Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 115
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #91
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    Officially it doesn't mean anything. But unofficially you can draw your own logical conclusion.
    It was completely obvious a few months ago what was happening. But some people will always want to pretend it isn't and indulge in a fleeting fantasy that the next sub-48 runner has arrived - and feign indignation when the obvious is pointed out.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #92
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    .....The confusing part was finding evidence of advantages in the pole vault and hammer throw but not implementing the restrictions there.
    Even a simpleton (aka IAAF board member), would know that the countries producing "anomalous" athletes tend to be poorer countries with restricted medical services that have absolutely no history of PV or HT performances or top notch sprint mechanics development.

    The best these countries can do is produce runners where testosterone doesn't require technical skill to maximise performance, and that appears to be in the "not too fast", "not too slow" middle.

    Don't fight the unnecessary fight are wise words indeed.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,046
    Quote Originally Posted by El Toro View Post
    Even a simpleton (aka IAAF board member), would know that the countries producing "anomalous" athletes tend to be poorer countries with restricted medical services that have absolutely no history of PV or HT performances or top notch sprint mechanics development.
    "Tend to be" is correct, but I can recall a couple of top-class athletes from a European country who suddenly disappeared from the scene a while ago while at the top of their game and I always had a suspicion the reason might have been the same as with Seyni.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Powell View Post
    "Tend to be" is correct, but I can recall a couple of top-class athletes from a European country who suddenly disappeared from the scene a while ago while at the top of their game and I always had a suspicion the reason might have been the same as with Seyni.
    Tendencies are not very relevant now; it's publicly known exactly which countries are represented by the top 10 women's pole vaulters and hammer throwers, and a fight to remove any still-active DSD athletes from those events would involve one or more of the countries in that small set.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #95
    Quote Originally Posted by trackCanuck View Post
    It was completely obvious a few months ago what was happening. But some people will always want to pretend it isn't and indulge in a fleeting fantasy that the next sub-48 runner has arrived - and feign indignation when the obvious is pointed out.
    I disagree. It is not indignant to be discreet &/or wait for concrete evidence. (which we still don't have, but which one can conclude based on her choice of event). To speculate on a someone's sexual development is not proper. It's also none of our business. Besides, as the restrictions are for only one specific type of DSD, there will be athletes still competing who either have a different type of DSD, that the IAAF 'experts' cant prove has any advantage, or have the restricted type and have decided to take medication. She could well have been either of these. We just didn't know.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Right next to a Gator filled pond
    Posts
    4,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiederganger View Post
    We just didn't know.
    Which leads to the speculation. Absent a complete release of the athletes medical records we'll never know. I'm not advocating for that at all. Just pointing out that we'll never "know".
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiederganger View Post
    We just didn't know.
    I wish there were some lottery with a large payoff whenever one of these situations arises - it was that obvious.

    She looked a bit iffy but that only roused curiosity. The dead giveaway was the unbelievable improvement in such a short time, and the way she could finish a 400 off a granny pace.

    We knew alright.
    Last edited by trackCanuck; 09-21-2019 at 01:17 AM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #98
    I dunno what has been confirmed but the first time I saw seyni on the startline when she ran 49.19 I knew the deal irrespective of whatever time she ran. There are some naive dudes on here lol might have been tricked a time or two by lovely gals with extra blessings.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #99
    Going forward, I hope the IAAF will be proactive with testing first-time Diamond League athletes in the restricted events if they've never been tested before. The sooner the IAAF and the athlete find out if there's an issue, the more private it is for the athlete and the better it is for their competitors. Don't wait for them to blow up with big times and medals and records.

    That doesn't mean putting everybody through the full barrage of hormonal, genetic, and genital examinations; testosterone levels are routinely measured as part of ordinary drug testing protocol, so that's how they can find the very few who measure above the 5.0 nmol/L limit, and only those few would have to be referred for additional inquiry. Next season, before anyone in the restricted events shows up at the start line for a Diamond League meet, all should at least be checked for T levels, if their T level hasn't already been measured this year or before (exceptions can be made for local non-elite talent given a lane at the last minute).
    Last edited by 18.99s; 09-21-2019 at 02:52 AM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Great points by 18.99,

    Not to mention the money lost by athletes placing below such athletes.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •