5000m World Record Splits: A Progression

rekrunner wrote:

As long time readers know, my non-moving goalpost position is, if EPO can produce massive drops in times, EPO should have produced these massive drops in other populations worldwide, not just selected populations in East Africa and a handful of athletes from North Africa. As any good scientist knows, the results should be repeatable. EPO could be a good explanation for a broadly observed massive drop in times, but, as a globally available, globally undetectable, and globally effective endurance super-drug, it is a very poor explanation for a local dominance lasting decades, starting one decade before EPO was introduced into the cycling peloton. And it is counter-intuitive to observe the remaining populations stagnate and plateau, at a time when a globally available endurance super-drug would be just what they needed to be able to compete.

Well that sort of begs the question doesn't it? It assumes that the entire world of athletics dopes everywhere at all times.

And many countries with doping cultures did see a big reduction in times. Was Cacho really over two seconds faster than Abascal and Gonzalez naturally? Two great Spanish runners who were around less than a decade before him?

Also, the fact that the UK runners times didn't improve in the 90s is a red flag, not that the Golden Brits had doped, but that they didn't and that the Africans of the 90's did. If everybody always doped, guys like Yates and Sharpe should have ran a bit faster. In fact, Sharpe who was a world junior champion over 800m effectively finished at the top level in his mid twenties just when EPO was becoming available.

rekrunner wrote:

Only three people have run faster than Coe, and they are all Kenyan.

Times have not evolved much in the last 36 years, suggesting both genetic differences and EPO plays next to no role in the 800m.

Actually, only 2 people have run faster than Coe over 800m (both Kenyan), unless you were also including his 1000m pb too!

Coevett wrote:

Oh o.k, so 20 seconds slower in the 5000m after 20 years is 'small', and 0.7 seconds faster after half-a-century in the 800m is 'HUUUUGGEE'.

Use your calculator and try it:

41.73 - 40.91.

Also:

2012 - 1981. How long is a century? And a half-century?

I stand corrected. I misread the all-time list. OK let's add Nijel Amos (Botswana) tied him to make it three.

Deanouk wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Only three people have run faster than Coe, and they are all Kenyan.

Times have not evolved much in the last 36 years, suggesting both genetic differences and EPO plays next to no role in the 800m.

Actually, only 2 people have run faster than Coe over 800m (both Kenyan), unless you were also including his 1000m pb too!

The contradictory assumptions surrounding doping are not mine, and seem to always morph to support a scenario designed to prove me wrong. I've been told anti-doping is so effective in 5 continents, that doping was effectively impossible, in order to explain the slow to no progress of non-Africans. Then I've been told that ABP is so generous, and micro-dosing gives full benefits, while not triggering ABP flags, allowing most of the dopers to escape detection, and to counter my "micro-dosing means micro-benefits" arguments. The definition of "massive drop in times" also seems to change significantly when it's East Africans versus other groups like Spanish. Of course the Spanish are the best examples of success, and were masters of EPO and blood doping, producing all-time bests slightly better than the '80s, but nowhere near their East African competitors.

Coevett wrote:

Well that sort of begs the question doesn't it? It assumes that the entire world of athletics dopes everywhere at all times.

And many countries with doping cultures did see a big reduction in times. Was Cacho really over two seconds faster than Abascal and Gonzalez naturally? Two great Spanish runners who were around less than a decade before him?

Also, the fact that the UK runners times didn't improve in the 90s is a red flag, not that the Golden Brits had doped, but that they didn't and that the Africans of the 90's did. If everybody always doped, guys like Yates and Sharpe should have ran a bit faster. In fact, Sharpe who was a world junior champion over 800m effectively finished at the top level in his mid twenties just when EPO was becoming available.

rekrunner wrote:

The contradictory assumptions surrounding doping are not mine, and seem to always morph to support a scenario designed to prove me wrong. I've been told anti-doping is so effective in 5 continents, that doping was effectively impossible, in order to explain the slow to no progress of non-Africans. Then I've been told that ABP is so generous, and micro-dosing gives full benefits, while not triggering ABP flags, allowing most of the dopers to escape detection, and to counter my "micro-dosing means micro-benefits" arguments.

