Was Michelle de Bruin our greatest Olympian? Eamonn Coughlan says yes

Pa Dee

charlemont wrote: »

Yes, I have to say she is our greatest Olympian but no I wouldn't ride her.

The lass pisses pure whiskey - who wouldn't want to ride her ....

Ficheall

DebDynamite wrote: »

Taking the tampered sample aside, her victory at the Olympics does seem suspect when you consider she had no major championship wins for most of her career and then wins 3 gold & 1 bronze medal at the age of 28, which quite old for a swimmer

Aye, that was one of the points raised by one of her main accusers who, incidentally, is planning to partake in the Olympic trials in 2012 at the age of 40...

Wibbs

Jimoslimos wrote: »

So US athletes should be subject to less scrutiny since they come from a bigger, more successful country than tiny insignificant Ireland. Of course no US athlete has been found doping have they? Or how many cover-ups have occurred? Names like Carl Lewis and Flo-Jo have in my eyes as much a cloud of suspicion hanging over them but that seems to get swept under the carpet.

Bingo. You could add a certain Mr Lance Armstrong to the same list of the "suspicious". A man who claims to have never failed a test, not never to have taken enhancements. Damn near every teammate of his has lit up like a Christmas tree in tests, yet he's clean? Hmmmmm. Cycling as a sport has long passed the point of clean.

Ficheall

Although it's disappointing that the Irish population seemed to bend over (backwards?) to agree that Michelle cheated, I don't think I'd begrudge Lance Armstrong his wins or any drugs he might be taking.

seanmacc

Just to add some anecodal truths to the Michelle Smith De Bruin saga that has me viewing her treatment in a totally different light. Which I heard from a number of ex employees in Dublin Port.

The person who took the drug sample from Michelle Smith De Bruin was a well known ex Irish customs officer. (Won't give his name)

This particular customs officer had a reputation down in Dublin Port in the pre free movement of goods across the EU era for taking back handers off tuckers and freight companies to get their loads through customs and out of the port asap. (The reputation of this man was well known to many who worked in the old B&I)

There is a journalist researching this mans reputation. Although it does not prove Michelles innocence it does put an extra doubt onto what the accepted version of events was. There may be a reason the lady is so vividly to this day trying to clear the blemish on her reputation.

Wibbs

I would. Simply because of the BS around him. Not the effort and training required on his part. Drugs don't magically make you better without serious serious effort, but looking at the times and speeds of races since the mid late 80's certainly makes one go "ah here Ted". When you see someone like him with the build more of a sprinter fly past naturally built climbers on hill climbs you start to ask questions. A few years back I read of an English lad who was a national winner on the amateur time trial circuit(and the Brits love time trialling and are damn good at it). Had a few national records under his belt. He got a place with some small team on the Tour de France and a time trial came around, one that was a distance he was very comfortable at and he ended up coming something like 3rd from last out of over a 100 other riders. Things that make you go "hmmmm" indeed.

Paul Kimmage's book on the subject "Rough Ride" is well worth a read and his experiences were at the dawn of the real boost in "enhancements". Previously it was more about stimulants and cortisiods(sp) to recover and stay on the bike day in day out.

Greg Lemond, one helluva talented rider noticed the change when he came back when he saw who had been mixed middling riders sailing past him.

Read an interesting blog(I'll try to find it) written by a low level US guy who ended up on the European pro circuit. It was an eye opener. Apparently some riders have more "talent" for drugs. IE when this bloke went to Italy one of his teammates was another American chappie who was slower than him back home, but was magically much faster over in Italy. He started on the same drug regime and improved but not nearly to the degree of this guy. The team doctor said this was common enough. That while you can't turn a cart horse into a champion race horse, you can turn a middling racehorse into a champion, but some see much bigger gains than others.

Red21

seanmacc wrote: »

There may be a reason the lady is so vividly to this day trying to clear the blemish on her reputation.

