Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Michael Weiss
Quote | Reply
What’s this guy on, other than his running shoes busting his ass 6 hrs a day? Even other pros are outright calling him out.

Edit: he ran 1:09:28



Strava I Instagram I Team Every Man Jack I
Last edited by: Sean H: May 27, 18 9:42
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He's a convicted doper that many have no tolerance for. Think it was back from his MTB racing days.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He's a convicted doper. He has never admitted any wrong doing.
Of course his actual blood was in a fridge in a lab somewhere to be put back in at a later date.
So yeah, he's full of shit. He's literally banned from Mountain biking. That is how dirty he is. Banned from cycling. Wrap your head around that one.

I've also heard from an Austrian friend that in smaller European races he has a car or motor cycle come out mid race for him to draft off of. My friend watched it happen, not me, but not more of a story than that.

Anyways, no one has any respect for him because he deserves no respect. He should never put on a number. Let alone continue to steal from clean athletes.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [oprfcc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've also heard from an Austrian friend that in smaller European races he has a car or motor cycle come out mid race for him to draft off of. My friend watched it happen, not me, but not more of a story than that.

How many Pros go to smaller races and for what reason? Favor for the race director? How can someone have a personal drafting vehicle during the race when races are suppose to provide a lead vehicle? Didn't he already serve a triathlon doping ban?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [oprfcc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
oprfcc wrote:
...

I've also heard from an Austrian friend that in smaller European races he has a car or motor cycle come out mid race for him to draft off of. My friend watched it happen, not me, but not more of a story than that.

....

Yeah I all BS on that one....

He was part of a sport that you doped or you didn't have a job. He served his penalty. I understand many feel different, but then maybe you should take that up with WADA.

I personally think the sport is just as dirty as any other pro endurance sport (cycling, running, etc). I don't see much reason to believe different. Amazing how records have been smashed over the past year or two......must be the disc brakes.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SBRcanuck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I personally think the sport is just as dirty as any other pro endurance sport (cycling, running, etc). I don't see much reason to believe different. Amazing how records have been smashed over the past year or two......must be the disc brakes.

-------

I think it's a sport that you can take advantage of because of the lightness on testing. But we don't have a ton of testing because we really don't have a lot invested into our sport because it's such a low $$ sport to begin with. We have really low level TV appeal and ITU is where the real olympic testing even matters. So long course (and really only LC events there are is IM events + some Challenge) is truly a sport that can be gamed by professionals, *if* they want too.

-USAT L2 coach, M.S. Exercise Physiology
https://www.instagram.com/alloutmultisport
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
His performances are getting comical. He was a nobody for like the last 5 years and now he’s running Gomez level fast. Come on.
Quote Reply
Post deleted by windschatten [ In reply to ]
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Professionals should look in the mirror. If they really wanted a clean sport, they would do something meaningful about it

--------

and what meaningful action should they take?

Boycott?

Demand for better services?


Professionals especially at LC level have no hand. They have just enough to keep themselves in the game, but they have no bargaining chips, and that's what is needed in order to force change. Demanding change doesn't do anything if it's falling on deaf ears, which is what would happen.


eta: this isnt a major sport where the sport + athletes work together to make a great product. This is a low level money making sport where it's run by 1 organization that runs it as a business 1st, "fairness" 2nd. It doesn't act with the athletes on an equal footing. It acts as how it sees and then requires the athletes to follow. The athletes have no real bargaining strategy here, to even suggest other wise, you just dont get it.

-USAT L2 coach, M.S. Exercise Physiology
https://www.instagram.com/alloutmultisport
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: B_Doughtie: May 27, 18 13:23
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
+1 on that .....

"see the world as it is not as you want it to be"
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [TizzleDK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i've followed weiss for a few years now. via instagra, via strava. he's been pretty transparent regarding his workouts.

i don't know him personally, but he's done a lot of training these past few years, and as an outsider i have seen some of the changes he's made in his training. as TG stated, he's also been looking scary lean....

he's always been a poor swimmer, so his focus has always been the bike and run. works for shorter distances. i don't see him ever doing well in kona because making front pack is so important.

Catalyst Wheel Covers: Be faster and look great without sacrificing weight.

TOPO Footwear: use code TOPOTRAN20 for 20% off any order!
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ahhchon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i don't know him personally, but he's done a lot of training these past few years...i have seen some of the changes... he's also been looking scary lean....he's always been a poor swimmer, so his focus has always been the bike and run.


When you have to bend backwards to find a reason for his dramatic improvement, it's probably a sign you're looking in the wrong area.

You're such a Trump ball washer! - Duffy - Feb 8, 17 13:18
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ahhchon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ahhchon wrote:
i've followed weiss for a few years now. via instagra, via strava. he's been pretty transparent regarding his workoutst.

I’m not sure if you are giving this as a reason to believe he’s clean, but I’ve neverunderstood how that justifies that a person is clean. I haven’t looked at his workouts but if he’s posting epic weeks, it would lead me to believe the opposite. And he’s a convicted doper so there’s that. Can we get another Weiss AMA thread?


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
as very little to do with likable but all to do with owning to your mistake.

Beth apologized, was reconise as involuntary ingestion and was very upfront, apologiste, open to this issue. She also said she would not return to pro racing after this.

Wiess was refusing to talk about it, denial all evidence, and as not reconise is wrong and not apologized for them.

not even close to be the same....and for Wiess.... it was very serious cheating using heavy hitter technique.

no double standard here....some very clear different path

Jonathan Caron

Jonnyo Coaching
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hairypiernas wrote:
I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy.


Fwiw Weiss has a super likable personality too but just might not be liked by some pros. I think Beth's is a little more about what she was popped for "Ostarine" and the fact that it was quite plausible that it was tainted supplements given the number of women being hit with the same positive. Hard to say since in general it seems like we (pro triathletes) are anti-confrontational to begin with.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Last edited by: Thomas Gerlach: May 31, 18 9:38
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [jonnyo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Except she is racing next week, no?


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Post deleted by windschatten [ In reply to ]
Last edited by: windschatten: May 27, 18 22:11
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
then lets call it a culture thing....


but a quick survey of the pro athletes shows quickly how people feel about those two case. That speak volume.

Jonathan Caron

Jonnyo Coaching
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Genuine question, does anyone really think you can be this lean all year round without being on some form of illegal substance?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sean H wrote:
What’s this guy on, other than his running shoes busting his ass 6 hrs a day? Even other pros are outright calling him out.

Edit: he ran 1:09:28

I'm calling you out as a flog. What are you on keyboard warrior...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know who Beth McKenzie is so I cannot comment. But Huthaller got busted for EPO, attempted to bribe employees at the WADA lab to get her B sample clean (for which she actually got probation!) and after her ban admitted to testosterone use. Later in a slowtwitch interview that was supposedly her public apology she said she was treated unfairly by being blamed for taking T because while she thought it was T her drug dealer was actually giving her a fake. During her ban she announced she would never race again, but nope- she entered Miami 70.3 as her first race after her ban where she got her boyfriend to intentionally block the pro women's field until she caught up and then drafted him to the finish.

https://www.slowtwitch.com/...70.3_Miami_3206.html

That is pretty serious shit.

And I have not dug up the thread but when people got all up in arms about a guy banned from cycling moving over to triathlon, Weiss agreed with Dan to start an AMA thread here to get it all about and rehabilitate his image. He refused to answer a single question about doping and was all bent out of shape about why people were not asking about his training or racing. It was a total joke. He was doing enhanced blood bags- really serious doping. He may have done his time and can legally race but we can make him feel unwelcome and put pressure on his sponsors (HED and Diamondback)

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
VeloVetta is developing AERO cycling shoes with CFD and wind tunnel testing.
InstagramFacebook
Last edited by: RowToTri: May 28, 18 3:25
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hairypiernas wrote:
I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy.

I agree on Beth Mckenzie, unbelievable, the world believes her story because she is "friendly" Hope she doesn't stand on the podium at Cairns
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hairypiernas wrote:
I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy.


I would agree with this. Forget about big sports where testing is a joke (NFL, Futbol, NBA, MLB, etc), but if we look at our little enclave triathlon just isn't tested to nearly as rigorous a standard as cycling. Doping is an issue in triathlon and because of the more lax testing, I suspect it allows for some rife cheating. Is Weiss clean now? I don't know and can't answer it. With the prevalence of different SARMs that aren't detectable, micro dosing EPO, TUEs and many more it is obvious our sport is as dirty as the rest. Oh yeah, blood bags still aren't detectable. Years ago we finally began to detect plasticizers, but do you think the cheats aren't still a decade ahead? Do we really feel like those amazing times coming out of the late 80s and 90s that held up for decades were clean? Give me a break. They just happened to coincide with the outbreak of the EPO and blood bag era. What's worse is the joke of a testing program. An athlete can cycle whatever drugs they want, miss two tests and we will never know. By the time the tester shows up again the drugs can clear their system, they have a cycle in them and they test fine. After 18 months those missed tests roll off their record and they can rinse and repeat. The worst part is we never know.

It is bad business for sport to nail their best athletes and I think all high levels sports are okay with having a flawed system.
Last edited by: turdburgler: May 28, 18 4:05
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [RowToTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What I don't get - there are so many young (and not so young) professional athletes with potential out there who would love a sponsorship - why would ANY sponsor give a single dollar to a convicted doper? Is this some "any news is good news" kind of thing? If I would sponsor an Athlete I wouldn't go near anyone associated with a positive WADA test, not even rumors, and for sure not a convict.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Ben6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The same reason futbol or NFL still employs batterers, cheaters, morally and ethically corrupt players; the vast majority of people forget all about this when their teams are winning and said players are performing.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [jonnyo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jonnyo wrote:
as very little to do with likable but all to do with owning to your mistake.

Beth apologized, was reconise as involuntary ingestion and was very upfront, apologiste, open to this issue. She also said she would not return to pro racing after this.

Wiess was refusing to talk about it, denial all evidence, and as not reconise is wrong and not apologized for them.

not even close to be the same....and for Wiess.... it was very serious cheating using heavy hitter technique.

no double standard here....some very clear different path

She is racing Cairns next weekend mate. Oh so you are saying you can dope and hope to never get caught and if you do all is fixed by apologizing or saying it was 'taken unintentionally' ? Some people are more liked than others and that is a basic component of the ganging up or choosing to embrace. Meanwhile she said she would never race again, but look out for the all the social media posts from the pros supporting beth mckenzie come june 10 in Ironman Cairns.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Ben6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just look at Lisa Hutthaler's facebook page, lots of sycophantic hero worshiping. Maybe she's busy deleting abusive posts after training sessions as her past behaviour was utterly shameless, but I suspect not....

SteveMc
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SteveMc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SteveMc wrote:
Just look at Lisa Hutthaler's facebook page, lots of sycophantic hero worshiping. Maybe she's busy deleting abusive posts after training sessions as her past behaviour was utterly shameless, but I suspect not....

SteveMc

I'm sure that when she returned to racing she had to do a lot of that. Yesterday, the first 5 or 6 comments on HED's Instagram photo of Michie were all about doping and those comments were all deleted.

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
VeloVetta is developing AERO cycling shoes with CFD and wind tunnel testing.
InstagramFacebook
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Ben6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ben6 wrote:
What I don't get - there are so many young (and not so young) professional athletes with potential out there who would love a sponsorship - why would ANY sponsor give a single dollar to a convicted doper? Is this some "any news is good news" kind of thing? If I would sponsor an Athlete I wouldn't go near anyone associated with a positive WADA test, not even rumors, and for sure not a convict.

Well look at all the sponsors for team Sky....they appear to be getting their money's worth. I think the reality is that hard core people like us know what is going on. General population, they just want to see gear under fast people and will go and buy it.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How do you know that there was `purpose and intent` as according to Gerdes/mckenzie it was accidental. Is there ever a place in your mind that it could be accidental. Or it is black and white.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
devashish_paul wrote:
Well look at all the sponsors for team Sky....they appear to be getting their money's worth. I think the reality is that hard core people like us know what is going on. General population, they just want to see gear under fast people and will go and buy it.

I think it must be the case, its the only explanation. But I still think there is a difference - Team Sky is "only" under investigation, and known to be immoral in abusing medicine to enhance their riders under the cover of medical exemptions. So as long as nobody is convicted, sponsors can just look at their numbers and exposures and ignore the rest. But if you are a sponsor and you have 5 CVs of guys you could give money to on your desk, only one of them is a convicted doper, how can you be so .... to ignore that just because he is 10% more likely to win a race? (insert any word here, for example greedy, careless, heartless, without principles, uncaring about the sports you are sponsoring, etc etc)
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
“It is bad business for sport to nail their best athletes and I think all high levels sports are okay with having a flawed system.”

