# Michelle Smith Medals



## DerKaiser (13 Aug 2012)

I'll start out by saying this has nothing to do with Michelle Smith.

She won 3 gold medals and one bronze at the Olympics in 1996. Regardless of whether you think she cheated or not they are there in the record books and are a matter of fact.

My problem is with the reporting of our current olympic success. Journalists routinely declare that it's a first gold for a female competitor representing Ireland or even more commonly state it's our first gold in 20 years (http://www.rte.ie/sport/olympics/2012/0813/333464-jacqui-hurleys-closing-thoughts-on-london-2012/). 

That is factually incorrect.

In short, I don't care how you airbrush Michelle Smith from our olympic history so long as it is not through denying facts.


----------



## TarfHead (13 Aug 2012)

You're right. Her medals still stand and the only taint against them is in people's heads. Like mine.

The piece you linked to is an opinion piece by Jacqui Hurley. I'd say it won;t be long on the website in that form.


----------



## T McGibney (13 Aug 2012)

DerKaiser said:


> Journalists routinely declare that it's a first gold for a female competitor representing Ireland or even more commonly state it's our first gold in 20 years.



Is anyone really bothered about what random sports journalists write/say/think? At this stage, the entire Michelle Smith saga needs to be consigned to history.


----------



## Shawady (14 Aug 2012)

The Sunday Times had a piece at the weekend summarizing our performance at the olympics. The article contained a table showing how many medals we had won in each olympics since 1956. For the year 1996, it claimed we won zero medals. In a footnote it stated "We do not include any medals from the discredited Michelle Smith".


----------



## truthseeker (14 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> The Sunday Times had a piece at the weekend summarizing our performance at the olympics. The article contained a table showing how many medals we had won in each olympics since 1956. For the year 1996, it claimed we won zero medals. In a footnote it stated "We do not include any medals from the discredited Michelle Smith".



Am I correct in saying that it was never proven that she had cheated/doped when she won the Olympic medals, but she failed drug tests the following year (or sometime afterwards)?

Although I do remember she went from zero to hero in a very short time frame so is it just accepted that she must have cheated in the Olympics?


----------



## Sunny (14 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> The Sunday Times had a piece at the weekend summarizing our performance at the olympics. The article contained a table showing how many medals we had won in each olympics since 1956. For the year 1996, it claimed we won zero medals. In a footnote it stated "We do not include any medals from the discredited Michelle Smith".


 
I agree with their stance. Just like I agree with David Walsh and Paul Kimmage continuing to ask the difficult questions of Lance Armstrong (and indeed Stephen Roche) when the rest of the media bury their heads in the sand.

Personally as an Irish sports fan, I have no desire to be associated with those medals and I don't care what the record books state. People are free to disagree and view Michelle Smith as Ireland's greatest Olympian just like many Americans still view Carl Lewis as their greatest Olympian but I for one will never acknowledge those achievements. (And I say that as someone in the innocence of youth cheered and defended Michelle Smith at the time.)


----------



## TarfHead (14 Aug 2012)

T McGibney said:


> Is anyone really bothered about what random sports journalists write/say/think?


 
The piece, linked to by the OP, is published on the RTE website. That, for me, creates a different context.

Any debate about the basis of her achievement has the potential to descend into a Saipan style shouting match, one that the AAM moderators would act upon.


----------



## Sunny (14 Aug 2012)

TarfHead said:


> The piece, linked to by the OP, is published on the RTE website. That, for me, creates a different context.
> 
> Any debate about the basis of her achievement has the potential to descend into a Saipan style shouting match, one that the AAM moderators would act upon.


 
It's the same contaxt. The journalist obviously feels the same as the journalists in the Sunday Times (and me).

But I agree that it is pointless discussion.


----------



## Shawady (14 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> Personally as an Irish sports fan, I have no desire to be associated with those medals and I don't care what the record books state. People are free to disagree and view Michelle Smith as Ireland's greatest Olympian just like many Americans still view Carl Lewis as their greatest Olympian but I for one will never acknowledge those achievements.


