenbuterol#Food_contamination

Stillhere
August 2nd, 2008, 05:35 PM
"I propose Lindsey and Flyqueen tomorrow morning take their kids or nieces or nephews to a zoo. Go to the duck exhibit, watch the ducks quack, watch them swim, watch a duck expert feed them, notice their duck feathers and nasty little duck neck wattle thing. Then, go home and wait for an attorney to show up a few weeks later and tell you what you saw was a giraffe. Then, go back to your kids and tell them it was a giraffe and see their reaction.":rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

ALM
August 2nd, 2008, 05:50 PM
She bought the gun, she bought the bullets, she aimed, and fired....on two separate occasions....

Two separate occasions?

Are the A and B samples taken at different times?

Or is it one sample that is split into "A" and "B", with the "B" being stored until needed?

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 06:16 PM
Don't put it past me.

I propose Lindsey and Flyqueen tomorrow morning take their kids or nieces or nephews to a zoo. Go to the duck exhibit, watch the ducks quack, watch them swim, watch a duck expert feed them, notice their duck feathers and nasty little duck neck wattle thing. Then, go home and wait for an attorney to show up a few weeks later and tell you what you saw was a giraffe. Then, go back to your kids and tell them it was a giraffe and see their reaction.

Bring George along with you...with drink in hand he can yell at the ducks "I believe you really are giraffe's" unlike all those haters on the USMS forums.

The Fortress
August 2nd, 2008, 06:24 PM
"The only new plan is to fire Shubert and let him deal with the lawsuits that are coming. Scheduling Trials to late and not taking action to name alternates after the positive test(s)...even Geek isn't that stupid.":rofl:

What role is Gull/Daniel Craig playing in the forum movie version? If it's not taken, I put dibs on the role of Tara Kirk's lawyer. Definite negligence case -- breach of a duty of care by USA swimming. Maybe we can also throw in some intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress. And I wonder if she had any endorsements or incentive clauses contingent on her making a second Olympic team?

I think for all but the truly naive the statement by Hardy's rep about her doing something for "the good of the team" was just appalling. It was transparently self-serving. It would have rung less false if she had merely said she wanted to avoid further distraction and left it at that.

I am weary of the references to the criminal justice system. This isn't it. We shouldn't even be using words like "guilty," "innocent," or, far worse, "proof positive." They have no relevance here. It's really a strict liability standard as Gull notes. Intent only goes to damages or, in this case, the length of the ban.

Question: Is the positive test set at X level solely to avoid false positives? Or is taking a PED in a quantity less than X level simply not that performance enhancing? I'm assuming it is, but am still curious.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 06:31 PM
Geek, considering the way you went after George to answer your questions it is disappointing that you are steadfastly avoiding commenting on the Kicker V. case.

Gull, the WADA information you quote deals with whether a violation has occurred. Now that JH is not contesting the validity of the test results no one is contesting that a violation occurred, regardless of circumstances or intentions. That doesn't mean that circumstances and intentions won't be taken into account when determining the penalty beyond the invalidation of results. If you review previous rulings you will find that some athletes have had the standard penalty reduced due to circumstances.

At this point I am having a hard time imagining an explanation and it seems likely it will turn out that she deliberately doped, but then, I would never have come up with the contaminated supplements explanation for Kicker's violation which I would have said was too far fetched to be true if it hadn't been proven to a court's satisfaction.


Question: Is the positive test set at X level solely to avoid false positives? Or is taking a PED in a quantity less than X level simply not that performance enhancing? I'm assuming it is, but am still curious.

I would not take it as a given that there is any tolerance for drugs that can be isolated. I think people may be getting confused with tests for substances that naturally occur, where tests set a level or ratio that is higher than ever naturally occurs. The Brazilian swimmer was nailed when it was shown that the testosterone in her system was synthetic rather than natural.

rhess54321
August 2nd, 2008, 07:56 PM
It's been a long time since I ventured onto the forums area, but I have enjoyed reading comments and here are a couple of more thoughts. First, I love the title of this thread with the word "withdrawals" in there. Is this a clerical error or a comment on coming down off the banned substance? Second, I am surprised this hasn't come up in the comments, but does any one besides me (maybe I'm the only one old enough on the thread to remember) recall the name Rick DeMont and what he went through? Check this out from 2001:
http://espn.go.com/talent/danpatrick/s/2001/0202/1057642.html

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 08:24 PM
It's been a long time since I ventured onto the forums area, but I have enjoyed reading comments and here are a couple of more thoughts. First, I love the title of this thread with the word "withdrawals" in there. Is this a clerical error or a comment on coming down off the banned substance? Second, I am surprised this hasn't come up in the comments, but does any one besides me (maybe I'm the only one old enough on the thread to remember) recall the name Rick DeMont and what he went through? Check this out from 2001:
http://espn.go.com/talent/danpatrick/s/2001/0202/1057642.html


Richard...great to have you join in the fun...how are things with the Guppies??!!

Good point about Rick...and it was brought up on at least one other thread.

By the way Lindsay, your correct in that some substances are banned entirely while others which are naturally occurring have "thresholds" that trigger a failure....however with gene dopping and stem cell infusions for $24k on the horizon none of this matters anyway.

aquageek
August 2nd, 2008, 09:29 PM
Geek, considering the way you went after George to answer your questions it is disappointing that you are steadfastly avoiding commenting on the Kicker V. case.

I know nothing about that case and therefore chose not to speak on it. But, you keep right on quoting it like it excuses her cheating ways. I do know that JH is a lying cheater, which is the topic for this thread. You somehow seem to think because she has a lawyer and can't spell the cheating drug she took that she must logically not suffer the consequences of her actions.

By your own admission she is a cheater and not contesting the results of her test. Why continue to defend her? Supplements are Russian Roulette, take them at your own risk/peril.

resqme
August 2nd, 2008, 10:03 PM
I think two items need to be considered in the PED culture that seems to be more and more of a constant in athletics today.

1. a lifetime ban for ANYONE testing positive
2. Three swimmers being named to the Olympic team (only two of course would swim) and a fourth being named an alternate. Now of course this item could be avoided being added - IF the trials are held earlier in an olympic year and USA Swimming had competent people running the organization.

Just my two cents worth - now I'm broke.

LindsayNB
August 2nd, 2008, 10:45 PM
I know nothing about that case and therefore chose not to speak on it. But, you keep right on quoting it like it excuses her cheating ways. I do know that JH is a lying cheater, which is the topic for this thread. You somehow seem to think because she has a lawyer and can't spell the cheating drug she took that she must logically not suffer the consequences of her actions.

By your own admission she is a cheater and not contesting the results of her test. Why continue to defend her? Supplements are Russian Roulette, take them at your own risk/peril.

The KV case doesn't excuse anything JH may have done and I never said or implied that it did. What it does do is illustrate that not everyone who tests positive knowingly cheated and that if you give people a chance to defend themselves sometimes you get surprised that things didn't happen the way you ASSUME they did. The Dumont case is another example. You ASSUME that JH deliberately cheated. There's a good chance you are correct. But I think that the hearing process was designed to ensure that people have the opportunity to demonstrate that assumptions aren't necessarily correct. The KV and RD cases demonstrate that a positive test isn't always the result of a deliberate attempt to cheat and that the truth sometimes comes out in the ensuing process.

If you reread what I wrote more carefully you might realize that I am not defending HER, I am defending the right to a fair process including the chance to present a defense. The conclusions you have come to about my position cannot reasonably be inferred from what I've written.

hofffam
August 2nd, 2008, 10:49 PM
Paul Smith said:


She bought the gun, she bought the bullets, she aimed, and fired....on two separate occasions....benefit of the doubt? I live you Fly...but I REALLY am glad your not a homicide detective or DA!


What do you mean two separate occasions?

I agree with your sentiments on JH, but the A and B sample were drawn at the same time. She "aimed" apparently once - after her first race at OTs.

Paul Smith
August 2nd, 2008, 11:50 PM
Paul Smith said:



What do you mean two separate occasions?

I agree with your sentiments on JH, but the A and B sample were drawn at the same time. She "aimed" apparently once - after her first race at OTs.

I stand corrected...she cheated numerous times and got busted this time...is that more accurate? Do you really think the cheaters that get caught never cheated before?

Allen Stark
August 3rd, 2008, 12:56 AM
Do I have proof she knowingly took the drug,no,but I think her suddenly becoming the US's second fastest freestyler is suspicious.By the rules she should be off the team.I hope Tara Kirk sues Shubert for lebenty gazillion dollars.

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 08:34 AM
The KV and RD cases demonstrate that a positive test isn't always the result of a deliberate attempt to cheat and that the truth sometimes comes out in the ensuing process.

Intent is irrelevant, read the rules, quite simple. The continue parsing of her cheating ways is comical and dishonest. You seem quite intent on supporting someone who is disgracing herself, the sport and her country.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 09:00 AM
I do know that JH is a lying cheater

Intent is irrelevant

This is where we differ with no apparent likelihood of reaching agreement. I feel that intent is relevant to whether someone is a lying cheater. You apparently do not. In the course of the various threads we've had three examples of athletes that tested positive and certainly committed doping violations but aren't in my opinion "lying cheaters", certainly no evidence that they lied has been brought up.

hofffam
August 3rd, 2008, 10:10 AM
I stand corrected...she cheated numerous times and got busted this time...is that more accurate? Do you really think the cheaters that get caught never cheated before?

No - I assume most cheaters are serial cheaters and the ones that are caught....just didn't get caught before.

As for the sudden improvement in freestyle - as someone pointed out way earlier (or was it another thread) - her breaststroke has not improved materially over the same period. So I don't doubt per se that her freestyle improvement could be due MOSTLY to training.

Katie Hoff's freestyle has improved tremendously over the past two years. I don't doubt her methods.

Stillhere
August 3rd, 2008, 10:46 AM
Interesting article---

It looks like the Hardy PR machine is going to go with the supplements she was taking are at fault BS. Why can't anyone just step up to the plate and admit they cheated? I do not buy the supplement BS for two reasons.
1. She knows the Kicker ordeal well...very well actually.
2. These days every top ranked USA swimmer has attended MANY lectures educating them on supplements and the dangers surrounding them.

She would have to be the dumbest moron on earth to NOT know full well the dangers of taking supplements. In fact, I think her deal with the supplement company may have intentionally been set up by her and the people who gave her the PED as a scape goat in the event she did get caught using PED. Now, she can play the Ms. Innocent nonsense and point the finger at the supplement company.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20080803-9999-7s3olynotes.html

In the event she does bring suit against the supplement manufacturer, and she is ever exposed to have intentionally used PED, then she has committed perjury which IS a criminal offense punishable with JAIL TIME.

USMSarah
August 3rd, 2008, 11:06 AM
On average, aren't supplements taken every day - just like us mortals taking our vitamins or the birth control pill on a daily basis? If Hardy was taking contaminated vitamins, don't you think that the clen would have been in every single one of her tests at Trials?

Stillhere
August 3rd, 2008, 11:10 AM
Sarah:
I thought that same thing and that is logical. But, someone posted that she MAY have opened another bottle or can of juice that was tainted---
The whole line they are tossing out there is complete nonsense---

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 11:19 AM
This is where we differ with no apparent likelihood of reaching agreement. I feel that intent is relevant to whether someone is a lying cheater. You apparently do not. In the course of the various threads we've had three examples of athletes that tested positive and certainly committed doping violations but aren't in my opinion "lying cheaters", certainly no evidence that they lied has been brought up.

Your feelings aren't relevant and neither are mine. The rules she chose to break are relevant. Personally, I could care less how she feels. She obviously is probably feeling a little different now that she was busted using banned substances. I will also not engage in parsing of the level of accountability she has for her own actions. She doped, she was busted, she has some cockamamy series of excuses, like all other busted dopers yet we need to feel for her and examine her intent, crazy.

She has admitted to also taking a dozen supplements. Am I supposed to feel sorry for her when she assumed the risk?

USMSarah
August 3rd, 2008, 11:20 AM
Sarah:
I thought that same thing and that is logical. But, someone posted that she MAY have opened another bottle or can of juice that was tainted---
The whole line they are tossing out there is complete nonsense---

It does seem very logical... along with no fight to stay on the olympic team and blaming supplements - it sounds like she's been cheating.

Stillhere
August 3rd, 2008, 11:55 AM
Well Sarah, as Geek pointed out---when it's quacking, waddles, has a cute little tail of feathers and a neat beak---chances are it's not a Giraffe---

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 12:09 PM
Supplement contamination is not a matter of opinion or assertion, it is a matter of verifiable scientific testing in a lab. If Hardy can't show that her supplements are contaminated then the whole supplements angle won't get her anywhere.

Has Hardy herself blamed supplements or in fact given any specific "excuse"? All I have read so far is her lawyer saying he has a lead without specifying the nature of that lead.

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 12:13 PM
Supplement contamination is not a matter of opinion or assertion, it is a matter of verifiable scientific testing in a lab.

You mean, kinda like urine testing which, by the way, she flunked. Let's keep that in the front of this whole discussion.

And now you are in cahoots with her atty, he dangled the hook and you jumped right on it.

Paul Smith
August 3rd, 2008, 12:14 PM
Supplement contamination is not a matter of opinion or assertion, it is a matter of verifiable scientific testing in a lab. If Hardy can't show that her supplements are contaminated then the whole supplements angle won't get her anywhere.

Lindsay, with all due respect have you ever spoken with anyone who has been a USA national team member, Olympian, NCAA swimmer, etc?

The reason I ask is that the arguments you are making are ridiculous to ANYONE who as ever competed at that level because it has been pounded into their heads that ANYTHING they take into their bodies THEY are responsible for verifying that its not illegal, contaminated, or whatever pathetic excuse du jour you or they want to make....its that simple.

JH made the choice to take a bunch of supplements...it was HER (and Salo's) responsibility to confirm if they were legal/contaminated.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 12:26 PM
The rules she chose to break are relevant.

You continue to ASSUME that she CHOSE to break the rules.

Paul Smith
August 3rd, 2008, 12:35 PM
You continue to ASSUME that she CHOSE to break the rules.

Lindsay....this is entering the realm of bizarre. She took supplements which included Clen and got busted...she broke two rules;

- using a banned substance
- the rule of being responsible for confirming the legality of what she was taking

knelson
August 3rd, 2008, 01:04 PM
Now, she can play the Ms. Innocent nonsense and point the finger at the supplement company.

And she knows there are plenty of suckers who will automatically side with her--the poor, innocent girl--rather than the big, bad drug company.

I think the Kicker Vencill incident did open some peoples' eyes to the fact that you need to be extremely cautious with anything you put in your body, on the other hand it also seems to have given some others a nice convenient excuse.

As somebody else already said in this thread, if she's going to blame the supplement company she better be prepared to prove the allegations.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 01:06 PM
Paul, I will have to wait until I hear their explanation before I can make a judgment on whether it is nonsense. As far as I know they are not blaming it on supplements.

Kicker was a member of the national team wasn't he?
Do you believe he deliberately set out to cheat by taking the supplements? Hopefully his case was enough to hammer it home for subsequent swimmers but is it the case that no swimmers are taking supplements these days? We know that some swimmers on the current Olympic team are taking supplements (E.g. Dara is very open about it, Larsen endorsed the same supplements that JH did). How does a swimmer know? Are all the swimmers that are taking any supplements idiots?

Because I think it is very unlikely that her supplements are contaminated with Clenbuteral I assume that she will come up with some other explanation.

Rick was a member of the Olympic team.
Do you believe he deliberately set out to cheat? Given that he duly reported the drug he was taking to USOC it seems unlikely.

Silken Laumann was a member of the Canadian national team.
She took the precaution of consulting with the team doctor to see if the cold med she wanted to take was ok and was told it was. Does the fact that he was wrong make her a lying cheater?

Given three examples of people that I would judge did not set out to cheat but tested positive none the less I think there is room for doubt, no matter how slim, that JH deliberately set out to cheat. To me taking supplements when a lot of other people are taking supplements is not good evidence of deliberate cheating. To me having an incompetent USOC medical official who doesn't perform the proper paperwork is not good evidence of deliberate cheating. To me having an incompetent team doctor that confuses the allergy and non-allergy formulations of a decongestant is not good evidence of deliberate cheating.

So I will continue to draw a distinction between having had a positive test and being a deliberate cheater, even if the vast majority of people with positive tests are deliberate cheaters, and I'll trust in the system to see through any nonsense that is thrown out. I'll give JH a little bit of time to come up with a plausible if not provable explanation before I assume she falls into the deliberate cheater category.

Paul, Geek won't address any of my points, will you?

Add on: Paul, when you state categorically that she took supplements with Clen in them are you lumping in Clen as a drug that can be taken in pure form with supplements? Perhaps that is where things are getting confused, when I see the term supplements I am not thinking of straight forward drugs of the banned sort. The government makes a distinction between drugs and supplements and I don't think you can sell drugs just by calling them supplements so the distinction isn't purely mine.

Paul Smith
August 3rd, 2008, 01:32 PM
Kicker was a member of the national team wasn't he?
Do you believe he deliberately set out to cheat by taking the supplements?
- He took supplements knowing FULL WELL that he was responsible for what he was taking. He was not taking anything under a doctors supervision and was not required nor did he report what he was taking to anyone...he won a lawsuit against the supplement company...fine...but I still say his ban was legitimate because you just don;t take the risk these days.

Hopefully his case was enough to hammer it home for subsequent swimmers but is it the case that no swimmers are taking supplements these days?
- Obviously not...i doubt there are very many elite swimmers that aren't taking something such as creatine, cytomax, etc. etc. But its still no excuse, what you put in your body your responsible for...if in this age you want to risk it your a fool.

We know that some swimmers on the current Olympic team are taking supplements (E.g. Dara is very open about it, Larsen endorsed the same supplements that JH did). How does a swimmer know? Are all the swimmers that are taking any supplements idiots?
- If they have not had the product checked out and approved then they are playing russian roulette...

Rick was a member of the Olympic team.
Do you believe he deliberately set out to cheat? Given that he duly reported the drug he was taking to USOC it seems unlikely.
- Of course not..any anyone who knows him and the story knows that he got screwed. Can you not see the difference between coming forward and disclosing the use of a doctors prescribed medication from taking over the counter..or in the case of Clen, illegal substances??!!

Silken Laumann was a member of the Canadian national team.
She took the precaution of consulting with the team doctor to see if the cold med she wanted to take was ok and was told it was. Does the fact that he was wrong make her a lying cheater?
- See above....apples to oranges vs. JH


So I will continue to draw a distinction between having had a positive test and being a deliberate cheater, even if the vast majority of people with positive tests are deliberate cheaters, and I'll trust in the system to see through any nonsense that is thrown out. I'll give JH a little bit of time to come up with a plausible if not provable explanation before I assume she falls into the deliberate cheater category.
- You do a huge disservice and in my opinion insult Rick & Silken by lumping what JH in with happened in the JH case.

Add on: Paul, when you state categorically that she took supplements with Clen in them are you lumping in Clen as a drug that can be taken in pure form with supplements?
- Of course not...I have no idea where she got Clen...she's the one along with her attorney that as of yesterday started pointing the finger at Advocare for a tainted supplement.

Bottom line...if I'm an elite/professional swimmer taking over the counter supplements knowing the testing protocol that exists in swimming then I'm an idiot if i don't have those products tested to confirm they are legal...and even then i have to accept the risk that because supplements in this country are not regulated they can and do have things in them that are not always listed...so in conclusion ANYONE taking supplements is rolling the dice.

ALM
August 3rd, 2008, 01:51 PM
This is the publication that USA Swimming provides to coaches and swimmers:

"Dietary Supplements: A Comprehensive Guide for Swim Coaches"
http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/_Rainbow/Science%20&%20Technology%20Research%20Grants/6f5579bc-6f6c-45d5-b59c-11e495c152fe/Dietary%20Supplements%20Guide%2005%20Dec%2015.pdf

It contains 37 pages of very clear language about the risks of taking supplements.

Pages 10-13 contain an interview with Kicker Vencill.

Page 9 contains an interesting risk chart.

-----------
Disclaimer: The tomato pictured in the avatar contains no PEDs.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 02:28 PM
“Suffice it to say, we took this course of action because we do believe there is an explanation for the positive and that she didn't knowingly or intentionally take clenbuterol,” Howard Jacobs, her attorney, said by phone late last night.

Jacobs would not elaborate other than to say: “I have a pretty good idea where it came from.”

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20080803-9999-7s3olynotes.html


I went looking for any claim by Hardy or her lawyer that she blaimed supplements and the above was all I could find.

Paul, you have a valid point that I might be doing a disservice to Rick and Silken by associating them with this case, especially given some of the guilt by association tendencies here. You should note however that I haven't equated what they did with what she may or may not have done, I just used them as examples to demonstrate that a positive test doesn't indicate a deliberate attempt at cheating 100% of the time. It would be interesting to know if, having had people point fingers at them as being cheaters, they would advocate for letting the process conclude before making assumptions, I wouldn't be surprised.

At this point Salo, and various message board posters and bloggers are the only one's I've seen link her test to supplements, so we'll have to wait to see if that is the tack she takes and whether she has any hard evidence. Until then, anyone assuming the Clen came from supplements is doing just that, assuming.

Allen Stark
August 3rd, 2008, 02:40 PM
As for the sudden improvement in freestyle - as someone pointed out way earlier (or was it another thread) - her breaststroke has not improved materially over the same period. So I don't doubt per se that her freestyle improvement could be due MOSTLY to training.

Katie Hoff's freestyle has improved tremendously over the past two years. I don't doubt her methods.

True,she didn't improve in BR,but I still think her free is suspicious.How many world class BR/Free people are there-her(and possibly you could count Phelps.)Free sprinting takes a lot of upper body strength.If Katie Hoff was suddenly our second best 50 sprinter I'd wonder about that too.