:eek: I think it's more than a blemish.
The thing I could never understand around all this is why isn't her coach lauded as as an irish hero by those who think she is innocent, Erik de bruin got this complete outsider to be one of the grestest swimmers of all time yet I don't remember the guy being once interviewed or ever having anything to say about it. If the lights of Jimmy Mcgee think so highly of her why has he never mentioned this guy, if they (jimmy and Eamonn) truly believe what they say, they should be trying to get a statue erected to honour him.
If you believe she is innocent then you believe that Michelle and Erik de bruin revolutioniesd swimming. How come the top swimmers havn't looked for or followed their training programme.

seanmacc

Red21 wrote: »

If you believe she is innocent then you believe that Michelle and Erik de bruin revolutioniesd swimming. How come the top swimmers havn't looked for or followed their training programme.

Maybe because they spent that much time calling them drug cheats that they weren't interested in having anything to do with them.

Michelle was not even getting close to World Record times when she was competitive. I'm not saying I believe she is innocent but I'd like to keep an open mind about it. In fairness, who would be naive enough to spike their samle with whiskey and think they'd not get caught?

The Aussie

A interesting article of a "Where are they now theme".
this part especially "on top of the tampering of the urine, Smith had also taken the bodybuilding drug Androstenedione, a metabolic precursor of testosterone, the night before the test."
and "three samples, taken between November 1997 and March 1998, had shown traces of Androstenedione, which was a banned drug. FINA thought they had a better case when it came to the tampered test"
So there was a bit more than the tampering of a sample to contend with which i probably why they decided to hand down the maximum of 4 years

I love the picture on the Sports Illustrated Mag, looks like one of the arms of those Chinese swimmers who appeared out of no where and disappeared just as quickly after blowing everyone else out of the water in the mid 90's


uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/29022012/58/london-2012-michelle-smith.html

fran17

i dont believe she was totally innocent of some form of wrong doing but nobody who gets to the very top of there field is.the majority of the contoversy was whipped up by the u.s because little miss perfect janet evans did'nt win.typical american sour grapes

Dyr

Who made that creep coughlan a senator?

funnights74

Wibbs wrote: »

Bingo. You could add a certain Mr Lance Armstrong to the same list of the "suspicious". A man who claims to have never failed a test, not never to have taken enhancements. Damn near every teammate of his has lit up like a Christmas tree in tests, yet he's clean? Hmmmmm. Cycling as a sport has long passed the point of clean.

Definitely, cycling has long lost any claim to have cleaned itself up, despite constant attempts to introduce Biological passports. It is a sport with zero amount of credibility, and i write this as a keen cyclist, all be it as a hobby.
In my opinion most sports is basically a battle of the chemists, while the testing methods are becoming more and more sophisticated the cheaters are always one step ahead of the testers.
The up coming Olympics should be interesting to say the least.

funnights74

Bambi wrote: »

Who made that creep coughlan a senator?

Enda!!

Kidchameleon

seanmacc wrote: »

Just to add some anecodal truths to the Michelle Smith De Bruin saga that has me viewing her treatment in a totally different light. Which I heard from a number of ex employees in Dublin Port.

The person who took the drug sample from Michelle Smith De Bruin was a well known ex Irish customs officer. (Won't give his name)

This particular customs officer had a reputation down in Dublin Port in the pre free movement of goods across the EU era for taking back handers off tuckers and freight companies to get their loads through customs and out of the port asap. (The reputation of this man was well known to many who worked in the old B&I)

There is a journalist researching this mans reputation. Although it does not prove Michelles innocence it does put an extra doubt onto what the accepted version of events was. There may be a reason the lady is so vividly to this day trying to clear the blemish on her reputation.

Let somebody else take a sample though. And why would somebody give him a back hander for something like that? Whats in it for them?

opinion guy

Red21 wrote: »

:eek: I think it's more than a blemish.
The thing I could never understand around all this is why isn't her coach lauded as as an irish hero by those who think she is innocent, Erik de bruin got this complete outsider to be one of the grestest swimmers of all time yet I don't remember the guy being once interviewed or ever having anything to say about it. If the lights of Jimmy Mcgee think so highly of her why has he never mentioned this guy, if they (jimmy and Eamonn) truly believe what they say, they should be trying to get a statue erected to honour him.
If you believe she is innocent then you believe that Michelle and Erik de bruin revolutioniesd swimming. How come the top swimmers havn't looked for or followed their training programme.