Bingo! I have not been in the sport that long but have heard from credible people that WTC in the past may have swept admission of doping and or absentee from the sport (after said admissions) under the rug for this reason...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [scca_ita] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Anyone who thinks Michael Jordan’s 18 month TO THE DAY retirement wasn’t a league suspension is crazy.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
turdburgler wrote:
hairypiernas wrote:
I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy.


I would agree with this. Forget about big sports where testing is a joke (NFL, Futbol, NBA, MLB, etc), but if we look at our little enclave triathlon just isn't tested to nearly as rigorous a standard as cycling. Doping is an issue in triathlon and because of the more lax testing, I suspect it allows for some rife cheating. Is Weiss clean now? I don't know and can't answer it. With the prevalence of different SARMs that aren't detectable, micro dosing EPO, TUEs and many more it is obvious our sport is as dirty as the rest. Oh yeah, blood bags still aren't detectable. Years ago we finally began to detect plasticizers, but do you think the cheats aren't still a decade ahead? Do we really feel like those amazing times coming out of the late 80s and 90s that held up for decades were clean? Give me a break. They just happened to coincide with the outbreak of the EPO and blood bag era. What's worse is the joke of a testing program. An athlete can cycle whatever drugs they want, miss two tests and we will never know. By the time the tester shows up again the drugs can clear their system, they have a cycle in them and they test fine. After 18 months those missed tests roll off their record and they can rinse and repeat. The worst part is we never know.

It is bad business for sport to nail their best athletes and I think all high levels sports are okay with having a flawed system.

I thought the same myself a number of years ago. Fast forward to today and I've had the privilege of working with, meeting, bike fitting, and coaching a couple.few dozen pros. First and probably least important, they are all super nice and I would be fairly surprised if any of them were taking any form of PEDs. Take it with a grain of salt. More importantly I've watched the progress of a lot of these athletes over a number of years, and seen a lot of bike power files and run files from training and racing. I've seen nothing to suggest anything other than a slow progression in fitness through massive amounts of hard work. PEDs and in particularly oxygen vectoring type drugs would be pretty obvious both in race results and training data.

I'm not saying triathlon is clean. I am saying it is probably not nearly as dirty as cycling, (mostly because there is far less money on the table). They also need to test more. Adam Otstot's (3rd at CHOO last week) summed it up nicely a few days ago, "Over the past 3 years I have been on the podium in three 70.3s and top 10 in 4 other races. Times tested in the span: once"


3 Months of Paradigm Shifting Swim Instruction for Cheap // Your Professional & Private “Critique my Fit”

The Swim Help Compilation Thread

Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sbernardi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sbernardi wrote:
Anyone who thinks Michael Jordan’s 18 month TO THE DAY retirement wasn’t a league suspension is crazy.


It may have been a secret suspension but don't think it was for PED
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/131997-mjs-1st-retirement-was-it-a-secret-suspension
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My opinion is that we should be harsh with convicted dopers. I get it that they can change and race clean later. But that is not the point.

When young athletes see that you get a second chance than likelyhood of making wrong decisions increase.

But when young athletes see that you will throw away your career with a positive than maybe they think twice. Everyone should be made clear that when he makes the wrong decision he will put everything at risk. Maybe he could get away with it but if not, than it's over. And while it's unfortunately not possible to ban someone for life we can at least make sure that their performance won't be given credit animore.

As a person everyone deserves a second chance. As an athlete not so much.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i agree. it's cynical, and i wish it weren't so, but i think that probably a lot of triathletes are either naive or sanctimonious about the state of doping in our sport. you read some of the articles that are written about it and it's not to be convinced that lots of people are on something. considering how many age-group triathletes dope (as has been established in peer-reviewed research), the idea that there's "not enough money" in the sport doesn't hold. the base salary for pro tour cycling is crap, too, (25k for continental tour and 30k for world tour riders) but we all believe those guys are jazzed to the gills.

it's an insanely demanding sport, both in terms of performance and recovery. the benefits for doping are clearly massive, at all distances. most triathletes race infrequently, and get tested very rarely. occam's razor says, to me, that there's doping going on.

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
i don't know him personally, but he's done a lot of training these past few years...i have seen some of the changes... he's also been looking scary lean....he's always been a poor swimmer, so his focus has always been the bike and run.


When you have to bend backwards to find a reason for his dramatic improvement, it's probably a sign you're looking in the wrong area.

or i'm not going to burn someone at the stake for past mistakes.

he doped in the past. thousands have done it.. i'm not saying it's right. but he served his ban and is allowed to race again.

i've been following him on strava since 2013... that's FIVE years, and i've watched his training progress. mainly out of curiosity (i follow a few pros). like i said, i'm no expert, but all that progression seems pretty natural. his running has really improved over the past 2 years, a lot of that has to do with being leaner.

i'm not saying he's NOT doping. i'm just saying that just because someone improves on their run, doesn't mean they are cheating, even if they did so in the past.

Catalyst Wheel Covers: Be faster and look great without sacrificing weight.

TOPO Footwear: use code TOPOTRAN20 for 20% off any order!
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ahhchon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Careful, that kind of talk isn't allowed here. They're going to accuse you of doping next. I happen to agree with you though.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm surprised folks here don't complain about Laurent Jalabert taking age group podiums at WTC events......
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Tri Bread] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tri Bread wrote:
Sbernardi wrote:
Anyone who thinks Michael Jordan’s 18 month TO THE DAY retirement wasn’t a league suspension is crazy.


It may have been a secret suspension but don't think it was for PED
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/131997-mjs-1st-retirement-was-it-a-secret-suspension

Supposedly for being a degenerate gambler.
Not PEDs.


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
presumably the NBA looked at pete rose and said, "no thanks."

anyway, there are theories that some athletes who have temporarily ducked out of competition in their primes were 'encouraged' to do so after testing positive. that a league/promoter/race director said, basically, "why don't you sit out this year?"

from the economic point of view it makes sense. the athlete and the league lose with a positive test, but '6 months for a hamstring' doesn't really raise any eyebrows.

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SBRcanuck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is certainly an interesting topic. Here are some interesting facts to consider:
- Testing for PED’s in sport is highly ineffective. Lance Armstrong was tested hundreds of times and NEVER had a reported failure. In all probability Floyd Landis failed test was due to massive dehydration, which is not to say he was not doping, it is saying his test failure was more fluke than good testing. Victor Conte has spoken to the details on how he, and hundreds (thousands?) of “doctors” can administer drugs and avoid being caught on tests by following established protocols.
- 99% of cycling fans, and ST followers were passionately convinced that Lance was clean, until the very bitter end. This blinded passion was driven because everyone thought he was a great guy, which was also proven to be untrue. The obvious, physiological evidence that Lance was doping was publicly known since the mid 90’s, but NOBODY wanted to accept it.
- The reality is, no one, other than the athlete in question and people directly working with the athlete know whether he or she is doping or not, yet all of us have opinions. As none of us have objective evidence, we form a subjective opinion that is largely based on emotion. Do we like or dislike the athlete? Do we believe or not believe a given performance was possible? Mostly the like/dislike seems to dominate.
Specifically to Weiss, when considering his known doping period to current-
- his swimming is essentially the same- 3rd pack pro level
- his biking, in my opinion, has regressed, from OMG super biker, ie Starky, Wurf, Brownlee, Sanders, Keinle...to very, very good, as in 1-2 minutes back of those mentioned
- his running has gone from decent, to OMG super runner, ie Gomez, Sanders, Frodo, Brownlee...
- his is obviously much leaner, suggesting a change in training, and likely diet.

That is the objective data on Weiss. Does it suggest doping? As it stands, I don’t think so. If you are of the belief that once a doper always a doper, than the performances and any objective information is not relevant.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IntenseOne wrote:

- Testing for PED’s in sport is highly ineffective.


I agree and disagree. I agree that it's ineffective relative to what it's purpoted to be. But I believe sport would massively change if we stopped all testing outright. It's a form of doping regulation, which, in my opinion, is far better than nothing.

Quote:

- 99% of cycling fans, and ST followers were passionately convinced that Lance was clean...


Oh heeeylll no. Go back and read all the Lance threads. As a card-carrying Lance-hater, we had a large, vocal contingent here on ST for around a decade before The Decision. I'm not sure if we were a majority, but we sure as hell weren't 1%.
Last edited by: trail: May 28, 18 14:35
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
trail wrote:
IntenseOne wrote:

- Testing for PED’s in sport is highly ineffective.


I agree and disagree. I agree that it's ineffective relative to what it's purpoted to be. But I believe sport would massively change if we stopped all testing outright. It's a form of doping regulation, which, in my opinion, is far better than nothing.

Quote:

- 99% of cycling fans, and ST followers were passionately convinced that Lance was clean...


Oh heeeylll no. Go back and read all the Lance threads. As a card-carrying Lance-hater, we had a large, vocal contingent here on ST for around a decade before The Decision. I'm not sure if we were a majority, but we sure as hell weren't 1%.

Apologies for old age memory! Sure seemed like even the slightest suggestion of Lance being dirty resulted in immediate crucifiction.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
just based off the picture listed without knowing the athlete and or course measures.

I would guess this could be .

[moderator's delete]

etc, etc. about 7-8 other top guys that race this way.

Point being. Why don't they get that kind of post. Seems to be more about the athlete then the numbers.

I don't like dopers just objectivity.

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter
Last edited by: Slowman: May 28, 18 20:53
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Because those athletes weren't already busted for blood doping?

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
VeloVetta is developing AERO cycling shoes with CFD and wind tunnel testing.
InstagramFacebook
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Tri Bread] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes. Not PEDs. Totally gambling. Prob bet on NBA games too.

http://www.TriScottsdale.org
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [RowToTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You are right, allegedly? We don't know anything about anything.

but the picture makes it sound like those numbers ( being able to win) are only because of blood doping?? So all others with similar numbers must be blood dopers then to no.

He shouldn't stay the numbers at all. Just say what you meant to say.

WE HAVE CHEATERS EVERY WHERE IN SPORTS NOW and NO ONE HAS THE BALLS TO SAY GET OUT!!!

THE IOC let Russian athletes back into the games for F sakes.

Nina Kraft ( 2004 Kona winner) got to come back to triathlon after being caught taking EPO and admitting it. ( if you use her example as well it doesn't stay with your system).

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Triathletetoth wrote:
just based off the picture listed without knowing the athlete and or course measures.

I would guess this could be .

---
---
---

etc, etc. about 7-8 other top guys that race this way.

Point being. Why don't they get that kind of post. Seems to be more about the athlete then the numbers.

I don't like dopers just objectivity.


----

I realize Weiss has been caught prior, but I’m not willing to label him “a cheat” for his recent results. Maybe he really is busting his ass and putting in the work, and getting the results.

I will say I think PED use is YUUUUGE in professional sports, and tri is no exception (in my opinion).
Last edited by: Slowman: May 28, 18 20:55
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
(in my opinion). /

So in your opinion, the guy that got busted prior and was a professional bike racer you defend, and two guys that have never come close to controversy you blast out of the blue? Horseshit... ( the smell of so peoples opinions)
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
(in my opinion). /

So in your opinion, the guy that got busted prior and was a professional bike racer you defend, and two guys that have never come close to controversy you blast out of the blue? Horseshit... ( the smell of so peoples opinions)

Whoooooooaaaa there! I’m not blasting anyone on PED use. I’m giving them all the benefit of hard work. While it’d be great to vilify a “known” cheat...we don’t know if he is cheating now. Sure, point out the past actions, but without positive proof recently you’re just looking at his “good results”. And by just looking at results, THEN we could have a post like this for a LOT of athletes (examples were given). Do you disagree?

Sorry your panties are in a bunch on this. #sorrynotsorry
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i really don't believe what i'm reading here. i'm hoping there's some sort of language (and culture) breakdown. if you're going to express concerns about the righteousness of certain athletes, you'll need to bring hard evidence. i don't necessarily mean a positive test or other proof of doping. but at least a hard data-driven analysis that you're willing to stand behind regardless of who else falls inside your mathematical formula that expresses a high likelihood. or whatever else you want to offer.

25 years ago i traveled the circuit, worldwide, along with a wife that got 2nd in kona, won a lot of IMs, and we knew the landscape. we weren't fools. but any suspicions we had remained between us, because what if we were wrong?

