In the immediate aftermath of her silver medal at the London Olympics, Valerie Adams was beyond consoling and wanted answers with regards to the administrative stuff-up that created unnecessary stress for her on "game" day.
Considering her state of mind, a throw of 20.4m was nowhere near her personal best but enough to secure what was at the time second place.
Yet Valerie was not happy, and her wrath was directed at officials, rather than her Belarusian competitor who threw close to her personal best with 21.36 to momentarily secure gold.
Despite raised eyebrows and snide comments from media and other athletes regarding the appearance of Nadzeya Ostapchuk, Adams remained tight-lipped about her rival. Now the tables have turned since Ostapchuk tested positive for metenolone.
Adams doesn't want to waste her energy or time talking about the woman who robbed her of her moment of glory in the Olympic Stadium. Instead, she wants to let the good news sink in, and bask in the belated glory of gold while Nadzeya tries desperately to explain away her positive result.
Like a caged animal she frantically searches for an escape - or should I say excuse - route.
Since the announcement she has claimed she is not a "complete idiot" who would take an outdated drug that is easily detectable, has accused the Olympic organisers of prejudice against Belarusian athletes, and has suggested the former deputy chairman of the Belarusian Athletics Federation, Anatoly Baduyev, has framed or misled her.
So which excuse is it? That she is a sophisticated drug cheat and not an idiotic one? That prejudice, not pumped-up juice is what caused metenolone to be in her sample? That Baduyev spiked her drink or bribed someone to provide a positive test as a vendetta against her?
These all seem a little far-fetched and bizarre to be anywhere near the truth but, hey, this is the Olympics, where everything is pushed to the limit.
Ostapchuk does have a point that it seems strange to be taking an easily detectable drug in competition phase when all athletes were aware the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) would test half of all competitors, and automatically test all medal winners between the start of the games and the end of the Paralympic games.
Although it is almost inevitable she will lose her gold medal (unless there is some technical flaw with the testing methods or treatment of samples) as a consolation prize she does have the honour (dishonour?) of being the first of the medallists to be caught doping at the London Olympics.
An unlucky 13 athletes who competed or were about to compete in London have tested positive for a range of substances including diuretics (known to act as masking agents), EPO, stimulants, and steroids. Only one of those athletes gets some sympathy from me.
Seventh-placed United States judo fighter Nicholas Delpopolo tested positive for marijuana after "inadvertently" ingesting a hash cookie at a party several weeks before the Olympics. I doubt he did this to gain an unfair advantage over his competitors.
I've always been sceptical of marijuana being on the banned substance list but understand that it is there mainly because it goes against the spirit of sport.
According to that criteria, perhaps alcohol and tobacco smoking should be on the banned substance list as well?
When it comes to inhaling, injecting or ingesting substances that are performance-enhancing, however, the argument is less hazy.
Or is it?
We would be naïve to think that there isn't a cloud of suspicion over all the athletes at the Olympics, whether they win or lose.
Ye Shiwen's superfast freestyle sprint after swimming the medley raised suspicions, as did Caster Semenya's second place in the 800m. Were their performances based on talent, hard-work, cheating or a combination of all of the above?
Doping and drug-use in sport is more than being motivated by profit, commercial interests, television or the erosion of traditional values. Athletes are more often than not willing to do anything to demonstrate they are the most dedicated, committed and hard-working competitors in their sport and that includes taking performance-enhancing drugs.
So far, Ostapchuk is the only medallist to have faced the consequences of taking too much of a risk.
Can all other drug cheats who have slipped through the system rest easy?
Not yet. Samples can be re-tested years later, so who else will be named and shamed from the London Olympics in years to come?
We thought we were watching athletes participate in the biggest challenge of their careers over the last couple of weeks.
The most significant battle for supremacy between drug cheats and scientists has only just begun.