Paul Smith
August 3rd, 2008, 02:41 PM
I went looking for any claim by Hardy or her lawyer that she blaimed supplements and the above was all I could find.

You seemed to have missed this part in the article you provided the link to?

"There are indications Hardy may finger a tainted nutritional supplement and, possibly, pursue legal action against the company that provided it. Hardy endorses AdvoCare, a supplement company based in Texas, and once said she regularly took a dozen of its products."

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 02:54 PM
You continue to ASSUME that she CHOSE to break the rules.

Seriously, do you think anyone that graduated kgarten will fall for this? It makes no difference her intent, for the millionth time. That is made clear to the athletes up front. She did choose to either take a banned item directly or chose to take something that included this banned item. Either way, she made the decision to put something in her body. Is she somehow immune from the other 6 billion people on earth to be responsible for what they eat?

You keep talking about some process that will magically erase the fact that she was on dope at Trials and has not once disputed her test results.

Please tell us all why she is not responsible for her own actions? The number of excuses you are trotting out to help her explain her dope results makes my head spin. I just say when she peed in a cup and it had PEDs in it that the case was pretty much closed, a fact made apparent to all test athletes as well up front for many many many years.

The Fortress
August 3rd, 2008, 03:14 PM
You seemed to have missed this part in the article you provided the link to?

"There are indications Hardy may finger a tainted nutritional supplement and, possibly, pursue legal action against the company that provided it. Hardy endorses AdvoCare, a supplement company based in Texas, and once said she regularly took a dozen of its products."

Advocare has issued a statement saying its products are not contaminated as was insinuated. I think Ms. Hardy should tread carefully or she will be facing a counterclaim.

I asked before, are clenbuterol and Advocare even manufactured in the same plant? If Advocare doesn't manufacture clenbuterol, how would it get into their products anyway? A contaminated ingredient?

Paul Smith
August 3rd, 2008, 03:26 PM
I asked before, are clenbuterol and Advocare even manufactured in the same plant? If Advocare doesn't manufacture clenbuterol, how would it get into their products anyway? A contaminated ingredient?

George & Lindsay have it on good authority (a Canadian Palm Reader) that Tanya Harding snuck the Clen into one of the 2000 different supplements JH was taking.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 03:53 PM
The number of excuses you are trotting out to help her explain her dope results makes my head spin.

Geek, you have an interesting method of debate if one can call it that. You don't respond to any points I make and you attribute to me all sorts of things I never said. Would you care to list one or two excuses I have trotted out for her? Likely not as I haven't made any excuses for her not being in a position to know what happened. What I have done is suggested we wait to see what excuses she comes up with before we decide whether they are nonsense or not.

Paul, in my books "There are indications that ..." coming from a reporter with no attribution is pretty weak and certainly not the same as an accusation from Hardy or her lawyer.

It's hard to imagine how nutritional supplements would get contaminated with Clen, given that Clen isn't distributed for human consumption in the USA. And I doubt that a lawyer would make the accusation that the Clen came from the supplements without hard evidence as it would seem to be asking for a lawsuit from the supplement manufacturer, but Fort would have a more informed opinion on that.

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 04:06 PM
Lindsey - please explain to me how she is not responsible for the substances she puts in her body but every other swimmer (thus far) is responsible. Did she get some sort of lying doping cheating free pass card? Why don't you first take note of these two facts - first, she has not disputed the results, second, she has acknowledged taking at least 12 supplements.

Let me ask you this, would it really make any difference at all if her supplements had clen or any other banned substances since for probably a decade she has been made aware probably dozens of time that they are unregulated and should be avoided? To me, it's another smoke screen and irrelevant but you keep on barking up that tree.

gull
August 3rd, 2008, 04:48 PM
She, like other athletes, take supplements for one reason and one reason only--to gain an edge. It is irrelevant whether or not they believe the supplements are untainted. They are made well aware of the risks, so when they get burned and test positive for banned substances, they should be labeled dopers, plain and simple.

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 05:05 PM
Take it from Daniel, he knows what he spouts about.

gull
August 3rd, 2008, 05:16 PM
Lindsay, if she produces a supplement which contains unlabeled clenbuterol, you are willing to let her off the hook, so to speak? She becomes an innocent victim, rather than a doper? Personally, at this point I have no interest in anything she or her attorney have to say.

SwimStud
August 3rd, 2008, 05:30 PM
Intent won't change anything. It made her swim faster and therefore she cannot attend the games. It won't let anyone else go in her place.

However, intent is relevant in the court of public opinion and or any punishment handed down.

LindsayNB
August 3rd, 2008, 05:53 PM
Lindsay, if she produces a supplement which contains unlabeled clenbuterol, you are willing to let her off the hook, so to speak? She becomes an innocent victim, rather than a doper? Personally, at this point I have no interest in anything she or her attorney have to say.

If it turns out that one of the supplements she was taking had unlabeled clenbuterol in it then I figure she should get the standard suspension. That's how Kicker was treated.

If the supplements are from a reputable manufacturer that a reasonable person would expect to be clean then my personal judgment of her moral character will be less severe than if she set out to deliberately use clenbuterol. The next question would be how much effort she put into ensuring the supplements were clean which would have bearing mostly on just how foolish/reckless she was.

I'll wait and see what they come up with and then come to a conclusion as to whether it is nonsense or not.

Blackbeard's Peg
August 3rd, 2008, 07:11 PM
Does anyone remember what suit Hardy, Kirk and Jackson wore at trials? Who who was wearing a LZR, one of those TYR suits or a B70?

No one has mentioned that piece of it. Since MS was such a gung-ho LZR dude, and (one of) the replacement girls were TYR swimmers, I wonder if that had anything to do with the lack of action. It would be a great way to get the suitmakers out of the beds of governing bodies going forward.

ALM
August 3rd, 2008, 07:40 PM
I asked before, are clenbuterol and Advocare even manufactured in the same plant? If Advocare doesn't manufacture clenbuterol, how would it get into their products anyway? A contaminated ingredient?

A contaminated ingredient is entirely possible. Apparently the ingredients in our food come from as far away as China. Ascorbic acid, for example. 80% of the world's supply of ascorbic acid (better known as Vitamin C) comes from China.

"Ascorbic acid is a common ingredient in everything from cosmetics to baked goods. It is used to make bread softer and more uniform, and some Midwestern bakers are working hard to find adequate supplies..."

From: "Olympics take a healthy bite out of your wallet"
http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/730642.html

Ascorbic acid is just one bread ingredient. Mine also contains niacin, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, calcium sulfate, monoglycerides, and azodicarbonamide. Who knows where those chemicals are manufactured.

And remember the contaminated ingredient that was found in pet food a year ago? "...melamine, a chemical used in fertilizers in Asia and forbidden in pet food, has been detected in the wheat gluten used by Canada-based Menu Foods.... FDA officials said the wheat gluten was imported from China but was not yet known to be used in human food. All wheat gluten coming from there will now be reviewed, they said...."

USMSarah
August 3rd, 2008, 07:56 PM
Does anyone remember what suit Hardy, Kirk and Jackson wore at trials? Who who was wearing a LZR, one of those TYR suits or a B70?

No one has mentioned that piece of it. Since MS was such a gung-ho LZR dude, and (one of) the replacement girls were TYR swimmers, I wonder if that had anything to do with the lack of action. It would be a great way to get the suitmakers out of the beds of governing bodies going forward.


Hardy and Kirk are Speedo athletes and Weir is TYR... no clue what suits they wore. As for Jackson, isn't she done w/ college swimming now?

The Fortress
August 3rd, 2008, 07:58 PM
Hardy and Kirk wore the LZR. Jackson wore the B70 and TYR suits. (She went faster with the B70, as I recall.)

aquageek
August 3rd, 2008, 08:23 PM
The next question would be how much effort she put into ensuring the supplements were clean which would have bearing mostly on just how foolish/reckless she was.

I'll wait and see what they come up with and then come to a conclusion as to whether it is nonsense or not.

In summary, you have an avenue that you will take to totally excuse away her behavior.

What exactly is nonsense about her two positive urine samples? And, please explain to me why she gets a free pass from you for taking the reckless step of taking supplements in the first place. It's probably more likely she just took clen and you are buying into her PR machine.

Trichica
August 3rd, 2008, 09:01 PM
This is a situation of strict liability. In other words, whether it was intentional or not, is not the issue. She tested positive--game over.

The burden is on the athlete. You know that you could lose endorsements, an olympic spot, etc. So you have to decide, do I assume the risk and do x,y or z.

Here is an example--dog bite laws. Many states have them-dog bites--no matter why--you the owner must pay the damages. It is a strict liability law. So Fido could be cute as a button, but he bites, you are strictly liable.

Same here for Hardy--she failed the test. Whatever the limit was, she went above it. How it got there--IT IS HER OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE IT DID NOT.

Clen cannot be present in a horse on race day. It is not to be used in the US for humans. Yet, somehow, it was in Hardy's urine.

As far as I am concerned, it was her responsibility to make sure it did not get into her body--her career depended on it. Somehow it got there. She is no longer challenging the results, which means she admits they are accurate.

Kirk is not on the team because of it (and I think she should have been placed on the team the second the positive was discovered as an alternate; and if JH should have prevailed, then fine tell Kirk she sits on the sidelines; other teams do it).

Hardy is strictly liable for anything she puts in her body. End of story.

The Fortress
August 3rd, 2008, 09:20 PM
It's probably more likely she just took clen and you are buying into her PR machine.

Yep.

I see she's already talking about her comeback and the 2012 Olympics. I know Angel Martino did it, but can Hardy survive the stigma?

SwimStud
August 3rd, 2008, 09:27 PM
Yep.

I see she's already talking about her comeback and the 2012 Olympics. I know Angel Martino did it, but can Hardy survive the stigma?

Well if she didn't ingest it intentionally then she'll probably make it through OK.
It'll be interesting watch the all the evidence come to light and see if anything suspicious is going on.

The Fortress
August 3rd, 2008, 09:31 PM
Well if she didn't ingest it intentionally then she'll probably make it through OK.
It'll be interesting watch the all the evidence come to light and see if anything suspicious is going on.

Of course. I was ASSUMING, as indicated by my "yep," that she was taking it intentionally, as that is by far the most likely scenario. It is already beyond suspicious.

SwimStud
August 3rd, 2008, 09:34 PM
Of course. I was ASSUMING, as indicated by my "yep," that she was taking it intentionally, as that is by far the most likely scenario. It is already beyond suspicion.

beyond suspicion? you saw her?

The Fortress
August 3rd, 2008, 09:42 PM
beyond suspicion? you saw her?

I thought we all agreed it was extremely suspicious and were mostly arguing about the likely "punishment" based on some (I say implausible) exonerating evidence? Oh, wait, I took the bait you left out for Geek and Smith. They can carry on!

Peter Cruise
August 3rd, 2008, 11:07 PM
Jessica Hardy has been kicked off the team and should be given some sort of huge suspension, up to and including lifetime. There- that is how I feel, straight out.