 
I think most Irish sports fans see those medals as tainted but you hit the nail on the head re: Carl Lewis. I have constantly read over the past few weeks that Usain Bolt was the first man to defend the 100m since Carl Lewis yet Lewis has question marks over his use of stimulants. Similarly I think Linford Christie tested positive for drugs long after his gold medal in 1992 100m but it doesn't come accross in the media that their medals are tainited in any way.

There was a documentary on the 1988 100m final recently and it stated that 6 of the 8 finalist had subsequently tested positive for stimulants but Ben Johnson was just dumb enough to get caught at the time.


----------



## TarfHead (14 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> It's the same contaxt.


 
Something published on the website of the national (State funded) broadcaster is, IMHO, different to something published in the Irish edition of a UK newspaper.


----------



## TarfHead (14 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> .. but Ben Johnson was just dumb enough to get caught at the time.


 
According to Victor (BALCO (Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery)) Conte, no athlete ever fails a drugs test, they fail an IQ test.


----------



## Shawady (14 Aug 2012)

You do wonder how many athletes actually take stimluants and are just one step ahead of the science?

Do they hold on to samples for a specific length of time now?


----------



## truthseeker (14 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> You do wonder how many athletes actually take stimluants and are just one step ahead of the science?
> 
> Do they hold on to samples for a specific length of time now?



Pretty much all of them at top level I would think.

There are a number of interesting documentaries on it.


----------



## Ceist Beag (14 Aug 2012)

They must be well ahead of the science if so - samples can be held for 8 years and medals stripped if they test positive at any time up to the end of the 8 years. Can they really be that far ahead of the science and if so should more be done to financially hit those caught (and with the aim of doing so pump more money into catching them in the first place)?


----------



## truthseeker (14 Aug 2012)

Ceist Beag said:


> They must be well ahead of the science if so - samples can be held for 8 years and medals stripped if they test positive at any time up to the end of the 8 years. Can they really be that far ahead of the science and if so should more be done to financially hit those caught (and with the aim of doing so pump more money into catching them in the first place)?



There are chemists who work solely on illegal formulas that will degrade, that are indistinguishable from real chemicals produced in the body, that people can use and all traces will be out of the system within certain time frames, that are exactly the same as something already tested for except for one carbon atom (or whatever) etc....

And then there are the legit scientists who are effectively poking a black box trying to figure out what people are putting into themselves. Its impossible to keep up with it really.


----------



## micmclo (14 Aug 2012)

I remember the American swimmer Janet Evans who was 9th overall in the heats and complained fiercely that while she had missed the final 8, Smith should not be there

She was dismissed as a whining American by RTÉ and the Irish public

Looks like she was right


----------



## PyritePete (14 Aug 2012)

I have posted here previously re Michelle Smith doing a runner from Dublin Hotels as she knew the testers were coming. She never failed a drug test (couldn't be caught ha ha) but was done for tampering with a sample. The fact that her husband was also involved in drugs....

big +1 for the documentary on 1988 Olympics 100 final - the race that rocked the world or something like that. Lewis is a plonker - he broke the code by appearing on UK television lamenting the drug cheats only to be found guilty of taking 3 banned stimulants himself. The big giveaway was the braces on Lewis' teeth - this can be put down to the human growth hormone taken. When Lewis hadn't beaten Johnson for years, he was losing out big time. 

People say Ben J was dumb, not in my opinion. He made millions ! Of the 2 sprinters from 1988 final, Robson Da Silva from Brazil stated he was clean but by staying clean he lost millions. The other clean sprinter was Calvin Smith who had no sympathy for Ben, Carl, Linford the lunchbox etc.

I also read that Dwain the Druggie Chambers had in his contract that he had to finish on the podium at major meets otherwise his endorsements, bonus etc was reduced by 50% ! And guess what he was taking & subsequently banned for.

The one I feel sorry for in 100m final just gone is Tyson Gay, beaten into 4th by a 1/100th of a second by a returning druggie - Justin Gatlin.


----------



## DerKaiser (14 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> Personally as an Irish sports fan, I have no desire to be associated with those medals


I agree 100%, but that's not my point.



Sunny said:


> I don't care what the record books state.


I do. You can't ignore facts you don't like. 