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Culley22 wrote:
monty wrote:
(in my opinion). /

So in your opinion, the guy that got busted prior and was a professional bike racer you defend, and two guys that have never come close to controversy you blast out of the blue? Horseshit... ( the smell of so peoples opinions)


Whoooooooaaaa there! I’m not blasting anyone on PED use. I’m giving them all the benefit of hard work. While it’d be great to vilify a “known” cheat...we don’t know if he is cheating now. Sure, point out the past actions, but without positive proof recently you’re just looking at his “good results”. And by just looking at results, THEN we could have a post like this for a LOT of athletes (examples were given). Do you disagree?

Sorry your panties are in a bunch on this. #sorrynotsorry

i modified your post. and took out names. look, i think this continued hazing of michi is pretty low. whether by spectators or other pros. who have a very selective idea of when outrage is warranted. in my opinion - and michi knows this, because while others are not willing to express to michi their views personally, and only tweet about him, i have expressed this face to face with him - i think he's never going to find stasis and resolution until he owns up to his past. that said, he served his time. i'm not saying that we all should forget his bust. just, that there's a line somewhere between remembering and stalking and i don't know where it is but i get the sense we may be across it.

on the other hand, it's just uncool to say, well, if i had to take my guess, this person, that one, and that one, are doping. you oughta be really effing sure you want to publicly say that, because, what if i said, "if i had to guess, culley22 is beating his dog. not an accusation! just a sort of inkling i have." how would that make you feel? because, that's pretty much what another athlete feels like when you make that public guess.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
Culley22 wrote:
monty wrote:
(in my opinion). /

So in your opinion, the guy that got busted prior and was a professional bike racer you defend, and two guys that have never come close to controversy you blast out of the blue? Horseshit... ( the smell of so peoples opinions)


Whoooooooaaaa there! I’m not blasting anyone on PED use. I’m giving them all the benefit of hard work. While it’d be great to vilify a “known” cheat...we don’t know if he is cheating now. Sure, point out the past actions, but without positive proof recently you’re just looking at his “good results”. And by just looking at results, THEN we could have a post like this for a LOT of athletes (examples were given). Do you disagree?

Sorry your panties are in a bunch on this. #sorrynotsorry

i modified your post. and took out names. look, i think this continued hazing of michi is pretty low. whether by spectators or other pros. who have a very selective idea of when outrage is warranted. in my opinion - and michi knows this, because while others are not willing to express to michi their views personally, and only tweet about him, i have expressed this face to face with him - i think he's never going to find stasis and resolution until he owns up to his past. that said, he served his time. i'm not saying that we all should forget his bust. just, that there's a line somewhere between remembering and stalking and i don't know where it is but i get the sense we may be across it.

on the other hand, it's just uncool to say, well, if i had to take my guess, this person, that one, and that one, are doping. you oughta be really effing sure you want to publicly say that, because, what if i said, "if i had to guess, culley22 is beating his dog. not an accusation! just a sort of inkling i have." how would that make you feel? because, that's pretty much what another athlete feels like when you make that public guess.

I went back and checked, and you could have at least just X’d them out, deleting a big chunk now makes it seem out of left field [pink]

You replied and wrote at me in your response so I just want to clarify: I’m not going after Weiss. I was saying that without proof and based on results, than all the top guys could then just have these “comments” about them.

As to your question (what if you said...): I wouldn’t care. I cant control other people’s thoughts. But if my position had people to have greater suspicion I was a dog beater...then I would expected such “inklings”, they come with “my position”, I expect them from some and they wouldn’t have me too worried as long as I knew I was clean.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Culley22 wrote:
Slowman wrote:
Culley22 wrote:
monty wrote:
(in my opinion). /

So in your opinion, the guy that got busted prior and was a professional bike racer you defend, and two guys that have never come close to controversy you blast out of the blue? Horseshit... ( the smell of so peoples opinions)


Whoooooooaaaa there! I’m not blasting anyone on PED use. I’m giving them all the benefit of hard work. While it’d be great to vilify a “known” cheat...we don’t know if he is cheating now. Sure, point out the past actions, but without positive proof recently you’re just looking at his “good results”. And by just looking at results, THEN we could have a post like this for a LOT of athletes (examples were given). Do you disagree?

Sorry your panties are in a bunch on this. #sorrynotsorry


i modified your post. and took out names. look, i think this continued hazing of michi is pretty low. whether by spectators or other pros. who have a very selective idea of when outrage is warranted. in my opinion - and michi knows this, because while others are not willing to express to michi their views personally, and only tweet about him, i have expressed this face to face with him - i think he's never going to find stasis and resolution until he owns up to his past. that said, he served his time. i'm not saying that we all should forget his bust. just, that there's a line somewhere between remembering and stalking and i don't know where it is but i get the sense we may be across it.

on the other hand, it's just uncool to say, well, if i had to take my guess, this person, that one, and that one, are doping. you oughta be really effing sure you want to publicly say that, because, what if i said, "if i had to guess, culley22 is beating his dog. not an accusation! just a sort of inkling i have." how would that make you feel? because, that's pretty much what another athlete feels like when you make that public guess.


I went back and checked, and you could have at least just X’d them out, deleting a big chunk now makes it seem out of left field [pink]

You replied and wrote at me in your response so I just want to clarify: I’m not going after Weiss. I was saying that without proof and based on results, than all the top guys could then just have these “comments” about them.

As to your question (what if you said...): I wouldn’t care. I cant control other people’s thoughts. But if my position had people to have greater suspicion I was a dog beater...then I would expected such “inklings”, they come with “my position”, I expect them from some and they wouldn’t have me too worried as long as I knew I was clean.

i know you're not going after weiss. in fact, i'm not sure, but i might be agreeing with you about weiss, as far as it goes. and, no, you're wrong. if your whole neighborhood, your whole city, your whole county, thought you were beating your dog, when you knew you weren't, you'd be pretty unhappy, both at the situation, and the agent who was responsible. it was my impression you were making insinuations at certain others, who have not been implicated in the least. perhaps i misread you.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:

i know you're not going after weiss. in fact, i'm not sure, but i might be agreeing with you about weiss, as far as it goes. and, no, you're wrong. if your whole neighborhood, your whole city, your whole county, thought you were beating your dog, when you knew you weren't, you'd be pretty unhappy, both at the situation, and the agent who was responsible. it was my impression you were making insinuations at certain others, who have not been implicated in the least. perhaps i misread you.

Ah, I see the confusion; I was not implicating the ones I mentioned, in fact exactly the opposite. I was using the pointy end of the field, who I am a fan of, at any point can be questioned if just using “results”. I would like to believe they’re all good, and barring any results I will continue to assume they are. Though, I will stand by my PED use statement in professional sports and my belief their use is widespread.

If I was the dog catcher of my neighborhood and it’s well known that dog catchers all over sometimes beat dogs, though I do not beat dogs (just catch them). But recognizing that sometimes if you’re really good at you job, and a public figure, that false things will be said about you at one point or another. So I wouldn’t think much of some rumor mongering that sometimes happens to people in my public, dog catcher, position. Especially if I knew I was clean.
Quote Reply
Post deleted by windschatten [ In reply to ]
Last edited by: windschatten: May 28, 18 22:37
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windschatten wrote:
Culley22 wrote:

If I was the dog catcher of my neighborhood and it’s well known that dog catchers all over sometimes beat dogs, though I do not beat dogs (just catch them). But recognizing that sometimes if you’re really good at you job, and a public figure, that false things will be said about you at one point or another. So I wouldn’t think much of some rumor mongering that sometimes happens to people in my public, dog catcher, position. Especially if I knew I was clean.


Oh really?

No worries about people shouting at you in the streets, calling you all sorts of names, spitting at you?

That wouldn't get to you at all?

I think you have no idea....

Please see Dan’s original question.

Did anyone here spit on, or scream names at anyone?? Because isn’t this in reference to people just expressing their “opinion” based on “inklings”....on the internet (or just in rumor mill whispers)?? Maybe I missed the public lynchings and assaults.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
i know you're not going after weiss. in fact, i'm not sure, but i might be agreeing with you about weiss, as far as it goes. and, no, you're wrong. if your whole neighborhood, your whole city, your whole county, thought you were beating your dog, when you knew you weren't, you'd be pretty unhappy, both at the situation, and the agent who was responsible. it was my impression you were making insinuations at certain others, who have not been implicated in the least. perhaps i misread you.

There is a saying: if you run into an asshole in the morning, that person is an asshole. When you run into assholes all day, maybe you’re the asshole.

If someone’s entire country think them to be a cheater (for whatever Reason the ENTIRE country has) then maybe...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I feel the best way to protest is to simply put his sponsors product on my black list. If companies want to sponsor convicted or ex-dopers then I simply wont spend my cash. The best form of protest is to not buy HED or Diamond Back or Blue Seventy etc. I wont buy these products.
We can't stop people racing once they come back from bans but we can protest by avoiding their sponsors. Stop supporting these companies - make it clear you don't like their sponsorship and marketing...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [sticky] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sticky wrote:
I feel the best way to protest is to simply put his sponsors product on my black list. If companies want to sponsor convicted or ex-dopers then I simply wont spend my cash. The best form of protest is to not buy HED or Diamond Back or Blue Seventy etc. I wont buy these products.
We can't stop people racing once they come back from bans but we can protest by avoiding their sponsors. Stop supporting these companies - make it clear you don't like their sponsorship and marketing...

Lol, I just bought HED Jet black wheels, I love them. Steve Hed was awesome and I will continue to support that company when I can.

It's been said before, if you are not going to buy certain products because they sponsor current or past dopers, you aren't going to be able to buy -anything-. If you don't believe that, then nothing personal, but you are being very naive.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [sticky] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Name a company you can support then. One that is going to give you the quality you want.

Shimano. Nope.

Campy. Nope.

SRAM. Nope.

Most bike companies. Nope.

Giro. Nope.

Bell. Nope.

Nike. Nope.

Adidas. Nope.

Unfortunately you're kind of left with mob rule or the mob courts. At some level most of the companies directly involved with triathlon and cycling and running are somehow and somewhere linked with athletes who have been convicted or otherwise shown to be doping.

I'm all for speaking with your dollars, it's just that if you're going to do it for Weiss' supporters, how far do you want it to go, and what equipment are you going to use?


Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | Cervelo | RokaWetsuits | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well in this case we know there is one “dog beater,” and it’s Weiss. Even if he promises he doesn’t do that any more, are you going to ask him to dog sit?

I still don’t follow the second chance in SPORT logic for a doper. He’s a nice guy? He’s sorry? Great. Let’s be friends and have a beer, but you don’t get to compete at the professional level again. The benefits of doping have been shown to last and get you to new levels. So what incentive is there for people to not dope to reach those new levels, say sorry, and get a second chance?


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [hairypiernas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I personally love the sport but i am of the opinion that doping in triathlon is the same as in other endurance sports(running, cycling...) and i bet that if testing was as rigorous in triathlon you would see more athletes caught way more often. I also find it hypocritical for the pro community to gang up on weiss and huethaller for example, because they don't have a likeable personality, physique or whatever it is, but they sock up to beth mcenzie (who is actually serving a doping ban) because she is likeable?! or is it because they want to participate in races she organizes? accept sponsorship from her clothing line? what is it? they embrace her in the community... talk about double standards oh boy. "

- I couldn't agree with you more on this. It makes me sick. I personally called out Beth McKenzie last October on twitter and got tons of hate messages from fellow pros defending her, it is complete BS. I don't understand why any athlete would want to support a doper's clothing line, it is insanity to me. I got shit on for speaking up for what I think is right. I don't care if I am in the pro triathlon "cool kids" clique, I'll say what I think is right and fair.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [KirstyJahn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, you have one new fan here. Good on you for speaking out. I wish more would.

Accidentally consuming the “in” drug doesn’t sit well with me. And then to go back on her promise to not race at the professional level again is just sad. It was like she tried to say the right things to test the water and be forgiven, but had no intention of following through.


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mungub50] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mungub50 wrote:
Well in this case we know there is one “dog beater,” and it’s Weiss. Even if he promises he doesn’t do that any more, are you going to ask him to dog sit?

