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

secretambition

Anyone who cheats at any point in their sporting career does so aware that if they are ever found out, it will tarnish their reputation in general and cause people to wonder about any previous achievements.

On that basis I have no sympathy for the unfairly blackening character argument.

bruschi

Indo404 wrote: »

"Most Irish people don't recognise MS anymore" myth.


I think there is a difference the way Smith was treated by the Irish press and the way she was treated by the general public. She still seems to be popular with the Irish people.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archive...348756146.html

And her 1996 wins were voted the best Olympic memories by the listeners of the Pat Kenny radio show.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/celebritiesgowild/latest.html

"She was too old" myth

. "Originally Posted by Spokes of Glory
The age factor is considered more significant in females because they lay down more body fat coming into adulthood.......hence the number of 17 and 18 year olds prevalent in the top ranks."
MS was 26 at the Olympics in 1996. "The average age of the top eight women in the 100-meter freestyle at the Olympic Trials is 26.8." http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/1574.html
Dara Torres US swimmer) competed in the 2008 Olympic Games and won a silver medal at age 41.

No availability for out-of-competition myth.
Originally Posted by Motorist
... FINA, swimming's international federation, had repeatedly expressed concern that Smith was unavailable for out-of-competition drug tests from 1995 onward. ...

Not true. FINA even wrote her a letter stating that FINA had no problem with her availability for out-of-competition tests. The letter was produced at the CAS hearing in 1998.

"She came out of nowhere" myth

Originally Posted by Red21
Don't know how Jimmy Magee gets away with this nonsence, she took 20 sec's off her 400m time an event that only takes 4 mins.
If paul hession had the same improvement he'd be in with a chance to win the 200m.
The 400 meter time in 1995 was a training swim for her Dutch club. You should compare like with like. She did not "improve" 20 seconds. Yes there is a difference of 20 seconds in those two times. Look at her time in the 400 IM in 1995 (4:42) and her time in 1996 (4:39). Same distance Those are two times you can compare. She was rested and tapered for both those meets.

PS "She came out of nowhere" Where did MS finish two years before the Olympics in 1996 at the wold championships in Rome?

I suppose it is easy for someone who is lazy to simply repeat these myths, instead of doing proper research.

Further, when any proper anlysis of her events is done, there were no huge drops in times, as was suggested by the Americans. The 1996 Olympic Games were the worst games for an American swimming team in forty years. It's easy to blame someone else, rather than explain why your own swimmers have not performed.
In one of the events in which she won a gold medal, MS was approached by the coach of a girl who had finished behind her in the medals. He congratulated her and said that his swimmer didn't deserve to win, as she hadn't trained hard enough. That is not something that can be said about Michelle Smith.

on your points, (interesting how everyone of your 16 posts on this forum are only to do with Michelle SMith, but however).

1. you are guaging her popularity on a non existant examiner page, and a "celebrity" competition which was won by a crooked local TD from Kerry, and that contained some of the worst z list celebs in Ireland. That proves nothing of her popularity.

2. the average age factor. yes, you can use your 100m average, that adds a year onto it from jsut one competetor. You could also look at this:

http://espn.go.com/espnw/training/6590755/in-long-run-women-getting-stronger-age

And while the average age of female U.S. Olympic swimmers in 2008 was just 22.82

or this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/magazine/29torres-t.html?pagewanted=all

notes that the average age of competitors at national swimming championships increased from 16 in the 1960s to 20 in 2004

where that article discusses how being old may not be a hinderence, but is certainly the exception rather than the rule.

even your own link says the average age of swimmers in USA was 19.2 years.

3. her times, which were impressive, all dramatically improved after 1994, afte she met her drug banned husband, and after she was going awol on drug testers. in the 200m IM, she improved from 2.23 to 2.13, and in the 400m IM imrpoved from 4.57 to 4.39.

you obviously have a personal interest in this, I dont. I'm looking from the outside on someone who wasnt considered a realistic medal hope to winning all around her and subsequently being positively drug tested and being handed a 4 year ban for tampering with a drug test.

CDfm

bruschi wrote: »

you obviously have a personal interest in this, I dont. .

I was asked this same question and really it is down to deep unease with how the sporting organizations who purport to organize the national team conduct themselves.

They get public money and people are well justified in asking questions in a public forum concerning their conduct when that conduct worries them.

Jame Gumb

I have no involvement with swimming.

