"I propose Lindsey and Flyqueen tomorrow morning take their kids or nieces or nephews to a zoo. Go to the duck exhibit, watch the ducks quack, watch them swim, watch a duck expert feed them, notice their duck feathers and nasty little duck neck wattle thing. Then, go home and wait for an attorney to show up a few weeks later and tell you what you saw was a giraffe. Then, go back to your kids and tell them it was a giraffe and see their reaction.":rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
She bought the gun, she bought the bullets, she aimed, and fired....on two separate occasions....
Two separate occasions?
Are the A and B samples taken at different times?
Or is it one sample that is split into "A" and "B", with the "B" being stored until needed?
And a VERY big shame on Mark Shubert and USS for getting the results of the test the day they had to turn in the final team rosters and choosing to not name alternates.
I think two items need to be considered in the PED culture that seems to be more and more of a constant in athletics today.
1. a lifetime ban for ANYONE testing positive
2. Three swimmers being named to the Olympic team (only two of course would swim) and a fourth being named an alternate. Now of course this item could be avoided being added - IF the trials are held earlier in an olympic year and USA Swimming had competent people running the organization.
Just my two cents worth - now I'm broke.
How about the day the tests results came back, Hardy says to USA Swimming, I am out--quick get Kirk on the roster--even if she said, do it just in case.
For that move, I would have respect.
As I said to my dad this morning as he showed me the headline, Hardy did not "withdraw"--she got caught doping and was getting booted.
So, so sad for Kirk.:2cents:
Geek, considering the way you went after George to answer your questions it is disappointing that you are steadfastly avoiding commenting on the Kicker V. case.
Gull, the WADA information you quote deals with whether a violation has occurred. Now that JH is not contesting the validity of the test results no one is contesting that a violation occurred, regardless of circumstances or intentions. That doesn't mean that circumstances and intentions won't be taken into account when determining the penalty beyond the invalidation of results. If you review previous rulings you will find that some athletes have had the standard penalty reduced due to circumstances.
At this point I am having a hard time imagining an explanation and it seems likely it will turn out that she deliberately doped, but then, I would never have come up with the contaminated supplements explanation for Kicker's violation which I would have said was too far fetched to be true if it hadn't been proven to a court's satisfaction.
Question: Is the positive test set at X level solely to avoid false positives? Or is taking a PED in a quantity less than X level simply not that performance enhancing? I'm assuming it is, but am still curious.
I would not take it as a given that there is any tolerance for drugs that can be isolated. I think people may be getting confused with tests for substances that naturally occur, where tests set a level or ratio that is higher than ever naturally occurs. The Brazilian swimmer was nailed when it was shown that the testosterone in her system was synthetic rather than natural.
Oh, c'mon Lindsay, it's over and done with. Who care what happens now? She's a doper, she cheated, she denied others a spot, she shamed the sport and her country. I could really care less about what happens from this point on. There is nothing left to tell. She already had her day, many of them as a matter of fact. She's just another in a long line of doping chumps, self-centered and a liar.
Paul Smith said:
What do you mean two separate occasions?
I agree with your sentiments on JH, but the A and B sample were drawn at the same time. She "aimed" apparently once - after her first race at OTs.
I stand corrected...she cheated numerous times and got busted this time...is that more accurate? Do you really think the cheaters that get caught never cheated before?
Wow, you all just throw her under the bus along with Salo. First on Salo, Kicker Vencil's supplement was found to be tainted - while Salo can discourage a swimmer from taking a supplement (and claims now he does) he can't watch them 24/7 and make them not take anything.
Ous Mellouli took an ADD med to help him study/finish a project which had NO bearing on his race performance.
As for Hardy - I don't know. I think perhaps her withdrawl is not as selfish as you are all making it out to be. She is the only one that can know with 100% certainty whether or not she did something intentionally wrong.
Also think of the flip side - IF her a sample was found to have a positive test but her b sample came back clear and they found out that her a sample was tampered with and they called Kirk, Jackson, and Weir and told them to come out only to then tell them the next day they weren't on the team imagine the out cry then.
Sometimes it takes something bad to call attention to flaws in the system. HOPEFULLY USA swimming can take a step back after Beijing and find a way (earlier trials) to make sure this never happens again. I still think inviting the 3rd place finishers in every event (sans the 100/200 free) to the camp just in case is not a bad idea. What if someone got injured?