HOWEVER- I am upset at the Geek and Paul (becoming a duo in their own right) continue to appear to ignore Lindsey's main point in a patently obtuse and combative manner. He is not arguing that she is not responsible for what she takes into her own body (in the highly unlikely 'contaminated supplement' scenario) nor is he quarreling with her being punished. In a quixotic way he is trying only to say that he is witholding his full moral condemnation pending any PROVEN extenuating circumstances (however unlikely that may be).

Why not move on? Geek, you are venturing into the ionosphere and quite frankly, you can do better than that.

matysekj
August 3rd, 2008, 11:28 PM
As usual, Peter speaks with great wisdom.

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 07:25 AM
As usual, Peter speaks with great wisdom.

Fair enough and I agree I've gone a bit overboard. But, here's the thing, in my opinion this never-ending long winded story of every doping cheating doper is part of the problem. It's never enough that the doper is busted, there has to be some long drawn out series of denials, stories, hearings, etc. To me, once the test is failed it's game over, you're out, there is no additional story to be told, no additional spin which excuses the behavior. We have people like Lindsey who want to microanalyze her intent, her feelings, my feelings, pay off narcs, etc.

Part of the process of stopping doping is stopping the endless circus that is currently allowed after you are a proven cheat, this case being yet another prime example.

Stop taking drugs, stop lying, stop cheating - simple concept.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 09:00 AM
Ditto on your last post Geek!
If you can't stand the heat---don't be a cheat----

USMSarah
August 4th, 2008, 09:57 AM
If you can't stand the heat---don't be a cheat----


Oh, I like that.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 10:03 AM
Can anybody here give me a good reason of why all of the other supporters of Advocare have jumped like rats from a sinking ship?

By how many other endorsers of this product there were, it would seem pretty reasonable to "ASSUME" that they were a reputable company.

Ooops......maybe not......

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 10:04 AM
Jessica Hardy has been kicked off the team and should be given some sort of huge suspension, up to and including lifetime. There- that is how I feel, straight out.

HOWEVER- I am upset at the Geek and Paul (becoming a duo in their own right) continue to appear to ignore Lindsey's main point in a patently obtuse and combative manner. He is not arguing that she is not responsible for what she takes into her own body (in the highly unlikely 'contaminated supplement' scenario) nor is he quarreling with her being punished. In a quixotic way he is trying only to say that he is witholding his full moral condemnation pending any PROVEN extenuating circumstances (however unlikely that may be).

Why not move on? Geek, you are venturing into the ionosphere and quite frankly, you can do better than that.

Sorry Peter but I feel very strongly that in general our society is to quick to give a pass, forgive, forget, make excuses and just simply not punish liars and cheaters...it seems everywhere I turn more and more people are looking to cut corners, screw people over and basically be selfish. There needs to be enough shame and harsh enough punishments for bad behavior to make people think a little bit harder before they engage in it.

There I go....riding Geek's coat tails again.

The Fortress
August 4th, 2008, 10:08 AM
Sorry Peter but I feel very strongly that in general our society is to quick to give a pass, forgive, forget, make excuses and just simply not punish liars and cheaters...it seems everywhere I turn more and more people are looking to cut corners, screw people over and basically be selfish. There needs to be enough shame and harsh enough punishments for bad behavior to make people think a little bit harder before they engage in it.

There I go....riding Geek's coat tails again.

Do you think lifetime bans will deter would be dopers? I'm not so sure about that ... Perhaps the main benefit would be preventing a known cheater from returning to the sport?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Paul about the Excuse Machine.

USMSarah
August 4th, 2008, 10:11 AM
I agree with Paul Smith... making excuses is a huge issue here, no one wants to be accountable for anything anymore - always blaming someone else for their problems. And, it's not just in sports - it is everywhere.

I for one am tired of looking up to athletic "heroes" and a couple years down the road, they admit to cheating or are caught... I feel like a fool when this happens because I cheered for them and wanted them to win/medal. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't like getting burned like that (from a fan's perspective).

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 10:13 AM
Sarah:
You are SO RIGHT THERE---and think how our kids must feel after getting burned?

"When you burn a kids hope--you are a serious dope---(er)"

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 10:23 AM
Can anybody here give me a good reason of why all of the other supporters of Advocare have jumped like rats from a sinking ship?

By how many other endorsers of this product there were, it would seem pretty reasonable to "ASSUME" that they were a reputable company.

Ooops......maybe not......

There are two sides to this, at least. First off, JH and her cadre of excuse making family and lawyers have certainly put the thought in everyone's mind that her supplements could be the culprit, this without a single shred of proof. So, to one of the Advocare athletes hearing this they might get very nervous and leave the company. The irony here is JH is a proven doper and a known liar and cheat yet there hasn't been a single thing proven wrong with any of Advocare's products.

The thing about cheaters, as previously stated, is that they don't do gown without a fight, and usually take others down with them. Look at the trail of corpses from Jones, Clemens, Bonds, Canseco, Floyd. It's a familiar pattern.

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 10:30 AM
Sorry Peter but I feel very strongly that in general our society is to quick to give a pass, forgive, forget, make excuses and just simply not punish liars and cheaters...it seems everywhere I turn more and more people are looking to cut corners, screw people over and basically be selfish. There needs to be enough shame and harsh enough punishments for bad behavior to make people think a little bit harder before they engage in it.

There I go....riding Geek's coat tails again.

Kinda like how the death penalty has stopped serial killers you mean?

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 10:33 AM
Do you think lifetime bans will deter would be dopers? I'm not so sure about that ... Perhaps the main benefit would be preventing a known cheater from returning to the sport?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Paul about the Excuse Machine.

Seriously. What doper says, 'if I get caught, it's only some bad publicity and a two year ban...totally worth the risk'? Somehow I just don't think any of them really consider the consequences, and probably assume they will never get caught.

Rain Man
August 4th, 2008, 10:34 AM
I've got to agree with the "harsh" posters here as well. We have to stop making excuses, searching for extenuating circumstances, and blaming supplement manufacturing for the dopers. They are doping, plain and simple. It is inconceivable that every American swimmer that tests positive must have been a victim of a circumstance beyond their control. We have to face the fact, that even in the oh-so-clean sport of American swimming, there are people that are going to cheat. If our collective reaction when we hear about a foreign swimmer getting caught is "hah.. knew it was too good to be true" then what have we to say when we hear it about one of "ours"?

There's been so much banter about "intent" and "moral judgment" but the facts of the case are that (1) she was taking supplements, despite the risks (2) she failed a doping test at OT's (3) she has dropped the appeals process and withdrawn from the team. You get to piece together the puzzle. If I had spent the last 4 years of my life training clean to make the Olympics, potentially a once in a lifetime chance, and found out I failed a drug test, I'd be appealing right up until the gun went off to start my preliminary heat. To me, not doing so is an admission of guilt.

And I would agree with a lifetime ban. If we are to take the anti-doping agencies seriously, then dish out serious punishments.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 10:36 AM
There are two sides to this, at least. First off, JH and her cadre of excuse making family and lawyers have certainly put the thought in everyone's mind that her supplements could be the culprit, this without a single shred of proof. So, to one of the Advocare athletes hearing this they might get very nervous and leave the company. The irony here is JH is a proven doper and a known liar and cheat yet there hasn't been a single thing proven wrong with any of Advocare's products.

The thing about cheaters, as previously stated, is that they don't do gown without a fight, and usually take others down with them. Look at the trail of corpses from Jones, Clemens, Bonds, Canseco, Floyd. It's a familiar pattern.

So, oh mighty and all knowing one......because her test came back POS she is automatically a lying cheat? How do you KNOW this for fact? All we know is that she tested POS....we KNOW nothing else until the end result!

Where is your PROOF that she lied? Or cheated? And don't go spouting drivel about past liars or cheaters.....where is the proof that JH has done either of those?

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 10:40 AM
So, oh mighty and all knowing one......because her test came back POS she is automatically a lying cheat? How do you KNOW this for fact? All we know is that she tested POS....we KNOW nothing else until the end result!

Where is your PROOF that she lied? Or cheated? And don't go spouting drivel about past liars or cheaters.....where is the proof that JH has done either of those?

Um, where is the proof she lied and cheated, try looking in the piss cup for starters. You will most assuredly find it there. Did you miss the part about her flunking a drug test?

My comment about past cheaters was to state that there is a pretty established pattern and JH isn't deviating one bit from it.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 10:41 AM
And when the cheats finally get beat--Old Geek turns up the heat--
And this ain't to bad for he calls out the Cad---
So tell it like it is--after they take a bad whiz---
And give no good quarter to those with no order---
Their time on the bench will create a big stench---but it's best to
give them their time--on a smelly side line---for that's where they belong--for they did a bad wrong--

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 10:43 AM
Um, where is the proof she lied and cheated, try looking in the piss cup for starters. You will most assuredly find it there. Did you miss the part about her flunking a drug test?


No oh wise one....that is where I stated that the only thing we KNOW is that she came up POS......

Now answer the question for once........Where is your proof that she lied? Or cheated?

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 10:45 AM
Some good things starting to happen on testing, hopefully this will help for where athletes have found something undetectable right now:

IOC to store athletes' test samples for eight years
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/beijing/2008-07-28-ioc-drug-testing_N.htm

So many honest athletes out there...but I guess because the death penalty doesn't scare off serial killers I guess it means harsh punishment for cheating athletes won't work either....we should just give them all therapy and a hug.

Stronger Olympics drug testing shakes things up
"The sheer number of disqualified athletes — at least 37 since April — new testing methods, and Saturday's ruling to strip another 2000 Olympic gold serve as warnings to athletes about the risks of using performance-enhancing drugs."
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/beijing/2008-08-03-drug-testing_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

matysekj
August 4th, 2008, 10:46 AM
The facts so far are that JH was caught with a banned substance in her system and is no longer on the US Olympic team as a result. That is her initial punishment for this offense, and it is appropriate. She apparently had nothing to prove any problems in the testing procedure or chain of custody of her samples, so she's not disputing the test results now. I'm not surprised at that - I believe that the testing process is sound and a positive test is a positive test, period.

It remains to be seen what additional punishment she will receive in the way of some sort of ban. All that Lindsay has been saying is let's wait until she's had a chance to present her case and see what type of ban is put in place as a result. I think that's reasonable. Calling this a circus or anything else prior to that happening is jumping the gun in my opinion. I seriously doubt that she'll be able to prove any lack of intent to cheat here, but I'm willing to wait until she presents her case before passing judgment.

Bottom line - she's out of the Olympics due to a doping infraction. That's good. We caught one. It really sucks that others lost their chance to get on the team as a result of bad timing of the Trials and test results, and USA Swimming needs to fix that. As for JH's future bans - we'll see what they are when they come out.

I also detect a bit of hypocrisy here in the holier-than-thou statements about how any swimmer is an idiot for taking supplements. Some of the people making these statements are the same people who have openly talked here about taking supplements like creatine themselves, and some of these people are Masters world record holders. Have you had all of your supplements tested? Is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Yeah, I know, "it's only Masters swimming", :blah::blah:. Still, the fact is that YOU take supplements and break world records, yet you decry others for taking supplements?