I still don’t follow the second chance in SPORT logic for a doper. He’s a nice guy? He’s sorry? Great. Let’s be friends and have a beer, but you don’t get to compete at the professional level again. The benefits of doping have been shown to last and get you to new levels. So what incentive is there for people to not dope to reach those new levels, say sorry, and get a second chance?

fine. but then everyone who gets popped gets banned for life. fine with me. i've got no problem with that. but that means everyone. and that's really not what the anti-weiss crowd seems to want. my problem is not with banning weiss for life. my problem is with banning only weiss for life. and for only tweeting about him.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [asianzone] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe if the roles were reversed and Weiss controlled the island house tri invites...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yep, and I can understand that frustration. It’s like people have a level of doping they can accept and likability plays into that. Some of us are anti-dopers. We don’t discriminate :).


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mungub50] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Take it up with WADA. Per the regs, he's served his time and is allowed to compete thereafter.

I'd imagine that the incentive to attempt to dope, hope nothing else goes wrong during the course of training/racing, win a bunch of stuff to make cash, and then sit out for anywhere from 2 to 4 years these days to live off of, and then hope that you maintained enough fitness/competitiveness from that doping period to then be able to come back and perform at a world-class level is pretty damn low.

----------------------------------
Blog | Twitter
"It ain't easy being green..."
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [rrheisler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rrheisler wrote:
Take it up with WADA. Per the regs, he's served his time and is allowed to compete thereafter.

I'd imagine that the incentive to attempt to dope, hope nothing else goes wrong during the course of training/racing, win a bunch of stuff to make cash, and then sit out for anywhere from 2 to 4 years these days to live off of, and then hope that you maintained enough fitness/competitiveness from that doping period to then be able to come back and perform at a world-class level is pretty damn low.

Without reference to any particular person, I'd imagine that the incentive for a pro to dope, given the probability of so many other things to go wrong, the difficulty of earning a living in this sport, the low risk of getting popped, and the lack of permanent ban is pretty damn high.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
i'm not saying that we all should forget his bust. just, that there's a line somewhere between remembering and stalking and i don't know where it is but i get the sense we may be across it.

I get that sense too. For example: his run was great, but when you see that there was a 1:11, a 1:12 a 1:13 and a female ran a 1:18 you get a sense that the run was short. But people would rather blame it on repeated cheating?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [KirstyJahn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
KirstyJahn wrote:


- I couldn't agree with you more on this. It makes me sick. I personally called out Beth McKenzie last October on twitter and got tons of hate messages from fellow pros defending her, it is complete BS. I don't understand why any athlete would want to support a doper's clothing line, it is insanity to me. I got shit on for speaking up for what I think is right. I don't care if I am in the pro triathlon "cool kids" clique, I'll say what I think is right and fair.

You earned another fan in me as well. This should be a no excuses type of deal. Get busted, get treated the same. The onus is on the pro to not take illegal substances whether intentional or not.

Strava I Instagram I Team Every Man Jack I
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
Slowman wrote:
i'm not saying that we all should forget his bust. just, that there's a line somewhere between remembering and stalking and i don't know where it is but i get the sense we may be across it.


I get that sense too. For example: his run was great, but when you see that there was a 1:11, a 1:12 a 1:13 and a female ran a 1:18 you get a sense that the run was short. But people would rather blame it on repeated cheating?

It's not just this one result that has people rolling their eyes, he ran 1:11 at Galveston then 1:10 at St George right before this.

Strava I Instagram I Team Every Man Jack I
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I need to get me some of these Tuesday meds people keep talking about. lol
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [KirstyJahn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kirsty, first off congrat's on the win.

But FYI "people in (moral) glass houses shouldn't throw stones". Maybe those folks suffer the same cognitive dissonance you suffer from, there are plenty of folks on here that would skewer you for your recent coach choice, just saying.

David T-D
http://www.tilburydavis.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [tilburs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tilburs wrote:
Kirsty, first off congrat's on the win. But FYI "people in (moral) glass houses shouldn't throw stones". Maybe those folks suffer the same cognitive dissonance you suffer from, there are plenty of folks on here that would skewer you for your recent coach choice, just saying.


lionel has been the source of - as far as i can tell - unfounded insinuations of doping pretty much from the time he burst onto the scene. you were his coach or at least coaching advisor, no? how did that make you feel? i don't know who anybody's coach is these days, so i don't know what you're referring to, but i think that's what kirsty's referring to: the selective decisions to display moral outrage, and the selective decisions to consider performances evidence of doping (lionel is usually first on the list when it comes to this bullshit). there's a lot i could say about this, because we (here at slowtwitch) get into the weeds when we investigate anti-doping, but i don't see that further detail would be helpful. just, yeah, kirsty is in my view spot-on when it comes to what certain pros in our sport decide to decry, and what they decide to overlook.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: May 29, 18 10:19
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
fine. but then everyone who gets popped gets banned for life. fine with me. i've got no problem with that. but that means everyone. and that's really not what the anti-weirs crowd seems to want. my problem is not with banning weiss for life. my problem is with banning only weiss for life. and for only tweeting about him.

Dan,
Have you ever done a poll on the sentence for dopers that get caught? Perhaps I am wrong but I would expect a very high percentage of folks to be in a favour of a 'ban for life' on the first offence. Is this not the case?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
the selective decisions to display moral outrage

This is simply what I am driving at.

Please let's not confound insinuation with a track record of served ban and utter lack of acknowledgement of guilt.

To answer your question..... I advised him for over a year, spent a lot of time in his company working face to face and frankly I paid no heed to "insinuation" because I got to see the work done and the data and the historic data and more importantly get to know the man beyond simple triathlon chit chat. I am comfortable with my integrity and his. As to what others think of me for that, not my concern.

David T-D
http://www.tilburydavis.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [tilburs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tilburs wrote:
Slowman wrote:
the selective decisions to display moral outrage


This is simply what I am driving at.

don't you think that's what kirsty was driving at?

tilburs wrote:
Please let's not confound insinuation with a track record of served ban and utter lack of acknowledgement of guilt.

which pro are you talking about? because, i think that's the point here.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Last edited by: Slowman: May 29, 18 10:43
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
Culley22 wrote:

As to your question (what if you said...): I wouldn’t care. I cant control other people’s thoughts. But if my position had people to have greater suspicion I was a dog beater...then I would expected such “inklings”, they come with “my position”, I expect them from some and they wouldn’t have me too worried as long as I knew I was clean.


i know you're not going after weiss. in fact, i'm not sure, but i might be agreeing with you about weiss, as far as it goes. and, no, you're wrong. if your whole neighborhood, your whole city, your whole county, thought you were beating your dog, when you knew you weren't, you'd be pretty unhappy, both at the situation, and the agent who was responsible. it was my impression you were making insinuations at certain others, who have not been implicated in the least. perhaps i misread you.

tilburs wrote:
To answer your question..... I advised him for over a year, spent a lot of time in his company working face to face and frankly I paid no heed to "insinuation" because I got to see the work done and the data and the historic data and more importantly get to know the man beyond simple triathlon chit chat. I am comfortable with my integrity and his. As to what others think of me for that, not my concern.

Holy SHIT, pretty much the exact answer I gave...and yet no downplay of this response? No dismissing of it as "no, you're wrong"?!?!? Too funny.

Dan, does two people answering the same way show that MIGHT actually be how people would respond? Or are more people needed to assure this?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
First: your ears must have been ringing because as you were responding to me I was looking up your results. Nice win this weekend! you racing townelake tri this year? Bridgeland? I don't think we've ever raced?

On Weiss I don't think we are that far off. I am fine with eye rolling. But I don't think you can take these results and say he is running on Gomez's level which is specifically what Clarke said. And I don't think that hyperbole serves a purpose when there are legitimate complaints about him.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
QUOTE "i really don't believe what i'm reading here. i'm hoping there's some sort of language (and culture) breakdown. if you're going to express concerns about the righteousness of certain athletes, you'll need to bring hard evidence."

How can you post this saying I need evidence yet the post of a picture is a bunch of number we see ever race of a swim time, bike time and run time ( that lead to wins) that says must be cheating???

this is very hypocritical that posting some ones NUMBERS is saying they guy is a cheat but others have the same numbers so they are clean???

you can say he is cheating but to say look at these splits he must be cheating but to not call out anyone else with the same splits is a bit off.

QUOTE "but any suspicions we had remained between us, because what if we were wrong?"

That's adding to my point a pro can't call out one pros race splits and say CHEATER.
When a dozen other guys have the near exact same splits but they are NOT cheaters. You just said what I said if you say one looks suspicious then call them all out but you maybe wrong.

His past no one can defend maybe??? but he hasn't got caught in triathlon and TRAITHLON is letting him race so fight the system.

( side note) I don't like him or his past just objectivity about splits matching doping allegations. You should be questioning Will Clarke he posted it???

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [tilburs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tilburs wrote:
But FYI "people in (moral) glass houses shouldn't throw stones". Maybe those folks suffer the same cognitive dissonance you suffer from, there are plenty of folks on here that would skewer you for your recent coach choice, just saying.
Man, I could not agree more. I'll take a doper over a sexual predator.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks! I’m not sure we have, I haven’t raced a lot. I’ve usually taken the summer less seriously training wise, so never in good shape for most of the local races. That changed this year when I got ITBS and had to defer my IMTX entry to Maryland (turned out to be blessing in disguise after seeing what happened there). Anyway, I know I’m doing buffalo springs in a few weeks then Maryland. We’ll have to see how much or little desert dude wants me to race leading up to that (sept 29).

Strava I Instagram I Team Every Man Jack I
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [tilburs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There seems to be extensive virtue signalling, moral relativism and some cognitive dissonance knocking around here

Apparently a clothing line from a doper is an outrage. Workouts scribed by a sexual predator are ok.........

I am going to have to seriously think this shit through.

Would I rather my daughter's wore a dopers clothes or be coached by Sutton..........

Edit. Cue the responses citing revisionist history, his mea culpa, how there is no moral equivalence blah blah blah

If I choose to exercise my right to be coached by Sutton i would also choose to keep my mouth shut about others exercising poor judgement
Last edited by: Andrewmc: May 29, 18 13:22
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Triathletetoth wrote:
QUOTE "i really don't believe what i'm reading here. i'm hoping there's some sort of language (and culture) breakdown. if you're going to express concerns about the righteousness of certain athletes, you'll need to bring hard evidence."

How can you post this saying I need evidence yet the post of a picture is a bunch of number we see ever race of a swim time, bike time and run time ( that lead to wins) that says must be cheating???

this is very hypocritical that posting some ones NUMBERS is saying they guy is a cheat but others have the same numbers so they are clean???

you can say he is cheating but to say look at these splits he must be cheating but to not call out anyone else with the same splits is a bit off.

QUOTE "but any suspicions we had remained between us, because what if we were wrong?"

That's adding to my point a pro can't call out one pros race splits and say CHEATER.
When a dozen other guys have the near exact same splits but they are NOT cheaters. You just said what I said if you say one looks suspicious then call them all out but you maybe wrong.

His past no one can defend maybe??? but he hasn't got caught in triathlon and TRAITHLON is letting him race so fight the system.

( side note) I don't like him or his past just objectivity about splits matching doping allegations. You should be questioning Will Clarke he posted it???

The point is this: we have rules on this forum about accusing athletes of doping without evidence. If you can’t follow the rules, then take that speech to Facebook or some other place.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Post deleted by windschatten [ In reply to ]
Last edited by: windschatten: May 29, 18 14:10
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In my role as moderator? No.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting take.

Will Clarke makes post with no evidence.
slow twitch poster on your form with no evidence says look this must be true, please discuss.
I say will clarkes statement is so stupid you could make that argument with all these splits of x athletes and admit I have no evidence, I am just making a point.

You say please no names when making a point even though I stated I don't think they are cheaters but by that pro's stupid logic everyone would be considered a doper???

I should have said ( this statement basically says)
so no names "anyone that can swim 26-28 then bike low 2 hr and then run 1:09-1:13 in will clarkes eyes is doping". WILL CLARKE NOT ME.

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Triathletetoth wrote:
Interesting take.

Will Clarke makes post with no evidence.
slow twitch poster on your form with no evidence says look this must be true, please discuss.
I say will clarkes statement is so stupid you could make that argument with all these splits of x athletes and admit I have no evidence, I am just making a point.

You say please no names when making a point even though I stated I don't think they are cheaters but by that pro's stupid logic everyone would be considered a doper???

I should have said ( this statement basically says)
so no names "anyone that can swim 26-28 then bike low 2 hr and then run 1:09-1:13 in will clarkes eyes is doping". WILL CLARKE NOT ME.

