Weldon Johnson buries the lede
In one of many threads on Letsrun.com about the Nike Oregon Project doping mess (I suppose I should call it a potential doping mess at this point, but for purposes of this blog I'm not a journalist), site co-founder Weldon Johnson describes the history of his relationship with Alberto Salazar. His post is extraordinary for what it reveals about longstanding behavior by Salazar and Nike that can aptly be labeled thuggery:
When Farah went to Alberto's group, on an interior page of a message board thread I posted that it was perfectly reasonable for people to ask Farah what supplements he was on and whether he was on thyroid medication. Alberto called me and in the course of his conversation said his guys would never speak to LRC again. I told him that was his right but if that was the case, we would need to state that they were doing that and why. I told him I thought it would make his group look bad. He reversed course and said he would not tell his athletes what to do. Before I spoke to Alberto but after he left a message, I showed the same post to a friend of mine and he said, "he's calling to congratulate you for being fair minded." I laughed and said "no he is not".
At the Olympics after Mo and Galen went 1-2 Alberto said "Another big problem I believe was there's too many people who use the excuse of drugs, that anyone who runs fast is on drugs. The second you start thinking that as a coach or as an athlete you're basically saying you're not good enough to compete with other people unless you cheat. What I've always told our guys is 'Don't believe all that bull. Those are the losers that say that.' Rather than trying to change their own training to get better they use that as excuse and it's a defeatist attitude. A lot of the mind-set for us was 'We can beat these guys. We've just got to train smart.'"http://www.letsrun.com/2012/farah-rupp-0804.php
The next day or a few days after that I asked him about that comment in light of what he said at Duke, "I believe that it is currently difficult to be among the top 5 in the world in any of the distance events without using EPO or Human Growth Hormone."
He did not like the question and definitely let me know it. I need to find the audio off an old computer.
I didn't quite realizing the timing of this but then when I got back from the Olympics we got a letter from his lawyer asking for the IP addresses and "identification information" of 117 different poster's names who he claimed were defaming his client. I told him we were not legally liable for the information posters posted but that if he would send me the posts that he deemed were defamatory I would look into them. I viewed it totally as an intimidation tactic or an attempt to find out who his critics were. The lawyer did not write back with a single post that was defamatory.
We never disclosed these incidents on LetsRun.com but perhaps we should have because there is more than a lot of tension with us and Alberto and it makes doing our job harder. My concern was if we disclosed them people would have said we had an agenda against Alberto. Looking in the rear view mirror, I realize now I don't have a problem with reporting factual information.
So even years ago, Salazar was concerned enough about the claims and observations of a bunch of anonymous message-board posters to try to figure out who they are. This is nuts. For one thing, even having an IP address in hand isn't typically enough these days to solidly establish the identity of anyone associated with it. In an age of countless public Wi-Fi networks and people posting from mobile phones and other devices, an IP address has become increasingly moot. I probably use at least three or four on a typical day.
On the message board, a lot of people are convinced that those defending Salazar, who are droning on about the supposed lack of credibility of those who have come forward and categorizing the evidence so far as trivial, are paid shills of Nike tabbed to foment doubt and bullshit. Until reading Weldon's post, I thought that this smacked too much of conspiracy-theory nonsense. Although in the main this remains my position, it's clear that Salazar has been more paranoid and controlling than even his bombastic and clearly controlling persona suggests. (On the matter of control, over the years I've had two very benign interview assignments with current members of the NOP nixed by Alberto at the last minute for clearly spurious reasons. I'm far from alone in this respect.)
So maybe the conspiratorial types are actually correct. This would actually make sense, because it would explain why a number of individuals who appear coherent and thoughtful on the surface are saying some absurdly mindless things about the controversy and repeating them ad nauseam.