Journal Entries
Are you sitting comfortably?
Posted Nov 12, 1999
Aaaaaaaaaaah!
I treated myself to a really good chair for my home office.
It's wonderful.
I just wanted to share that 
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Nov 12, 1999
Payne Stewart
Posted Oct 25, 1999
I came in this evening and the first item on the news was the presumed death of Payne Stewart.
As an avid golf fan, I am overwhelmed with shock. He was a genuine personality in an increasingly corporatised game, he kept his head in Boston when his Ryder Cup colleagues were behaving shamefully, and above all he was a fine golfer.
He'll be sorely missed.
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Oct 25, 1999
Drugs Testing Soapbox
Posted Aug 17, 1999
There has been a big outcry recently in UK athletics because of positive tests for nandrolone on Dougie Walker and Linford Christie.
There seem to be two main pieces of evidence: on the one hand, chemical analysis shows traces of the metabolites of nandrolone, which is not a naturally-occurring chemical, in samples of their urine. On the other hand, they are nice blokes who would never do that sort of thing.
The British athletics establishment has already decided, on the basis of these two facts, that both men are innocent, and they're outraged that the IAAF doesn't think the same. Jon Ridgeon, a senior man in the UK Athletics Board, actually said in a radio interview that "the important thing is for Linford to be exonerated". Not for justice to be done, not for drugs to be kept out of the sport. Shame on them.
One explanation is that the men could have taken "sports supplements" which contained "precusors of nandrolone". Presumably this was in the hope that their bodies would form their own nandrolone (which is, let us remember, a banned substance), or at least give some of the same benefits. Of course, that makes it perfectly alright, doesn't it?
Another argument put forward is that Linford Chritie had "nothing to gain" at his age by taking steroids. Let's run through that again. An ageing athlete can still command considerable appearance money on the athletics circuit, on the basis of his World and Olympic titles. However, if his performance falls to below international standard, he'll lose that. As he ages, training hurts more, and he loses muscle definition. Why would he NOT take steroids?
Or, let us consider someone who is an up-and-coming trainer of international sprinters. He may be tempted to use nandrolone to enhance the performance of his charges, but there is a chance they might test positive. However, he has a spotless reputation (except a previous positive test which he explained away as coming from that well-konwn source of stimulants, ginseng tea). If HE tests positive for the drug, no-one will believe it. The tests will be discredted and a positive test by one of his junoirs may be overturned.
This argument that "they're not the type" really rankles. Shall we divide athletes into "that type" and others, and only test those we believe are capable of using illegal aids? Isn't this the sort of "positive vetting" which made sure that Kim Philby and Guy Burgess were okay chaps who would never spy for the Russians? Maybe O.J. Simpson could have saved a big defence bill for his court case, if only he'd used the simple argument that, as one of America's best-loved sportsmen/actors, he would never butcher his wife and her friend?
Get real.
Discuss this Journal entry [4]
Latest reply: Aug 17, 1999
Off again
Posted Aug 5, 1999
Okay, once again the travel bug overtakes me, and I'll be gone for the best part of 2 weeks.
Highlight of the trip: total solar eclipse (hopefully) from a mountaintop in Austria. Cornwall Schmornwall
Discuss this Journal entry [1]
Latest reply: Aug 5, 1999
Outed
Posted Aug 3, 1999
So, the secret's out, we are named and shamed
If you came here hoping to see what a sub-editor calls home, well, I guess that now you know. Before you pass comment, please bear the following in mind:
1) We don't get paid;
2) We only pre-filter: Mark still makes the final inclusion decision on all articles;
3) No-one said our articles are better than yours (least of all us), we're just a bunch of people TDV think will follow the rules, and who can spell, mostly.
4) We don't get paid.
It's fun being part of the process, but it's also a responsibility. We are as aware as anyone of the negative effects of the submission backlog on the morale of the site - and we all hope things are getting better. I was banging on about it myself 10 weeks or more ago in discussions, 7 weeks ago in this very journal. We're doing what we can within the confines of having a life. Please bear with us.
Discuss this Journal entry [3]
Latest reply: Aug 3, 1999
Global Village Idiot
Researcher U28387
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."