Sounds to me like you're a dog beater.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What Will Clark did wasn't classy but these people my guess never worked in a corporate environment so they have no idea what can be said or be said in public, you simply don't lash out without evidence, its simple!
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Triathletetoth wrote:
Interesting take.

Will Clarke makes post with no evidence.
slow twitch poster on your form with no evidence says look this must be true, please discuss.
I say will clarkes statement is so stupid you could make that argument with all these splits of x athletes and admit I have no evidence, I am just making a point.

You say please no names when making a point even though I stated I don't think they are cheaters but by that pro's stupid logic everyone would be considered a doper???

I should have said ( this statement basically says)
so no names "anyone that can swim 26-28 then bike low 2 hr and then run 1:09-1:13 in will clarkes eyes is doping". WILL CLARKE NOT ME.

maybe something was lost in the translation. that's not how i read what you wrote. nevertheless, it's certainly possible that i misread it.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
this flew right over my head.

Please don't explain it to me. I don't have time for that.

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Triathletetoth] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Triathletetoth wrote:
Interesting take.


Will Clarke makes post with no evidence.
slow twitch poster on your form with no evidence says look this must be true, please discuss.
I say will clarkes statement is so stupid you could make that argument with all these splits of x athletes and admit I have no evidence, I am just making a point.

You say please no names when making a point even though I stated I don't think they are cheaters but by that pro's stupid logic everyone would be considered a doper???

I should have said ( this statement basically says)
so no names "anyone that can swim 26-28 then bike low 2 hr and then run 1:09-1:13 in will clarkes eyes is doping". WILL CLARKE NOT ME.

Finally some common sense! Hoorah... We may all have our doubts but if we label every world record broken, remarkable or unsuspected performance then we will be doubting everything and everyone. Does anyone question the dominance of the Germans in Ironman at the moment? Based on the groundless claims should we have a post about them and what their doctors are prescribing;)?

People may have a gripe that Weiss has been done for doping in 2005 in a different sport and certainly a very different time. I imagine being a lot younger and maybe in an environment being cycling where it was rife (this was the Lance Armstrong, Fuentes blood doping period and Floyd Landis) and he may have felt compelled to dope to be competitive. I'm not here to make excuses for dopers but people make mistakes and provided they serve their penalty, you may not like them but they are under the same doping tests and guidelines as everyone else. Pull out your knives if he fails any time soon.

David Millar Scottish cyclist got done for doping around this period, served his time and came back a massive anti doping proponent and very vocal regarding it in the peloton and earned a lot of respect. As for Weiss having to apologise. Apologise to who? I am sure he harbours the guilt and regret and probably doesn't want to talk about especially as he is now competing in a different sport to a different audience 13 years after the fact.

http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/462/the-fall-and-rise-of-david-millar


Now based on this logic that Weiss must be on drugs to run as fast then what is that Spanish athlete on (as we can only accuse Weiss and name other athletes)? Do they have the same doctor out of Germany? My point being where do we stop? I watch sport and celebrate amazing results in the hope everyone is clean and I suggest you all do the same until someone gets busted. I feel sorry for the rest of you and how much lack of enjoyment you must take out of the sport continually doubting every result...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I doubt most unbelievable results because history has shown they usually are, well, unbelievable. I do still enjoy the sport though and get satisfaction in following it.

As for Weiss and who he owes an apology to? Oh, I don’t know, maybe his competitors that he cheated...but he’s sorry you say? Well then, that changes everything.

Every decade it’s the same argument of “this is a new era and doping doesn’t exist.” The same things were being said back in 2005 about the issues of 1999ish time frame. When are we going to learn from history?

And the doping tests and guidelines are meaningless. In the rare case that they do work, how much confidence do you really have in the management of the results? Ironman busting a star athlete is not likely. I really lost faith in the system with the recent ITU fiasco(s). I thought they were a legit organization but they are no better than the rest of them. Sweeping things under the rug with little to no explanation.

I do understand your point of view though. It is easier just to have faith and take the results for what they are. It does make the sport more enjoyable. However, I think this acceptance is one of the reasons change hasn’t happened. So I’ll continue to be cynical and question those unbelievable performances.


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm going to have to disagree with you that people that have been busted for doping in the past should be treated the same as those that haven't.

We want people to stop doping, right? Then we should definitely shame those that have been busted. There's not enough shame going on in the world today. Motivate people to do the right thing (or be extremely careful of what they put in their bodies) because if they don't there will be consequences. And not just here take a 2 year hiatus from racing and train your face off (or have a baby). They should be ostracized if we can't get a permanent ban from the governing bodies.

Strava I Instagram I Team Every Man Jack I
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sean H wrote:
I'm going to have to disagree with you that people that have been busted for doping in the past should be treated the same as those that haven't.

We want people to stop doping, right? Then we should definitely shame those that have been busted. There's not enough shame going on in the world today. Motivate people to do the right thing (or be extremely careful of what they put in their bodies) because if they don't there will be consequences. And not just here take a 2 year hiatus from racing and train your face off (or have a baby). They should be ostracized if we can't get a permanent ban from the governing bodies.

Interesting thought process:

Dope until caught

Once caught, have baby (which would require time off anyway)

Return to racing in 2 years.


But really, we are over 100 posts into a thread talking about why people dope and what should be done and there isn't a single mentioned about the health risks these athletes take by engaging in doping.

___________________________________________
2020 IRONMAN 70.3 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP - M35-39
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [LifeTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Right, because tri is so lucrative that people can afford to take years off and just train. Definitely not going to have to take a few hits to their training when they work full time.

I think you're going to get some ugly responses to the health issues thing.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
imswimmer328 wrote:
Right, because tri is so lucrative that people can afford to take years off and just train. Definitely not going to have to take a few hits to their training when they work full time.

I think you're going to get some ugly responses to the health issues thing.

Most triathletes who are doping are not making their living off of triathlon - even pros. For many of them, taking a few years off of triathlon would probably relieve a financial burden! The myth that doping is mostly about money is just that - a myth.

And I see no reason why he would get "ugly responses" about the health issue. Do you find that statement offensive?

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
VeloVetta is developing AERO cycling shoes with CFD and wind tunnel testing.
InstagramFacebook
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [RowToTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I suspect you're about to see a number of responses wishing bad health on people from doping, based on the rest of the thread. This forum is getting a little ridiculous about the whole thing.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
imswimmer328 wrote:
I suspect you're about to see a number of responses wishing bad health on people from doping, based on the rest of the thread. This forum is getting a little ridiculous about the whole thing.

I seriously doubt we will see that. We will see people who want dopers banned from sports, not who want dopers put into the hospital.

His post is about the personal health risks dopers are willing to take to cheat. He's not hoping for health consequences.

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
VeloVetta is developing AERO cycling shoes with CFD and wind tunnel testing.
InstagramFacebook
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Doesn't it seem like the other pros and posters here are saying that the proof is the 1:09 run split? To run sub 70 in a 70.3 is pretty serious running pedigree and we haven't seen that from Weiss before. I'm not accusing him, it would seem as though that is the evidence people are pulling from since they don't have drug tests to prove it.

The only thing making me believe that he's clean is that Sanders and Kienle still beat him up at St. George. If Weiss had mopped the floor with those guys, I'd be skeptical as hell.

Team Zoot 2019
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [aerobean] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
aerobean wrote:
Doesn't it seem like the other pros and posters here are saying that the proof is the 1:09 run split? To run sub 70 in a 70.3 is pretty serious running pedigree and we haven't seen that from Weiss before. I'm not accusing him, it would seem as though that is the evidence people are pulling from since they don't have drug tests to prove it.

The only thing making me believe that he's clean is that Sanders and Kienle still beat him up at St. George. If Weiss had mopped the floor with those guys, I'd be skeptical as hell.

yeah, that's what they're saying. but it's not proof. i think it's okay to speculate; not to assert. i (personally) don't think it's fine to viciously stalk him personally, primarily because it's a very selective decision to stalk (while giving other folks who are prime stalk targets a pass). but that's just my view, and not a moderating issue.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And there is the apparent cognitive dissonance (or moral relativism - both apply) of people who are choosing to virtue signal over particular individuals...........
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
And there is the apparent cognitive dissonance (or moral relativism - both apply) of people who are choosing to virtue signal over particular individuals...........

yeah. whatever. sometimes i think about writing a book. 30 years dealing with all the facets of this business. but then i realize, what's it going to accomplish?

the one thing that people might find interesting is how utterly unequipped i was to even begin, and how fortuitous it was for me to know how much i didn't know. still, the trick was to acknowledge what you didn't know, and live underneath that umbrella of forced humility. which is why the world of 2 billion moral and technical experts in everything is so incongruous with my own journey, which required every minute and second of gladwell's 10,000 hours, and then some.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Was he tested after running 1:09. I know he wasn't tested after STG 70.3 Top 2 were.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SA001] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SA001 wrote:
Was he tested after running 1:09. I know he wasn't tested after STG 70.3 Top 2 were.

you're asking the wrong guy.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SA001] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SA001 wrote:
Was he tested after running 1:09. I know he wasn't tested after STG 70.3 Top 2 were.
What’s it seem to matter. He's already been labeled as having cheated and no one wants to believe otherwise.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Was the course an accurate 13.1 miles?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [wetswimmer99] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Of course not. Look at the times across the board.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
SA001 wrote:
Was he tested after running 1:09. I know he wasn't tested after STG 70.3 Top 2 were.
What’s it seem to matter. He's already been labeled as having cheated and no one wants to believe otherwise.
To be fair he earned the label of “cheater”...

The fact he may not be cheating here doesn’t just delete past actions. And as they say: actions have consequences...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Culley22] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Culley22 wrote:
Shambolic wrote:
SA001 wrote:
Was he tested after running 1:09. I know he wasn't tested after STG 70.3 Top 2 were.

What’s it seem to matter. He's already been labeled as having cheated and no one wants to believe otherwise.

To be fair he earned the label of “cheater”...

The fact he may not be cheating here doesn’t just delete past actions. And as they say: actions have consequences...
The consequence of a small amount of people with little else of importance to do having a sook on a triathlon forum? LOL
Quote Reply
Post deleted by windschatten [ In reply to ]
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's the second beating the dog comment and neither of us it was aimed at have any idea what you're on about? So yeah ok whatever...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
There seems to be extensive virtue signalling, moral relativism and some cognitive dissonance knocking around here

Apparently a clothing line from a doper is an outrage. Workouts scribed by a sexual predator are ok.........

I am going to have to seriously think this shit through.

Would I rather my daughter's wore a dopers clothes or be coached by Sutton..........

Edit. Cue the responses citing revisionist history, his mea culpa, how there is no moral equivalence blah blah blah

If I choose to exercise my right to be coached by Sutton i would also choose to keep my mouth shut about others exercising poor judgement


Bravo. Couldn't agree more. Moral relativism puzzles can be tough. But, in this case, not so much. If we're going to have a conversation about offences worthy of lifetime bans from the sport, crimes of pedophilia against young athletes placed in your care seem like a really good place to start.

Alan Couzens, M.Sc. (Sports Science)
Exercise Physiologist/Coach
https://alancouzens.com
https://HumanGo.ai
Last edited by: Alan Couzens: May 31, 18 6:06
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Alan Couzens] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Alan Couzens wrote:
Andrewmc wrote:
There seems to be extensive virtue signalling, moral relativism and some cognitive dissonance knocking around here

Apparently a clothing line from a doper is an outrage. Workouts scribed by a sexual predator are ok.........

I am going to have to seriously think this shit through.

Would I rather my daughter's wore a dopers clothes or be coached by Sutton..........

Edit. Cue the responses citing revisionist history, his mea culpa, how there is no moral equivalence blah blah blah

If I choose to exercise my right to be coached by Sutton i would also choose to keep my mouth shut about others exercising poor judgement


Bravo. Couldn't agree more. Moral relativism puzzles can be tough. But, in this case, not so much. If we're going to have a conversation about offences worthy of a lifetime ban from the sport, crimes of pedophilia against young athletes placed in your care seems like a really good place to start.
Good call. Any athletes that are Catholics or go to church we should bar them from the sport or at least tell them to shut up for supporting an organisation that conducted thousands of cases of pedophilia against children under their care, defended it in court putting them on the stand and let so many committed suicide but we all still celebrate Christmas and Easter.

Is a kid that stole a candy bar from a store always labelled a thief and carry that through life and into his job career. What about someone that commits DUI? I have a lot more contempt for them than an ex doper... Sutton is now married with a wife and children.