Erik de Bruin was suspended from competition himself in the 90's for doping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_de_Bruin

If I recall correctly - this was the reason there was alot of suspicion thrown Michelle's direction before the tampered sample incident.

celticcrash

Michelle should be carrying the tourch not Louie Walshs wimpy rent boys.

sheesh

DebDynamite wrote: »

Taking the tampered sample aside, her victory at the Olympics does seem suspect when you consider she had no major championship wins for most of her career and then wins 3 gold & 1 bronze medal at the age of 28, which quite old for a swimmer

you do know that her times for those swims were very similar to those in years previously there was no obvious jump.her argument was that it was a slow olympics.

I have my suspicions about here too but I think they are all doing it.

3ndahalfof6

the sooner they bring in the new Olympics for drug enhancing athletes and keep the original Olympics for the clean athletes the better, I know which one I will be watching.

The Aussie

sheesh wrote: »

you do know that her times for those swims were very similar to those in years previously there was no obvious jump.her argument was that it was a slow olympics.

According to the article i linked above these were her times.

"In 1992, Smith covered the 400m in 4:58.94 but when she won in Atlanta her winning time was 4:39.18. In 1993 she was not ranked inside the world's top 25 in any stroke, and now she was clutching three gold medals."

almost 20 seconds in 4 years is a bit suspect but to jump up in rankings this much will always have people asking questions.

uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/29022012/58/london-2012-michelle-smith.html

Logical Fallacy

dlofnep wrote: »

A very large portion of Olympians are on drugs, they just cycle well and haven't been caught. She was just in on the trend. Remember the talks of the Chinese eating dog-food to beat Sonia O'Sullivan? More like, roids.

You don't even really need to cycle so much at Olympic level I reckon. How long was Victor Conte pumping athletes full of **** that WADA had never heard of, let alone had a test for? I'm always amazed when I hear of someone at Olympic level getting busted for something like Stanz or D-bol, how ****ing out of the loop are they?

Guys like Victor Conte and William Llewellyn will always be a few steps ahead of WADA, and even then WADA are bent as **** to begin with.

sock puppet

fran17 wrote: »

i dont believe she was totally innocent of some form of wrong doing but nobody who gets to the very top of there field is.

Basis for this? The dominance of East Germany in the 80s and China in the early nineties would suggest to me that they were alone in having systematic doping regimes.

Nermal

funnights74 wrote: »

Definitely, cycling has long lost any claim to have cleaned itself up, despite constant attempts to introduce Biological passports. It is a sport with zero amount of credibility, and i write this as a keen cyclist, all be it as a hobby.

I think the athletes in every other sport are as doped or more so than cycling, it's just that cycling seems to have the harshest testing regime. Not harsh enough to result in a clean sport, obviously, but light-years ahead of anything else bar athletics.

Ficheall

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Let somebody else take a sample though.

There were other samples taken...

fran17

sock puppet wrote: »

Basis for this? The dominance of East Germany in the 80s and China in the early nineties would suggest to me that they were alone in having systematic doping regimes.

oh i agree that on a grand scale the east german and chinese regimes leave everyone else for dead.but with the pressures and financial rewards on offer nowadays anything that gives one the slightest advantage would be too strong to resist.the whole marion jones saga was a huge eye opener to everyone no

K-9

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

What Chinese? A Romanian athlete beat Sonia for gold fair and square in Sydney.

She finished 4th in her first Olympics, beaten by 3 Chinese women.

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

not saying gabriela szabo WAS definitely juiced, but her coach / husband was found in possession of a car-boot full of performance enhancing drugs just after that race

Fair and square indeed!

My name is URL

What was it she took.. androstenedione? Wasn't that shown to have a very negligible (if any) effect whatsoever on increasing strength and performance levels?

It's debatable whether or not the reason for her 'success' lies with her taking the banned substance. She was wrong to do so of course, and deserves the fallout, but she was still a highly talented athlete imo.

