5000m World Record Splits: A Progression

Subway, here there are my answers :

1 a)- How you well know, middle and long distances are strongly influenced by tactical developments. The fact Bosse won in 1'44"67 means the race was tactically slow, not that the value of the athletes in the final is represented by their times.

What is it possible to say about the Olympic Final in Rio of 1500m, with the first 800m in 2'17" ?

1 b)- I don't know how many times I have to explain that Monaco is, in the last 5 years, THE ONLY MEETING OF DL ORGANIZING A FAST RACE AND PAYING THE PACERS WITH DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF MONEY. Why Monaco ? Because, for the data of the meeting (it's the last BEFORE the main Championship in Summer), the athletes are at the peak of their shape, and have interest in running fast for testing themselves before the main seasonal appointment.

1 c)- Maybe you don't read what I write. There are no more races of 5000m organized with pacers, and there is currently a very limited number of 5000m in DL (next year, 2 only, the other are 3000m). For running in 12'50" athletes need not only talent, but also organization of the race with right rabbits, and possibly a competitive group. This, currently, doesn't happen, because there is no more interest in this situation (nothing to do with doping).

2 - I don't forget Longo. At that time I was the Technical Scientific Director of Italian Federation. We had the notification from IAAF that Andrea Longo was positive for Nandrolone few days before WCh of Edmonton. We spoke with the athlete, and he told us NEVER took something different from the supplement of an American Company which whom he had an official contract. That Company was considered the number one in the World at the moment, and the products were guaranteed as absolutely legal.

The Italian Federation, believing Andrea had said the truth, invested more than 30,000 Euros for buying the same supplement (Ultimate Nutrition) in several European Countries, and sent all the samples to the lab of Koln, to the doctor Manfred Donike (at that time, responsible of antidoping for the IAAF). Donike and his staff made a deep and long investigation, and at the end the result was that 22% of all the samples were contaminated.

We sent all the dossier to the IAAF, that confirmed the sanction, but accepted the "bona fide", and authorized Longo to have two weeks at disposal after the deadline for achieving the standard for WCh 2003, something he was able to do.

Longo made an allegation against the Company, that had to pay him the money he lost for the ban. At the same time, the Company made an allegation for sabotage against unknown people, for cleaning its reputation.

3- Cycling is too much different from running. In cycling, you can go faster because you have more strength, and are able to use the same rhytm while pedaling, pushing one or two teeth more (a longer gear). In this case, we can't speak of EXTRA TRAINING (because the volume was the same), but of SAME TRAINING WITH MORE POWER, and EPO was only the support for the main doping, that was GH or Testosterone or some other steroid. So, it's not they used Nandrolone for supporting EPO, but EPO for supporting Nandrolone or other steroids, that were the main source of doping.

This is something we don't need in athletics, especially in long distances (while in 800m some more strength can be useful, mainly for women). So, please, don't continue to mix different disciplines, that have big differences in the requested qualities.

4- The best Marathon runners had from 4 to 8 tests per year. They have contracts with the organizers of the Major Marathons, signed already several months before (for example, we already know where Geoffrey Kirui, who is the World Champion, goes to run next year), and the pool of Majors have a budget for testing the athletes under contract 2-4 times BEFORE their marathon, in order to avoid the possibility of a victory by a doped athlete (what happened in the past with Shobukhova and Rita Jeptoo in Chicago), with all the effects we can understand (wrong distribution of prizes, points for the jackpot that are not valid, loss of image for the activity).

Going again to the Rita Jeptoo case : she was not DQ for doping BEFORE Chicago, but for BEHAVIOR AGAINST THE ETHIC OF ATHLETICS. This was the only way for avoiding the fact she had already won the jackpot (she won Boston and Chicago in 2013, and Boston again in 2014), and the Majors didn't want that an "official" doped athlete could win 500,000 USD. The final result is that Rita, when doped in 2014, won Chicago with the slower time of her career (excluding the first year of activity as marathon runner). And Jemima Sumgong was caught during an OOC test paid by the Majors.

5- There are no many half marathoners under 59' in the world. However, athletes like Cheroben, Kamworor, Karoki are in the pool for whereabouts, while I think that Okombo and Oloitiptit are still not in the list.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

LM wrote:

I wish I had $100k+ I could throw out there, with $20k for a pacer who would run 2:33, 5:06, and 7:39, splits and then $10k bonus for any runners hitting 4k in under 10:15. I'd bet my life you'd see at least 2 sub 12:45s and a host of other sub 12:50s.