Who among us is totally moral and just on all levels? When do people move on?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Alan Couzens] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am baffled that a woman would decide that they are going to take a stand, draw a line in the sand on their personal objection to doping whilst being coached by a guy who raped a child in his care (to be clear it was statutory rape of a minor)

The mental gymnastics to make this reasonable in ones own mind must be quite the sight

I am guessing a parallel is speaking out about USA gymnastics and their failure in duty of care, and then taking a role in a weinstein movie

If one (not you specifically) is unable to see that their private actions do not align with their public pronouncements they have literally zero credibility.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Sean H] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
interesting the post from Ruedi Wild who was 2nd behind M. Weiss...

"the new but famous Austrian superrunner"
Last edited by: Plissken74: May 31, 18 0:16
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am not sure I understand your point

Sutton raped a girl under the age of consent. He argued it was consensual (she was 14 he was 27). He has stated he was victim of a violent parent, that she consented etc. She was 14. He was the adult. He had a duty of care and he had sex with her and they pleaded down the charges)

Weiss got done for blood doping. He harmed his competitors

If I doped, I would not be calling out Sutton about his own behaviour

Equally if I was coached by Sutton it would not appear my moral compass extends as far as "advocating moral and ethical behaviour and associating with people that exhibit those traits all the time" rather only when it suits me, and not when the best tri coach in the world is a convicted child molester / rapist, pick your terminology to assuage your conscience

The problem with the virtue signalling crowd; "I called her out on twitter" BS, is that they almost always demonstrate that it's not some sort of underlying values that drive them to do it, but the need to be seen to do it.

On a personal note, IF Weiss did his time (and as I understand it he did not actually fail a test but was banned based upon statements made by other athletes) AND if Sutton did his "time", moved on, works only with adults and has "attoned" I think they should be able to get on with their lives

What drives me mad, is the selective signalling about X = bad, whilst ignoring Y.

I would be interested to know the results of Weiss drug tests
Last edited by: Andrewmc: May 31, 18 1:19
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Plissken74] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ruedi shouldn't be throwing shade around when he sabotaged himself with that Rudy Project windsail, I mean helmet. :)
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This has been a wild episode of stage rushing and mug slinger cross fire ... Definately feel like a binding jerry springer end of show sum up moment is eminent
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [KirstyJahn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kirsty - I noticed that you wore Betty gear in your race this past weekend and the kit for the brand is made by Hincapie Sportswear... owned by confessed doper George Hincapie.

Just fyi
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
...

I would be interested to know the results of Weiss drug tests

Would it matter? I think the assumption is most pro's know how to not show up glowing on race day. A negative drug test doesn't mean much these days.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [SBRcanuck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fair point
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [jordanac] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This gets funnier and funnier

The signals are looking a little less virtuous........

Something about no sin and casting stones or living in glass houses...........
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [jordanac] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jordanac wrote:
Kirsty - I noticed that you wore Betty gear in your race this past weekend and the kit for the brand is made by Hincapie Sportswear... owned by confessed doper George Hincapie. Just fyi

and i happen to know a little about you. isn't it true that you entered a race that used, as its volunteer coordinator, a person known to be the closest personal friend to a known philologist; and who himself engages in glossolalia? just sayin' ;-)

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That one sent me to the dictionary. Twice.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The difference in all of these examples is a direct vs indirect relationship (besides the Sutton connection). Are we going to start questioning her food choices because company XYZ has questionable ethical standards?

She merely pointed out the inconsistencies in defending some dopers while throwing others under the bus. Phil Gaimon(ing) it if you will...

Let’s keep this thing on track. Dopers suck!


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [wetswimmer99] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did this one last year and I'm fairly confident it was around 12.6 miles
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mbwallis] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mbwallis wrote:
That one sent me to the dictionary. Twice.

then my job is done here.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [TriathlonJoe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriathlonJoe wrote:
I need to get me some of these Tuesday meds people keep talking about. lol

Bahaha, Thanks for the morning laugh. Would have been better if I had read this on Tuesday instead of today.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mungub50] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 "I don't understand why any athlete would want to support a doper's clothing line, it is insanity to me. I got shit on for speaking up for what I think is right"

This is what she said whilst wearing hincapie clothing and being coached by a child rapist........

Rapists suck
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [jordanac] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jordanac wrote:
Kirsty - I noticed that you wore Betty gear in your race this past weekend and the kit for the brand is made by Hincapie Sportswear... owned by confessed doper George Hincapie.

Just fyi


I am not sure Kirsty would even know that fact as I certainly didn't and it would give no indication on their website of that fact. Just as most people don't know that you have been to the Island House triathlon how many times??? There is a difference in knowingly supporting a doper directly and unknowingly supporting a doper indirectly. If you have been in the sport as deep as I am you know doubt know some stories that are not public but are true and can be truly sad.

If there is anything that came from the 2016 election (regardless of political affiliation) is there is a huge difference between what people say they are going to do (exit polls) and what they actually do (votes tallied), maybe because of fear of being bullied. I respect any professional that has the courage to call out doping in public. It isn't a popular choice and often receives blowback. If they don't know before, they will shortly after, and that is it takes tremendous emotional energy to get thru the blowback and that affects workout, recovery, etc.

As for me, I have been outspoken about this publicly over and over again and that is the interference of the lead vehicle in races. It can have a greater effect than doping IMHO and I always bringing it up at pro meetings and sometimes in public. I have been fighting it for years and I have taken abuse. I have never seen Luke bring it up or fight for it, maybe he has but not in my direct presence. I would also state publicly if I ever had a TUE for anything. I wonder if Luke, Beth, and Kirsty would do the same? But most pros aren't this bold as they don't want to rock the boat so I understand if they don't but I am not going to gang up on on someone that does as I already know how much courage it takes to say "screw the *cool* kids, screw the fame, screw the wins and success, screw the money"

Curious why would you make this about Kirsty? Are you affiliated with Wyn in any way or is this just a Beth friends thing? Fwiw, Beth has always been kind and I too want to believe that it was contamination and hope it is. I have said this publicly, I want to know what brand it was. Forget about the lawyers, forget about the settlement, NDAs whatever, and do the right thing for your peers, for humanity. Help them out by shedding light on the product that got you banned. Too many sealed lawsuits have allowed too many shady actors to perpetuate for too long.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Last edited by: Thomas Gerlach: May 31, 18 8:54
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
"I don't understand why any athlete would want to support a doper's clothing line, it is insanity to me. I got shit on for speaking up for what I think is right"

This is what she said whilst wearing hincapie clothing and being coached by a child rapist........

Rapists suck

can i just say that in all your posts about virtue signaling, which started well enough, you're starting to sound conspicuously like what you're arguing against. i'm not particularly a fan of hincapie; nor of sutton; nor of the prince of bahrain; nor of michi weiss; nor of a lot of people who have behaved badly, very badly, or questionably in their pasts. but my post in fun an hour ago didn't seem to have it's intended effect.

the one idea to which i most strongly cling, that i must believe in, that would sink me if i didn't believe in it, is redemption. to be clear, redemption should only be offered to those who seek it, and if you don't think you're guilty you don't seek it. so, yes, one problem we have with all the bad actors discussed here is that their various bad acts have only imperfectly been cleansed by the acknowledgement of the actions and the request for redemption.

nevertheless, some folks have seen their ways clear to offer redemption. (yes, i think those folks might want to speak to why they've seen fit to offer it; but i don't begrudge anyone extending redemption.) please give these folks the freedom to offer redemption.

now, yes, i get it, you're objecting to the hypocrisy of pointing out the sin in others while harboring a sin yourself. but when one person objects to the virtue signaling of another, and then a third party virtue signals against the virtual signaler, where is that going to stop? what we end up with is the inability to allow anyone to extend redemption, which resolves into a giant circle virtue jerk.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You - the royal you - do not get to demonstrate virtuous behaviour selectively

If you are going to call a person out for their behaviour in one domain, your own behaviour in another is fair game

You don't get to say "I can't forgive a doper" but "child rapists are ok" without opening your self up to the fair criticism that you are; a hypocrite, display an astounding cognitive dissonance and moral relativism........
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You can find the Betty connection over on the Hincapie site. But it does come off a bit ingenuous to talk about "supporting a doper's clothing company" when your sponsor is aligned with one. Yeah, we're getting into shades of responsibility, etc. and it winds up with no winners at the end of the day.

With regard to your last paragraph, although truth is an absolute defense in a defamation claim, you can bet your behind that you'd have a lawsuit on your hands the second the brand name is uttered. And that's simply a price many are unwilling to pay. I obviously can't speak on anyone's behalf on that - but that's the calculus involved. It's easy to say that you'd perform differently if in that situation - but I can't imagine most of us would be willing to contend with the legal bills associated with defending a civil claim. It's five figures, easily, even if you wind up with a dismissal/MSJ.

----------------------------------
Blog | Twitter
"It ain't easy being green..."
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [rrheisler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
to you and mr. gerlach both: are you asking about a contaminated supplement? as you both certainly know USADA maintains this list.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My interpretation of Mr. Gerlach's post was requesting for the specific supplement to be named in the ostarine positives, to be named by those who tested positive and claimed supplement contamination. I was merely explaining why that was likely to not be the case by the individual.

And yes, that database is certainly useful in potentially filling in some of the details missing in the above examples.

----------------------------------
Blog | Twitter
"It ain't easy being green..."
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My point which has been lost in the midst of getting caught up in tackling apologists, is that I would let Weiss and Sutton, broadly speaking, get on with their lives, but if you decide you want to call one out, you better be whiter than white in the company you keep, or you can legitimately be called a hypocrite

Sutton did something two decades ago for which he will be both publicly and privately criticised and he has to live with it, as do his family, and his clients

Weiss did something alleged by a third party and he has to live with it

Neither needs to apologise to me, or anyone else, but it seems many are quick to get on the crucifixion band wagon and they may not have right on their side

I am not holding myself up as some arbiter of truth.

For example, my problem with lance was never thank he cheated, he worked within the system he was in. My problem - as if he cares- was the subsequent behaviour towards others.

That said. I take your point. I've made my point. I'm done.
Last edited by: Andrewmc: May 31, 18 8:24
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [rrheisler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rrheisler wrote:
My interpretation of Mr. Gerlach's post was requesting for the specific supplement to be named in the ostarine positives, to be named by those who tested positive and claimed supplement contamination. I was merely explaining why that was likely to not be the case by the individual.

And yes, that database is certainly useful in potentially filling in some of the details missing in the above examples.

you're right. just, my guess is that this dbase likely answers mr. gerlach's question.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agreed. I think there's an unrealistic expectation that athletes, in an instance of claiming tainted supplementation, will immediately be able to disclose the name of the product. Which, well, is just not going to happen; not with the ease of filing a suit and the likelihood that you're going to make it at least to a few motions, which is (as mentioned) a sizable dollar amount.

A somewhat analogous case going on right now - the defamation trial between Dr. Chris Amann and Phil Brooks (aka CM Punk). https://www.si.com/...nn-colt-cabana-trial

That...is not a cheap lawsuit going on.

----------------------------------
Blog | Twitter
"It ain't easy being green..."
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
rrheisler wrote:
My interpretation of Mr. Gerlach's post was requesting for the specific supplement to be named in the ostarine positives, to be named by those who tested positive and claimed supplement contamination. I was merely explaining why that was likely to not be the case by the individual.
And yes, that database is certainly useful in potentially filling in some of the details missing in the above examples.


you're right. just, my guess is that this dbase likely answers mr. gerlach's question.

I know about that list but my question is if the supplement Beth took is on that list? I would like to think so but do we know for sure? There has to be a better way to do this. Maybe even given shorter sentences for people who actually publicly name the product. With that being said, I can't access Supplement 411 right now. It seems to be locked behind a credential wall. Is this new?


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That still doesn't remove the disincentive for an athlete to have to defend themselves against a defamation lawsuit. That's why this stuff doesn't come out in the open in 99% of cases.

----------------------------------
Blog | Twitter
"It ain't easy being green..."
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
You - the royal you - do not get to demonstrate virtuous behaviour selectively

If you are going to call a person out for their behaviour in one domain, your own behaviour in another is fair game

You don't get to say "I can't forgive a doper" but "child rapists are ok" without opening your self up to the fair criticism that you are; a hypocrite, display an astounding cognitive dissonance and moral relativism........

That is a fair point.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [windschatten] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windschatten wrote:

I rather have him hammering the keyboard than beating his dog....
.
Well played! lol
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I guess I prefer seeing a convicted doper producing and selling clothes over a convicted doper still competing in sports.

