OK, what about the russian sprint team?

None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to state any
doubts about those two russian skiers who just left the rest of the
final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was willing to do so according
to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian sprint team
bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being entered, and then they
came back with that incredible final performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight blemish to that
result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

On Feb 18, 8:06*am, Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"
wrote:
None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to state any
doubts about those two russian skiers who just left the rest of the
final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was willing to do so according
to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian sprint team
bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being entered, and then they
came back with that incredible final performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight blemish to that
result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Terje,
When I watched the two Russian Men win in the sprint yesterday I
thought the same thing as you. Of course there will be readers here
who say" how dare you question their win". However I'm with you
thinking they looked more fresh at the finish than all the other men
in the final sprint. At the elite level doping becomes very strategic.
There is a window in which you can use the benefits of EPO without
being caught. Perhaps this is why they chose not to race in Canmore.
It's the time table the best dopers are able to pull off without
getting caught. So congratulations to the Russian Men in the sprint
until they get caught.

Unfortunately, as in the case of Dementiev and Tchepelova, they may
only be caught years later, and their victories won't be expunged. And
thus it will continue until the sports authorities get real about
penalties. Minimum 5 year suspension to remove them from the next
Olympic cycle. Criminal fraud charges like they are doing in Austria.
Spend the testing money where it is most effective, out of competition
testing. Suspending countries where there is a cluster of detections.
It sometimes takes national shaming before there is action, as in
Austria.

Chris

On Feb 18, 12:18*pm, Douglas wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:06*am, Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"
wrote:





None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to state any
doubts about those two russian skiers who just left the rest of the
final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was willing to do so according
to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian sprint team
bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being entered, and then they
came back with that incredible final performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight blemish to that
result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Terje,
When I watched the two Russian Men win in the sprint yesterday I
thought the same thing as you. Of course there will be readers here
who say" how dare you question their win". However I'm with you
thinking they looked more fresh at the finish than all the other men
in the final sprint. At the elite level doping becomes very strategic.
There is a window in which you can use the benefits of EPO without
being caught. Perhaps this is why they chose not to race in Canmore.
It's the time table the best dopers are able to pull off without
getting caught. So congratulations to the Russian Men in the sprint
until they get caught.

Chris' comment is misleading. The Olympic rules/policies (and
perhaps FIS's) allow retroactive disqualification if later-developed
tests find a sample to be positive for a drug banned at the time.
However, the call for retroactive disqualification (punishment) where
there is no proof of violation at the time is, in my opinion, worse
than a bad idea. We wouldn't allow it in everyday civil affairs, so why
in sports? For context, I'd also suggest the writer check out Magnar
Dalen's recent interview comments about drugs at
http://fasterskier.com/2010/02/to-sk...-magnar-dalen/
(near the bottom).

Gene

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 05:04:15 -0800 (PST)
cpella wrote:

Unfortunately, as in the case of Dementiev and Tchepelova, they may
only be caught years later, and their victories won't be expunged. And
thus it will continue until the sports authorities get real about
penalties. Minimum 5 year suspension to remove them from the next
Olympic cycle. Criminal fraud charges like they are doing in Austria.
Spend the testing money where it is most effective, out of competition
testing. Suspending countries where there is a cluster of detections.
It sometimes takes national shaming before there is action, as in
Austria.

Chris

On Feb 18, 12:18*pm, Douglas wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:06*am, Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"
wrote:





None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to
state any doubts about those two russian skiers who just left the
rest of the final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was willing
to do so according to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian sprint
team bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being entered, and
then they came back with that incredible final performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight blemish
to that result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Terje,
When I watched the two Russian Men win in the sprint yesterday I
thought the same thing as you. Of course there will be readers here
who say" how dare you question their win". However I'm with you
thinking they looked more fresh at the finish than all the other men
in the final sprint. At the elite level doping becomes very
strategic. There is a window in which you can use the benefits of
EPO without being caught. Perhaps this is why they chose not to
race in Canmore. It's the time table the best dopers are able to
pull off without getting caught. So congratulations to the Russian
Men in the sprint until they get caught.

Doesn't disprove my main point. The current punitive levels are
insufficient to act as a disincentive. How they can be increased is
open to discussion.
Also, it is not clear to me what the Olympics have to do with civil
law. It an athlete's privilege to compete in the games, not a right.
They can make whatever rules they want. They can exclude women from
jumping if they want to, and Canadian courts upheld that decision. The
IOS seems to operate in its own world. And there are precedents in
other fields for removing awards from people for their actions whether
or not they occurred before or after the award. The IOC runs their own
ship and they should determine how the value of their product is
perceived. They can get away with sending people down dangerous luge
courses and downhill ski runs. Removing a medal retroactively because
the medal holder has tainted the brand of the product seems pretty
small potatoes in comparison to what they get away with in terms of
everyday civil law.


