Are drugs behind the amazing drop in marathon times?

you are perceptive.

drugs are in all sports...who is kidding whom?

What was the average age of the top ten finishers compared to 5 years ago?

There are new drugs out there-- lots of new peptides. Gene doping. But marathon runners are always 5-10 years behind cycling, football, track and field strength events.

It's just faster runners moving to the marathon earlier in their career coupled with the advantage of being born at altitude, and having the right build. How many American's can have a BMI of 18-20 and not breakdown over high mileage?

*stipe wrote:

Well, maybe you need to be a 2:06-2:07 marathoner to run 2:04 with PEDs.

Seriously, not accusing anyone, but the times are crazy.

So why are they running slower on the track?

"...then it must be...THE SHOES!!!"

Drugs.

You obviously don't know science if you think "gene" doping is actually going on. And new peptides? - Please.

Junk Master wrote:

There are new drugs out there-- lots of new peptides. Gene doping. But marathon runners are always 5-10 years behind cycling, football, track and field strength events.

It's just faster runners moving to the marathon earlier in their career coupled with the advantage of being born at altitude, and having the right build. How many American's can have a BMI of 18-20 and not breakdown over high mileage?

Lol. Fragment 176-191. IGF-1 des 1,3. Ostarine.

Please explain.

This is somewhat old but still gives history and implicates Kenya in steroid use going back to the 1960's.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sex_news_sports_funny_grok/anabolic_athletics

LOL. I swear, the difference is due to an incredibly obscure wonderdrug, not a simple movement of talent!!!

Occam's razor, people.

Money. Money changes everything.

Freelove wrote:

It's not that complicated: more money in marathons and less in track means that fast 5k-10k runners have moved to the marathon. Adding more very fast guys in the marathon changed how it was raced. There's better pacing work now, plus anyone with any shot at winning is going for the win.

Look at track times and you'll see they haven't gotten any faster over the past decade. The talent has just shifted to the marathon.

If guys are doping, their hematocrits aren't going too high, because nobody's dying in their sleep. So testing hematocrit doesn't seem like it would catch many people.

Agreed. The new crop of marathoners are very young, both the new Kenyans and the new Ethiopians at Dubai.

Also, if elite marathoners are training at altitude, would EPO make any difference? I honestly don't know, but it seems like it wouldn't.

it's drugs, don't delude yourself

agreer wrote:

Agreed. The new crop of marathoners are very young, both the new Kenyans and the new Ethiopians at Dubai.

Also, if elite marathoners are training at altitude, would EPO make any difference? I honestly don't know, but it seems like it wouldn't.

EPO makes a huge difference. If you train at altitude your red blood cell count goes up a couple percent. If you take EPO it goes up to whatever you want it to go up to.

Guys were doping in the marathon in the 1990's and running 2:06. Guys are doping in the marathon now and running 2:03. The difference is now they go to the marathon first instead of staying on the track until they can't get it done there anymore.

Trollist wrote:

agreer wrote:

Agreed. The new crop of marathoners are very young, both the new Kenyans and the new Ethiopians at Dubai.

Also, if elite marathoners are training at altitude, would EPO make any difference? I honestly don't know, but it seems like it wouldn't.

EPO makes a huge difference. If you train at altitude your red blood cell count goes up a couple percent. If you take EPO it goes up to whatever you want it to go up to.

Guys were doping in the marathon in the 1990's and running 2:06. Guys are doping in the marathon now and running 2:03. The difference is now they go to the marathon first instead of staying on the track until they can't get it done there anymore.

It must be really embarrasing for the Americans. A couple of third world countries can dope hundreds of runners and get away with it, but as soon as the Americans try they get caught.

Deception is the only felony wrote:

Why are only the East Africans receiving these amazing new drugs?

why are only men receiving these drugs? I dont see women running 2:04.

Oh Please wrote:

[quote]Deception is the only felony wrote:

I'm a former cyclist, and what I saw there was that all nationalities got faster. Armstrong (USA), Ullrich (GER), Basso (ITA), Valverde (SPA).

They're all white, dummy. African guys who would run 2:08 clean are running 2:04 on drugs. White guys who would run 2:14 clean are running 2:10. Just look at the results from the oly trials. Has US ever produced that depth in a single race before?

All the contries are on drugs, its just that the white dudes are still about five minutes behind the Africans.

yes wrote:

it's drugs, don't delude yourself

And yet you'll show up on some other thread and say that 1500m and 5000m times not measuring up to those of the late 1990s is clear evidence that those times were drug aided and that the drop off is due to improved testing.

Cyndi Lauper wrote:

Money. Money changes everything.

Yeah.

No doubt there are some drugs around, but the idea that just the Ethiopians and Kenyans are taking drugs is silly.

It's about a tradition that means that many, many kids are trying hard to become distance runners.

And it's about a lack of other ways of having a shot at an affluent lifestyle. If you live in the states or western europe then you study hard at school, go to a good university, become a doctor/lawyer/banker/whatever and you'll have a pretty comfortable lifestyle - big house, nice car etc. etc. - it's really not *that* hard to do if you apply yourself properly. It's a much better bet than gambling on spending lots of time trying to become a distance runner.

OTOH if you're a poor kid in Kenya then the equation changes - it's a better bet to get your trainers on and start putting the miles in. Of course many are still going to fail to make the big time, but the alternatives don't look nearly as attractive as in the rich industrialized countries.

And now the money is in the marathon - so the usual route for the few that do make it to the top has changed. Why spend a decade trying to get a couple of Olympic medals on the track? No real money in that - especially because Nike, Adidas etc. are not that interested in sponsoring yet another Kenyan - a mediocre American runner is going to make much more in sponsorship than a much better Kenyan. So skip the track career and go straight to the marathon where the prize and appearance money is worth having.