Like I said before. I think dopers deserv a second chance - as a human being, not an athlete.

So it's great when an ex doper can find a job that makes him happy.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [rrheisler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rrheisler wrote:
That still doesn't remove the disincentive for an athlete to have to defend themselves against a defamation lawsuit. That's why this stuff doesn't come out in the open in 99% of cases.

I understand why athletes don't do it. I get it it - war is expensive. That is a problem with our legal system today and I think it is an unfortunate reality.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When will Herbert be interviewing Weiss???
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I will take one last turn at this :-)
Definition of cheater- someone who does not adhere to the rules. Can we all agree on this?
Weiss WAS a cheater. It is obvious everyone agrees with this!
The RULES call for a suspension, which Weiss complied with and served. He apparently has also complied with all of the required testing rules since his returned (otherwise he would have been further suspended or banned)
So, if Weiss is currently following all the rules, then he is NOT cheating.
Weiss is not the only triathlete who has cheated and been suspended for it, not even close.
No one can KNOW who is cheating in a given race unless the person has been caught, or you actually witnessed it.
It seems that NO ONE should be calling anyone out if there is not proof of the infraction, speculative call outs are indeed a slippery slope.
If you don’t like the rules, ie duration of suspensions, then fight to change them, but don’t bash someone for following them.
There are plenty of rules/laws that I am fighting to change, such as the penalties for DUI, which I think are obscenely too light, but in the mean time I refrain from calling out individuals who I know that have served what I consider to lienient a penalty.
I don’t like the current penalties, AND enforcement of doping and drafting, but honestly these are both way down my list of concerns :-)
I try my best to remind myself to be tolerant and avoid being judgmental of others, hopefully we can all agree to work on this!
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not necessarily referring to Weiss but all dopers in general. So actually yes!

Doping is not something you can do on your own, it needs time and an infrastructure: to use PED you need to "work" with more people. All of them are part of the problem. Make no mistakes: they are all part of a criminal organisation.

When they're caught doping their usual response is: "it was a one-time mistake". No. It was not. Do you really want to come clean? Report all your accomplices so they can be also prosecuted. If not you're part of the criminal organisation. Period.

This is the bare minimum you need to do to be considered again a valuable member of the community. But competing again? No. Never. Forget it.

Competing is a privilege not a right. And you lost it for good.

So the question dopers need to ask themselves is: Do I want to be accepted as a member of the society? Because their competitive days are over (pro or ager) and their past, present, and future achievements should be deleted for ever.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
if you were doped to stay at the top, how can you be at the top without?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [elquike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
elquike wrote:
Not necessarily referring to Weiss but all dopers in general. So actually yes!

Doping is not something you can do on your own, it needs time and an infrastructure: to use PED you need to "work" with more people. All of them are part of the problem. Make no mistakes: they are all part of a criminal organisation.

When they're caught doping their usual response is: "it was a one-time mistake". No. It was not. Do you really want to come clean? Report all your accomplices so they can be also prosecuted. If not you're part of the criminal organisation. Period.

This is the bare minimum you need to do to be considered again a valuable member of the community. But competing again? No. Never. Forget it.

Competing is a privilege not a right. And you lost it for good.

So the question dopers need to ask themselves is: Do I want to be accepted as a member of the society? Because their competitive days are over (pro or ager) and their past, present, and future achievements should be deleted for ever.


I in general agree with your comment, as I tend to be in favor of erring on the side of harsher penalties, particularly for infractions of clear, conscious choice, such as doping (and DUI’s), but until the laws and rules are changed to reflect this, other than petitioning for change, I try to avoid condemning people for abiding by the rules as they now stand. From my perspective, it is a FAR bigger issue that our society is soft and lienient on DUI, which results in more deaths per month than all world wide terroist acts in the last 50 YEARS! I am not aware of ANY deaths (of those not involved) from athletes doping :-) I only mention this as a point of perspective.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Plissken74] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Plissken74 wrote:
if you were doped to stay at the top, how can you be at the top without?

I don’t know, I have never doped :-)
There is a lot of data from the cycling world that doping does not have the same influence for all athletes. This makes sense, as it is the case with all medications. What this means, is certain athletes will benefit far more than others, which conversely means some athletes will loose less performance than others when stopping.
Bottom line- no one should dope! Yet MANY DO. No one should draft in a non drafting race, yet MANY DO.
I cannot change this, and neither can you. I can, and do choose not to dope, not to draft, not to cheat, and so can you! So if everyone signs up, problem solved.
This is not a new problem, there is significant evidence that the beginning of cheating in sport began with the beginning of sport.
So ultimately, it is a personal choice. I have made mine, I hope others follow, but if they don’t, I do not have the time or energy to worry about it.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Plissken74] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
if you were doped to stay at the top, how can you be at the top without? //

I think you are under some false impression that dopers were not great athletes to begin with. OF course there may be some residual benefits years later after quitting(another subject which I believe to be true), but I think there are a lot of ex dopers out there still killing it in cycling. I dont think the entire peloton is clean, but I do believe the majority of it is now and a lot of those guys today were in the midst of the doping era.


And Weiss is not at the top, he is near it. Of course there are so many watered down Ironman races now it can look like one is dominating, but just take a look at the WC for 70.3 and Kona to see who is really on top. It does look like he has made an improvement, but honestly, without knowing if the courses are short( I believe this latest one for sure was) how can anyone be worked up about a time on a short course? I will give you all a clue, be would not have outrun Javier, or Brownlee, or Frodo,Lange, or several others that routinely beat him in runs. And on the other side, he would not have outridden Lionel, or Sebi, or Wurf either.


Mikki is a student of the sport of Triathlon who now has a pretty long history in the sport, and should be improving, and he is an ex doper who probably races clean now. This is all we know for sure until something else comes along to change things..
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IntenseOne wrote:
elquike wrote:
Not necessarily referring to Weiss but all dopers in general. So actually yes!

Doping is not something you can do on your own, it needs time and an infrastructure: to use PED you need to "work" with more people. All of them are part of the problem. Make no mistakes: they are all part of a criminal organisation.

When they're caught doping their usual response is: "it was a one-time mistake". No. It was not. Do you really want to come clean? Report all your accomplices so they can be also prosecuted. If not you're part of the criminal organisation. Period.

This is the bare minimum you need to do to be considered again a valuable member of the community. But competing again? No. Never. Forget it.

Competing is a privilege not a right. And you lost it for good.

So the question dopers need to ask themselves is: Do I want to be accepted as a member of the society? Because their competitive days are over (pro or ager) and their past, present, and future achievements should be deleted for ever.



I in general agree with your comment, as I tend to be in favor of erring on the side of harsher penalties, particularly for infractions of clear, conscious choice, such as doping (and DUI’s), but until the laws and rules are changed to reflect this, other than petitioning for change, I try to avoid condemning people for abiding by the rules as they now stand. From my perspective, it is a FAR bigger issue that our society is soft and lienient on DUI, which results in more deaths per month than all world wide terroist acts in the last 50 YEARS! I am not aware of ANY deaths (of those not involved) from athletes doping :-) I only mention this as a point of perspective.

You are right. DUI is far worse than doping.

Doping can also be seen for example as a fraud or (if you're forced into it) as corruption but it cannot be compared to DUI or any other "serious" crimes.

I was only referring to "valuable member of community" is the field of sports. I want to be tough on doping but without losing the perspective as you very well explained.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [rrheisler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't remember if Beth named the supplement which supposedly caused the ostarine positive, but Lauren Barnett did. I understand she's actually suing them now. She had a stronger case than Beth though, if I remember correctly.

Ironically, Beth races again soon whereas Lauren shows no public signs of coming back.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mbwallis] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mbwallis wrote:
I don't remember if Beth named the supplement which supposedly caused the ostarine positive, but Lauren Barnett did. I understand she's actually suing them now. She had a stronger case than Beth though, if I remember correctly.

Ironically, Beth races again soon whereas Lauren shows no public signs of coming back.

I do not no Lauren, and she very well may have taken the supplement unaware that it contained ostarine. I don’t remember the name of the supplement, but I do remember that it was an electrolyte replacement that marketed itself by proclaiming it would boost your performance by a significant amount. I also remember it did not list ostarine as an ingredient, but wouldn’t you want to know what was allegedly in at that was boosting your performance? Ancient salt- LOL? I know I would have asked, and I think Lauren should have. Maybe she did, but I know for sure that none of their listed ingredients could have provided a performance boost, so if she asked, it would have to have been an ingredient they were not listing, and who would take a product from a company that is not fully listing what they put in it. There are literally hundreds of options for electrolytes, when you decide to take one from a company guaranteeing performance gains- from a secret ingredient, you probably deserve whatever comes from it.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
She got the supplement from a triathlon store that *probably* sponsored her. The supplement maker was local.

This was not a case of Spiked Gatorade given To her on the course. But this also wasn’t a trip to GNC and picking something up next to a bottle of all natural Turbo Maxxxx extreme.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The company was Classified Nutrition according to the following Triathlete.ca article. What I would be most interested in if this plays out in court is how fault is placed. Is it Classified Nutrition mostly at fault or the company that was responsible for making/packaging the product assuming there is one, or some other supplier?


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
She got the supplement from a triathlon store that *probably* sponsored her. The supplement maker was local.

This was not a case of Spiked Gatorade given To her on the course. But this also wasn’t a trip to GNC and picking something up next to a bottle of all natural Turbo Maxxxx extreme.

Yep, I know all of that, but also know not to ingest something if I do not know exactly what is in it. If I am getting an electrolyte, even for free from a sponsor, and it is labeled that it boosts performance, I am not taking it without a very, very good explanation of what is in it.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thomas Gerlach wrote:
The company was Classified Nutrition according to the following Triathlete.ca article. What I would be most interested in if this plays out in court is how fault is placed. Is it Classified Nutrition mostly at fault or the company that was responsible for making/packaging the product assuming there is one, or some other supplier?

Thanks for the reminder. This company was apparently buying Osterine from an illegal source (it is not legal in the US), and yet they are still doing business, just no longer for their electrolyte product. Here is a statement from the USADA:
“Classified Nutrition
An electrolyte replacement product manufactured by Classified Nutrition was recently found to contain Ostarine, an investigational new drug that has not been approved for human consumption. The Classified Nutrition product, called Neurolytes, is also on USADA’s HRL.”

My question then, and now, is why would anyone take an ELECTROLYTE actively claiming a boost in performance ???
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Oh I agree. I am not suggesting she did deserve a ban.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
Alan Couzens wrote:
Andrewmc wrote:
There seems to be extensive virtue signalling, moral relativism and some cognitive dissonance knocking around here

Apparently a clothing line from a doper is an outrage. Workouts scribed by a sexual predator are ok.........

I am going to have to seriously think this shit through.

Would I rather my daughter's wore a dopers clothes or be coached by Sutton..........

Edit. Cue the responses citing revisionist history, his mea culpa, how there is no moral equivalence blah blah blah

If I choose to exercise my right to be coached by Sutton i would also choose to keep my mouth shut about others exercising poor judgement


Bravo. Couldn't agree more. Moral relativism puzzles can be tough. But, in this case, not so much. If we're going to have a conversation about offences worthy of a lifetime ban from the sport, crimes of pedophilia against young athletes placed in your care seems like a really good place to start.

Good call. Any athletes that are Catholics or go to church we should bar them from the sport or at least tell them to shut up for supporting an organisation that conducted thousands of cases of pedophilia against children under their care, defended it in court putting them on the stand and let so many committed suicide but we all still celebrate Christmas and Easter.

Is a kid that stole a candy bar from a store always labelled a thief and carry that through life and into his job career. What about someone that commits DUI? I have a lot more contempt for them than an ex doper... Sutton is now married with a wife and children.

Who among us is totally moral and just on all levels? When do people move on?


god i hate this argument in relation to sutton. i hereby declare that i am not totally moral and just on all levels. but i can also say with 100% certainty that i haven't ever raped a child that i was coaching.

i agree that there's all sorts of grey area in the world of doping. but are we really so far down the relativism rabbit hole that we can't draw the line at coaches raping athletes?

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
but honestly, without knowing if the courses are short( I believe this latest one for sure was)


I measured 89,6 km resp. 20.44 km in St. Pölten.
Last edited by: longtrousers: May 31, 18 23:59
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [iron_mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe you should learn all the facts before you make it sound so black and white then (agreed yes he was in the wrong) but I really can't believe people still bang on about it.

https://www.outsideonline.com/1892511/they-shoot-triathletes-dont-they
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I really can't believe people still bang on about it.


