Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

doping stuff - ideas...
Quote | Reply
I was chatting with friends about the Brigitte MM thing and the fact that she admitted right away...
Please read to the end before jumping all over...
Someone suggested that if someone admitted right away, this athlete could have a slightly shorter suspension, say 1-2 months less...Of course, the athlete is still cheating, so some kind of disagree...but I do see a positive (pun intended) here...
1. you don't have the impression the athlete thinks you're an idiot by coming up with some stupid excuses
2. it would actually lower legal fees significantly...

As some still thought, it's too nice to dopers who admit right away...I thought about the following

Fact: someone tests positive, samples A and B

1. athlete admits right away. Then, show some mercy, and give a 1-2 months shorter suspension during which the athlete will be tested a lot, during competitions, outside of competitions etc...like parole stuff...

2. athlete doesn't admit.
2.1 athlete shows it's a mistake, he/she is cleared (hey it does happen...)
2.2. athlete doesn't show anything and then it's lifetime suspension. period. no appeal

This way, it may lessen legal battles and all the media crap around them, will therefore save a lot of money spent in legal battles, that can now be spent on more testing. It also sends a fairly strong message to dopers...
if you want to fight it in court, you better be sure of yourself, because if it fails, you're out for life.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]
Fact: someone tests positive, samples A and B

1. athlete admits right away. Then, show some mercy, and give a 1-2 months shorter suspension during which the athlete will be tested a lot, during competitions, outside of competitions etc...like parole stuff...

2. athlete doesn't admit.
2.1 athlete shows it's a mistake, he/she is cleared (hey it does happen...)
2.2. athlete doesn't show anything and then it's lifetime suspension. period. no appeal
[/reply]

Just a question in part 1 its a " 1-2 months shorter suspension" Shorter then what the part 2 lifetime suspesion? Uhmmm I dont get it.

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
obviously not two months less from a lifetime ban... ;-)
so I am not talking about second time offenders that should get a lifetime ban, period.

if you test positive, admit and don't go to court etc. and get a 2 year suspension, admitting right away would get you 22 months, with 2 months on probation. instead of 24 months

if you test positive and go to court, and prove there was a mistake. you get out of it

if you test positive, go to court, don't prove anything, then bummer...you should have thought twice about it and you get suspended for life. no appeal.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I also think that admitting right away makes them MUCH less likely to dig into your past and past results. By owning up, I think there is zero chance the McMahon's gold medal from Sydney will ever come into question (legally; obviously it will be suspect in the public eye, but I don't think she will risk losing it). Whereas, if she had fought, they might have dug deeper into her past, medical records, etc., and she might have lost the medal.

Nina Kraft the same way. She said "I used EPO, but ONLY before Hawaii." Thus protecting her prize money and other compensation from the previous races (like St. Croix) that she had won.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Gut response, Francois...at the end of the day, this is not really different.

I think this line of thought (which, admittedly, I have had...MORE than once)...plays to our need to believe that these folks are basically good people who've made bad decisions. The potentially reduced legal fees is a new angle that I haven't thought of. But if we dig a little deeper into that argument, I think that is saying that right and wrong have a price.

I DO like the second strike lifetime ban. I think the first offense ought to remain stiff, though. It ought to significanly effect the athlete's ability to continue, though not destroy all hope.

I think, after a few more moment's thought, that the ones who are the "nice" guys and gals who just made a mistake...will do just as Bridgette and Nina have done. The really intransigent cheaters would still deny everything, even under your system.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What if they deny at first, then admit like halfway through the process? What's the cutoff time to fess up?
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think you shouldn't pay an extra penalty for going to court. Look at the phenomenon of unstable urine that results in (I believe) positive nandralone tests as the urine breaks down. That is a new discovery. So if you went to court because you really were innocent, but there just wasn't the technology to back you up, then you would be screwed, even though you actually were innocent. THAT SUCKS. Going to court should always be your right... Unless they have a photo of you sticking a needle in your ass, I don't think you should be penalized for trying to prove your innocence...

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
you are not penalized for going to court, you are penalized for dragging everyone to court and being guilty...if you go to court and prove that you are clean, you are of course, not penalized...but if you drag everyone to court like Beileve Tyler then the suspension should be a lifetime ban...
1. suspension for being +
2. one suspension for wasting money and acting as if all the others are idiots ready to believe the first BS you come up with...
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But what if you are innocent, but cannot prove it (as is certainly possible for athletes that tested positive for nandralone BEFORE the concept of unstable urine was discovered). Then you drag everyone to court, but the research/technology is not yet available to prove your innocence. Why should you suffer?

And, regardless of whether or not Tyler did it, the concept of chimeristic blood is going to be the next big hurdle. It is WAY more common that WADA will admit to, and it is certainly a very plausible explanation for his positive tests. I am not saying that is what happened in his case, I am just saying that the idea that it was a ridiculous defense is ridiculous. It really was quite a reasonable defense, but WADA is so worried about "opening doors" that they don't admit to things they know.

Like Karen Smyers being convicted of morphine usage. It was from poppy seeds on bagels. They knew this could have caused it, but they never told anyone, since they were afraid athletes would use it as an "excuse." WADA does not help athletes be clean, something that I think is unfortunate.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ok, but then the problem is what do you do? Risk to suspend an innocent with strict rules? or not take the risks and know that then, virtually anyone will be able to get away with it (as it is the case right now unless you're dumb)
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There is no good answer. Ruining the career of an innocent athlete is terrible. But not protecting the integrity of the sport is also awful. I see the arguments both ways.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just think we need to rethink the whole doping thing.

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Athlete 1 gets positive, both samples A and B, is however innocent, but cannot prove and has so much integrity and self proudness or whatever, and doesn't want to say he cheated just to get a lesser suspension => he gets a lifetime ban

Athlete 2 did cheat, got caught, will definitely say he did cheat now in order to get the lesser suspension => he gets 2 years minus



THE SOLUTION : have 100% proof testing. Talk about a dream.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think you raise a good point, Francois. I mean in criminal cases people can plea bargain to lesser offenses. Even though it isn't noble to cheat I think the immediate confession speaks to an inner honesty that suggests regret and a low likelihood of recitivism. While I would like to believe that a certain american's positive is false I don't believe fluctuating chimerism has yet been described in the scientific literature. Could still happen, pigs could fly...............

Pat
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I´m just glad she FINALLY tested positive... about 5 years too late...

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


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, then, Rappstar, which side would you choose? Here is one of the fundamental questions that needs to be answered by anyone having an honest debate about doping. I prioritize the integrity of the sport over the individual athlete. Of course I realize that means I am more likely to find substance in the stricter or even somewhat Draconian anti-doping measures. I must therefore be careful to listen to and carefully consider the other side as well.

Anyway...which is it for you? Anyone? As Rappstar points out...there is no one good answer here. Just two choices, each with merit.
Last edited by: TriBriGuy: Jul 4, 05 5:55
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that if we are on the side of 'we can't have innocent athletes suspended' then the only solution becomes to legalize doping, because then, all dopers will ALWAYS have an excuse and will get out of it...

so the only solution is to maybe wrong sometimes...IMO.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's pretty close to how I follow it, Francois. As far as being wrong sometimes, I am not afraid of that. I think too many people want to find perfection in any solution. The truth is, either way there will be mistakes...and I, like you, would rather not open the ethical and/or moral door to cheating.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't make a living at triathlon (or any other sport) so I guess it's a little more black and white for me.

If you cheat, you did it knowingly. lifetime ban, end of story. If some feel lifetime is too much then 2 year ban but don't cut them slack because they admitted it. Who cares if they admit it, they SHOULD admit it. they WILLINGLY, KNOWINGLY cheated. Screw 'em.
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [JohnInRI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you cheat, it is not always knowingly. Karen Smyers and the poppy seeds leading to a positive morphine test. Katja Schumacher and unstable urine leading to a nandrolone positive. Kicker Vencil and nandrolone from vitamin off the shelf. I mean, granted, these are fewer and farther between than the actual doping cases, but there are enough to make you seriously consider dropping a lifetime ban for a first offense.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd like to see something closer to the American jury system, which flawed as it may be, is pretty darn good. I'd like to see a jury of peers (12 or so other ATHLETES) being responsbile. I think that a jury of peers would be more sensitive to the facts and would give a fairer verdict as they could 1) identify with what it were like if it were their career on the chopping block, 2) indentify with the possibility of competing against doped athletes and suffering as a result.

I think there should be a short timeframe (~3 months or so) to hold such a trial. There should be a reasonable limit on time of the trial (1-2 weeks). And during the time of the trial, you are suspended from competing, but you would not lose any winnings/medals until a verdict was returned.

I think something like this could work. These long drawn out trials are a waste. I think a short, concise argument should be made on both sides, and then a verdict returned. Case closed. I'd feel much better if something like this existed, over what they have now.

And, to answer your initial question, I'd rather that no innocent person was convicted. I think, "what if it was me?" And I know that I'd rather compete and lose to dopers than have my own integrity scarred because of Draconian rules. I know I'd rather see a murderer go free than put an innocent man in jail for life, so I just try to apply the same logic here. It's just what feels right to me...

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Certainly we are into a different time period with what seems to be a different approach on the part of athletes. Just 5 years ago in just about all positive doping cases it was, deny deny deny, by the athlete and all of their supporters. Now, in a way it's a bit refreshing to see an admitance, often with a plausible reason, immediately after a postive test is called on the A sample. I am not saying what the athlete did was right, it's just that now we don't have to go through this big song-and-dance of the athlete denying everything and exhausting every and all appeals and everyones time and patience. Now the athlete admits they did something wrong and are prepared to serve their sentance. However, the other side of this is that it could be a crass gamble on the part of the athlete to somehow salvage their career. OK, I got caught with my hand in the cookie jar. I will admit guilt. Serve my two year sentance and come back and show them that I can do it clean( because in some/all instances they had been world class, clean) Pro cyclist David Millar is a classic example of this - was great when clean( suposedly). Took EPO to get through a bad patch. Tested positive. Admited guilt. Is serving a two year suspension. Vows to come back stronger than ever, clean. In fact. I think I read that he has made a special extraordinary appeal to shorten his sentance slightly so that he could race in the 06 Tour de France!

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: doping stuff - ideas... [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]Unless they have a photo of you sticking a needle in your ass, I don't think you should be penalized for trying to prove your innocence...[/reply]

Photos (and videos) aren't worth dick these days, too easily faked.

Dopers will always be one step ahead and it will only get worse with gene doping. I can't see muscle biopsies before every race ever being accepted regardless of the reason.

I think it would be better if it was legal. At least there could be legitimate medical supervision instead of washed up veterinarians and gym rats providing their "technical" expertise.
Quote Reply