Pages: | 1 | 2 |
s.mouse
Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 7:30PM Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I really hate to be a pessimist, but overall, times seem to be going the wrong way in an Olympic year, as well as over the last few years. Again, that's only my perception, and I really am too lazy to compare statistically (fire up the machine, ventolin). It seemed that low 44's in the 400m was not uncommon, as were 1.42 mid for the 8, and I'm not referring to just the front man outlier. El Gerrouj ran under 3.30, something like 34 times. Bekele et al finished the last 5k of a 10k under 13 minutes. A 3k in 7.20?! Forgive me for being skeptical, but something seems really fishy, and it's not my ex. We all know that drugs -epo derivatives, gh, and designer steroids have a place in our sport, and have had for years. My training group back in the day referred to the Atlanta Olympics as "the growth hormone games". Perhaps the IAAF has gotten everyone scared? Have they listed a declaration of saving samples and testing them retroactively down the road? Does anyone know? Sprintgeezer?
113
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 7:34PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
It's June 2. Not only that, but most of the Pre Classic meet records went down today-- some of them were broken by multiple runners.
The MonBRO Doctrine
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 7:39PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I guess all the 100/200 runners, steeplechasers and marathoners didn't get the memo.
s.mouse
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 7:42PM - in reply to 113 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Like I said, just my perception. Seems to be a different vibe, generally speaking.
phucket
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 7:43PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
It's 8 weeks until the Olympics. Give people a chance to race!

You can rest assured that drug use is as rampant as ever.
Sprintgeezer
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 8:01PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I honestly don't know, I have been out of the game too long, and am now an outsider looking in.

The guys I run with, who are good and whom I have never, ever seen use, are running only times that would be considered sub-elite, 10.3-10.5 for the 100. Another should go 20. in the 200, but that is a far cry from sub-20. Those kinds of times aren't included in any sort of drug discussions.

The men's 100m has gotten off to an amazing start, however, with a 9.75, and a bunch of 9.8's and low-mid 9.9's. It's not too dramatic, considering that it's an Olympic year.

Like another poster said, it's too early to really have any sort of good idea, at least as far as the sprints are concerned.

As far as distance is concerned, you tell me--what is the "vibe"? Lowered expectations? Sprint expectations are probably higher this year than they EVER have been--expectations for Bolt to set a new WR, for Blake to go 9.6x, for Powell and Gatlin to be 9.7x, for Bledman and maybe Bailey to be 9.8x, etc.

So far, the progression of the season seems to indicate as though those expectations will be met. The sprint vibe is solid.

Yeah, I know, that just means they're all still doping, right?

Ahh, Carmelita Jeter--huge, ripped, and golden.

Bolt will never test positive, and as long as he's winning, all will be right in the T&F universe.
Nappy Roots
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 8:17PM - in reply to Sprintgeezer Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
The thing that's really odd to me is the sudden emerging of all of these 800/1500 Ethiopian runners. Particularly, there are so many "no-name" Ethiopians rolling out. Interesting...
The MonBRO Doctrine
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 8:46PM - in reply to Sprintgeezer Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Sprintgeezer wrote:



The men's 100m has gotten off to an amazing start, however, with a 9.75, and a bunch of 9.8's and low-mid 9.9's. It's not too dramatic, considering that it's an Olympic year.

.


That sounds pretty dramatic. Remember that 9.75 would have been the world record as late as 2007.
Sprintgeezer
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 9:11PM - in reply to The MonBRO Doctrine Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Is "pretty" dramatic, "too" dramatic?

lol

I agree, so far it's "pretty" dramatic, when you cast it in that light--especially considering that is a 9.75 BASIC!
The MonBRO Doctrine
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 9:13PM - in reply to Sprintgeezer Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Is "pretty" dramatic, "too" dramatic?

lol

I agree, so far it's "pretty" dramatic, when you cast it in that light--especially considering that is a 9.75 BASIC!


I didn't mean to provoke a big argument; I was really just looking to point out that little factoid about how recently that would have been a world record!
Sprintgeezer
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 9:17PM - in reply to The MonBRO Doctrine Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
No argument, I thought it was funny
s.mouse
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 9:29PM - in reply to Sprintgeezer Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
the vibe to me is just the fact that athletes in the distance/mid distance events (as a whole) seem to be regressing in terms of performances, rather than progressing. besides koech and a couple of other kenyans, how many people have been under 8.05 in the steeple over last 4 years? why aren't there guys running sub 13 on the back of 10k's anymore? there used to be seemingly oodles of sub 13 guys....oodles of 3.32 guys...mid 90's up until around 2008...like i said, maybe the word is out that there will be retroactive testing? like SG, i'm way too far out of the loop to have any inside scoop. all my training stable retired almost a decade ago. maybe i'm just making more out of it than i should.
The MonBRO Doctrine
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 9:35PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