My friends and I are sports fans and the general consensus among us is that she is a "non person" and that her medals never happened.

I'm pretty sure that feeling is replicated among the general public.

Between drugged up people and drugged up animals, what are we like?!

Ficheall

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Between drugged up people and drugged up animals, what are we like?!

Many of the world's other countries with successful athletes?

CDfm

Jame Gumb wrote: »

My friends and I are sports fans and the general consensus among us is that she is a "non person" and that her medals never happened.

She won the medal's fair and square and you can't unwin something. It's a logical fallacy.

Jame Gumb

CDfm wrote: »

She won the medal's fair and square

Like many sports fans, I'm highly sceptical about that.

marcus2000

Not sure about her personally, but guilty or not, and as an Irishperson myself, It was one of the best weeks of Olympics that I can recall. It made great edge-of-the-seat TV!!!

CDfm

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Like many sports fans, I'm highly sceptical about that.

Absolutely, and you are entitled to be sceptical.

As an issue it transcends sport. And,a reasonable person might think that , if there is a doubt then no one should be entitled to take away her good name.

Really, you don't have to like her or admire her , but you should want the procedures and practices to be above board.

Pantsface

CDfm wrote: »

So was it wrong to force Sonia O'Sullivan to strip or not.





Absolutely no connection and I neither know the woman or any of her family.

I am aware this is a contentious area and I have seen no evidence that she cheated to get the medal's.

I have used facts not hyperbole to make my points.

I think she should have had the cop to wear the correct kit in the first place. Its simple really

Pantsface

CDfm wrote: »

Absolutely, and you are entitled to be sceptical.

As an issue it transcends sport. And,a reasonable person might think that , if there is a doubt then no one should be entitled to take away her good name.

Really, you don't have to like her or admire her , but you should want the procedures and practices to be above board.[/QUOTE]


Where were they "below board"?

What did they do? Did they tamper with her urine sample? Is that what you're implying?

CDfm

Pherekydes wrote: »

One minute you're asking about the competition when Sonia was forced to change kit; the next minute you seem to have all the details. I'm a little perplexed.

Sonia didn't meet Nic Bideau until after the 1996 games were over.

The issue over the kit has been well documented. It was more a power struggle between AAI and the OCI, with Sonia a pawn in the middle.

According to the Olympic charter, the Athletic competitions of the Olympic games are conducted under the auspices of the world governing body, the IAAF, and the rules and regulations of the IAAF apply at all times. Now, AAI are affiliated to the IAAF, and have the right to decide the equipment their athletes (to wit, Sonia, amongst others) wear. But the OCI signed a contract with a rival company and forced Sonia to change literally at the last second.

None of this was Sonia's fault.


.

Pantsface wrote: »

Thats fair enough.

Pantsface wrote: »

I think she should have had the cop to wear the correct kit in the first place. Its simple really

I thought that you had accepted Pherekydes explanation above as you agreed with him and thanked his post which said "None of this was Sonia's fault. ".

Pantsface wrote: »

Where were they "below board"?

What did they do? Did they tamper with her urine sample? Is that what you're implying?

In the context of this thread , we are asked if we agree that Michelle is Ireland's Greatest Olympian and she must be if we are following the Olympic Commitee's rules.

I cited the Sonia O'Sullivan affair as an example of something that caused me concern and the culture within the sporting organization's and a situation which may have been demeaning to an athlete. There were ,of course,other very serious issue's in swimming too.

So what I am saying is that the sports organizations have not been beyond reproach in the past and if there are issue's concerning a sample then that is the type of organization's you are dealing with. In 2008 , the current Minister for Justice ,Alan Shatter commented on the failure of Swim Ireland to vet over half it's staff and coaches.

"It is an unforgivable act of negligence, especially in respect of events in the public knowledge which have led to prosecutions," he said.


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/swim-group-in-abuse-scandal-has-vetted-less-than-half-staff-1423212.html

I don't think it is unreasonable to question this and others don't either and we are looking at how the organisations behaved in the past.

How can anyone be sure how the sample got tampered with and that is the whole point. It got tampered with.

oldbie

No one knows what her reason for tampering with the sample was (if in fact she wasn't stitched up by the Janet Evans campaign). She could have make a huge error of judgement and smoked a doobie the night before which would have gotten her a ban. Who knows! There's no proof she ever took a performance enhancing substance.

I Heart Internet

^ But has she ever offered any kind of explanation as to the dodgy sample?? I don't recall her offering any kind of defence.

StephenHendry

she still our greatest olympian, her feat of 3 gold and 1 bronze probably won't be beaten or matched by any of our olypians if ever. obviously through her ban imposed by FINA, the issue of drug use, her sample being tampered, her boyfriends association with drug taking means she will never get full recognition or credit for her achievements. she has no doubt played a big part in her own downfall and success , whichever way you look at it. im just gutted i never got to see any of her races live at atlanta

Wishful Thinking

Just went onto YouTube & cannot find any clips of her at the 1996 Olympics

Totally airbrushed from history?

mathepac

I Heart Internet wrote: »

^ But has she ever offered any kind of explanation as to the dodgy sample?? I don't recall her offering any kind of defence.

Unlike certain other jurisdictions, an "accused person" is not obliged to offer any kind of defence; this is where real life is different to the telly. It is up to the accusers / prosecuters to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that a defendant is guilty.

Royal Legend

Personally, there was no proof that she cheated, she is in my eyes our greatest Olympian.

Her main accuser was a swimmer in the USA, not exactly clean are they either.
Its amazing that more is not made of Carl Lewis 4 golds, are they not tainted? or Flo Jo for that matter, greatest sprinter ever, tested more than most, fastest woman of all time, yet her memory is tainted by some, a) because she was so fast and b) because she died from a heart attack a few years later.
Its easy to cast aspertions on someones character, but without proof it is libelous IMO.
I was watching iTalk sport on Setanta a few weeks ago when Coughlan was on it with Kimmage and Kimmage got thick with Coughlan about his opinion of drugs in Athletics, Kimmage as much as said that Bolt could not possibly do what he does legally. Eamonn put Kimmage in his place, that he had a chip on his shoulder about drug taking in sport

Motorist

Michelle Smith's legacy was mentioned again today by John Leonard, executive director of the World Swimming Coaches Association in relation to "dramatic" improvements in Ye Shiwen's times. He said "the 16-year-old's performance was "suspicious" and said it brought back "a lot of awful memories" of the Irish swimmer Michelle Smith's race in the same event at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Smith, now Michelle de Bruin, was banned for four years in 1998 after testing positive for an anabolic steroid."

What an ongoing, international embarrassment she is.

FishBowel

She's now a successful barrister making more money than anyone on this thread. Doubt she cares about what that guy said today?

Motorist

Motorist wrote: »

Michelle Smith's legacy was mentioned again today by John Leonard, executive director of the World Swimming Coaches Association in relation to "dramatic" improvements in Ye Shiwen's times. He said "the 16-year-old's performance was "suspicious" and said it brought back "a lot of awful memories" of the Irish swimmer Michelle Smith's race in the same event at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Smith, now Michelle de Bruin, was banned for four years in 1998 after testing positive for an anabolic steroid."

What an ongoing, international embarrassment she is.

Except for the fact she wasn't tested positive for an anabolic steroid.

ZeitgeistGlee

FishBowel wrote: »

She's now a successful barrister making more money than anyone on this thread. Doubt she cares about what that guy said today?

Regardless of how much money a person makes, I doubt attacks on the validity of their personal achievements are ever just brushed off.

PK2008

Karsini wrote: »

Except for the fact she wasn't tested positive for an anabolic steroid.

Yeh, I thought it was whiskey in the sample?

In any case she was deffo on something, even Aquaman raised an eyebrow at that one

foxyboxer

Motorist wrote: »

Michelle Smith's legacy was mentioned again today by John Leonard, executive director of the World Swimming Coaches Association in relation to "dramatic" improvements in Ye Shiwen's times. He said "the 16-year-old's performance was "suspicious" and said it brought back "a lot of awful memories" of the Irish swimmer Michelle Smith's race in the same event at the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Smith, now Michelle de Bruin, was banned for four years in 1998 after testing positive for an anabolic steroid."

What an ongoing, international embarrassment she is.

Remember how Michael Johnson was blowing away all comers in 1996?
Perhaps this may be the case with Shiwen's performance. Gold medallist until proven guilty.

Raphael

The ban was for tampering, but at the appeal it came out that there were traces of steroids in the samples.

Motorist

FishBowel wrote: »

She's now a successful barrister making more money than anyone on this thread. Doubt she cares about what that guy said today?