Fey!

The Aussie wrote: »

on top of the tampering of the urine, Smith had also taken the bodybuilding drug Androstenedione, a metabolic precursor of testosterone, the night before the test."
and "three samples, taken between November 1997 and March 1998, had shown traces of Androstenedione, which was a banned drug.

That differs from wikipedia, which states that the drug was NOT a banned substance at the time.

Wiki wrote:

Smith later received a four-year suspension in 1998 after being found guilty of tampering with a urine sample. The ban was imposed after a urine sample taken during a routine random drug test was found to be contaminated with alcohol.[1] The bodybuilding drug Androstenedione was also found in her samples, but this was not a banned drug.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Smith

The whole lot looks circumstantial in my opinion. It reads along the lines:

Her husband did drugs, so she must do drugs too
I (Janet Evans) didn't beat her, so she must be doing drugs
Her urine reeked of whiskey, so she must have tampered with it, but we can't say how she did
Ireland have never won a swimming gold, so it's impossible that there must be a first time for it
She beat all of her previous performances, which must be impossible

loobylou

seanmacc wrote: »

In fairness, who would be naive enough to spike their samle with whiskey and think they'd not get caught?

What was being alleged is that she was unable to give a clean sample. She therefore deliberately contaminated said sample by adding whisky to it, probably in the hope it would be declared null and void.

twinytwo

Canis Lupus wrote: »

She was a drugs cheat and despite not testing positive, to suggest she wasn't juiced up for the olympics would be naive. Greatest Irish olympian my hole.

firstly the test was after the olympics... secondly she was accused of adding alcohol of some sort.. i think it was whiskey to a urine sample she gave, while there was someone sitting there looking at her.. so somehow she would need to smuggle the alcohol in and add it to the sample all without getting seen, which i find highly unlikely.... all sparked off by the americans because she beat their supposed up and coming star.

if it turns out that it is that easy to tamper with a sample why is not every athlete who was ever caught on drugs not do it.

The Aussie

Fey! wrote: »

That differs from wikipedia, which states that the drug was NOT a banned substance at the time.

From Androstenedione on Wiki (i normally dont try and quote Wiki as i find it unreliable and not precise at times), it does not say in which month it was banned but but the March 1998 one is well after the 1997 Ban.
"The International Olympic Committee in 1997 banned androstenedione and placed it under the category of androgenic-anabolic steroids"

http:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androstenedione

My Quote for Comparison

The Aussie wrote: »

"three samples, taken between November 1997 and March 1998, had shown traces of Androstenedione, which was a banned drug.

Jimmyhologram

twinytwo wrote: »

firstly the test was after the olympics... secondly she was accused of adding alcohol of some sort.. i think it was whiskey to a urine sample she gave, while there was someone sitting there looking at her.. so somehow she would need to smuggle the alcohol in and add it to the sample all without getting seen, which i find highly unlikely.... all sparked off by the americans because she beat their supposed up and coming star.

if it turns out that it is that easy to tamper with a sample why is not every athlete who was ever caught on drugs not do it.

Here's a question I have:

Do you tamper knowing full well that the tampering will show up in the test?

In that case, does it make sense to tamper only because it's slightly better to be caught for tampering than to test positive for illegal drugs?

Just trying to understand the logic for it.

SocSocPol

Since she tested after every race at the Olympics and passed no problem, and since she was never stripped of her medals then yes she is Irelands greatest ever Olympian.

The Aussie

SocSocPol wrote: »

Since she tested after every race at the Olympics and passed no problem.

So did Marion Jones, it pays to have a good Chemist

Parsley

longshanks wrote: »

Fuck off. Sport is about what's right. What inspires to greatness. What makes the impossible happen. No room for cheats.

I saw that quote on the twitter earlier.

if that's how you feel, you shouldn't want to watch the 100m final.

Pherekydes

K-9 wrote: »

She finished 4th in her first Olympics, beaten by 3 Chinese women.

That is incorrect. She was beaten by a Russian, who died at age 43, a Ukrainian, who tested positive in 1993, and a Canadian.