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 10:47 AM
Where is your proof that she lied? Or cheated?

Just because you didn't like my answer doesn't mean it is going to change. The proof is in the piss cup. What more proof do I need, she flunked a drug test. Is there another set of proof required?

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 10:49 AM
Some good things starting to happen on testing, hopefully this will help for where athletes have found something undetectable right now:

IOC to store athletes' test samples for eight years
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/beijing/2008-07-28-ioc-drug-testing_N.htm

So many honest athletes out there...but I guess because the death penalty doesn't scare off serial killers I guess it means harsh punishment for cheating athletes won't work either....we should just give them all therapy and a hug.

Stronger Olympics drug testing shakes things up
"The sheer number of disqualified athletes — at least 37 since April — new testing methods, and Saturday's ruling to strip another 2000 Olympic gold serve as warnings to athletes about the risks of using performance-enhancing drugs."
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/beijing/2008-08-03-drug-testing_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip


Is that really your response? :joker:

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 10:52 AM
Just because you didn't like my answer doesn't mean it is going to change. The proof is in the piss cup. What more proof do I need, she flunked a drug test. Is there another set of proof required?

:blah::blah::blah::blah::blah:

Where is the proof.....you make these unequivical statements....but have nothing to back it up.

Doesn't have anything to do with whether I like your answer or not....you still refuse to put up your proof.....

You say that you KNOW for a fact that she lied and cheated......"Where's the beef?"

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 10:53 AM
Still, the fact is that YOU take supplements and break world records, yet you decry others for taking supplements?

I don't give a flying fart who takes what supplements. But, I don't know a single person who takes them that doesn't realize they are on their own with them. It is well known that the supplement industry is full of fraud, deceit, unregulated, and this point is absolutely driven home to elite athletes. If you know a single person subject to drug testing, they will let you know this. But, apparently, when someone who is tested comes up positive they proclaim ignorance.

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 10:54 AM
:blah::blah::blah::blah::blah:

Where is the proof.....you make these unequivical statements....but have nothing to back it up.

Doesn't have anything to do with whether I like your answer or not....you still refuse to put up your proof.....

Piss cup, two positive samples, that is the proof. What more proof do you require? Three times I have answered your question. It won't change no matter how many times you ask. Should you ask again, my answer will be piss cup.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 10:58 AM
Piss cup, two positive samples, that is the proof. What more proof do you require? Three times I have answered your question. It won't change no matter how many times you ask. Should you ask again, my answer will be piss cup.

No dice oh wise one......all that confirms is that her sample tested POS. Do you not know the difference? Do we need to get crayons and a chalkboard? You made the statement....now back up the statement.....

Rain Man
August 4th, 2008, 11:06 AM
...all that confirms is that her sample tested POS.

I hesitate to post my own reply to this, but if it is confirmed that her sample tested positive, then why all the commotion? Within the drug testing procedures, she is guilty of a doping offence.

For some reason you really seem to be searching for a reason why she's actually innocent. I would agree that we don't yet know why she tested positive, and we may never will, but the case does have facts, and the fact is that she has violated anti-doping regulations.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:10 AM
I hesitate to post my own reply to this, but if it is confirmed that her sample tested positive, then why all the commotion? Within the drug testing procedures, she is guilty of a doping offence.

For some reason you really seem to be searching for a reason why she's actually innocent. I would agree that we don't yet know why she tested positive, and we may never will, but the case does have facts, and the fact is that she has violated anti-doping regulations.

Not looking to claim anything other than the fact that yes she tested positive. I have never argued that.....in fact, I was one of the first that said that now that she is positive she is done swimming for a while. What I have a problem with is the blanket statement that she is a LIAR and a CHEAT. According to others here.....she KNOWINGLY LIED and KNOWINGLY CHEATED. What I want to see is their proof that this actually happened KNOWINGLY!!!

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 11:18 AM
What I want to see is their proof that this actually happened KNOWINGLY!!!

Piss cup, 4th time, won't change, not even if you ask again.

I respected your argument about your hero and idol Torres that she has never tested positive and that is the litmus test. Only now do I realize that it is not a litmus test of cheating, it is simply the first of many tests that lying cheating dopers must flunk in order for there to be a partial acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and then that evaporates when their attorney spew off dribble you might find slightly plausible.

Once a person tests positive, the case is closed in my book. But, we need all sides of the argument. After all, as Smith says, you guys keep the therapists in business.

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 11:20 AM
According to others here.....she KNOWINGLY LIED and KNOWINGLY CHEATED. What I want to see is their proof that this actually happened KNOWINGLY!!!

Quite a game of semantics going on here. What do you mean by "knowingly"? Did she take something (even what she considered a legal supplement) knowingly? Some are arguing that even if she tested positive because she took something that was tainted (which is probably a long-shot but could have happened) then she still knew there was a risk. She's been told over and over that supplements are dangerous and she knowingly chose to take them anyway. Somehow she ingested clenbuterol. Could she possibly be just plain stupid or foolish instead of a liar? Perhaps. Either way she is a "cheat" since she competed with something that wasn't supposed to be in her system. Either way, she comes out looking pretty bad.

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:21 AM
I for one am tired of looking up to athletic "heroes" and a couple years down the road, they admit to cheating or are caught... I feel like a fool when this happens because I cheered for them and wanted them to win/medal. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't like getting burned like that (from a fan's perspective).

This is why I don't buy into it beyond skin depth... honestly... it plays into their egos and sense of money/fame means liberty to do as you please.

The best true sporting moment I saw via catching the ESPY's was the 2 girls carrying their opponent around the bases for a HR b/c she blew her knee out on the way to first.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:21 AM
Piss cup, 4th time, won't change, not even if you ask again.

I respected your argument about your hero and idol Torres that she has never tested positive and that is the litmus test. Only now do I realize that it is not a litmus test of cheating, it is simply the first of many tests that lying cheating dopers must flunk in order for there to be a partial acknowledgment of wrongdoing, and then that evaporates when their attorney spew off dribble you might find slightly plausible.

Once a person tests positive, the case is closed in my book. But, we need all sides of the argument. After all, as Smith says, you guys keep the therapists in business.

Sounds like with the lack of proof, you keep going back the same old:blah::blah::blah:.....I say we agree to disagree and move on.....

Rain Man
August 4th, 2008, 11:24 AM
We don't know the intent yet, and Geek may be quite harsh in his assessment of the situation, but I think a lot of people share the general sentiment. Personally, at this point with athletics, I could care less about intent either. The rules are out there, they are professionals, and there's been enough publicity and awareness about doping that no one can claim ignorance.

It is her job now to prove that it was never her intent to dope. She and her lawyers have the task of having her supplements tested and going through the long and arduous process of clearing her name. If indeed she was the victim of a contaminated substance, then it is another valuable lesson for everyone that you must exercise utmost caution with supplements and that you are responsible for everything in your body. Apparently Kicker Vencil wasn't a big enough name, and we need another lesson to ram it home.

If she rolls over and accepts whatever punishment (ban) is handed to her with no appeals or fight, then I think it is perfectly fair for everyone to make the assumption that she has admitted she was caught. No one would let their professional career and reputation be torn to shreds if they knew they were innocent. They would fight to the bitter end. Some fight to the bitter end even when they know they are guilty, for goodness sake.

My personal opinion is that she has already made that admission of guilt by dropping the process and withdrawing from the Olympic team. It may be cynical of me, but I also believe that there are American swimmers that are cheating and one was caught. No facts to back that up, but it would strike me as odd that a nation of 300 million people wouldn't have the same issues as the other nations.

I'm tired of it, tired of the doping, tired of the excuses, the blame-game, and people not taking responsibility for their actions. Which, from what I've read, she still has not verbally taken responsibility for failing the test. We've been duped enough by athletes, and it's time we accept the fact that some of our own will attempt to get away with cheating and will be caught.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:24 AM
Everybody here that takes supplements is a KNOWING Cheater!!!!!!!
You heard it here first.....................

How many of the supplement takers here actually send them out to be tested? Answer.....(I am guessing) is 0

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 11:24 AM
What more proof do you need that she cheated if two positive urine samples aren't enough?

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 11:24 AM
I also detect a bit of hypocrisy here in the holier-than-thou statements about how any swimmer is an idiot for taking supplements. Some of the people making these statements are the same people who have openly talked here about taking supplements like creatine themselves, and some of these people are Masters world record holders. Have you had all of your supplements tested? Is this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Yeah, I know, "it's only Masters swimming", :blah::blah:. Still, the fact is that YOU take supplements and break world records, yet you decry others for taking supplements?

Are you kidding me?

I never took a single supplement when I was swimming college and during the time I was training for the 84' trials....I was very aware even back then what the consequences were and was not willing to take ANY risk of making the team and getting booted.

As for being an old fart swimming masters I have openly acknowledged trying creatine...and if you or anyone else ever has a concern about my possibly using something illegal send the tester unannounced any day, any time...I'll even pay for the test results.

Is that Holier than thou enough for you? :mooning:

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 11:25 AM
Gosh, it sure sounds like a few of us have hair in our ears---
Huh, what did you say?
I said, it sounds like a few of us have hair in our ears---
Huh, I can't hear you---
Never mind---

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:27 AM
What more proof do you need that she cheated if two positive urine samples aren't enough?

Show me how that means she KNOWINGLY took Clen?

I have already conceded the fact that she is POS....never said she wasn't.

Show me how with a POS test result you can absolutely confirm that she is a LIAR and a CHEAT?

And before you answer.....remember....I am one of the people that thinks there should be a LIFETIME ban on these infractions.......not just a slap on the wrist and sent on their way

matysekj
August 4th, 2008, 11:27 AM
As for being an old fart swimming masters I have openly acknowledged trying creatine...and if you or anyone else ever has a concern about my possibly using something illegal send the tester unannounced any day, any time...I'll even pay for the test results.

Fair enough. If your test came back positive due to some tainted creatine supplement, would that make you a lying cheater?

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:28 AM
Are you kidding me?

I never took a single supplement when I was swimming college and during the time I was training for the 84' trials....I was very aware even back then what the consequences were and was not willing to take ANY risk of making the team and getting booted.

As for being an old fart swimming masters I have openly acknowledged trying creatine...and if you or anyone else ever has a concern about my possibly using something illegal send the tester unannounced any day, any time...I'll even pay for the test results.

Is that Holier than thou enough for you? :mooning:

Paul, did you take any vitamins at all?

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 11:29 AM
Gosh, it sure sounds like a few of us have hair in our ears---
Huh, what did you say?
I said, it sounds like a few of us have hair in our ears---
Huh, I can't hear you---
Never mind---

And on our backs...and its turning gray and expanding!

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:31 AM
If our collective reaction when we hear about a foreign swimmer getting caught is "hah.. knew it was too good to be true" then what have we to say when we hear it about one of "ours"?


So you mean that Americans tend to generally think that every aspect of sports here is the paragon of openess, honesty and fairness. So much so that a doping scandal really rocks the foundation of society--quick, put up the bat signal!!

