I think you're on too much sun for a readhead, it prevents you from speaking straight and makes you an expert in steroids because your 'husband told you so'...

Since she willingly confessed to using PEDs, I wonder if she will give up her suppliers? If she does, it is possible that they will also start talking in the hopes of lessening their punishment. When that happens things could really get ugly, as the BALCO scandal has shown. Other triathletes, cyclists, and who knows what that will be caught up in this. On the other hand, triathlon is a fringe sport and this could disappear from the public eye pretty fast.

I don't know Nina, but she seems like a really nice person who did something stupid. But, I also think she should be banned and fined heavily. It's ok with me if that makes it hard or impossible for her to make a living doing tris ever again. Just because you like someone doesn't mean that you don't want them punished for what they did. I don't think the people you counted as "for Nina" necessarily believe that she shouldn't be punished.



"i'm not calling most posters hypocrites. just wanted to point out that different folks get different treatment. "

I have to admit that I admire her coming forward and admitting it right away rather than deny, deny, deny. That gives her a leg up in my book, but she's still a cheater and should suffer the consequences.

D.

actually, I am not saying she is a nice person and just made a mistake (for nice person, we had an argument about coaching that I mentioned here a while ago and won't mention again, but it really pissed me off)

what I said though is that she made a mistake, she admitted, and I certainly don't say she doesn't need to be punished. Her ban should be in agreement with the current regulations (2yrs I believe, which basically means for life as she is 35 or 36). What I am not agreeing on is when I hear 'she is a piece of garbagge' etc...who has never cheated here? who has never written a tax return a bit loosely to get more money back? who has never went through an orange light that turned red...

she made a mistake, she will pay for it, but it's not necessary to add more crap.

I agree. although I don't think she should be fined and penalized more than what current rules say.

Crap, cut off my response to the above quote.

Your mindset is WHY you (and I) don't dope, but you have to realize that there are people in our sport (and others) who are in it for TOTALLY different reasons. Some people base their entire identity on how well they perform in sporting events. It's these warped souls who see anything that could make them better as something worth doing, since it ultimately leads to a better self view. We're in it for the health, some others have much more invested in it, and these are the ones who are prone to cheating.

I don't think it's rampant in AG events, but it exists. I'll bet my last months salary that some of those on the podium at IMFL last week were juiced. I'll also bet that there are some mid-packers juiced too. Like you, I can't fathom why, but they are not thinking about this sport the way you and I are. Once you realize that, you'll begin to understand why sports med doctors are approached daily by aging mid-pack athletes for "help" improving.

I don't think PED users are inherently scumbags, they've just gotten caught up in the game. It would be nice if they had the decency though when they enter a major competition, that bars PED use, to either drop out before the finish or forfeit their podium position and prize money to the person who finished next in line. Sincere question; do you think the athletes behind Nina may have actually done better because they were chasing her, or was she just too far ahead to pull any of them along? What about in general, is it possible PED users are actually raising the level of achievement of clean athletes? In some type of sardonic way I'd like to see a PED user who wins a major competition just stand up and say "F the UCI, F WADA, F USADA, and F the hypocrisy of the pharmaceutical companies. I just came here to haul ass and I took a shitload of drugs to do it. I'm going to die a premature death and be chastised to infinity. My name will be erased from the results, but I don't care because like Ben Johnson, we all know who won the race."

On a tangent, it would be interesting to see all the convicted PED users group together and form their own governing body and sanction their own races. The top athletes would still be tested, but conversely, if they were clean then they would be banned for two years to get their shit together and find a good doctor. I bet they could draw some decent ratings.

"she made a mistake"

Francois,

1. It's refreshing that it would appear Kraft is prepared to come out and admit that she took EPO. How often does this happen after a very high profile athlete get's nailed with a positive test? It's extremely rare, but I notice is starting to happen with greater frequency. Cyclist, David Millar after a bit of pressure did the same thing. Could it be that the officials have closed the gap on the athletes quicker than athletes thought? In the past, becasue the testing was so far behind, the deny, deny, deny defence worked.