Ficheall

Jimmyhologram wrote: »

Here's a question I have:

Do you tamper knowing full well that the tampering will show up in the test?

In that case, does it make sense to tamper only because it's slightly better to be caught for tampering than to test positive for illegal drugs?

Just trying to understand the logic for it.

Perhaps she hoped the persecution would end, at whatever cost?
Testing clean didn't seem to have done her any good.

Mars Bar

DUnno, maybe she was. However, I believe Katie Taylor will become the Irish Olympian Queen.

Jimoslimos

Mars Bar wrote: »

DUnno, maybe she was. However, I believe Katie Taylor will become the Irish Olympian Queen.

Regardless of whether she wins gold, Katie Taylor will never match Sonia in my eyes.

Ellis Dee

There was that unfortunate incident, which had nothing to do with the Olympics or any other competition, since it was the result of a surprise inspection of her at home, but she was checked, double-checked, treble-checked at the Olympics - probably more than any other swimmer there, because the Americans, especially, were really loud in their accusations - and nothing was found. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Starobelgrade: Of course you wouldn't ride her. You'll only ever get to ride women that are in your own league - and she's way, way, way out of it. Try and have a nice **** as a consolation prize, though. :)

As the only Irish person ever to win three Olympic golds - and they were not taken away from her despite probably the most vicious campaign of defamation against a successful athlete that the Olympics have ever seen - she is undeniably our greatest Olympian to date. :D:D

Paparazzo

hardCopy wrote: »

Druggies out!

That she has been vilified in Ireland and others have been ignored in their own countries is to our credit. Long may our vilification of cheating continue.

Except Stephen Roche

Pherekydes

Ellis Dee wrote: »

There was that unfortunate incident, which had nothing to do with the Olympics or any other competition, since it was the result of a surprise inspection of her at home, but she was checked, double-checked, treble-checked at the Olympics - probably more than any other swimmer there, because the Americans, especially, were really loud in their accusations - and nothing was found. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Starobelgrade: Of course you wouldn't ride her. You'll only ever get to ride women that are in your own league - and she's way, way, way out of it. Try and have a nice **** as a consolation prize, though. :)

As the only Irish person ever to win three Olympic golds - and they were not taken away from her despite probably the most vicious campaign of defamation against a successful athlete that the Olympics have ever seen - she is undeniably our greatest Olympian to date. :D:D

Good defence of the woman.

John Flanagan won the Hammer 3 straight times, albeit in the colours of the USA.

Martin Sheridan, also competing for the USA, won FIVE golds, 3 silvers and a bronze (including the 1906 Intercalated Games).

Pat O'Callaghan won the Hammer twice.

These guys would top my list of Ireland's greatest olympians.

Nodin

Ellis Dee wrote: »

There was that unfortunate incident, which had nothing to do with the Olympics or any other competition, since it was the result of a surprise inspection of her at home, but she was checked, double-checked, treble-checked at the Olympics - probably more than any other swimmer there, because the Americans, especially, were really loud in their accusations - and nothing was found. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

........

Emm.....

He used a falsified accreditation badge of a Belgian official to gain entry into the doping control area. In the anti-doping area, Erik proceeded to mark up Michelle's doping control form with comments regarding the sloppiness of the control procedures in Dutch.[2][3] It was reported that in 1996 and 1997, the International Swimming Federation (FINA) had concerns about Smith's repeated unavailability for random out-of-competition testing. Her submitted training schedule was left totally blank, apart from her name and nationality, making it difficult to predict her movements. It has been suggested that Smith's behaviour during this period is wholly consistent with the typical behaviour of others who have subsequently been found guilty of drug taking offences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Smith

Pherekydes

That's why WADA introduced the "whereabouts" rule.

But to jump from not finding an athlete to assuming doping is a logical leap too far.