s.mouse wrote:

the vibe to me is just the fact that athletes in the distance/mid distance events (as a whole) seem to be regressing in terms of performances, rather than progressing. besides koech and a couple of other kenyans, how many people have been under 8.05 in the steeple over last 4 years? why aren't there guys running sub 13 on the back of 10k's anymore? there used to be seemingly oodles of sub 13 guys....oodles of 3.32 guys...mid 90's up until around 2008...like i said, maybe the word is out that there will be retroactive testing? like SG, i'm way too far out of the loop to have any inside scoop. all my training stable retired almost a decade ago. maybe i'm just making more out of it than i should.


Brimin Kipruto missed the world record in the steeple by 0.01 seconds last year and Ezekiel Kemboi ran 7:55. As far as I know, Kenenisa Bekele and Haile Gebrselassie in the 2003 WC final are the only two to ever split a sub-13 5000 in a 10000. But yes, generally, the 1500-10000 (minus the steeple) have been slower in recent years.
113
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 10:18PM - in reply to The MonBRO Doctrine Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
In '04, when Bekele set the 5k WR, only 11 guys broke 13:00. Last year, 13 did. There's going to be some random variance from year to year, but it's tough to support the claim that times in general are slower.

As to this year, the poor conditions at Hengelo didn't help anything. Usually several of the top times in the distance events come out of that meet, and that wasn't the case this year. But as others have posted, there's plenty of hot meets left to come.
Seyta
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/2/2012 10:44PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

s.mouse wrote:

I really hate to be a pessimist, but overall, times seem to be going the wrong way in an Olympic year, as well as over the last few years. Again, that's only my perception, and I really am too lazy to compare statistically (fire up the machine, ventolin). It seemed that low 44's in the 400m was not uncommon, as were 1.42 mid for the 8, and I'm not referring to just the front man outlier. El Gerrouj ran under 3.30, something like 34 times. Bekele et al finished the last 5k of a 10k under 13 minutes. A 3k in 7.20?! Forgive me for being skeptical, but something seems really fishy, and it's not my ex. We all know that drugs -epo derivatives, gh, and designer steroids have a place in our sport, and have had for years. My training group back in the day referred to the Atlanta Olympics as "the growth hormone games". Perhaps the IAAF has gotten everyone scared? Have they listed a declaration of saving samples and testing them retroactively down the road? Does anyone know? Sprintgeezer?


You have ONE Daniel Komen, ONE Gebrselassie, ONE Bekele, and ONE El Guerrouj, and ONE Lagat

They're the outlier times.

The times simply appear to be slower because there are not as MANY outlier times, and that in turn is because of the five mentioned above, two of them are gone, two of them are nearly 40, and one has been injured for a substantial portion of the last two years.
s.mouse
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/3/2012 12:40PM - in reply to Seyta Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Thanks for the interesting replies. Seems it was only a figment of my imagination. Good discussion here, I think. On top of that, there were no derogatory volleys fired at/to anyone. Refreshing.
Runquick
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/3/2012 2:10PM - in reply to s.mouse Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
The 100, 200, 800, 3000sc and, marathon are stonger than they have ever been. The 1500 is still very deep the are just no outliers like Lagat or El G around currently. The 5000 is strong but we have not seen any really fast races yet(it is still June). Mo should be well under 12:50 by the end of the year. The 10000 is not what it once was but that is not because people don't have the ability it is because they are in the Marathon. Farah can probably run in the 26:30s. There may have been dopers in the past but I don't think there were any more than there are now. People are still running just as fast minus 3 men(Geb, Bekele and El G).
we need a stats genius
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/3/2012 3:14PM - in reply to Runquick Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
there may be some credence to what the OP is saying. Check out this link: http://www.alltime-athletics.com/men.htm

A lot of top times are, of course, by those big guys in the 90s that we all know. But there does seem to be a trend of faster times in general... Maybe?
humbledone
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/3/2012 3:17PM - in reply to we need a stats genius Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
That 5k list looks like an even mix of 90s times and 2000-present times. Whatever happened to sileshi sihine?
juiceeed!
RE: Times slower vs drug clampdown 6/3/2012 3:23PM - in reply to humbledone Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Thanks for the link. Is the 400m a better event for doping benefits? There were a TON of sub 44 400ms run in the 90s. Most by the big names tho
Pages: | 1 | 2 |