2016 Rio Olympics | ATHLETICS | Part II | August 12th thru August 21st | NBC/CBC | ‎

[Halladay]

Impressive this world record has lasted for 23 years and counting.

 

[Cody Webster]

Gold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kurtz]

What it hasn't proven is how much of one it gives to those who are female by gender with male sex traits.

Unless I'm mistaken, there just hasn't been enough testing done on that, due to there being no reason to test for it until recently. It has just been a logical assumption. If testosterone helps you run faster, then having 3x as much as your competitors will help you, be you man or woman.

And we've seen that assumption proven true when Castor was asked to take pills that reduced her testosterone.

Now, the powers upstairs decided that they needed more scientific proof, and frankly...fair enough. The timing just sucks for Bishop.

 

[EC09]

So much USA gold.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Science has proven that testosterone gives athletes an advantage. What it hasn't proven is how much of one it gives to those who are female by gender with male sex traits. The CAS suspended the IIAF's testosterone policy because there is no science to prove that women or hypo-androgenic athletes with naturally occurring testosterone over the limit have an advantage over their competitors. If the IIAF wants to re institute their policy, the onus is on them to prove it with actual scientific data that proves an inherent advantage exists. Not some armchair experts on the internet.

I'm not going to have this debate here, not worth the time or effort.

I'm not going to have this debate on here either, but didn't they say multiple times today and yesterday that the policy was removed because of an human rights appeal?

That's to say they didn't get rid of it because they didn't think it was an advantage but because somebody in power ruled it was wrong to force the inhibition of testosterone in her body?

I believe it's an advantage and can't prove it but it's a very touchy subject because no matter what they want to do it's unfair to somebody.

 

[EC09]

I guess we get the silver back in the 1500??

 

[KaylaJ]

I'm not going to have this debate on here either, but didn't they say multiple times today and yesterday that the policy was removed because of an human rights appeal?

That's to say they didn't get rid of it because they didn't think it was an advantage but because somebody in power ruled it was wrong to force the inhibition of testosterone in her body?

I believe it's an advantage and can't prove it but it's a very touchy subject because no matter what they want to do it's unfair to somebody.

Dutee Chand did not want to undergo the testing or the surgery so she appealed. The court "...went on to say that it “was unable to conclude that hyperandrogenic female athletes may benefit from such a significant performance advantage that it is necessary to exclude them from competing in the female category.”

linky

 

[gary69]

Even moreso than in the past, nowadays it seems that all sporting associations are fighting unnecessary fights.

Just make it three categories and be done with it.

One "restricted category" where you need to have internal & external female genitalia and testoterone levels below a certain level.

And then a second "open category" where everybody else can compete within whatever doping restrictions.

And finally a third category of "anything goes", where there are no doping tests or any restrictions.

If you fail the demands in your category your results just gets pushed into next less regulated category.

Then let the athletes decide where they want to participate & let sponsors and spectators and paying customers decide what they want to see and pay for.

 

[KapG]

Dutee Chand did not want to do the testing or the surgery so she appealed. The court "...went on to say that it “was unable to conclude that hyperandrogenic female athletes may benefit from such a significant performance advantage that it is necessary to exclude them from competing in the female category.â€

linky

Yet the girl most people are talking about had drastic drops in her times when her testosterone levels were lowered.

Touchy subject for sure. Unfair for a lot of people No matter what you do

 

[KaylaJ]

Yet the girl most people are talking about had drastic drops in her times when her testosterone levels were lowered.

Touchy subject for sure. Unfair for a lot of people No matter what you do

Perhaps that is part of the problem when we're only looking at one case. Caster is obviously not the only one with higher levels of testosterone in the Olympics, but how many others failed to medal or even qualify?


Also, no matter what, sports will always be unfair.


PS:

"Botton is plagued by other memories. “Caster needed help and she was approached by people she shouldn’t have trusted. Someone sold an article with Caster to You magazine where they dolled her up in a dress. You never see Caster in a dress. It was so awkward. Caster went off the rails. Over the next few years her performances dropped for a multitude of reasons. It wasn’t just [testosterone-suppressing] medication. She was a long way from home – a very rural community – and thrust into this global limelight. Then she fell out with her old coach Michael Seme and, apparently, started partying hard in Pretoria. Michael said she was spending more time with her girlfriend than training."


linky


That article also brings up a knee injury in 2013-2014

 

[Canada4Gold]

So they reinstated all 3 DQ'd runners in the 5000 changing the medals again.