His comments were carried on a lot of news bulletins today, and mentioned across the UK and Ireland. On the web his comments were carried on around 500 news websites. Not that the "successful barrister" cares though.

Red21

Fair play to Gary O' Toole he gave another dig at de bruin tonight when he and Bill were discussing the drug rumours

Sky King

Wow it all makes sense now, here was me thinking all along that she got an on the spot whiskey test and tried to ruin it by urinating in it..

The Aussie

Michelle Michael took so many drugs She He would even fail the Grope test.

PK2008 wrote: »

In any case she was deffo on something, even Aquaman raised an eyebrow at that one

Class

Red21

A large chunk of the medals in female swimming at any olympics are taken by teenagers, are people so thick that they actually believe that a woman who reached her peak at 17 and remained at that same level for 6/7 years all of a sudden went from being a complete outsider to world domination by natural methods.
She still to this day has given no explination for her massive jump in perfromance.
When I say de bruin was a complete outsider I mean that she wouldn't have even been considered an international swimmer oin the states until she took the drugs that changed her into a man.

Sea Filly

yizorselves wrote: »

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

"An Interview with Angel Heredia - Former PED Dealer to Athletes and Olympians"

read that, cheapens sport but what can ye do

^^^^^^^

Great read.

leeroybrown

foxyboxer wrote: »

Remember how Michael Johnson was blowing away all comers in 1996?
Perhaps this may be the case with Shiwen's performance. Gold medallist until proven guilty.

Michael Johnson was an exceptional athlete at the peak of his career who was already dominant in his events. He was a consistent gold medal winner across almost ten years of major championships and he incrementally improved his performance over that career. Shinwen and Michelle Smith both turned up from nowhere to put enormous performances. Michelle Smith in particular went from nowhere to champion late in her career when most swimmers peak quite early. Smith's conviction for deliberate sample tampering is as good as a positive test in my view. Shinwen is a gold medalist until proven otherwise but the numbers are incredibly suspect and it's not as if the Chinese swimming team don't have a recent high profile record of widespread doping in their juniors.

Personally I think that there is still widespread doping and the science/tech involved is incredibly sophisticated and miles ahead of the testers.

leeroybrown

yizorselves wrote: »

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

"An Interview with Angel Heredia - Former PED Dealer to Athletes and Olympians"

read that, cheapens sport but what can ye do

Excellent read. Thanks for posting it.

mathepac

leeroybrown wrote: »

... Michelle Smith in particular went from nowhere to champion late in her career when most swimmers peak quite early. ...

Another revisionist. Clearly you haven't taken the time to read the thread or familiarise with the lead up to the Olympics. But why should truth or actual recorded events get in the way of yet another stupid post?

leeroybrown wrote: »

... Smith's conviction for deliberate sample tampering is as good as a positive test in my view. ....

Her conviction? She faced criminal charges, was found guilty and imprisoned? She was actually convicted of a crime? Fcuk me man, that's taking revisionism a bit too far even for this thread. An avid Sun / Sindo reader no doubt? Your female colleague who displays the 12-year old's journalistic skills on the front page of the Sindo writes slightly better comedy than you but your post so far rates highly as fiction.

BTW who do you think gives a shyte about your distorted view of what happened and your crappy and rather creepy attempt at re-aligning reality to match your crazy views?

leeroybrown wrote: »

... Personally I think that there is still widespread doping and the science/tech involved is incredibly sophisticated and miles ahead of the testers.

And your deep personal insights and technical knowledge about doping in sport were formed by (delete as appropriate):

1. Years of smoking hash
2. A brain exchange with a frog
3. Watching re-runs of the Jeremy Kyle Show
4. Phoning Irish Psychics Live?

Do you know what day it is? You need to focus on the small realities first and then work up to the really important stuff like the name of the bird with her assets on display in Ireland's brightest daily (Hint: Start at page 2 and work forwards from there, adding 1 to the page number until you find her. If you get to page 4 and haven't found her, reverse the process (that means go backwards)).

Richard Hillman

I think the thing that annoyed us most as a country was that we defended her to the hilt against the Wicked Witch of the West Janet Evans who dared to question our girl Michelle and her/our achievements. Most of the country (not all) were blinded by the success and refused to believe anything different.