Red21

She went to the 1988 aged 19 and failed to make the semi-finals (top 16) at these games she was praised for her meticulous preparation, both herself and the irish team said they had left no stone unturned and they were happy with the performance.
As she was only 19 a person might think that maybe there is a chance for her at the next games but thats not generally how womens swimming works, certainly there would be scope for improvement but it would be highly unlikely that she would ever get into a final let alone win a medal, Janet Evans also went to these games aged 17 and won 3 gold medals.
For the next few years, Smith trained just as hard as the other swimmers she also availed of all the professional coaching that they had yet as was expected she didn't improve on her world ranking if anything she went slightly back when compared to the other swimmers.
The question is simple yet she has never given a proper answer.
What training did you do after 92 that you hadn't done before 92 that took you from being a complete outsider to being able dominate world swimming.

opinion guy

Red21 wrote: »

She went to the 1988 aged 19 and failed to make the semi-finals (top 16) at these games she was praised for her meticulous preparation, both herself and the irish team said they had left no stone unturned and they were happy with the performance.
As she was only 19 a person might think that maybe there is a chance for her at the next games but thats not generally how womens swimming works, certainly there would be scope for improvement but it would be highly unlikely that she would ever get into a final let alone win a medal, Janet Evans also went to these games aged 17 and won 3 gold medals.
For the next few years, Smith trained just as hard as the other swimmers she also availed of all the professional coaching that they had yet as was expected she didn't improve on her world ranking if anything she went slightly back when compared to the other swimmers.
The question is simple yet she has never given a proper answer.
What training did you do after 92 that you hadn't done before 92 that took you from being a complete outsider to being able dominate world swimming.

Didn't Erik de Bruin claim he had secret training techniques he didn't want to give away ?
Or something like that ?

The Aussie

Red21 wrote: »

The question is simple yet she has never given a proper answer.
What training did you do after 92 that you hadn't done before 92 that took you from being a complete outsider to being able dominate world swimming.

Can i have a crack at the answer.

D-R-U-G-S

which equates to

C-H-E-A-T

Now if thats the type of person anyone wants to idolize.
It speaks volumes, so idolize away...

The Aussie

Ellis Dee wrote: »

she was checked, double-checked, treble-checked at the Olympics - probably more than any other swimmer there, because the Americans, especially, were really loud in their accusations - and nothing was found. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

i wil put this up again, simply because i dont get tired of it, But...
So did Marion Jones, yet another cheat, it seems we have a sister hood of cheats.

Red21

opinion guy wrote: »

Didn't Erik de Bruin claim he had secret training techniques he didn't want to give away ?
Or something like that ?

I can't remember Erik ever being interviewed by a newspaper or television, I can remember Michelle giving press conferances and when asked about her training, her answers were very cleverly and professionally delivered they were hopeless in explaining how she actually did it. She treated the irish public like they were complete fools saying things like " we started using heavier weights".

opinion guy

Red21 wrote: »

I can't remember Erik ever being interviewed by a newspaper or television, I can remember Michelle giving press conferances and when asked about her training, her answers were very cleverly and professionally delivered they were hopeless in explaining how she actually did it. She treated the irish public like they were complete fools saying things like " we started using heavier weights".

Well to be fair here - its not impossible that to have training breakthrough. It does happen. Bode Miller case in point with his comeback to competitive skiing. I've read interviews of him talk about his revamped training methods and whilst he wasn't giving it all away, the bits he did give away made sense.

mathepac

Mars Bar wrote: »

... I believe Katie Taylor will become the Irish Olympian Queen.

I believe Katie Taylor is our supreme athlete and I don't believe her record will ever be equalled by another Irish amateur athlete

Katie faces an enormous challenge at the Olympics as she will be boxing in a weight category above that which she is classified for other competitions i.e. 64kg, where she will meet women who are heavier / stronger than her usual opponents.

I believe she can win a medal and unfortunately as boxers only box in a single competition, I doubt if she'll still be boxing in eight years time, which she'd have to do to emulate Michelle's untarnished achievements, but she could not emulate her at a single Olympics

The other notable Irish performer at Michelle's Olympics was commentator Gary O'Toole who kept trotting out the 1-2-3 results and times in advance of the penultimate and ultimate races.

Michelle, Queen of the Olympics, Katie Empress of Sport.