No matter how uncomfortable I am about it, if someone asks me how many medals Ireland won at Atlanta, I will say four.

If I'm asked in a quiz who was the first woman to have won Olympic gold representing Ireland, I will say Michelle Smith, no matter how much I want it to have been Katie Taylor (or Sonia!).


----------



## blueband (14 Aug 2012)

micmclo said:


> I remember the American swimmer Janet Evans who was 9th overall in the heats and complained fiercely that while she had missed the final 8, Smith should not be there
> 
> She was dismissed as a whining American by RTÉ and the Irish public
> 
> Looks like she was right


how was she right? there was no wrong doing ever proven against michelle smith at the time she won the medals, thats how they were never taken back from her!


----------



## TarfHead (14 Aug 2012)

micmclo said:


> I remember the American swimmer Janet Evans who was 9th overall in the heats and complained fiercely that while she had missed the final 8



My recollection is different. Evans was asked a question if other swimmers were talking about Smith's performance. She confirmed that they were. Even Gary O'Toole in the RTE studio was reserved in his appraisal of Smith's performance. For one so articulate and insightful in his analysis, his understatement spoke volumes.


----------



## Birroc (14 Aug 2012)

I was discussing this with a friend earlier. They kept saying that Katie was first Olympic gold since Carruth (1992) and they did not say 'in boxing'.

I studied the story when it broke in the 1990s and I was utterly convinced that Michelle Smith was doping before and after 1996. She probably should have retired but the fact she never won a World Championship medal kept her going.

I think she should now do 1 of the following; 

a) Admit she took drugs and move on
or
b) Defend her name. If she feels her medals are being unfairly airbrushed from history, take legal proceedings (I believe she did law since). Why is she so quiet about it all?


----------



## micmclo (14 Aug 2012)

Well of course she became a barrister, a perfect career


----------



## blueband (15 Aug 2012)

why should she have to defend her name ....if she is being accused of cheating when she won her medals, the surely the onus is on her accusers to prove she did in fact cheat!


----------



## DerKaiser (15 Aug 2012)

Birroc said:


> I was discussing this with a friend earlier. They kept saying that Katie was first Olympic gold since Carruth (1992) and they did not say 'in boxing'.


 
Isn't there something deeply wrong with this? We can hold and alter opinions to suit ourselves, we can't make up our own facts.

Even using the phrase first 'untarnished' medal since 1992 would suffice.


----------



## T McGibney (15 Aug 2012)

Birroc said:


> If she feels her medals are being unfairly airbrushed from history, take legal proceedings



Sorry, how can she take legal proceedings against a journalist or reporter who would presumably just turn around and say 'oops, I forgot about Michelle, sorry about that"?


----------



## Birroc (15 Aug 2012)

T McGibney said:


> Sorry, how can she take legal proceedings against a journalist or reporter who would presumably just turn around and say 'oops, I forgot about Michelle, sorry about that"?


 
I am talking about TV commentators, they continually ignore the Michelle Smith medals. One legal proceeding would sort out the awkwardness once and for all. Most people realise they are tarnished but she still has them so they should be recognised.


----------



## SarahMc (15 Aug 2012)

It was also mentioned on the introduction to the Vincent Browne show on TV3 that Taylor was our first female gold medalist.


----------



## TarfHead (16 Aug 2012)

Birroc said:


> One legal proceeding would sort out the awkwardness once and for all.


 
Prosecution: Did you take performance enhancing drugs ?

Defence: I did not

Prosecution: Did too

Defence: Did not

Prosecution: Did too

et cetera ad infinitum


----------



## T McGibney (16 Aug 2012)

Birroc said:


> I am talking about TV commentators, they continually ignore the Michelle Smith medals. One legal proceeding would sort out the awkwardness once and for all. Most people realise they are tarnished but she still has them so they should be recognised.



You can't sue a TV commentator for ignoring something. Any attempted legal proceedings mounted on such a basis would be dismissed as frivolous once the laughter had died down.


----------



## Birroc (16 Aug 2012)

T McGibney said:


> You can't sue a TV commentator for ignoring something. Any attempted legal proceedings mounted on such a basis would be dismissed as frivolous once the laughter had died down.