If you pointed the finger at disgraced foreign athletes and thought of it in nationalistic terms, you're misguided.

It's like the thread saying how American's will be pointed at and embarrassed before the world. I really don't think the world thought that there were no athletes here that cheated or did wrong before the hubbub. An honest-minded person will look and blame the individual--not the society.

If you uncover a governing body scheme to dope that's one thing, a handful of cheating athletes getting caught is another--yes there's bound to be more US, GB, FR, IT anywere you want to name.

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:32 AM
And when the cheats finally get beat--Old Geek turns up the heat--
And this ain't to bad for he calls out the Cad---
So tell it like it is--after they take a bad whiz---
And give no good quarter to those with no order---
Their time on the bench will create a big stench---but it's best to
give them their time--on a smelly side line---for that's where they belong--for they did a bad wrong--


Ack not poetry!!

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Everybody here that takes supplements is a KNOWING Cheater!!!!!!!
You heard it here first.....................

How many of the supplement takers here actually send them out to be tested? Answer.....(I am guessing) is 0

Wow. I think you have a reading comprehension problem... I don't believe I was talking about anyone here was I?

I suppose you think it's possible that clen was found in JH's urine but that doesn't mean she cheated. So her swims were then possibly legal? I guess you also think that she could possibly come out of this whole thing looking like an angel. You don't seem to acknowledge that, whether she knew she ingested clen or had no idea she was taking a tainted form of one of 12 supplements (that USA Swimming warned her about) she looks either guilty of doping or incredible foolishness (I'd venture to say, recklessness).

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Show me how with a POS test result you can absolutely confirm that she is a LIAR and a CHEAT?


I give in, I do openly agree that because she can't spell the drug she took that she has to be clean. That sure convinces me more than urine tests. No wait, she got it from a handshake, even more convincing. She has paid attorneys to fight her case, NOW I'M TRIPLY CONVINCED.

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Paul, did you take any vitamins at all?

Nothing.

Ok...maybe some recreational, non-performance enhancing....I think I'll stop there!

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:33 AM
Some good things starting to happen on testing, hopefully this will help for where athletes have found something undetectable right now:

IOC to store athletes' test samples for eight years
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/beijing/2008-07-28-ioc-drug-testing_N.htm


Whoa there goes the horse...quick bolt the stable now!
Seriously, couldn't they have done this before?

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:35 AM
I also detect a bit of hypocrisy here in the holier-than-thou statements ?

Yeah and then some but hey, to err is human to forgive is divine right?

Kill em all and let god sort it out...ayayayaa

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 11:36 AM
I give in, I do openly agree that because she can't spell the drug she took that she has to be clean. That sure convinces me more than urine tests. No wait, she got it from a handshake, even more convincing. She has paid attorneys to fight her case, NOW I'M TRIPLY CONVINCED.


Could it have been an "invisible twin" taking the Clen and secretly slipping it into JH's sample?

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:37 AM
Wow. I think you have a reading comprehension problem... I don't believe I was talking about anyone here was I?

I suppose you think it's possible that clen was found in JH's urine but that doesn't mean she cheated. So her swims were then possibly legal? I guess you also think that she could possibly come out of this whole thing looking like an angel. You don't seem to acknowledge that, whether she knew she ingested clen or had no idea she was taking a tainted form of one of 12 supplements (that USA Swimming warned her about) she looks either guilty of doping or incredible foolishness (I'd venture to say, recklessness).

You have not read what I said................

My position is...she tested positive....for now she is done with swimming..period! If they can prove the tests were tainted or that the chain of custody was broken, she could possibly be reinstated. If they can not prove that....minimum....2 years out of swimming.....REGARDLESS of how it got in there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What I have a problem with.......AGAIN......is people in here spewing garbage about the fact that they ABSOLUTELY KNOW she did this on purpose!!!!!!!

That is preposterous.....unless there name is God and they know everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 11:38 AM
As for being an old fart swimming masters I have openly acknowledged trying creatine...and if you or anyone else ever has a concern about my possibly using something illegal send the tester unannounced any day, any time...I'll even pay for the test results.



Now you sound like Dara... ;)

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:39 AM
Nothing.

Ok...maybe some recreational, non-performance enhancing....I think I'll stop there!

Yeah, you and me both........:lmao:

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 11:42 AM
Now you sound like Dara... ;)

Except I can't beat her anymore!!!

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 11:45 AM
A reposting from 2 Aug 08

"Honestly, I believe JH shook hands with someone who must have intentionally put this PED into her system---or, maybe a meteorite slammed through her hotel roof while she was soundly sleeping the night before her race--and it had the PED on it from flying through the atmosphere---and it landed next to her bed and the dust got on her--and the maid cleaned up the mess before she realized she had been infected by the meteorite---Maybe she sat on a toilet seat that someone intentionally doctored with PED powder to make sure she tested + so their swimmer could have a better chance---All are obviously plausible given the fact that no one ever knowingly takes PED.":dunno:
__________________

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 11:45 AM
What I have a problem with.......AGAIN......is people in here spewing garbage about the fact that they ABSOLUTELY KNOW she did this on purpose!!!!!!!

That is preposterous.....unless there name is God and they know everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That we cannot know if she really did know how to spell clenbuterol (not even sure I'm spelling it right!) before she tested positive is pretty obvious at this point. I think the problem is that you come off sounding like JH could be a victim here. And, I don't think some of us agree that she can consider herself a true victim even if she recklessly took something that was tainted. SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT WENT INTO HER BODY. PERIOD. No one is claiming to be god on high--with intimate knowledge of JH's every thought or intent. But, she can't claim to be entirely innocent. She had the drug in her system. She is not an innocent victim unless it's proven that someone snuck into her hotel room the night before the event and injected her in her sleep. Then I will recant everything I've said. THAT would make her an innocent victim. Anything short of that leaves her responsible for her own actions.

pwolf66
August 4th, 2008, 11:49 AM
Do you think lifetime bans will deter would be dopers? I'm not so sure about that ... Perhaps the main benefit would be preventing a known cheater from returning to the sport?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Paul about the Excuse Machine.


Fort, I would assume that the risk/reward calculations being done would come out differently if the punishment is lifetime ban versus 2 years. I know mine would but maybe I'm in the minority. Then again, if one KNOWS that they can't make it without doping, it might not matter.

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:50 AM
That we cannot know if she really did know how to spell clenbuterol (not even sure I'm spelling it right!) before she tested positive is pretty obvious at this point. I think the problem is that you come off sounding like JH could be a victim here. And, I don't think some of us agree that she can consider herself a true victim even if she recklessly took something that was tainted. SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT WENT INTO HER BODY. PERIOD. No one is claiming to be god on high--with intimate knowledge of JH's every thought or intent. But, she can't claim to be entirely innocent. She had the drug in her system. She is not an innocent victim unless it's proven that someone snuck into her hotel room the night before the event and injected her in her sleep. Then I will recant everything I've said. THAT would make her an innocent victim. Anything short of that leaves her responsible for her own actions.

Amy, I apologize if I come off as thinking she is a victim.....not intended that way at all......the only possible way that she could be a victim here is if the test was flawed.....not likely since the B sample was POS as well. And that would have been tested at a separate lab from the first....the only other possibility is the chain of custody........all I really take issue with here is the outright conviction before all the results are in.

My opinion still is.....if you admit to or knowingly cheat....LIFETIME ban. no excuses no recourse.....you're done.

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 11:51 AM
SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT WENT INTO HER BODY. PERIOD.

Apparently not. It is always someone else's fault. It's much easier to live that way, I'm gonna start.

pwolf66
August 4th, 2008, 11:52 AM
Kinda like how the death penalty has stopped serial killers you mean?

Oh, puh-leeze. You mean the 'we sentence you to death, well, maybe not, we have to hear a billion appeal attempts, clemency appeals, protests, oh wait, now it's the human rights folks protesting the mental anguish aspect' silliness?

And NO punishment would be a 100% deterrent but if it deters 10%, is it worth it?

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 11:54 AM
Oh, puh-leeze. You mean the 'we sentence you to death, well, maybe not, we have to hear a billion appeal attempts, clemency appeals, protests, oh wait, now it's the human rights folks protesting the mental anguish aspect' silliness?

And NO punishment would be a 100% deterrent but if it deters 10%, is it worth it?

Look at Texas.....they put in a fast lane for death row.......I do believe statistics show their murder rate has dropped some.

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 11:56 AM
Amy, I apologize if I come off as thinking she is a victim.....not intended that way at all......the only possible way that she could be a victim here is if the test was flawed.....not likely since the B sample was POS as well. And that would have been tested at a separate lab from the first....the only other possibility is the chain of custody........all I really take issue with here is the outright conviction before all the results are in.

My opinion still is.....if you admit to or knowingly cheat....LIFETIME ban. no excuses no recourse.....you're done.

No apology necessary. Again, I think most of this argument is about semantics. And, being a cynic, I think that there are probably more of our swimmers out there using things than we know about. And JH just happened to get caught. I realize not everyone likes to think that but it's hard for me not to these days...

pwolf66
August 4th, 2008, 12:01 PM
Look at Texas.....they put in a fast lane for death row.......I do believe statistics show their murder rate has dropped some.


Gotta love Ron White.

'My state's put in an express lane'

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 12:03 PM
Oh, puh-leeze. You mean the 'we sentence you to death, well, maybe not, we have to hear a billion appeal attempts, clemency appeals, protests, oh wait, now it's the human rights folks protesting the mental anguish aspect' silliness?

And NO punishment would be a 100% deterrent but if it deters 10%, is it worth it?

So you think that is the thought process that a criminal has before killing somebody? That they will lead a cushy life behind bars and evade their execution via countless appeals? Possible, but not probable.

We are obviously talking about two very different crimes and punishments here, but my point is that the perpetrators of these crimes are probably not terribly concerned about the consequences of their actions. They are interested in the here and now.

lefty
August 4th, 2008, 12:09 PM
It was stated several pages earlier that NCAA level swimmers are fully aware of the risks of taking supplements. This is not what I have experienced. Most college swimmers buy their supplements at the nutrion store. That is the extent of their quality assurance. At top tier (swimming) Universities this is probably not the case, but that is the exception not the norm. I wonder if the testing is less encompassing in the NCAA?

It seems that the prevelent opinion being expressed here is that there is no such thing as an honest mistake. Lindsay must be naive or living in utopia for wanting to find out more about the circumstances before labeling JH a lieing cheat and banning her for life. But it seems to be that the true naivete being asserted here is basing a serious conviction - that noone is ever falsely labeled - on limited personal experiences.

lefty
August 4th, 2008, 12:16 PM
Look at Texas.....they put in a fast lane for death row.......I do believe statistics show their murder rate has dropped some.


This assertion has no stastical basis. Murder rates have declined everywhere the past 30 years. No more or less so in Texas. If rates dropped significantly more in states that had a death penatly than this would be relelvent, but that is not remotely the case. I was born in Texas 32 years ago so we might as well attribute the drop to me.