This DQ, then appeal, change, re-appeal is garbage. Finish the race, inform them and only them there may be something amiss with their race, have the discussion then and there, bring the runners who finished behind them in so they won't appeal afterwards and figure it out. If you reach a DQ then that stands.

DQing a runner or runners to put other runners in podium position and then reversing the decision to cause those other runners to not medal after all that is creul.

 

[shortshorts]

Science has proven that testosterone gives athletes an advantage. What it hasn't proven is how much of one it gives to those who are female by gender with male sex traits. The CAS suspended the IIAF's testosterone policy because there is no science to prove that women or hypo-androgenic athletes with naturally occurring testosterone over the limit have an advantage over their competitors. If the IIAF wants to re institute their policy, the onus is on them to prove it with actual scientific data that proves an inherent advantage exists. Not some armchair experts on the internet.

I'm not going to have this debate here, not worth the time or effort.

Err on the side of lack of data and political correctness.

The argument and (so far) lack of data does not mean you are correct either.

 

[Shrimper]

Butchard cam fourth, nice.

 

[loudi94]

Hasn't it been proven that testosterone has a direct impact on athletic performance? Aren't drugs to raise testosterone banned? Wasn't Castor forced to take testosterone-reducing drugs last year, and as a result her times went way down?

Also, no one has said anything despicable in this thread, so your outrage is misplaced here.

Male athletes that are discovered to have naturally abnormal high T aren't subject to extra testing or forced to take reducing drugs.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Testo is testo at the end of the day, you recover better the more testo you have in your body, you develop better the more testo you have, your body reacts better.
But atleast it's natural testo.

You can see it on her times what it does, you can just look at her and see she's more muscular than the rest.

I'm not disputing the benefits and and biological effects of testosterone, inherently, it provides an advantage for and whilst competing in athletic activity. But as loudi94, are we going to apply the same standard to male athletes who display abnormally high variances of testosterone levels compared to their fellow competitors as well?

I also think we should be careful in brandishing those with different body types as having an automatic advantage or benefiting from inherent biological circumstances. Serena Williams in tennis is a good example of a female athlete with a body type and muscle mass that is clearly female but looks more physically imposing than some of her competitors. Other girls (and this exists in all female sports) who may have the exact same body type have instead made it clear they're more interested in cashing in on lucrative endorsements by appearing extra feminine instead of pushing themselves to their physical peaks.

How do you explain her drop in times when her testosterone was lowered?

Just saying

I think this is a fair point to raise and certainly don't have a problem with it being presented as evidence that she may have biologically inherent advantage.

It is important to take in to account and factor in outside circumstances like the personal and physical ones KaylaJ referenced as well, though.

Unless I'm mistaken, there just hasn't been enough testing done on that, due to there being no reason to test for it until recently. It has just been a logical assumption. If testosterone helps you run faster, then having 3x as much as your competitors will help you, be you man or woman.

And we've seen that assumption proven true when Castor was asked to take pills that reduced her testosterone.

Now, the powers upstairs decided that they needed more scientific proof, and frankly...fair enough. The timing just sucks for Bishop.

You're right, the ban was instituted by the IIAF based on supposition and hypothesis that piggybacked off of the factual assumption that higher levels of testosterone do provide an inherent advantage.

I don't have a problem with that. But in the case of hyperandrogenic athletes, in order to avoid repeating the same ethical, reliability and validity mistakes the IIAF made in the 70's and 80's with their systemic chromosomal testing, it's important that any future guidelines that are instituted are completely transparent and fair to all involved. If that results in athletes like Caster Semenya having to suppress their hormones, then so be it.

It is interesting that such a double standard exists for men though. There is no upper limit to the amount of natural testosterone that is allowed to occur in a male body. Furthermore, the therapeutic use exemption exists for those with low testosterone levels and enables them to use medically prescribed steroids to augment their androgen levels.