 
I am sure Smith is glad you are not her legal counsel. I am also sure you could make a case against RTE outlining where every single one of their commentators chose to dismiss her 3 gold medals (how do you forget an Irish athlete with 3 Golds?) with constant incorrect statements e.g. "first Irish woman to get gold", "first gold since 1992". Surely they were instructed to do so. I am sure the thorny issue came up at a senior level and instructions were given.

I am not sure why I am defending Smith because I am convinced she was doping but the silence and awkwardness is annoying and two-faced.


----------



## DB74 (20 Aug 2012)

RTE setting their stall out early here anyway

[broken link removed]

"Cadbury, proud sponsor of Team Ireland, and RTÉ Sport want you to vote for your favourite Irish Olympic moment."

Choose between

A. Ronnie Delaney, Melbourne 1956 (gold medal)
B. John Treacy, Los Angeles 1984 (silver medal)
C. Michael Carruth, Barcelona 1992 (gold medal)
D. Sonia O'Sullivan, Sydney 2000 (silver medal)

At least in the blurb about Sonia it states "She became only the second Irish woman to win an Olympic medal, after Michelle Smith"


----------



## onekeano (21 Aug 2012)

*The biggest victim............*

Her Dad.....have heard him on several occasions being emphatic about her innocence.......this man (like lots of others) brought her to training @ 5am morning after morning for years....only to end up spending his life protesting her innocence, I really pity that man.

Roy


----------



## blueband (21 Aug 2012)

i guess the man is only doing what any farther would do for his daughter, considering the fact that there was never any wrong doing proven against her, hence she still retains all her medals.


----------



## gianni (21 Aug 2012)

blueband said:


> i guess the man is only doing what any farther would do for his daughter, considering the fact that there was never any wrong doing proven against her, hence she still retains all her medals.




There was wrong doing proven against her - namely the tampering with a urine sample. This occurred after the 1996 Olympics. Hence she retained her medals.


----------



## blueband (21 Aug 2012)

so your point is????   i thougnt the thread was called 'michelle smiths medals'!


----------



## PaddyBloggit (22 Aug 2012)

I think *gianni* makes his point very clear *blueband* ... I don't get your confusion??

and your point about the thread title? *gianni* does reference the medals.


----------



## blueband (22 Aug 2012)

PaddyBloggit said:


> I think *gianni* makes his point very clear *blueband* ... I don't get your confusion??
> 
> and your point about the thread title? *gianni* does reference the medals.


 i dont think im confusied at all! there was no wrong doing ever proven against the girl when she won her medals, what happend or didnt happen after that is irrelevant, if gianni has factual proof that she did indeed cheat during the 1996 olympics ,then let him/her put it out on the table so we all can see it! otherwise they are simply engaged in gossip and heresay.


----------



## Sunny (22 Aug 2012)

blueband said:


> i dont think im confusied at all! there was no wrong doing ever proven against the girl when she won her medals, what happend or didnt happen after that is irrelevant, if gianni has factual proof that she did indeed cheat during the 1996 olympics ,then let him/her put it out on the table so we all can see it! otherwise they are simply engaged in gossip and heresay.


 
You are right. And Sonia O' Sullivan should cop herself on as well if she thinks she was robbed by those three Chineese athletes in the 1993 world championships. And that world record in the womens 1500m that the Chinesse woman set that still stands today was an amazing achievement by an amazing athelete.  

I seem to remember the Irish kicking up a fuss about drug cheats at that time despite nothing being proved. Of course, when they are Irish medals at stake it's different.


----------



## DerKaiser (22 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> You are right. And Sonia O' Sullivan should cop herself on as well if she thinks she was robbed by those three Chineese athletes in the 1993 world championships. And that world record in the womens 1500m that the Chinesse woman set that still stands today was an amazing achievement by an amazing athelete.
> 
> I seem to remember the Irish kicking up a fuss about drug cheats at that time despite nothing being proved. Of course, when they are Irish medals at stake it's different.


 
The comparison to 1993 is a reasonable one. We don't say Sonia won gold on that occasion no matter how hard done she was by probable cheats. It's a historic fact that the chinese won the medals and that has never changed.