On Feb 19, 11:30*am, wrote:
Chris' comment is misleading. *The Olympic rules/policies (and
perhaps FIS's) allow retroactive disqualification if later-developed
tests find a sample to be positive for a drug banned at the time.
However, the call for retroactive disqualification (punishment) where
there is no proof of violation at the time is, in my opinion, worse
than a bad idea. We wouldn't allow it in everyday civil affairs, so why
in sports? *For context, I'd also suggest the writer check out Magnar
Dalen's recent interview comments about drugs athttp://fasterskier.com/2010/02/to-ski-as-fast-as-possible-an-intervie...
(near the bottom). *

Gene

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 05:04:15 -0800 (PST)



cpella wrote:
Unfortunately, as in the case of Dementiev and Tchepelova, they may
only be caught years later, and their victories won't be expunged. And
thus it will continue until the sports authorities get real about
penalties. Minimum 5 year suspension to remove them from the next
Olympic cycle. Criminal fraud charges like they are doing in Austria.
Spend the testing money where it is most effective, out of competition
testing. Suspending countries where there is a cluster of detections.
It sometimes takes national shaming before there is action, as in
Austria.

Chris

On Feb 18, 12:18*pm, Douglas wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:06*am, Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"
wrote:

None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to
state any doubts about those two russian skiers who just left the
rest of the final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was willing
to do so according to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian sprint
team bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being entered, and
then they came back with that incredible final performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight blemish
to that result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Terje,
When I watched the two Russian Men win in the sprint yesterday I
thought the same thing as you. Of course there will be readers here
who say" how dare you question their win". However I'm with you
thinking they looked more fresh at the finish than all the other men
in the final sprint. At the elite level doping becomes very
strategic. There is a window in which you can use the benefits of
EPO without being caught. Perhaps this is why they chose not to
race in Canmore. It's the time table the best dopers are able to
pull off without getting caught. So congratulations to the Russian
Men in the sprint until they get caught.

First off, if your point is about the Olympics, you're factually wrong
about the rules and policies. Check it out. If your point is about
disincentives, the view that increasingly severe punishment stops crime
is self-evidently false (plus there's a lot of research on the subject).

You say sport is different than the rest of life, i.e., competing is a
privilege. Well, a driver's license is legally considered a
privilege. If a truck driver gets caught DUI or kills others with
reckless driving, then should all their past truck driving earnings be
taken away, or maybe record of their license deleted, so that they are
retroactively guilty of driving without one? The list of parallel
examples could go on and on.

That's why I think the logic of this kind of argument, wherever it's
coming from, is a kind of puritanical moral self righteous world view:
sin is proof that one has always been a sinner, and thus record of the
sinner's past should be expunged. I'd prefer to leave such matters to
the court of public opinion. And with sports, that court is powerful.

Gene



On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:22:13 -0800 (PST)
cpella wrote:

Doesn't disprove my main point. The current punitive levels are
insufficient to act as a disincentive. How they can be increased is
open to discussion.
Also, it is not clear to me what the Olympics have to do with civil
law. It an athlete's privilege to compete in the games, not a right.
They can make whatever rules they want. They can exclude women from
jumping if they want to, and Canadian courts upheld that decision. The
IOS seems to operate in its own world. And there are precedents in
other fields for removing awards from people for their actions whether
or not they occurred before or after the award. The IOC runs their own
ship and they should determine how the value of their product is
perceived. They can get away with sending people down dangerous luge
courses and downhill ski runs. Removing a medal retroactively because
the medal holder has tainted the brand of the product seems pretty
small potatoes in comparison to what they get away with in terms of
everyday civil law.


On Feb 19, 11:30*am, wrote:
Chris' comment is misleading. *The Olympic rules/policies (and
perhaps FIS's) allow retroactive disqualification if later-developed
tests find a sample to be positive for a drug banned at the time.
However, the call for retroactive disqualification (punishment)
where there is no proof of violation at the time is, in my opinion,
worse than a bad idea. We wouldn't allow it in everyday civil
affairs, so why in sports? *For context, I'd also suggest the
writer check out Magnar Dalen's recent interview comments about
drugs
athttp://fasterskier.com/2010/02/to-ski-as-fast-as-possible-an-intervie....
(near the bottom). *

Gene

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 05:04:15 -0800 (PST)



cpella wrote:
Unfortunately, as in the case of Dementiev and Tchepelova, they
may only be caught years later, and their victories won't be
expunged. And thus it will continue until the sports authorities
get real about penalties. Minimum 5 year suspension to remove
them from the next Olympic cycle. Criminal fraud charges like
they are doing in Austria. Spend the testing money where it is
most effective, out of competition testing. Suspending countries
where there is a cluster of detections. It sometimes takes
national shaming before there is action, as in Austria.

Chris

On Feb 18, 12:18*pm, Douglas wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:06*am, Terje Mathisen "terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"
wrote:

None of the Norwegian racers or leaders have been willing to
state any doubts about those two russian skiers who just left
the rest of the final heat in the dust, but Pär Elofsson was
willing to do so according to the reports I've read.