The definition of "massive drop in times" also seems to change significantly when it's East Africans versus other groups like Spanish.

Of course the Spanish are the best examples of success, and were masters of EPO and blood doping, producing all-time bests slightly better than the '80s, but nowhere near their East African competitors.

Hmm...o.k, so maybe it was just the East Africans doping themselves to the gills with EPO, especially as you say only they experienced a "massive drop in times".

doomb wrote:

Coevett wrote:

Oh o.k, so 20 seconds slower in the 5000m after 20 years is 'small', and 0.7 seconds faster after half-a-century in the 800m is 'HUUUUGGEE'.

Use your calculator and try it:

41.73 - 40.91.

Also:

2012 - 1981. How long is a century? And a half-century?

Oh, o.k. 0.8 seconds compared to 20 seconds. 1981 to 2018 is nearly 40 years and there's no sign of any Kenyan on the horizon running faster than Rushida, so only a slight exaggeration on my part.

What's lacking is a basis that shows EPO could provide these massive drop in times at the elite level.

Coevett wrote:

Hmm...o.k, so maybe it was just the East Africans doping themselves to the gills with EPO, especially as you say only they experienced a "massive drop in times".

It's notable that both Rushida and Kiprop had fathers who were competitive athletes, with Rushida's dad being a 400m relay Olympic silver medalist. So Kenya has genetically superior distance runners, but their greatest runner is an 800 man (and Massai) who has clearly benefited from his father's elite sprinting genes. Bit of a co-incidence there. Whilst looking up Kiprop, I found the following Scientific Article :

So...looks like I was right, again.

The important point to keep in mind is that the vast improvements in times occurred during the EPO era, and that if you take them out, times really haven't improved much at all since the 80s when Europe and the rest of the white world was still able to produce lots of elite runners. This suggests that there is no significant genetic advantage for East Africans and that their domination since the 90s has been due to doping and the general decline of European running (caused itself no doubt in part by the doping of Africans).

Of the 50 fastest times/performances ever over 1500m for men, 27 of them (that's 54%) were produced during the period 1992 - 2001, which is less than a decade in duration and roughly the time from when EPO use first emerged in athletics until the introduction of the first test (albeit not a very effective one).

Of those 50 performances, all except 3 were by athletes from Kenyan, Moroccan or Algerian descent. The 3 that were not were of Somali descent (Farah with 2 performances that were 3:28 high) and Cacho (3:28.95, after a career of 3:32's). Now historically, Morocco and Algeria have a terrible record for doping in T&F, and the Spanish's reputation isn't much better.

That leaves the Kenyans, the biggest group by far, but also the one country (in terms of this event) where, as far as I am aware (and please correct me or confirm if otherwise the case), they only began random out of competition and out of season testing by their own national federation, last year. Yes, I know that they would have been scrutiny by the IAAF once established in the World's top 10, but the turnover of athletes in this category is pretty high, and the level of scrutiny far less rigorous.

If, as I suspect, Kenyan athletes only started being tested OOC and randomly to the same level as in most of Western European countries in 2017, then only 2 performances by Kenyans appear on the all time top 50 list since that was started; Manangoi's 3:28.8 (No. 31) and Cheruiyot's 3:29.10 (No. 47).

If we look at another 10 year period, the decade from 2008 to 2017, which is the time period since the ABP has been in operation, then there have only been 12 performances (24%) that make it onto the top 50 list, less than half the number appearing during the 'EPO' decade. Of these 12 runs, 5 were by Kenyans (4 by Kiprop, and 1 each from Kiplagat, Kwemoi, Manangoi and Cheuiyot), 1 by Makhloufi (ALG), 1 by Iguider (MOR) and 2 by Farah.