Same thing for a 1500 paced at 55, 1:50, 2:18. Bet my life you get one or two 3:26s, and couple other guys 3:28 or better.

Will these runners be regularly tested in the lead up to these hypothetical races?

They would be subject to the same testing they currently are, yes.

I'm sure if you allowed them to do whatever they wanted, then you could get some low-mid 12:30s and 3:26:00 or better.

5000m wrote:

According to those splits, Bekele ran the last 3000m in 7:31.88!

and Geb ran his last 1k in 2:27!

Renato Canova wrote:

Going again to the Rita Jeptoo case : she was not DQ for doping BEFORE Chicago, but for BEHAVIOR AGAINST THE ETHIC OF ATHLETICS.

No. CAS based the extension to 4 years on her unethical behavior, but the Boston DQ on her doping at or rather before Boston, explicitly referring to IAAF rule 40.8, i.e. the rule of multiple anti-doping rule violations.

What you suggest, is not allowed.

Sorry, Casual Observer, but you are wrong.

The rule 40.8 is as follows :

For the purposes of imposing sanctions under Rule 40.8, an anti-doping rule

violation will only be considered a second violation if it can be established that the

Athlete or other Person committed the second anti-doping rule violation after the

Athlete or other Person received notice pursuant to Rule 37 or after reasonable

efforts were made to give notice of the first anti-doping rule violation; if this

cannot be established, the violations shall be considered together as one single first

violation and the sanction imposed shall be based on the violation that carries the

more severe sanction.

(ii) If, after the resolution of a first anti-doping rule violation, facts are discovered

involving an anti-doping rule violation by the Athlete or other Person which

occurred prior to notification of the first violation, then an additional sanction shall

be imposed based on the sanction that could have been imposed if the two

violations would have been adjudicated at the same time. Results in all

Competitions dating back to the earlier anti-doping rule violation will be

Disqualified as provided in Rule 40.9.

This means that Rita is not in the first part (rule 40.8) because never received some notification about some first violation.

You can argue she could go under the second part (ii) of the 40.8 rule. This never happened, since the test was carried out on 25th September, and she NEVER had any positive test before, and any suspicion fluctuation in her Biological Passport.

So, in order to disqualify her from the jackpot, they applied the following formula :

"Attempted use of a prohibited method and Tampering", without any real proof, in total agreement with the organizers of the Majors. This happened for ethic reasons, and was a right punishment, BUT THERE WAS NO ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE FOUND BEFORE BOSTON, AND THERE WERE NO SUSPICIONS ABOUT HER BIOLOGICAL PASSPORT.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

You dopey idiot, if you know anything about 800m you'd know 1:44 is an elite time. The point I made is if Bosse ran hard out and did this time to win the World Championships then it is obviously an elite time.

The entire theme of this thread is that the EPO era distorted historical times. 3:32 is elite for 1500m as are Ben True (13:02) and Paul Chelimo (13:03) over 5000m. To say they aren't or a 2:08 marathon isn't elite is rubbish.

Hey shiitface, thanks for the compliment.

And you're like ventolin, hijacking a thread, together with the Coevetts and casual observers, and turning every fvcking thing into doping discussions.

This thread is about the 5000m World Record Splits: A Progression.

Yours truly,

Dopey Idiot

EPO works on plenty of runners and a percentage of elites around the world try it and other peds. There can still be great clean performances but there are PED problems. In all likelihood EPO does help runners from all over. So we need real and fair testing systems to improve faith in the sport. This debate is a distraction. Finally, we will never know the truth of our records but it won’t look good if people can’t come close to records for 30years (Flojo)

The 4 year extension was based on a comfortable satisfaction of aggravating circumstances, listing a few reasons: "her long relationship with the doctor in question, her multiple visits to see him, that her rEPO use was consistent with her competition calendar, that she hid the visits to the doctor in question from her manager and coach, as well as her deceptive and obstructive conduct throughout the proceedings." Otherwise, the public statement doesn't detail all the evidence. We know for sure that EPO was found in a 25 Sep. 2014 sample, but we don't know what is significant about 17 April 2014. In Rule 40.8, it looks like the relevant text is "other anti-doping rule violation". There could be explicit evidence of EPO use before Boston, or maybe something implicit, like dates of doctor visits, but the ruling doesn't give the evidence of the nature of the violation. Since Jeptoo was not represented, and not present, and was tried in her absence, it's not out of the question that the CAS actually did something that was not allowed, to their comfortable satisfaction, with no one to object, and chose this date in order to deny Jeptoo the WMM jackpot, in the interest of "justice", and to set an example. Since this was an appeal already, Jeptoo probably has no recourse.

casual obsever wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

Going again to the Rita Jeptoo case : she was not DQ for doping BEFORE Chicago, but for BEHAVIOR AGAINST THE ETHIC OF ATHLETICS.

No. CAS based the extension to 4 years on her unethical behavior, but the Boston DQ on her doping at or rather before Boston, explicitly referring to IAAF rule 40.8, i.e. the rule of multiple anti-doping rule violations.

What you suggest, is not allowed.

I could argue that, but instead, let me cite CAS, which did state that directly:

So 40.8 was indeed used to DQ for Boston. One doesn't need a positive test for a DQ based on doping, as you know. Here, CAS had apparently enough evidence for a doping conviction based on that "her long relationship with the doctor in question, her multiple visits to him, ..." started long before Chicago.

Exactly. CAS is convinced that she was doped in Boston, but did not bother to provide details in the public statement.

So was the IAAF, apparently.

CAS needed to find some way for disqualifying Rita from the jackpot, and, without further evidence, the only way was to look at her behavior.

Of course she had long and continue frequentation with the doctor : after deviding from her husband, the doctor became her boyfriend...

However, there were no positive tests before the test of 25th September, and her biological passport was not suspicious.

I don't discuss the MERIT of the sanction : she was totally stupid, and deserved to be banned.

I discuss the general thought that she was able to run her best marathon because of doping.

The evidence is that she never used EPO before her victory in Boston, and that, after using EPO befoire Chicago, she ran the worst time of her career, after the first year of marathon (2014).

I never discussed the rule to ban who used doping : according to me, the ban must be still longer, and the sanction more tough (for example, with the cancellation of all the results achieved in the athletic life, from the beginning).

I discuss the effect of EPO, and the negative influence the common thought that can help a lot the athletes of endurance (runners) can have with people that well know NEVER shall be tested (amateurs, schoolboys, people in the gym and others).

And I know that the most part of top athletes are clean, that it's possible to be WR holder and Olympic Champion without any drug, and that the human limits are well beyond the current world bests.

Dopey Idiot wrote:

And you're like ventolin, hijacking a thread, together with the Coevetts and casual observers, and turning every fvcking thing into doping discussions.

This thread is about the 5000m World Record Splits: A Progression.

That was the title, yes. Yet already the 2nd answer back in 2004 turned it into a doping discussion, because the progression appeared so suspicious:

Ithink wrote:Drugs are a wonderful thing. Look at the dramatic drop in the mid-ninties. It is really sad for all future athletes to be judged agaisnt these times.

In 2012, and now in 2017, further oil was added to that thought because the progression stopped in 2004.

The direction that this thread took back then had nothing to do with the names you blamed for this. We just kept this discussion alive for a while, along with rekrunner and Canova and LM and wtfunny etc.

rekrunner wrote:

From just reading the abstract, it looks like Ashenden didn't look at training or performance at all, but looked at how the changes in altitude bring changes in blood values, which affect his ON and OFF scores.

Well...rekrunner you have to read more than just the abstract. The Kenyan control group, which was comprised of 6 top elites, had initial blood samples collected during a training camp at 2100 meters altitude. Average Hb recorded at the camp; 15.8. After descent to sea-level a second sample was collected 7 days later with an average of 14.1; a ~12% decline in just one (1) week:

Renato Canova wrote:

And I know that the most part of top athletes are clean, that it's possible to be WR holder and Olympic Champion without any drug, and that the human limits are well beyond the current world bests.

What do you say the WR can be at each distance, 800m, 1500m, 3000m, 3000m ST, 5000m, 10000m, HM, Marathon if we have an athlete of the best theoretical talent that can exist (maybe like Bekele or Bolt, maybe more talented) with the full development and training?

Exactly. I had in my career one athlete with this kind of talent : Stephen Cherono (alias Saaeed Saif Shaheen).