One thing I really like about Geek is that he'll tell you the truth. He likes the death penalty because it gives victems revenge. At least he is honest (Geek if I am misattributing you I apologize).

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 12:37 PM
I'll see if I can find the study I read that supports this assumption.

By the way.....my mom was a cop in So Cal on the Sheriff's Dept....She once worked at the women's jail in L.A........There were some that were so institutionalized that they would get out of jail on Mon and would be back in within a mnth because they literally KNEW that they had a better life on the inside........Look at what a lot of prisons have turned into with the PC mentality of this country.....They are glorified Country Clubs. I am specifically talking about some of the minimum security facilities.

I say reopen Alcatraz and fill it up......no TV, no Cable, no weight rooms. no Rec Rooms.....a real prison. And see how many people want to actually spend time there compared to others.

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 12:39 PM
It was stated several pages earlier that NCAA level swimmers are fully aware of the risks of taking supplements. This is not what I have experienced. Most college swimmers buy their supplements at the nutrion store. That is the extent of their quality assurance. At top tier (swimming) Universities this is probably not the case, but that is the exception not the norm. I wonder if the testing is less encompassing in the NCAA?

It seems that the prevelent opinion being expressed here is that there is no such thing as an honest mistake. Lindsay must be naive or living in utopia for wanting to find out more about the circumstances before labeling JH a lieing cheat and banning her for life. But it seems to be that the true naivete being asserted here is basing a serious conviction - that noone is ever falsely labeled - on limited personal experiences.

Lefty, your correct that not all colleges have testing programs for swimmers like Texas, U of A, Auburn, etc...but to suggest that in this day and age a collegiate swimmer isn't aware of the problems with drugs and possibilities of tainted supplements I find hard to believe....

But that was not really the association I was making...my point is if your an elite swimmer with trials cuts, let along a pro like JH and a shot at making the team then you are rolling the dice if you choose to take anything into your body and not be VERY sure about what it is.

JH was taking a huge amount of over the counter supplements...that in itself is enough for me to say she was pushing the envelope.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 12:53 PM
One thing is certain in Texas with respect to the murder rate dropping since they put in the fast lane to the needle---EVERYONE that got the needle--- has not killed anyone since! That is deterrent in my book---

lefty
August 4th, 2008, 12:57 PM
Lefty, your correct that not all colleges have testing programs for swimmers like Texas, U of A, Auburn, etc...but to suggest that in this day and age a collegiate swimmer isn't aware of the problems with drugs and possibilities of tainted supplements I find hard to believe....

But that was not really the association I was making...my point is if your an elite swimmer with trials cuts, let along a pro like JH and a shot at making the team then you are rolling the dice if you choose to take anything into your body and not be VERY sure about what it is.

JH was taking a huge amount of over the counter supplements...that in itself is enough for me to say she was pushing the envelope.

We agree then. You did state "NCAA swimmer" earlier, but now that you have clarified... (and) I DO agree that at best JH was sutpid for taking OTC supplements. One might even argue willfully ignorant.

Though GH Jr. was pretty poignant a few months back when he disclosed that he attempted to get supplement guidance from USSwimming and there advice was nothing more than be careful. Considering the consequences USswim should be a little more involved in this. If nothing else it would give one less crack for cheaters to attempt to hide in.

Trichica
August 4th, 2008, 01:10 PM
tjburk said "Show me how that means she KNOWINGLY took Clen?"

As I posted before--you do not need it. It is a strict liability rule. You test positive and thus violated the rule no matter how it got there, It matters not if she did it knowingly--this is not a "intent" based rule/law.

And btw, clen is not used in the US on people and it has to clear a horse's system before it races--so how in the world would it just so happen to end up in her urine and above the acceptable levels.

"Knowingly" is completely irrelevant here with respect to her guilt. The best she could have done, if she chose to continue with the appeal, is try to lower her fine/suspension somehow.

It is a strict liability rule. Who the heck cares how a substance that is not to be used on horses and the racing commission does not allow in horses on race day, got into her urine.

Yeah, I know, she was a at restaurant which was set up by a rival; there she ate pork which they spiked; touched the door handle when she went to the bathroom which was laced with clen and while away from the table, the waiter switched her water bottles. Got it.

lefty
August 4th, 2008, 01:21 PM
tjburk said "Show me how that means she KNOWINGLY took Clen?"

As I posted before--you do not need it. It is a strict liability rule. You test positive and thus violated the rule no matter how it got there, It matters not if she did it knowingly--this is not a "intent" based rule/law.

Everyone (including JH herself) has long since agreed on that she should be DQ'd from Olympics

The Fortress
August 4th, 2008, 01:22 PM
I agree with scyfreestyler that dopers are likely not weighing the consequences too rationally. They're living in denial. Besides, depending on your age and ignoring the Dara anomaly, in some cases, 2 years could effectively be like a lifetime ban.

Why did she improve so much in freestyle and not breaststroke?

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 01:33 PM
I agree with scyfreestyler that dopers are likely not weighing the consequences too rationally. They're living in denial. Besides, depending on your age and ignoring the Dara anomaly, in some cases 2 years, could effectively be like a lifetime ban.

Why did she improve so much in freestyle and not breaststroke?

That is actually a very good question.....you would think that taking PEDs would enhance every aspect of your swimming since it would increase muscle mass in all of your muscles not just a few.....

Any experts out there on this one?

BillS
August 4th, 2008, 02:04 PM
One thing is certain in Texas with respect to the murder rate dropping since they put in the fast lane to the needle---EVERYONE that got the needle--- has not killed anyone since! That is deterrent in my book---


And if an innocent person or two is hastily executed via the fast lane, hey, that's just all the more deterrence, right?

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 02:28 PM
Oh no Bill, I was only referring to the "guilty ones" they executed after ten to twenty appeals and years on death row---
And I do not want to hijack this thread with this "non-swimming" discussion....so I will end my comments here.

Leonard Jansen
August 4th, 2008, 02:30 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...

A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.

And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.

(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)

-LBJ

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 02:33 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...

A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.

And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.

(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)

-LBJ

I'll drink to that one.....if I can quit laughing long enough to down it!!!!!

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 02:36 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...

A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.

And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.

(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)

-LBJ

Let's get something straight, there are two SBB...one calls himself the Goodsmith (although I think everyone see's his true colors) and IS NOT married to the knife wielding SBM...and no we are not polygamists.

Second...you can wait as long as you want, say a few prayers, consult a psychic but you most likely will never know the truth regarding her intent.

Smith by Marriage
August 4th, 2008, 02:42 PM
I think it is safe to say, that any jury of my peers, who have been introduced to or informed about John Smith, would let me off in a heartbeat.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 03:09 PM
A smith here--a Smith there--a Smith everywhere---but not a Smith to drink-Oh wait---they all drink---Sorry---excuse me....

LindsayNB
August 4th, 2008, 03:25 PM
Second...you can wait as long as you want, say a few prayers, consult a psychic but you most likely will never know the truth regarding her intent.

JH's lawyer has made a few statements the he has a good lead on where it came from and plans to present evidence at her hearing, why not wait for him to put his cards on the table and then make a judgment?

beluga
August 4th, 2008, 03:27 PM
I promised myself I wouldn't get sucked back into this, but apparently I'm not getting an adequate dose of pain these days...

A person (say, Smith By Marriage) has a knife in her hand and she is standing over the dead body of a man (say, a Smith by Birth). When asked if she has killed SBB, SBM says yes. At this point, I think we can all agree that SBM is a murderer. Based on what I've read, I am sure that Lindsey and Tracy would agree as well, as would I. If SBM killed SBB because he made a snotty comment in a USMS forum about her getting her swimsuit on, she gets a ticket to terminal dreamland. If she was slicing tomatoes and SBB tripped over his own klutzy feet and fell into the knife, she gets a lesser sentence.

And that is, I think ,what some of us have been saying: Before we fry her completely, we'd like to KNOW what actually happened. Did JH test positive for clenbuterol: YES. But, is she just stupid (for, say, taking tainted supplements) or evil (for deliberately doping)? Until all the facts are in, I have the luxury of being able to wait to decide if she is worse than stupid and shall do so.

(I realize that if SBM knifed SBB because he said that her swimsuit made her butt look fat she'd get off scott-free if there were women on the jury, but we have to accept that the system isn't perfect. Even you, Geek, need to admit that some things are above the law.)

-LBJ

without getting into a buch of legal minutia, murder is generally the the unlawful intentional killing of one human being by another.

While SBM may have killed SBB, SBM in not necessarily a murderer. It could have been accidental, self defense, or justifiable.

Which kind of like JH, she tested positive for a banned substance, thus her performance doesn't count, and she's not eligible for the Olympics.

Under the rules governing elite athletes, she's guilty of doping, and banned from competition (for two years for a first offense)

The point many seem to be overlooking, is that under the same rules, she is entitled to an appeal to USADA and CAS. And unlike major league baseball where a player is 'innocent' and can play until his appeal is resolved, JH is guilty until she can demonstrate that the positive test was somehow invalid, or there are some extenuating/mitigating circumstances that might reduce her ban.

(btw I voted that she knowingly used a banned substance in the poll)

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 03:27 PM
JH's lawyer has made a few statements the he has a good lead on where it came from and plans to present evidence at her hearing, why not wait for him to put his cards on the table and then make a judgment?

All in at the flop.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 03:33 PM
Actually, it was all IN at the + test on both A & B splits---and, as many of us are saying here---all the rest is nonsense!

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 03:40 PM
JH's lawyer has made a few statements the he has a good lead on where it came from and plans to present evidence at her hearing, why not wait for him to put his cards on the table and then make a judgment?

Are we supposed to read this and not laugh out loud? Quick review - she tested positive for a banned substance.

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 03:45 PM
Actually, it was all IN at the + test on both A & B splits---and, as many of us are saying here---all the rest is nonsense!

Are you stillhere? LOL!

It's not nonsense though. The punishment that follows and the way she is viewed by her peers will depend upon the hearing. If she is found to be a Kicker V. type of case it will be a different outlook than if she is found to have purchased a product knowing exactly what it was. Either way she is guilty of doping, sure. But depending upon the information presented in the hearing she could be a victim, foolish, or an outright cheater. Obviously the last two are the most likely, but until she has the chance to present her case it's all speculation really.

LindsayNB
August 4th, 2008, 03:46 PM
:argue:
Geek, while you may be unwilling to agree to disagree on whether there is any difference between knowingly cheating and unknowingly cheating it is very clear that there is nothing to be gained from arguing with you.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 03:58 PM
Listen, I am tired of the nonsense AFTER these cheats get caught. They go to their friends and lawyers, family and all that and HIDE behind the facts. She took her web page down, she did not yell bloody murder on top of buildings that she was innocent. She never one time asked---no---demanded to take three unbiased lie detector tests, she did what ALL the other PED cheaters did and that was get a lawyer and go on to insult all of our intelligence with the denials.
As to HOW it got in her system...who cares. She swam against other clean, dedicated, hard working swimmers and cost two of them their rightful place on the US Olympic team. I think her actions AFTER getting caught are as bad as cheating in the first place.
And please spare us the toilet seat contamination or the hand shake or the her dissing the supplement company with her attorneys innuendos about them giving it to her. She did it, she needs to take responsibility and come clean. Clean with no more drug use and clean with the truth and for goodness sake-clean by stopping this charade of lies. Let us all face the facts--The little darling from Long Beach who swam for the Cal Bears is a cheater and her actions after testing + are sorry!