She let us down and made us look stupid. She will never be forgiven for it.

mathepac

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I think the thing that annoyed us most as a country was that we defended her to the hilt against the Wicked Witch of the West Janet Evans who dared to question our girl Michelle and her/our achievements. ...

I didn't appoint you as my spokesman so less of the "we" stuff please.

Richard Hillman wrote: »

... Most of the country (not all) were blinded by the success and refused to believe anything different.

She let us down and made us look stupid. She will never be forgiven for it.

Most of the posters in the "anti-Michelle" lynch-mob don't need anyone's help looking stupid, that's something they've managed here all on their own.

With no evidence and a total disregard for long-established facts, they have once again rushed to condemnation like the good little mob-rule adherents they are.

Red21

mathepac wrote: »

Another revisionist. Clearly you haven't taken the time to read the thread or familiarise with the lead up to the Olympics. But why should truth or actual recorded events get in the way of yet another stupid post?.

What has this thread got to do with the actual truth?
When you say the "the lead up to olympics " what do you actually mean? because the 5/6 months before the 96' games has nothing to do with the truth, where as the 7/8 years before the 96' games has everything to do with the truth.
The truth is that in the history of sport, from the puck fada to olympic handball, Michelle De Bruin is known the world over as greatest cheat of all time, because her improvement are so unbelieveable she is up there with Ben Johnson but unlike johnson, she has become a demonstration of the power of drugs.
No other single person has ruined sport more than de briun and this is known the world over.

Sea Filly

mathepac wrote: »

With no evidence and a total disregard for long-established facts

Tell us these facts. Educate us.

Cienciano

I love the "never failed a drugs test" argument some people are using. Marion Jones never failed a drugs test. Mark McGwire never failed a drugs test. Bjarne Riis never failed a drugs test. Wang Junxia and Lance Armstrong never failed a drugs test.

Red21

Richard Hillman wrote: »

She let us down and made us look stupid. She will never be forgiven for it.

The thing is I think I could forgive her, mainly because her story was unbeliveable to begin with. If she held a press conferance and came clean, I reckon it would go a long way, after all she was only a kid when she first decided to go went down this route.
People might say i'm nieve, but I also believe that she might come clean about the whole thing some day, it must be understood that inatially she was lead to believe that she could get away with this yet at every turn things went against her. I'm sure that over the last few years shes had some kinda notion that the whole thing was somewhat settled and she had her medals in her back pocket, yet what has happened this year with her not allowed carry the torch, it must have been an awful kick in the ass, what happen this year has really turned her medals to dust and it may begin to dawn on her that for her familys sack she should just tell the truth as she will never be ahead of this thing.
Of course it may not be as easy for those who believe her to forgive.

paky

It was never proven that Smith actually took performance enhancing drugs so I can't see why she is so vilified especially in Ireland . Sonia O Sullivan in the very same Olympics had to drop out of a race in which she was favourite to win due to an upset stomach. Who's to say that someone didn't have some sort of vandetta against the Irish team that year?

Red21

paky wrote: »

It was never proven that Smith actually took performance enhancing drugs so I can't see why she is so vilified especially in Ireland .

Seriously??? you can't see why she's vilified? no matter what side of the argument you're on you should be able to see that, it's quiet clear.

paky wrote: »

Sonia O Sullivan in the very same Olympics had to drop out of a race in which she was favourite to win due to an upset stomach. Who's to say that someone didn't have some sort of vandetta against the Irish team that year?

I've no idea what your point is here, surely you're not saying that the person with the vandetta was given de bruin drugs unknowns to her.

paky

Red21 wrote: »

I've no idea what your point is here, surely you're not saying that the person with the vandetta was given de bruin drugs unknowns to her.

What do you mean? Theres no proof that she took any drugs whatsoever. The only evidence which stands against her are four Olympic medals and a tampered urine test. Lol anyone could have tampered with it! Does the fact that she won four medals suggest guilt? No it doesn't!

mathepac

Sea Filly wrote: »

Tell us these facts. Educate us.

I see no point in re-posting information already given in the thread by someone who had inside knowledge of what happened and when. Do your own research and quote the facts that have led you to your opinion, for what it's worth. otherwise you're just trolling.

The Michelle de Bruin lynch-mob members clearly have no interest in the truth as they are happy to post their unsupported statements and musing without access to facts and they cannot quote any supporting information. "Oh the Mirror said she let us down, the Sun said this, RTE said that, Humphreys on the back page of the Times said something else, me told me granny she doesn't like her" - all merely opinion, a lot of which has been shown in the thread to be based on lies and mis-information.