----------



## Sunny (22 Aug 2012)

DerKaiser said:


> The comparison to 1993 is a reasonable one. We don't say Sonia won gold on that occasion no matter how hard done she was by probable cheats. It's a historic fact that the chinese won the medals and that has never changed.


 
Of course we don't say Sonia won gold. Even Sonia wouldn't say she won gold. No athlete would claim glory under those circumstances just like no other swimmer is trying to claim a gold medal off Michelle Smith from 1996. But I do not recognise that world record or those medals. And I don't recognise Michelle Smiths medals or records either. And I don't care what the record books state.


----------



## blueband (22 Aug 2012)

if my memory serves me right, was'nt soina suffering from a stomach com


----------



## blueband (22 Aug 2012)

sorry! hit that by mistake.
stomach complaint during that race, so she probably wasnt running at her best anyway on the day.


----------



## DB74 (22 Aug 2012)

blueband said:


> sorry! hit that by mistake.
> stomach complaint during that race, so she probably wasnt running at her best anyway on the day.



Not during the 1993 WCs where the Chinese filled the 1st 3 spots. It was at the 1996 Olympics that she had the stomach problems I think.


----------



## TarfHead (22 Aug 2012)

blueband said:


> .. what happend or didnt happen after that is irrelevant, if gianni has factual proof that she did indeed cheat during the 1996 olympics ,then let him/her put it out on the table so we all can see it! otherwise they are simply engaged in gossip and heresay.


 
There is no proof or evidence that Michelle Smith engaged in anything illegal as part of her preparations for the 1996 Olympics. There is an information vacuum as to how she was transformed from the swimmer she was in 1992 to the one she was in 1996. In the absence of any plausible explanation to account for that dramatic and unprecedented rate of improvement, it is human nature to speculate. And when, in that 4 year period, she was being coached by Erik De Bruin who was, at best, equivocal about the use of performance enhancing drugs, that speculation centres on the basis for her rate of improvement.

As far as I can remember, no explanation was ever offered that was accepted by other competitors, coaches, sports scientists, etc. For someone with her level of achievement and PBs, in 1992, to improve dramatically to be not just an Olympic finalist, but dominant gold medallist, is unprecedented. To do so at a stage of life when she should be past her peak (and slowing down) is also unprecedented.

For Erik de Bruin to have transformed a good international competitor to an Olympic champion is remarkable. That should make him one of the most sought-after coaches in the world. To my knowledge, he is not actively involved, in any capacity, as a swimming coach.


----------



## Birroc (22 Aug 2012)

DB74 said:


> Not during the 1993 WCs where the Chinese filled the 1st 3 spots. It was at the 1996 Olympics that she had the stomach problems I think.


 
The 3000m in 1993 WC was incredible. Sonia was the outright favourite and was beaten by 3 relatively unknown Chinese ladies who posted world record times. They rarely raced outside China and the Chinese authorities said they were testing them regularly but found nothing -they rarely if ever found Chinese drug-takers but were quick to find and publicise the foreign athletes!
Felt bad for Sonia at the time but she never really complained.


----------



## Shawady (24 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> I agree with their stance. Just like I agree with David Walsh and Paul Kimmage continuing to ask the difficult questions of Lance Armstrong (and indeed Stephen Roche) when the rest of the media bury their heads in the sand.


 
Lance Armstrong is to be stripped of all his titles since 1998, including his 7 Tour De France titles.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/cycling/2012/0824/334767-armstrong-faces-life-ban-loss-of-seven-tours/


----------



## The_Banker (24 Aug 2012)

I think Lance was the best cyclist in the world at that time. He may have been taking EPO/Steroids but so was everyone else (apparently).

So they kinda cancelled each other out.


----------



## Birroc (24 Aug 2012)

The_Banker said:


> He may have been taking EPO/Steroids but so was everyone else (apparently).
> 
> So they kinda cancelled each other out.



Yeah that was the problem -they were all doing it.


----------



## mandelbrot (24 Aug 2012)

Birroc said:


> Yeah that was the problem -they were all doing it.


 
Which means they're taking the title from one cheat and giving it to another... whoop dee doo!