2. A mistake? How? Why? Do you mean to say that she did not know that taking synthetic EPO was illegal? If she had some medical condition, and she needed to take it then she needed, to have that cleared - some pro cyclists have done this.

3. I agree with you that the sentance - two years seems a bit light. What happened to the four year bans and a life-time if caught again? I am guessing that the quick admisson( "I lost my head", "I made a mistake"), might be a new strategy, as some form of plea bargain and also to save face for the come-back two years down the road.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

that's semantic...I can write 'she did something wrong' instead if you prefer.

Naw - I am a biologist and I find the workings of the human body to be fascinating. I'm sorry my points about Nina's face upset you.

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

it's not the points you make on her face that upset me. she is not a good friend or anything.
I don't like things that are not fair that's all.
she tested positive to EPO, admitted, she will be banned. that's fair.
adding that she is also likely taking steroids because she is not pretty like lori, this is bogus and this upsets me...

"It's refreshing that it would appear Kraft is prepared to come out and admit that she took EPO."



What's refreshing about admitting EPO usage after she tested positive? "Refreshing" would be if she admitted her mistake before the race & decided to turn herslef in & not race at all.

Phelps admitted to drinking & driving after he got arrested for DUI - does that make it alright?

Someone mentioned steroids, HGH and looks. Although steroids can leave some traces in your face, mainly testosterone, the signs of HGH abuse are pretty obvious for a doctor or nutricionist. For a good example I could point you to some pics in the male hottie thread. So the abusers are out there and are age groupers.

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

"My name will be erased from the results, but I don't care because like Ben Johnson, we all know who won the race."


Unfortunatley, that's what can't be changed or taken back. The image of Johnson crossing the finish line arms raised in victory as he crushed the world 100m record, is seared into our minds. Same with Kraft at IMH, she will pay a big price for this, in many ways, but we still have that image of her crossing the finish line first. It's most unfortunate for the women that finished behind her, the ones robbed of their true place of finish and on the podium.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

problem is that all those behind Ben (2-3-4-5) tested positive later also...big cover up by USATF...

I thought you might take it as a 'pretty not pretty' thing. That wasn't my point at all. There are a lot of pictures on her website that are more unflattering to her. But I picked this one because I thought it illustrated my points. If it makes you feel better to make personal attacks on me, that's fine. ;)

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

Perhaps, "encouraging" would have been a better choice of words - the concept is the same. We MAYbe emerging from the time when EVERY positive test was met with complete and total denial on the part of the athlete and all of their supporters. Go back even a couple of years and tell me about any athlete who would step forward after a positive test and say," Yes, I took some drugs" This is a very recent trend, and one I suspect driven by the more sophisticated testing and a closing of the gap between what athletes think they can get away with and the testing procedures of the officials. In a round about way, it's good news!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I see what you're saying, fair enough.

well, as a scientist, if it doesn't bother you to be intellectually dishonest, you're in trouble. keep up the good work.

"i'm not calling most posters hypocrites. just wanted to point out that different folks get different treatment. "


I can agree with this assessment.

OK, Tyler is positive twice I guess. Once at the Olympics and once in Spain. I have no idea about the accuracy of any of these tests.

I had assumed that blood was drawn in August in Athens and tested at some lab of the Olympics choosing. Then in Sept. the Tour of Spain drew blood, I assumed, and they sent it to a lab of their choosing. Same lab? Since the tests were done within a few weeks of each other (in my example), could they be positive because of one "incident", in other words how long after doing something will you continue to test positive? Are they seeing the same thing in the X-ray over and over, to use your metaphor?

How did YOU arrive at:
"Actually the score is now 3 positive, 1 negative (the Olympics test was initially ruled negative)."

sample A and B at the vuelta...

Actually 3 positive, 1 can't be determined because they froze the sample. So easily could have been 4 positive.