Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
J.R.
Wang Junxia the greatest woman runner of all time 5/6/2012 12:09PM - in reply to Maybe12 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
There sure are a lot of drug believers on here, who think taking drugs is the only way to run your best times.
dont stop there
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/6/2012 12:14PM - in reply to Maybe12 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
And finished second in the 10, on the same sprinter track that Geb complained about.
sceptic...
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 5:38AM - in reply to say whuuuh? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

say whuuuh? wrote:

Did you even watch that race? Um, Wang finished second.


Right, so she went from losing to Radcliffe in a junior race in 1992, to smashing senior world records out of sight in 1993. I don't think this fact speaks in her favor.
Jeff Wigand
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 5:50AM - in reply to strange coincidence? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

strange coincidence? wrote:

Radcliffe started accusing others the same time she started running faster herself.

Strange coincidence? I think not.

It is one of the ways she has attempted to divert such suspicions from herself to others, especially Olga Yegorova and Junxia Wang, who were her primary competitors at that time.

Indeed, Radcliffes marathon time at London is closer to the men's WR times than any of the other women's WR's.


Drug cheats don't offer to have their blood stored for future testing.
Jeff Wigand
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 5:52AM - in reply to Pumanator Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Pumanator wrote:

Your argument ignores the fact if you can build a track to 400 meters you can also build a track that is 390 meters. How hard would it be to adjust the size of a track? It doesn't seem complicated to pull off.


It is, when you have a world audience. Where were all the stellar men's performances from those championships?
Jeff Wigand
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 5:57AM - in reply to break it up Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

break it up wrote:

Radcliffe's 2:15 marathon from a runner that never broke 30:00 for 10k is equally off the charts as Wangs 10k.


I want to get this straight: you're comparing a solo female only 10000m run without any pacemakers in shit weather to a perfectly male paced marathon in excellent conditions?

If she hadn't run the 10000m in the driving rain at the European Championships and had instead run it in perfect conditions in Oslo or Palo Alto with male Kenyans to pace her from start to finish, do you think she might have been under 30:00?
Link
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 9:25AM - in reply to Jeff Wigand Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Jeff Wigand wrote:

[quote]strange coincidence? wrote:

Radcliffe started accusing others the same time she started running faster herself.

Strange coincidence? I think not.

It is one of the ways she has attempted to divert such suspicions from herself to others, especially Olga Yegorova and Junxia Wang, who were her primary competitors at that time.

Indeed, Radcliffes marathon time at London is closer to the men's WR times than any of the other women's WR's.


Drug cheats don't offer to have their blood stored for future testing.[/quote]

1. Yes they do.
2. Did she, in fact, actually have her blood stored?

The point of the OP is valid. We have no evidence that Ma's army doped other than the fact that they ran startlingly fast. If that's the criterion, then Radcliffe is just as certainly a drug cheat.
Worse, Radcliffe has had very little success in world champs and the Olympics. The same was not true about Wang. By this light it is more likely that Paula is a doper.

I don't really know, nor, unless any of you are Puala or Wang or, possibly, their coaches do you. I will say, though, that I think both Paula and Wang were cheaters. Of course, so too have most of the WR setters of the past 30 years - or more. It's a sad fact, but T&F at the highest level is kind of a carnival. Anyone who wants to return the sport to its former glory must begin by finding a way to eliminate doping. It's a sad fact ,too, but one way to do that might be to return to the days when the sport was amateur. Sure, it wasn't really, but I still think that would eliminate people who were running only for cash.
Walt George
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 11:03AM - in reply to Link Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
‘Radcliffe has had little success at world champs’???

Shows what you know - do a bit of research before you mouth off.

Anybody who knows anything about athletics knows that Paula Radcliffe won the 2005 World Championship Marathon in the record time of 2.20.57.
no way no how
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 11:26AM - in reply to Jeff Wigand Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Drug cheats don't offer to have their blood stored for future testing.


What happened to all her test results that were going to be made public in the past.

Blood stored for future testing? What a joke.

Want some proof? There it is right in front of you.
113
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 11:47AM - in reply to Jeff Wigand Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Jeff Wigand wrote:

[quote]Pumanator wrote:

Your argument ignores the fact if you can build a track to 400 meters you can also build a track that is 390 meters. How hard would it be to adjust the size of a track? It doesn't seem complicated to pull off.


It is, when you have a world audience. Where were all the stellar men's performances from those championships?[/quote]

World audience? Really? We don't even have complete video of any of the races, and very few foreign reporters attended.

As for the men's performances, national records were set in the 100, 400, 400 hurdles, and steeplechase (8:24). The winning 5k time was 13:32-- the all-time Chinese record is 13:25.

Not as outrageous as the men's times, I'll give you that. But still pretty damn quick for a domestic, late-season meet in a country that has few if any elite male track athletes.
113
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 12:09PM - in reply to WTF! Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Beijing Workers' September 8-13 - Even the last placed finisher made headlines as 14 year old Yang Ling ran a stunning 8:42.3 for 8th to conclude this most dramatic of weeks in global athletics.



I'd never seen this result before. Come on, folks. This meet was as crooked as you can get. I don't know if they shortened the track, messed with the timing, started from the wrong lines, ran fewer laps, or just injected each athlete directly in the heart with adrenaline on the starting line. But none of these marks should ever be taken seriously by anyone.

You want to say Paula doped, that's fine. But let's not use that as an excuse to ignore the fact that two meets (the '93 and '97 Chinese National Games) were deliberate attempts to rewrite the women's record book by any means necessary. The fact that they got away with it is sad-- the IAAF shouldn't compound that by continuing the recognize both the "records" and the athletes involved.
Link
RE: Paula Radcliffe should give Wang Junxia the benefit of the doubt 5/7/2012 1:43PM - in reply to Walt George Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
"little" and "no" are not the same. And, given who she is, the number of shots she's had and her percentage of successes as measured by medals, I'm sticking with what I said above. I'd say the same of Ron Clark, Jim Ryun and any of dozens of others.
Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |