Dara Torres-Amazing

It is such a shame that the mindset of people is "Guilty until proved innocent" rather than "Innocent until proven guilty". I am 46 years old and though I am not an elite swimmer like Dara, she has shown me there is no reason I can't tie or beat my times as a kid. In one season with the right coach I have gone from breaking 30 for the 50 Free and going 27.83 lead off on a relay at Nationals this spring. I am only 1.84 seconds off my best time which I did back in 1980. My goal is to make it this year. Training techniques have changed since my old days several little changes have really made such a difference. Innocent until proven guilty!

I really feel for Tara Kirk. We all know what it is like to beat yourself up over losing by such a small margin--now magnify that by it being the olympic games and what that could mean. That being said, I am disappointed in Hardy and besides her dad's explanation that it could have come from a handshake, I have no idea what she is going to do to prevail. As for the tests where she did not test positive, in the Tour De France, Ricco tested positive for EPO. While origanlly denying it, he admitted it. This is what he had to say about the tests and their accuracy. If the ones given to Hardy had the same measure of "reliability" , then I seriously doubt she can prevail on an appeal. Statements from Ricco: "During the tour they made a lot of tests, they made 10 tests in about 13 legs, two were positive and in fact in theory all the tests should have been positive therefore the method needs to be checked," he said. www.stuff.co.nz/4638068a1823.html

Speaking of PEDs, speculation etc. has anybody read about gene therapy? From what I am understanding, if John Doe got it done (gene therapy) starting three years ago and if there are no blood samples of him on file before three years ago, he would never get caught even if they develop a test tomorrow or five years from now. The reason? There is no baseline for a comparison to see what his true DNA was. Blood samples tested next week or five years from now will not tell us anything because we do not know what his "normal" blood looked like. We now may have athletes being made - "better, stronger, faster" - and may never be able to prove it. I suspct the "smart cheaters" would go out of the country to get it done - reduces problems with witnesses and records.

George - I've had it with you, that is the final result. You do not seem to understand that she has tested positive, end of story. She is now in the appeals phase which will not change the fact that she doped. There are various factors that can mitigate her outcome, I guess. But, nothing will change that she was on drugs for the trials. It would not matter if she was held down and injected while eating Jazzy's dope laced veggie burger with a bogus prescription for horse asthma inhalers in hand. She was juiced for the trials, period, get it straight please.

Wait for what? It's over. All we're waiting for is to determine the length of the ban on the odd chance there might be hypothetical, though implausible, mitigating circumstances that are more than just "I don't even know how to spell clenbuterol" posing. There is no question that she had banned substances in her system WHEN RACING that gave her an edge over her competitors. If that is indeed the case, then why do they even have an appeals process? It would be far simpler and cheaper to say "If you test positive on your A and B samples, you are guilty, no appeals, no chance to challenge it and we will mail you your sentence. Have a nice day." A process like that would also save a lot of time and money in the criminal justice system as well. The evidence is strongly against her, but why not wait for the process put in place to protect the athlete to deliver the final "verdict" before potentially trashing her life? There have been instances where samples were mislabelled or chain-of-custody was violated or there were questionable positives, etc. -LBJ

Thanks for levity, I have been called drunk and off my medication because I want to wait for the whole process to be completed. If that is indeed the case, then why do they even have an appeals process? It would be far simpler and cheaper to say "If you test positive on your A and B samples, you are guilty, no appeals, no chance to challenge it and we will mail you your sentence. Have a nice day." A process like that would also save a lot of time and money in the criminal justice system as well. The evidence is strongly against her, but why not wait for the process put in place to protect the athlete to deliver the final "verdict" before potentially trashing her life? There have been instances where samples were mislabelled or chain-of-custody was violated or there were questionable positives, etc. -LBJ

If that is indeed the case, then why do they even have an appeals process? It would be far simpler and cheaper to say "If you test positive on your A and B samples, you are guilty, no appeals, no chance to challenge it and we will mail you your sentence. Have a nice day." A process like that would also save a lot of time and money in the criminal justice system as well. The evidence is strongly against her, but why not wait for the process put in place to protect the athlete to deliver the final "verdict" before potentially trashing her life? There have been instances where samples were mislabelled or chain-of-custody was violated or there were questionable positives, etc. -LBJ Because many of these comments regarding Hardy are emotionally driven, IMHO. :2cents:

The evidence is strongly against her, but why not wait for the process put in place to protect the athlete to deliver the final "verdict" before potentially trashing her life? There have been instances where samples were mislabelled or chain-of-custody was violated or there were questionable positives, etc. You and George seem to be confused about the process. The failed test is all that is necessary and sufficient to suspend her. Period. She has the right to appeal the test results, which she plans to do. The final authority is the Court of Arbitration for Sport. How many times have the results been overturned by the CAS?

Fortress: Dead on target there! Can you even fathom how Ms. Kirk must feel after spending years and years of hard work and dedication to get to the Olympic games only to have it robbed by a drug cheat---and the incompetence of USA Swimming? This has been a dark hour for USA Swimming not only with the + test by JH, but the poor, incompetent manner that USA Swimming handled it after the + test results. I HOPE Ms. Kirk wins her suit---

My comments are not emotionally driven. They are based on my understanding of the rules, my dislike of cheaters and my cynicism about drug use in sports. More logic, than emotion. Now the Smiths ... I was not really aiming that at you Fort, just to be clear. My comment was aimed at the people who wanted her locked up, thrown in jail, and to have her entire life ruined. That is either emotion or ______.