For all we know the best "clean" cyclist in the world is some guy who no-one has ever heard of, who's stuck in the middle of the peloton somewhere...


----------



## Sunny (24 Aug 2012)

I hope Paul kimmage and David Walsh are drinking champagne tonight. They are a credit to their profession.


----------



## Deiseblue (24 Aug 2012)

Sunny said:


> I hope Paul kimmage and David Walsh are drinking champagne tonight. They are a credit to their profession.



Absolutely agree.

They both stuck to their guns when the litigious Armstrong machine was ranged against them.


----------



## DB74 (24 Aug 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> Which means they're taking the title from one cheat and giving it to another... whoop dee doo!
> 
> For all we know the best "clean" cyclist in the world is some guy who no-one has ever heard of, who's stuck in the middle of the peloton somewhere...



They won't award the title to anyone else. It's just going to be left vacant apparently.


----------



## Teatime (27 Aug 2012)

DB74 said:


> They won't award the title to anyone else. It's just going to be left vacant apparently.



I heard most of the 2nd place finishers are known drug cheats too!


----------



## Shawady (27 Aug 2012)

The Sunday Times had an interesting article on it yesterday. They gave the top 5 finishers from each of the 7 tour de france titles that Armstrong won and most of them had a history of drug taking.
What's worrying is that Armstrong has been tested 500 times and never tested positive. I't hard to see how the sport has any credibility.

I was surprised to read the David Walsh was asking questions as far back as 1999.


----------



## TarfHead (27 Aug 2012)

Shawady said:


> I was surprised to read the David Walsh was asking questions as far back as 1999.


 
In 1998, the year the Tour was started in Ireland, a member of the Festina team was caught with a supply of performance enhancing drugs. After all of that had been processed, there was an expectation that the 1999 Tour would be slower than in previous years, i.e. all the riders would be 'clean'.

In 1999 the Tour was won by Armstrong in a time faster than in 1998. Many journalists accounted this improvement to better bikes, better road surfaces. David Walsh, and others, did not.

Lance Armstrong did not act alone. There are others who should be held to account for their actions, or inactions, in enabling and facilitating Armstrong's success.

It is naive to assert that the absence of a postive test for drugs means an athlete is clean. The science and motives for concealing cheating will always be ahead of those seeking to expose it.


----------



## DB74 (27 Aug 2012)

TarfHead said:


> It is naive to assert that the absence of a postive test for drugs means an athlete is clean. The science and motives for concealing cheating will always be ahead of those seeking to expose it.



Indeed. Marion Jones never failed a drugs test in her entire career


----------



## joe sod (28 Aug 2012)

i suppose its a very easy temptation because when you have given so many years of your life to the sport training and everything, that when you see it slipping away you get desperate. It makes you think about all the years that were given by other competitors and no medal at the end of it all. I dont think children should not be encouraged into ultra competitive sports, just sports for well being and fitness. I think it would have been better for michelle if she had been caught straight away like ben johnson, maybe she is afraid of letting down her family. The mistake she made was winning 4 medals, if she had just went for one she would probably have gotten away with it and a blind eye would have been turned


----------



## mathepac (6 Sep 2012)

joe sod said:


> ... I think it would have been better for michelle if she had been caught straight away like ben johnson ...


Caught at what precisely?


joe sod said:


> ... maybe she is afraid of letting down her family. The mistake she made was winning 4 medals, if she had just went for one she would probably have gotten away with it and a blind eye would have been turned


She would have got away with what and to what would a blind eye have been turned, so to speak?

In 1998, 2 years after the Olympics, she was banned for 4 years for tampering with a urine sample by allegedly introducing whiskey into it.


----------



## Birroc (6 Sep 2012)

...but there's a hole in the bucket Dear Liza, Dear Liza...


----------



## Kine (6 Sep 2012)

I just don't know how you can tamper with a urine sample - they stand there and watch you go!


----------



## mathepac (6 Sep 2012)

Tell me about it. There's been a lot of speculation about how it happened, most of it bizarre. The testers, a strange couple IMHO, were insistent in their evidence that it was not introduced in the jacks and the smell of whiskey only became evident in the kitchen when they decanted Michelle's sample into smaller vials to be sent for testing.