In other words half of those 12 were set by athletes who were not (at the time they set them) under the same level of testing as the vast majority of the world's elite athletes. As far as Iguider and Makhloufi are concerned, I am presuming that Algeria and Morocco carried out OOC and OOS testing in 2015 as athletes from the US, UK and most others have been subjected to for decades? It is a very unstable foundation to claim Kenyan dominance in an event where they have not been competing on a level playing field until this past season. Regardless of whether or not Kenyan athletes doped or took EPO, it takes a leap of faith to accept that Kenyan athletes competing over decades where they were not subjected to the same level of testing as most other countries, were all clean. It is hardly surprising that so many question marks exist around their perceived 'dominance'.

Even more remarkably is that every single one of the 12 performances from the ABP era that appear in the all time top 50 over 1500m, were set in Monaco! In fact the fastest time set in the ABP era by a non Kenyan, and not in Monaco, is Souleiman's 3:30.16 in 2014 at Doha!

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

I'm beginning to like you again. Yes I remember that race, it was puzzling among running circles where I come from, nobody could believe that he could improve so much in one year. But then again Gebrhiwet improved from running a 3k equivalent of c13:30 for 5,000m to running 12:47 in one year yet we are supposed to believe that an elite 5,000m runner couldn't improve on his best times set as 18 year old (when testers didn't know who he was).

Did you say 18 year old!

DATE OF BIRTH 11 MAY 1994

5000 Metres 12:47.53 Paris Saint-Denis (Stade de France) 06 JUL 2012

rekrunner wrote:

a handful of athletes from North Africa. As any good scientist knows, the results should be repeatable.

Rekrunner mate you must have massive hands ?

Like Trump.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

a handful of athletes from North Africa. As any good scientist knows, the results should be repeatable.

Rekrunner mate you must have massive hands ?

If you are looking at top-50 performances, 21 of them were produced by El Guerrouj, who was a rather prolific top runner (33 out of the top 100 times). I'm not sure what to make of 27 in one decade, with El Guerrouj, and 12 in another, without El Guerrouj. In 1992-2000, all countries were subject to the same level of EPO testing, as no test existed. And as you astutely pointed out, the only non-African was Cacho. Two possibilities: 1) non-Africans did not take EPO 2) or they did, with the same result -- only Cacho (doped or non-doped) in the top-50. The IAAF started OOC testing for EPO in 2002, for urine, where there is no logistical difficulty to collect and store samples and get them to the lab. The urine test was easy to beat. It is the OOC blood testing, which only began in 2009, that presents a logistical difficulty from East African countries, where the blood needs to arrive in the lab within 24 hours.

➡Kiprop and Kiplagat are on the Fancy bears list, which is a behind the scenes (not publicly intended) observation on what doping analysts are seeing in the tested samples.

➡Rosa gets busted and Kiprop virtually over night slowed by 4-5 seconds over 1500m, without any notification of an injury.

➡I'm not sure if OOC testing in Africa is done in blood, the only accredited lab in Africa is get this, no longer accredited.

➡Algeria and Morocco, can we be sure there are no tipoffs?

➡Makhloufi has been around the Jama crowd.

➡ "every single one of the 12 performances from the ABP era that appear in the all time top 50 over 1500m, were set in Monaco!" Looks like that race is 2s quicker over 1500m than anywhere else at the moment.

➡ "In fact the fastest time set in the ABP era by a non Kenyan, and not in Monaco, is Souleiman's 3:30.16 in 2014 at Doha!" ↖which says it all, since Jama got busted he has gone backwards at a fast rate as has Genzebe.

If you think you are right again -- I guess that's the most important thing. Is it Rushida, or Rudisha? The important point to keep in mind is that for "Europe and the rest of the white world" times really haven't improved much at all since the 80s, even during the EPO-era. Since EPO was available, and undetectable, and effective, for East Africans and non-Africans alike, this suggests that other local factors, like genetics, environment, financial incentives, improvements in training, are more significant contributors to the vast improvements during the EPO-era, than global factors like EPO.