It seems really suspicious to me that the entire russian
sprint team bowed out of the Canmore sprints, after being
entered, and then they came back with that incredible final
performance.

This is really sad IMHO, it will leave at least a slight
blemish to that result list. :-(

Terje
--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in
caching"

Terje,
When I watched the two Russian Men win in the sprint yesterday I
thought the same thing as you. Of course there will be readers
here who say" how dare you question their win". However I'm
with you thinking they looked more fresh at the finish than all
the other men in the final sprint. At the elite level doping
becomes very strategic. There is a window in which you can use
the benefits of EPO without being caught. Perhaps this is why
they chose not to race in Canmore. It's the time table the best
dopers are able to pull off without getting caught. So
congratulations to the Russian Men in the sprint until they get
caught.

wrote:
First off, if your point is about the Olympics, you're factually wrong
about the rules and policies. Check it out. If your point is about
disincentives, the view that increasingly severe punishment stops crime
is self-evidently false (plus there's a lot of research on the subject).

You say sport is different than the rest of life, i.e., competing is a
privilege. Well, a driver's license is legally considered a
privilege. If a truck driver gets caught DUI or kills others with
reckless driving, then should all their past truck driving earnings be
taken away, or maybe record of their license deleted, so that they are
retroactively guilty of driving without one? The list of parallel
examples could go on and on.

That's why I think the logic of this kind of argument, wherever it's
coming from, is a kind of puritanical moral self righteous world view:
sin is proof that one has always been a sinner, and thus record of the
sinner's past should be expunged. I'd prefer to leave such matters to
the court of public opinion. And with sports, that court is powerful.

The one good thing is that all the doping tests are kept pretty much
indefinitely, which means that they can be retested in a year or two
when better/more sensitive tests have been developed.

If such re-testing finds proof of cheating then they will indeed
retroactively take away Olympic medals: Alsgaard and Estil (afair) got
medals several years later due to this.

Terje

--
- Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Terje Mathisen wrote:
wrote:
First off, if your point is about the Olympics, you're factually wrong
about the rules and policies. Check it out. If your point is about
disincentives, the view that increasingly severe punishment stops crime
is self-evidently false (plus there's a lot of research on the subject).

You say sport is different than the rest of life, i.e., competing is a
privilege. Well, a driver's license is legally considered a
privilege. If a truck driver gets caught DUI or kills others with
reckless driving, then should all their past truck driving earnings be
taken away, or maybe record of their license deleted, so that they are
retroactively guilty of driving without one? The list of parallel
examples could go on and on.

That's why I think the logic of this kind of argument, wherever it's
coming from, is a kind of puritanical moral self righteous world view:
sin is proof that one has always been a sinner, and thus record of the
sinner's past should be expunged. I'd prefer to leave such matters to
the court of public opinion. And with sports, that court is powerful.

The one good thing is that all the doping tests are kept pretty much
indefinitely, which means that they can be retested in a year or two
when better/more sensitive tests have been developed.

If such re-testing finds proof of cheating then they will indeed
retroactively take away Olympic medals: Alsgaard and Estil (afair) got
medals several years later due to this.

Terje
Generating an odd result in 2002: Becky Scott ended up being awarded
bronze, silver, *and* gold for the same race (albeit she didn't get the
gold until 2 years after the race - I've always wondered if they let
her keep the silver and bronze medals...).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckie_Scott
Bob

Only time will tell if the Russians are clean, but obviously there are
doubts.
JKal.


"Bob" wrote in message
...
Terje Mathisen wrote:
wrote:
First off, if your point is about the Olympics, you're factually wrong
about the rules and policies. Check it out. If your point is about
disincentives, the view that increasingly severe punishment stops crime
is self-evidently false (plus there's a lot of research on the subject).

You say sport is different than the rest of life, i.e., competing is a
privilege. Well, a driver's license is legally considered a
privilege. If a truck driver gets caught DUI or kills others with
reckless driving, then should all their past truck driving earnings be
taken away, or maybe record of their license deleted, so that they are
retroactively guilty of driving without one? The list of parallel
examples could go on and on.

That's why I think the logic of this kind of argument, wherever it's
coming from, is a kind of puritanical moral self righteous world view:
sin is proof that one has always been a sinner, and thus record of the
sinner's past should be expunged. I'd prefer to leave such matters to
the court of public opinion. And with sports, that court is powerful.

The one good thing is that all the doping tests are kept pretty much
indefinitely, which means that they can be retested in a year or two when
better/more sensitive tests have been developed.

If such re-testing finds proof of cheating then they will indeed
retroactively take away Olympic medals: Alsgaard and Estil (afair) got
medals several years later due to this.

Terje
Generating an odd result in 2002: Becky Scott ended up being awarded
bronze, silver, *and* gold for the same race (albeit she didn't get the
gold until 2 years after the race - I've always wondered if they let her
keep the silver and bronze medals...).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckie_Scott
Bob