My big issue with this whole thing is that as suggested earlier in the thread, people are trying to re-write history. The facts are she won her European gold medals (two of them) before the Olympics and her Olympic medals (4 of them) and no-one can produce hard evidence that she doped or cheated. This lack of evidence is proof in some peoples' eyes that she cheated.

Some may point to the fact that her spoiled 1998 sample had traces of a banned substance in it BUT this substance was not banned until after the Olympics and was consumed by many athletes as a food supplement and it was no secret they were taking it. They literally went to the local chemists, bought it legally without prescription over the counter and ate it on their cornflakes.

In another strange twist, this substance which chemically is NOT an anabolic steroid was legally classified as such by the sporting organisations and added to the banned list as a result, leaving chemists, athletes and "people who know" astounded.


----------



## gianni (6 Sep 2012)

Kine said:


> I just don't know how you can tamper with a urine sample - they stand there and watch you go!




You'd be surprised at the lengths some would go to.

http://www.ureasample.com/buy-drug-test-solutions/store/comersus_viewItem.asp?idProduct=1072

This is just one of many 'devices' that is used by drug cheats in sport and other settings.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (6 Sep 2012)

gianni said:


> You'd be surprised at the lengths some would go to.
> 
> http://www.ureasample.com/buy-drug-test-solutions/store/comersus_viewItem.asp?idProduct=1072
> 
> This is just one of many 'devices' that is used by drug cheats in sport and other settings.



.... is there something else about Michelle Smith that we don't know about?


----------



## Liamos (7 Sep 2012)

mathepac said:


> Tell me about it. There's been a lot of speculation about how it happened, most of it bizarre. The testers, a strange couple IMHO, were insistent in their evidence that it was not introduced in the jacks and the smell of whiskey only became evident in the kitchen when they decanted Michelle's sample into smaller vials to be sent for testing.
> 
> My big issue with this whole thing is that as suggested earlier in the thread, people are trying to re-write history. The facts are she won her European gold medals (two of them) before the Olympics and her Olympic medals (4 of them) and no-one can produce hard evidence that she doped or cheated. This lack of evidence is proof in some peoples' eyes that she cheated.
> 
> ...


 
Is that you Michelle?


----------



## TarfHead (7 Sep 2012)

mathepac said:


> This lack of evidence is proof in some peoples' eyes that she cheated.


 
The lack of a plausible explanation how she dramatically improved between 1992 and 1996 works for me .


----------



## Kine (7 Sep 2012)

TarfHead said:


> The lack of a plausible explanation how she dramatically improved between 1992 and 1996 works for me .


 
I think you could use the same logic for quite a few athletes...just look at the young British lad who won the 100m last night. Literally has knocked a whole second off his PB this season. A truely astounding improvemnet over 100m jump, but no-one is saying he is a drugs cheat. 

I am not defending MS by the way, unfortuantely she will always be tainted which, rightly or wrongly, is just a shame.


----------



## Sunny (7 Sep 2012)

Kine said:


> I think you could use the same logic for quite a few athletes...just look at the young British lad who won the 100m last night. Literally has knocked a whole second off his PB this season. A truely astounding improvemnet over 100m jump, but no-one is saying he is a drugs cheat.


 
He was 19 though. Same with the 16 year old Chineese swimmer during the Olympics. Big jumps in PB times are not unusual for young athletes. They are unusual to say the least for a athlete in her mid 20's.


----------



## Shawady (17 Sep 2012)

Strange story. Jimmy Magee has come out and claimed Michelle Smith and Lance Armstrong were clean athletes.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...ted-smith-deserved-more-publicity-567260.html


----------



## gianni (17 Sep 2012)

Shawady said:


> Strange story. Jimmy Magee has come out and claimed Michelle Smith and Lance Armstrong were clean athletes.
> 
> http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...ted-smith-deserved-more-publicity-567260.html



When his argument contains a gem like this:

“Michelle Smith is now a barrister. She did the bar examination and in  all of Ireland she was number three. Do you think she took something for  that?” 

it's hard to take him seriously...


----------