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 04:09 PM
I'll wait and see the outcome myself before I yell "Burn her"

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 04:14 PM
I never said burn her! She burned herself by cheating--then again many times with her denials and lawyers innuendos.
She never has come clean---just like all the rest. Kicker's case is different in that they did not know the FULL risks of taking supplements then and they darn sure know now. That is a major reason why I don't buy her BS one bit. Also, her not having a hearing IMHO is a simple and effective way to gain MORE TIME to get their lies together and find a way to get her out from under what she did--and that was to cheat.

aquageek
August 4th, 2008, 04:14 PM
No matter what, we can all count on a rich tale from her attorneys, complete with charts, graphs, somber music and pictures of Kicker V, the hero of all dopers. She's also out for 2 years despite all the whining about vicitmhood, which is a great first step towards getting rid of dopers in the sport.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 04:19 PM
"Obviously the last two are the most likely, but until she has the chance to present her case it's all speculation really."

She had the chance to present her case but chose to stall to find more time to figure out how to lie her way out of this. Then, had the gall to use the nonsense that she did it for the team. Please pass me a bucket while I toss my grits on that one....

tjburk
August 4th, 2008, 04:32 PM
I reiterate what I said.........

So we can agree to disagee on this portion....or y'all can keep spouting your BELIEFS and I will keep spouting mine.....your choice!

USMSarah
August 4th, 2008, 04:33 PM
The best true sporting moment I saw via catching the ESPY's was the 2 girls carrying their opponent around the bases for a HR b/c she blew her knee out on the way to first.

OMG! I saw a picture of that on espn's website - I thought it was one of the best sports stories I've ever heard. The picture said it all. I teared up a bit.

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 04:50 PM
Let us all face the facts--The little darling from Long Beach who swam for the Cal Bears is a cheater and her actions after testing + are sorry!

Hey now, your starting to sound like the "Stanford snob" from Tara Kirk's blog with your (perhaps inadvertent) dig at Cal: http://wcsnblogs.com/swimming/tarakirk/tarakirk/2008/08/02/disappointment-yet-again/#comments

I think she was representing the Trojans of USC, yes? :soapbox:

I like the Stanford "snob"'s suggestion though...

scyfreestyler
August 4th, 2008, 04:51 PM
"Obviously the last two are the most likely, but until she has the chance to present her case it's all speculation really."

She had the chance to present her case but chose to stall to find more time to figure out how to lie her way out of this. Then, had the gall to use the nonsense that she did it for the team. Please pass me a bucket while I toss my grits on that one....

Rocky, you could very well be correct and the stalling is for no other reason than to prepare a load of lies. I just happen to think it's a bit extreme to pronounce these things as fact when the only real fact is, that you don't really know.

SwimStud
August 4th, 2008, 04:51 PM
OMG! I saw a picture of that on espn's website - I thought it was one of the best sports stories I've ever heard. The picture said it all. I teared up a bit.

Oh Sarah, don't be such a girl! :D

hehehe

It made a refreshing change though didn't it?

USMSarah
August 4th, 2008, 05:02 PM
OMG! I saw a picture of that on espn's website - I thought it was one of the best sports stories I've ever heard. The picture said it all. I teared up a bit.

Oh Sarah, don't be such a girl! :D

hehehe

It made a refreshing change though didn't it?

;) Only privately shed tears into my goggles.

Stillhere
August 4th, 2008, 05:10 PM
Amy:
Please forgive my post if you thought it was a dig on the Cal Bears program or the team! I love the Cal Bears womans swim team and in fact, it is very, very high up on my list of the BEST in NCAA Swimming. What I meant is she swam for one of the best in the country and went from swimming at Cal to going pro---and then to this junk.
Please except my humble apologize for I did not and would not say anything bad about Cal Swimming.

ALM
August 4th, 2008, 06:53 PM
JH's lawyer has made a few statements the he has a good lead on where it came from and plans to present evidence at her hearing, why not wait for him to put his cards on the table and then make a judgment?

Her lawyer is the same guy who came up with the "Chimera defense" for Tyler Hamilton (from Wikipedia: "a chimera is an animal that has two or more different populations of genetically distinct cells that originated in different zygotes; if the different cells emerged from the same zygote, it is called a mosaicism. Chimerism is rare in human beings: there have been only about 40 reported cases.")

Jacobs is a former triathlete who has also defended Marion Jones, Floyd Landis, and Tim Montgomery. Here's an article about him:

"For athletes accused of taking drugs, a Perry Mason of their own"
"Attorney Howard Jacobs, who has defended athletes from Marion Jones to US swimmer Jessica Hardy, believes the system is tilted too much toward antidoping agencies..."
http://features.csmonitor.com/backstory/2008/07/28/qdope3/

ALM
August 4th, 2008, 07:02 PM
Now you sound like Dara... ;)


Except I can't beat her anymore!!!

Finally... He admits it... :whiteflag:

Paul Smith
August 4th, 2008, 08:09 PM
Finally... He admits it... :whiteflag:

You got me Anna...I give up...all my arguments and skepticism comes from a deep/dark insecurity...someone else brought this up awhile back in a PM and I was so moved by the insight I've used it as my tag line in all my posts since...but given the fact I'm married to the knife wielding, John Smith castrating, SBM can you blame me for being such a wimp?

gobears
August 4th, 2008, 09:10 PM
Amy:
Please forgive my post if you thought it was a dig on the Cal Bears program or the team! I love the Cal Bears womans swim team and in fact, it is very, very high up on my list of the BEST in NCAA Swimming. What I meant is she swam for one of the best in the country and went from swimming at Cal to going pro---and then to this junk.
Please except my humble apologize for I did not and would not say anything bad about Cal Swimming.

I pretty much assumed you didn't mean anything by it, Stillhere. I probably should have put a smiley there to communicate that better. I do think the guy on Kirk's website was taking an opportunity to dis Cal. I was going to ask him how "Muffy" is doing and to please pass the Grey Poupon...

ALM
August 4th, 2008, 11:08 PM
Swimmer to request reduced suspension
Associated Press
August 4, 2008

LOS ANGELES – Swimmer Jessica Hardy will try to have her possible two-year suspension “reduced substantially” after a failed drug test cost her a spot on the U.S. Olympic team.

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency said Friday the 21-year-old sprinter had withdrawn from the team nearly a month after she tested positive for a low level of clenbuterol, a prohibited anabolic agent, at the Olympic trials.

“She accepts the fact that the testing was properly done and the results properly reported,” her lawyer, Howard Jacobs, said in a statement released Friday night.

He said investigations were trying to determine the source of the clenbuterol.

“Jessica did not knowingly or intentionally take any banned substances,” Jacobs said. He noted that Hardy has cooperated fully with USADA since she was informed July 21 of her positive test.

gull
August 5th, 2008, 01:34 PM
He noted that Hardy has cooperated fully with USADA since she was informed July 21 of her positive test.

Meaning what, that she answered their phone calls?




He said investigations were trying to determine the source of the clenbuterol.


Perhaps something she...ingested?


Time to send in the Closer. Brenda (Kyra Sedgwick) can get her to talk.

aquageek
August 5th, 2008, 01:46 PM
More news of doping:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/summer08/trackandfield/news/story?id=3519823

Looks like the Ruskies are at it again. A sweet, innocent blonde American would never stoop to such lows, we know that for sure.

gull
August 5th, 2008, 02:31 PM
If the supplements are from a reputable manufacturer that a reasonable person would expect to be clean then my personal judgment of her moral character will be less severe than if she set out to deliberately use clenbuterol.

This is where you and I disagree. Because I really don't know how we can trust anything she or her lawyer produce or say at this point. The only indisputable fact is that she failed her drug test. Give her the standard two year suspension as a first time offender and move on.

Note that I did not say that she should be burned at the stake.

aquageek
August 5th, 2008, 02:37 PM
Since supplements are unregulated what exactly would constitute reputable?

Also, why are drug cheats busted so quickly but it takes them weeks and months to figure out what story they are gonna tell to try to get out of it?

gull
August 5th, 2008, 02:53 PM
Also, why are drug cheats busted so quickly but it takes them weeks and months to figure out what story they are gonna tell to try to get out of it?

Probably because they all lawyer up. And lawyers are paid by the hour.

Hey, what's the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?

pwolf66
August 5th, 2008, 03:40 PM
Hey, what's the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?

One's an ugly, nasty, scum sucking bottom feeder and the other goes good with fries?

The Fortress
August 5th, 2008, 10:04 PM
Probably because they all lawyer up. And lawyers are paid by the hour.

The "reputable" supplement companies are going to respond by lawyering up. They're not just going to stand by and be the scapegoat for athletes, especially if athletes routinely plan and invoke supplement contamination as their fallback excuse. I recall reading somewhere that Hammer Nutrition threatened to sue some triathletes for libel and slander when they claimed contamined Hammer products caused them to test positive.

I see regulation in the future as well.

scyfreestyler
August 5th, 2008, 10:07 PM
Placing blame on a supplement company is really quite meaningless anyhow, unless there is some verifiable proof that such contamination or mislabeling actually exists.

Fort, you see regulation as in FDA oversight of what goes into these products?

The Fortress
August 5th, 2008, 10:17 PM
Placing blame on a supplement company is really quite meaningless anyhow, unless there is some verifiable proof that such contamination or mislabeling actually exists.

Fort, you see regulation as in FDA oversight of what goes into these products?

I doubt FDA would regulate them as a conventional food or drug, although they probably are treated as "food." There is an FDA Office of Nutritional Products that is governed by a different set of regulations. Products must be "safe" and truthfully labelled. Any adverse effects must be reported, etc. I think they're primarily targeting dietary pills and such. But the regs could be modified or interpreted to include these athletic supplements, particularly since their use (or misuse) seems to be burgeoning.

For that matter, the FTC might one day begin to wonder about their advertising claims, if they haven't already.

scyfreestyler
August 5th, 2008, 10:22 PM
There are some restrictions on advertising claims...see the class action against Airborne Herbal Supplement. These companies are not permitted to make claims of curing disease, sickness, etc.. Dr. Dean Edell is continuously on a rampage about these vendors peddling mostly worthless products to unsuspecting consumers with claims that border the limits of the law. I share his anger.

The Fortress
August 5th, 2008, 10:41 PM
I remember that suit! The specificity of the advertising claim determines the level of substantiation and whether it has to be scientific and/or a well-controlled study. The FTC will likely target other unsubstantiated OTC advertising soon too, particularly if enough consumers complain.

I assume dietary supplements must at least conform to good manufacturing practices and avoid contamination with prescription drugs or controlled substances that are more heavily regulated ...