Coevett wrote:

It assumes that the entire world of athletics dopes everywhere at all times.

Well, not the entire world, but the majority. Read up on our history.

Also, that should not be surprising, considering the huge rewards and low risk.

Then, unless someone thinks that being hugely talented goes automatically hand in hand with having an impeccable character, talented superstars dope as often as want-to-be stars. Or more, according to Seppelt's data, because they have more to gain, e.g. wins,, thus money and fame, than also-rans who fight to make it to the final.

In conclusion: to set a WR, you need to be a great talent, optimize your training, and be a high responder.

Coevett wrote:

wtfunny wrote:

"briefly"??

Ahh, so making snarky one sentence replies in the absence of any substantial counterarguments constitutes a rebuttal in your eyes?

wtfunny wrote:

I would indeed. And the point would remain perfectly valid.

No, you'd still be a low IQ ass who has no comprehension of demographics or statistics.

LOL .. you don't even see it, do you?

Coevett wrote:

wtfunny wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about here. And I suspect you don't either.

That's because you're really not very bright are you?

Nope. You don't.

You're right though .. White Brits haven't dominated International middle and long distance because of video games and football. .. and, of course, cheating Africans. And I'm a pompous liberal cretin with an "ebony feitish" .... but I'm the snarky one.

Learn to reason and argue and the principles of basic logic. Pointing out spelling mistakes and being 0.1 of a second out when comparing a fraction of a number to 20 seconds does not constitute argument. Similarly, you repeatedly assume what is being disputed - that everybody dopes so African success must be genetic - and then present your assumption as proof that I and others are committing some kind of fallacy.

Once more. The fact that African times dropped more than European times during the period when EPO was readily available (everywhere) points to Africans being greater cheats than others and this likely explains their success at least as much as genetics does.

There are a huge number of indicators that the crazy times of the 90s and early 2000s were the result of EPO. Dominance of the all time lists is one of them. Others include the fact that times got crazier in relation to the longer distance, as you would expect from EPO. That suddenly, all these great 1500m runners like EL G who were apparently 3 or 4 seconds faster than Coe, Ovett, Cram, (who were only 10 years before with no significant improvement in training or tracks etc) and even Cheaouita just couldn't turn out a decent 800m time to save their lives, yet could run sub 3:30 every week for fun and then move up to the 5000m and make Cheaouita's times look like a different era. In fact the change in trend from 800/1500m runners to either 1500m specialists or 1500/5000 doublers was so sudden that the IAAF changed the timetable almost overnight undoing decades of middle-distance history just to cater to the benefits of African genes combined with gallons of EPO.

If the generation of British middle-distance that followed Coe, Ovett, Cram, Elliot were not only slower but repeatedly failed drug tests, then everybody would assume that the Golden Brits doped and that explained UK middle-distance success. Yet North Africans came from almost nowhere, having only the most dubious athlete of all time - Aouita - to follow (less than ten years before) - ran times that were thought near impossible, week in week out for years during a period when the first endurance drug was widely available and untestable - and then were followed by athletes who while still enjoying incredible success were considerably slower and often failed improved drug tests (for EPO). Yet British athletes like David Sharpe, who was a world junior champion at 800m (and 5th in the 1500m) and training partner of Steve Cram, and who Cram and many others thought was an even better talent, ended up running slower times and simply lost the will to compete when EPO became available and Africans started running these crazy times. I'm pretty sure, if 'everybody doped' and in particular, if Coe, Ovett, Cram were doping, then Sharpe would have lapped up the EPO with encouragment from Cram and by the time he was in his mid-twenties and at his peak he should have been threatening Coe and Cram's times. Instead, he just gave up like other similarly talented Brits such as Curtis Rob,