The condemnatory sheep who would continue with their bigoted farce aimed at dragging down a high-achieving female in the face robust evidence to the contrary, all have the same tune - "She is baaahd, she is baaahd, she is baaahd, baaahd I tell you, someone, somewhere told she is baaahd, so she must be baaahd." It gets annoying when the constant bleating drowns out truth, fact and honesty, because as flock members they can really only hear each other, but at least in winter they can huddle together for warmth.

Now get the flock outta here.:p

Tombo2001

my understanding of the situation is that the performance enhancer she was using was only made illegal for competitive purposes in 1997.

She won her medals in 1996, at which time the product was not illegal, and as such she wasnt breaking any rules.

So where does one stand on that? I dont know.

Anyway Ronnie Delaney was and will be our greatest Olympian and imho or greatest sportsman until someone comes along and wins the Olympic 1500m again. For me there is no bigger event in individual sports. And Sonia our greatest sportswoman.

Tombo2001

Royal Legend wrote: »

Personally, there was no proof that she cheated, she is in my eyes our greatest Olympian.

Her main accuser was a swimmer in the USA, not exactly clean are they either.
Its amazing that more is not made of Carl Lewis 4 golds, are they not tainted? or Flo Jo for that matter, greatest sprinter ever, tested more than most, fastest woman of all time, yet her memory is tainted by some, a) because she was so fast and b) because she died from a heart attack a few years later.
Its easy to cast aspertions on someones character, but without proof it is libelous IMO.
I was watching iTalk sport on Setanta a few weeks ago when Coughlan was on it with Kimmage and Kimmage got thick with Coughlan about his opinion of drugs in Athletics, Kimmage as much as said that Bolt could not possibly do what he does legally. Eamonn put Kimmage in his place, that he had a chip on his shoulder about drug taking in sport

You are right about the US being as guilty as anyone else, at least in the 1980s and 1990s.

But about Kimmage having a chip on his shoulder.........you could hardly say he is making it up now, could you? I know he has made a career out of calling time on drug cheats.......but major sporting events have consistently disappointed with regard to drug cheating and the inability of the authorities to deal with it......Kimmage's own sport being the prime example.

alastair

mathepac wrote: »

The condemnatory sheep who would continue with their bigoted farce aimed at dragging down a high-achieving female in the face robust evidence to the contrary, all have the same tune - "She is baaahd, she is baaahd, she is baaahd, baaahd I tell you, someone, somewhere told she is baaahd, so she must be baaahd." It gets annoying when the constant bleating drowns out truth, fact and honesty, because as flock members they can really only hear each other, but at least in winter they can huddle together for warmth.

Let it go. She was a cheat and got caught. We've come to terms with it. You should too.

mathepac

alastair wrote: »

... She was a cheat and got caught. ....

Prove it dates, times, places, test results - all those little things that go to build a credible body of evidence that she cheated her way to being our supreme olympic champion

alastair wrote: »

... We've come to terms with it. ...

I wish you and your cohort well in your recovery and hopefully you'll all have a warm and woolly future..

alastair wrote: »

... You should too.

Thanks for the "shudds, cudda, wuddas". I like eating sheep but I could't live with them.

Karsini wrote: »

Except for the fact she wasn't tested positive for an anabolic steroid.

As @Karsini pointed out above the stuff that some of Michelle's detractors trot out as fact at times is just downright embarrassing.

Sea Filly

mathepac wrote: »

I see no point in re-posting information already given in the thread by someone who had inside knowledge of what happened and when.

Now why does this not surprise me?

alastair

mathepac wrote: »

Prove it dates, times, places, test results - all those little things that go to build a credible body of evidence that she cheated her way to being our supreme olympic champion.

Well - a finding of sample tampering by FINA is fairly clear as to her guilt in '98 - as were her attempts to undermine the integrity/legitimacy of FINA. The IOC testing of her B sample which found testosterone only clarifies the matter. I was aware that most of the Irish swim scene were working under the assumption she was doping in 1994 - I was told so at the time. That she then went on to patently unbelievable improvements in performance, past her prime, doesn't really do anything to disprove those assumptions. Her peers, the experts in the field, the governing bodies who oversee doping, and all common sense point to her being a cheat. If it walks and talks like a duck, it's a duck.