He was undefeated in 26 following races of 3000 steeple from 2002 till 2006, won WCh 2003 and 2006, bettered the WR in 2004, and couldn't win OG 2004 only because the Kenyan Olympic Committee didn't give him the release (that was part of the agreement between Government of Qatar and government of Kenya) for competing in Olympics.

His shape in 2006 was by far better than in 2004, when he improved the WR, and he could have run under 7'50", if the third pacer of the race (Mateelong) was able to run 63" instead a pedestrian 68"5.

At the end of his career, due to a stupid accident against the door of a car, I was not happy about his WR, that was far from his real value (showed in training), and he was 24 only when had to stop. It's not unfair to think that his potential limits were well under 7'50" in steeple and about 12'35" in 5000m, if he had the opportunity to run till the age of 30 years, corresponding to OG 2012.

The same for Bekele. He never prepared seriously the event of 10000m, very easy for him to dominate, and when he bettered the WR, one time was a little sick, the other time was not in full shape. To think about a time very close 26' for 10000m is something normal, for who knows his training, and recognize his talent.

In spite of many people think, these athletes were totally clean. For Shaheen I can put my hand on fire, since I was the most part of time with him, everywhere, and well know what he ate, how he recovered, how he trained, and the mentality he had.

For Kenenisa I can only say this is my thought, after working with him in Ethiopia for some month at the end of 2014 - beginning of 2015, when I had the opportunity to know many things about his training, his mentality, his family, his principles, all connected with a talent never seen before (and probably never possible to see in the future).

David Rudisha is 100% clean, but for 800m maybe possible to find some new talent able to attack his WR in short time (for example, Emmanuel Korir), since the distance is not exclusive of African talents.

And I don't want to speak about HM and Marathon, because are two distances that till now never had a precise technical definition, and are in continue evolution (especially HM).

Rita improved by 4 mins then was busted for EPO some coincidence. You seem to defend he doping as well which is worrying

How about Sumgong? What are your excuses there?

The standard ban for EPO is now 4 years extenuating circumstances or assistance will only reduce that. You write as if the standard ban was 2 years and they increased it to 4 years.

Also see you saying she was clean in Chicago for her sun 2:20

But you only provided a link to the abstract. When I read your response, you also talk about blood values and altitude, and not about training and performance.

High-Octane Dopers wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

From just reading the abstract, it looks like Ashenden didn't look at training or performance at all, but looked at how the changes in altitude bring changes in blood values, which affect his ON and OFF scores.

Well...rekrunner you have to read more than just the abstract. The Kenyan control group, which was comprised of 6 top elites, had initial blood samples collected during a training camp at 2100 meters altitude. Average Hb recorded at the camp; 15.8. After descent to sea-level a second sample was collected 7 days later with an average of 14.1; a ~12% decline in just one (1) week:

Renato Canova wrote:

Mr Obvious, I can send you the data about tests with all the Chinese Team during a period of two months in altitude in Duoba, three years ago, week after week.

This is what I have in my computer at the moment.

Renato has sent me some data with test results for the Chinese team. So he is willing to give at least some data.

I haven't extensively looked at it yet.

I guess my first point of confusion is what to make of this in how it relates to EPO working. According to Renato's argument, as best and honestly as I can interpret it, his assertion has been that EPO does not work for the "Best talents, born, living, and training at altitude, when they are in the best shape"

The information I got concerns the following athletes:

Yinli He:

B. 20 July, 1988, Baotou, Inner Mongolia (altitude 1000m)

PBs

10000: 32:41.5

Half Marathon: 1:11:34

30k: 1:43:48

Marathon: 2:27:35

Zhang Yingying:

b. 4 Jan. 1990, Hailar District, Inner Mongolia (altitude 614 m)

5000 m 15:06.08

10,000 m 31:17.30

Marathon 2:22.38

but well short of these times at the time we have measurements for

Maybe because in 2014, the standard ban was 2 years and they increased it to 4 years. About Sumgong, Renato already told us: "(I don't know about Jemima Sumgong)"

ukathleticscoach wrote:

The standard ban for EPO is now 4 years extenuating circumstances or assistance will only reduce that. You write as if the standard ban was 2 years and they increased it to 4 years.

Also see you saying she was clean in Chicago for her sun 2:20

ukathleticscoach wrote:

How about Sumgong? What are your excuses there?