She was 14. A child. And, as her coach, he was an authority figure with significant influence over her. He abused that authority in the worst way possible.

Your moral code (or lack thereof) is becoming more apparent with every post you make. Unbelievable.

Alan Couzens, M.Sc. (Sports Science)
Exercise Physiologist/Coach
https://alancouzens.com
https://HumanGo.ai
Last edited by: Alan Couzens: Jun 1, 18 6:25
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
People have the right to bang on about it. Thank you for sharing the article though. I found this quote pretty interesting and it made me wonder what he is up to these days -

Richie Cunningham, a professional triathlete from Australia, says, "I would never be coached by the guy. I guess for some it's OK to sell your soul, as long as you end up winning."


https://twitter.com/mungub
http://benmunguia.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [IntenseOne] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IntenseOne wrote:
No one can KNOW who is cheating in a given race unless the person has been caught, or you actually witnessed it.
It seems that NO ONE should be calling anyone out if there is not proof of the infraction, speculative call outs are indeed a slippery slope.

Here's my rule of thumb: there are several people whom I privately suspect of doping. I do not call them out or make accusations unless I am also willing to report them to USADA. (And I have tipped USADA before - it's easy and efficient to do, and they respond promptly to reports).

Pointing fingers in social media doesn't accomplish much in the end. Assisting USADA is far more likely to achieve the desired result.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mungub50] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mungub50 wrote:
People have the right to bang on about it. Thank you for sharing the article though. I found this quote pretty interesting and it made me wonder what he is up to these days -

Richie Cunningham, a professional triathlete from Australia, says, "I would never be coached by the guy. I guess for some it's OK to sell your soul, as long as you end up winning."

I believe he is a firefighter or working for some sort of job like that in Colorado.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I prefer this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/...ry/0,,678189,00.html

"The first offence occurred when the swimmer was staying at Sutton's house, and the coach joined her in bed. 'She states that she was very scared and didn't know how to handle the situation and she knew it was wrong,' the prosecution said. Another offence happened when Sutton was massaging the girl. 'As he was rubbing her leg he moved his hand further towards her groin and he put one of his fingers in her vagina,' the court was told.

The other counts included one where Sutton picked the girl up from school, took her to an underground car park and forced her to give him oral sex in the back of the van. 'She tried to lift her head but his hand was at the back of her head,' the court was told. 'She recalls him saying things like 'You're good at this'. She states that she felt like it was something she was supposed to be doing because he made her feel like it's the right thing to do.'"

Yep, that's who I want to pay for workout plans. Why bang on about raping children?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mbwallis] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I prefer to simply call out dopers whilst he just does my plans. Dopers suck...........and I won't wear clothes designed or made by dopers...........
Last edited by: Andrewmc: Jun 1, 18 9:17
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Thomas Gerlach] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sheriff Deputy.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Alan Couzens] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Alan Couzens wrote:
Quote:
I really can't believe people still bang on about it.


She was 14. A child. And, as her coach, he was an authority figure with significant influence over her. He abused that authority in the worst way possible.

Your moral code (or lack thereof) is becoming more apparent with every post you make. Unbelievable.
Lol really. As adjudged by you on a tri forum. How will I sleep tonight? My point all along is when do we let go. Everyone has served there penalty so many years ago. Let the court of Slowtwitch roll on and no be allowed to have a fresh opinion...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
Maybe you should learn all the facts before you make it sound so black and white then (agreed yes he was in the wrong) but I really can't believe people still bang on about it.

https://www.outsideonline.com/1892511/they-shoot-triathletes-dont-they
Quote:


Did you learn anything from the recent gymnastics scandal, or maybe google us swimming and coaches abusing their young swimmers. People bang on about it because if Sutton gets a pass we normalize this shit.
Last edited by: The Guardian: Jun 1, 18 16:59
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [The Guardian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Guardian wrote:
Shambolic wrote:
Maybe you should learn all the facts before you make it sound so black and white then (agreed yes he was in the wrong) but I really can't believe people still bang on about it.

https://www.outsideonline.com/1892511/they-shoot-triathletes-dont-they
Quote:


Did you learn anything from the recent gymnastics scandal, or maybe google us swimming and coaches abusing their young swimmers. People bang on about it because if Sutton gets a pass we normalize this shit.
What about the Catholic church? Everyone seems to give them a pass for systemic child abuse and then what is worse defending themselves in court and causing thousands of suicides around the world. I am sure plenty of good people who are triathletes on here still go to church every Sunday but choose to bash the few in question on this thread. Yes I am fully aware of Weinstein, US gymnastics coach, the US president and it seems every actor of some prominence in Hollywood. I am not denying what he did was wrong 30 years ago now in an ISOLATED case. As slowman talked about earlier in the thread I think he and Weiss have earned their redemption and everyone needs to move on from the sewing circle of the slowtwitch forum having never met any of the people involved. Thats just my opinion everyone can bash me over it but people deserve forgiveness at some point.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Are you seriously comparing cheating in sports to raping a 14 year old? What the fuck is wrong with you?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I never compared the two. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [mbwallis] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mbwallis wrote:
I prefer this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/...ry/0,,678189,00.html

Thanks for digging that up as that really puts things in perspective The Outside Online article seemed to tone down the abuse even though I still consider the abuse of a position of power as a heinous crime when it comes to both sex and minors, but even if of age as well, even if consensual. The Guardian article really paints a different picture. I don't think there is a question in my mind about the type of person Sutto is and I would argue if that has changed. His manipulation of the psyche of athletes seem to be on thing that is reiterated over and over again today as a key to his success. His request that athletes submit to him 100% seems to also be reiterated. Reformed or not, that seems like two huge risk for athletes. I guess if these athletes want it bad enough and they are willing to do whatever it takes that is their own fault but I would be curious if any former athletes or current athletes of his have read this piece and what their take is.

The way I look at it is that WADA/USADA is partially protecting athletes from their own demise by banning the use of some unsafe drugs. Maybe Sutto should be banned from coaching completely and not just in Australia. What sort of tests/protocol has Sutto passed to prove his isn't in danger of doing the same thing again other than refusing to coach athletes under 16. 16 is a start but we need to protect people of all ages from the abuse of power regardless of how consensual things may be.


Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think your Catholic church analogy holds up. Going to church is kind of like continuing to watch women's gymnastics - it doesn't mean that you agree with the abusers buried within the system. Now, if one were to continue to go to a certain priest that was a known abuser - that would be the Sutton case. And I am pretty sure no one is doing that - or if they are, then they are pretty weird.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [The Guardian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No it is the knowledge and coverup from the very top not the rogue priests I am making comparison to. A rogue doctor or coach doesn't make me want to stop watching a sport but a rogue organisation that moves perpetrators around to hide their actions would be another matter. I just want to highlight what seems to be an inconsistency in what people seem to see as a doper or Sutto's case in relation to the real world and peoples blindness to bigger and far worse issues to individuals. I have never condoned their actions but say that each have served their penalty a long time ago and I personally look to move on. If your choice is not to then so be it. This whole thread has turned into a bit of a farce and I'm done. I've made my point and people are free to disagree. I suggest you read the link below or even watch the movie in regard the Catholic Church argument and that is just one of the many cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_the_Catholic_archdiocese_of_Boston
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If people were willing to let it go then this thread would not have taken the turn it has, but what someone did was decide that dopers (or their clothing) should be called out whilst being coached by Sutton. It is, as explained repeatedly, hypocritical, a cognitive dissonance and / or virtue signalling

As an aside. As a father of two girls I'd not let them anywhere near him. Not because 18 years later I think he is a threat, but because there are somethings and some sorts of crimes that have much longer term consequences in terms of trust from society. What i am unable to wrap my head round is, that I don't think today, any of his female athletes would be going to larry Nasser or us swimming coaches for plans but Sutton is different............maybe it's just the scale of abuse that doesn't make it ok

He does get good results though.......
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
31 years but we digress
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
The Guardian wrote:
Shambolic wrote:
Maybe you should learn all the facts before you make it sound so black and white then (agreed yes he was in the wrong) but I really can't believe people still bang on about it.

https://www.outsideonline.com/1892511/they-shoot-triathletes-dont-they
Quote:


I am not denying what he did was wrong 30 years ago now in an ISOLATED case.

I trained with & knew one of his top female athletes from the 90's/early 2000's very well. To put it mildly, the guy is a creep & in my opinion, he should not be allowed to coach.

I am shocked that more hasn't come out about him.
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I was referencing his admission in 1999-2000.

Either way the point stands. Perhaps if Larry ever gets out some here could look him up for flexibility training.......
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [NAB777] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Based on what someone told you your opinion. Sounds legit...
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
each have served their penalty a long time ago


Did Sutton serve his penalty, though?

Did he do any jail time as others guilty of similar acts of molestation do (and should)?

Did he even serve the minor sentence that was handed down? Thinking that, maybe, a lifetime ban is a deserved punishment for that level of offense (an offense that the victim will carry through the entirety of their life) &, heck, given his proclivities for wanting to have sex with children that maybe a job in a position of authority over a bunch of young athletes isn't the best long term career choice?

No, he doesn't stick around and 'take his punishment like a man'. Instead, he flees to a country known for its tolerance of disgusting old dudes who like to have sex with children and seeks legal advice as to 'just how young can I go?'

His actions after the fact speak to his lack of remorse and are completely indefensible.

Bottom line: Coaches, from any sport, who commit a sex offense against their athletes should receive a lifetime coaching ban. A ban that is enforced globally.

The one thing we do agree on - Sutton being allowed to continue to coach brings the entire sport (religion) into disrepute.

Alan Couzens, M.Sc. (Sports Science)
Exercise Physiologist/Coach
https://alancouzens.com
https://HumanGo.ai
Last edited by: Alan Couzens: Jun 2, 18 10:46
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Alan Couzens] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would stop now as you are making yourself look like a fool with rash outlandish claims. If you want to check your facts he has been in Australia the last month running sold out athlete training camps including my home town that friends eagerly attended, so if he hadn't served his penalty he would have been arrested at immigration. As I say he served his penalty long ago and people choose to attend his camps or be coached by him...
Last edited by: Shambolic: Jun 2, 18 14:58
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not sure what facts you disagree with. The lifetime ban from coaching in Australia was handed down at the trial and was referenced in the Guardian piece that came out shortly after the trial that mbwallis linked to.

Regarding his failure to adhere to this by running the recent camps, Triathlon Australia was contacted. I was told that the sanctions could only be enforced at the level of the federation but that he would never again be certified as as coach within Australia or be involved in any way with the Australian team.

This kind of locality of enforcement is exactly the problem I'm talking about. All athletes around the world should be subject to the same level of protection from coaches with this type of history. At the very least, hopefully threads like this will help to inform some of the younger athletes who may not be aware of just how grievous and disgusting his acts were.

Alan Couzens, M.Sc. (Sports Science)
Exercise Physiologist/Coach
https://alancouzens.com
https://HumanGo.ai
Last edited by: Alan Couzens: Jun 3, 18 6:39
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Shambolic] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Shambolic wrote:
Based on what someone told you your opinion. Sounds legit...

First hand, mate. She was an ITU athlete, lived with him in Europe and was there.......
Quote Reply
Re: Michael Weiss [Alan Couzens] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This post has definitely drifted!
My score card says Sutton is REALLY, REALLY Bad, and should probably never get a pass for what he did. Weiss was a cheat, and clearly not as bad as Sutton, possibly in the same category of any sport cheater, and MAYBE get’s a pass if he no longer cheats. Does that sum it up?
In regard to the overall general topic of punishment for bad deeds, IMO the entire society has for far to long errored on the side of being much to lienient. It seems to me bad things essential fall into 2 major categories-
REALLY, REALLY BAD horrific offenses that as a society we should NEVER forgive, and then bad things that we shouldn’t do, but are “repairable”.
In the first category, I would certainly include murder, child abuse, DUI ( because it is a conscience choice that disregards the life of others)- things of that nature. For acts in this category the punishment should be so hainous, so harsh, that everyone would say “whoa, that’s crazy”. Why? This are all acts of disregard for other people’s life’s that are done by conscience choice, and there is no coming back for the victims. You do not want punishments so weak that no one even remember them, you want everyone from a young age to fully understand that it is a line you don’t ever cross, and there is no coming back.
For the second category, I am highly negotiable:-)
Quote Reply