I'm not going to have this debate on here either, but didn't they say multiple times today and yesterday that the policy was removed because of an human rights appeal?

That's to say they didn't get rid of it because they didn't think it was an advantage but because somebody in power ruled it was wrong to force the inhibition of testosterone in her body?

I believe it's an advantage and can't prove it but it's a very touchy subject because no matter what they want to do it's unfair to somebody.

KaylaJ posted the reference, but basically the IIAF was unable to produce evidence of any sort (that'd hold up in a court) proving how much of an advantage hyperandrogenic runners had over everyone else when Duttee Chand decided to take her case to them. The CAS then determined that the guideline would be suspended, pending scientific evidence brought forward over the next two years, before a decision would be made on re-instituting the policy or upholding their original decision to suspend it.

Err on the side of lack of data and political correctness.

The argument and (so far) lack of data does not mean you are correct either.

I don't think it makes me correct, what bothers me is the automatic jumping to definitive conclusions before anything can be reliably proven beyond reasonable doubt. I honestly think it's put everybody in a tough position, and can understand why the unfair complaints are being espoused on both sides, however.

As for "political correctness" factoring into any argument of this, one of the campaigns for President of the United States is not politically correct either... and look at the type of people who support him/it. I'd rather be "politically correct" than the alternative.

 

[shortshorts]

I don't think it makes me correct, what bothers me is the automatic jumping to definitive conclusions before anything can be reliably proven beyond reasonable doubt. I honestly think it's put everybody in a tough position, and can understand why the unfair complaints are being espoused on both sides, however.

As for "political correctness" factoring into any argument of this, one of the campaigns for President of the United States is not politically correct either... and look at the type of people who support him/it. I'd rather be "politically correct" than the alternative.

You're making it out to be a "you're a morally terrible person" vs "I'm a morally better person" argument (not necessarily you per se).

You are correct, people are terrible if they say demeaning things under the vein of the same argument. However, while the "end argument" is the same, being skeptical and having a strong opinion against Semenya and others is not being mean or unfair. This is usually the case with highly controversial topics.

 

[Power Man]

Taoufik Makhloufi gave one of his medals to Decathlonian Laarbi Berrada

Just to give you a little context :

Berrada didn't have any support from our Federation - NONE. No financial support, infrastructure , etc

He prepared for the Olympics like Balboa did in Rocky IV, in the wild using his surroundings

And he still finished 5th in the Decathlon by the way.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Taoufik Makhloufi gave one of his medals to Decathlonian Laarbi Berrada

Just to give you a little context :

Berrada didn't have any support from our Federation - NONE. No financial support, infrastructure , etc

He prepared for the Olympics like Balboa did in Rocky IV, in the wild using his surroundings

And he still finished 5th in the Decathlon by the way.

Wow. I'd be interested to watch his methods. Did his performance at least draw any attention in Algeria?

 

[Deficient Mode]

The US had an unusually strong medal yield in distance running events. Actually on the mens' side they got more medals than even Kenya and Ethiopia. Crazy.

 

[hockeykicker]

this is a great thing

 

[KaylaJ]

^won the bronze medal too


There was one country they brought up last night who didn't have such a good showing and said the media was blasting them back home. I want to say it was Kenya, but I do not recall now.

 

[FVM]

^won the bronze medal too


There was one country they brought up last night who didn't have such a good showing and said the media was blasting them back home. I want to say it was Kenya, but I do not recall now.

Finland is one such country for sure. We got a haul of one bronze medal in total.

 

[Deficient Mode]

^won the bronze medal too


There was one country they brought up last night who didn't have such a good showing and said the media was blasting them back home. I want to say it was Kenya, but I do not recall now.

Kenyans definitely seem to be blasting many of their athletes. Kiprop in particular. It was a disappointing Olympics for Kenyan athletes.

 

[KaylaJ]

Finland is one such country for sure. We got a haul of one bronze medal in total.

where's Paavo Nurmi when you need him huh? lol

Will be interesting to see if these down years translate in four year to more or what.

 

[Habsfunk]

It's amazing that the top marathon runners maintain a 20 km/h pace for 42 kilometres. I don't think I could run that fast for one lap of the track.