| fsdfdf |
| ||
|
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/sportingscene/2012/07/how-many-olympic-runners-dope.html "Nicholas Thompson: In our last exchange, we talked about one of the things I love about track: strategy in the five-thousand-metre. But now I want to ask about something less lovely: drugs. Specifically, Malcolm, how many of these guys do you think are doping? My instinct is that virtually all the men and all the women in every event shorter than four hundred metres are doped, about half of the quarter milers are doped, a few of the half milers, and very few of the long-distance runners. There are some exceptions though: Moroccan men and Russian women seem to have particular issues. The greatest dopers of all time, I suspect, were the Chinese women in the early nineties who claimed that exotic worms made them fast. I would, however, be shocked if any of the top Kenyan or Ethiopian distance runners dope. I’m sure there are physiological benefits to doping in long-distance running, just as there are in long-distance cycling. (There’s an interesting Science of Sport study from a few weeks ago that suggests that the winners of the Tour de France have slowed down so much since Lance Armstrong’s time that it’s perhaps conceivable they weren’t doped this year.) But drugs haven’t become part of the culture of distance running. Malcolm Gladwell: I confess that I don’t understand the relationship between long-distance running and doping. Sprinting—yes. But do we know what kind of benefit a truly élite runner in, say, the ten-thousand-metre gets from drugs? What I’ve always understood is that to compete in anything from the five-thousand-metre to the marathon, you need to train at least a hundred and twenty miles a week. But most people who try to run a hundred and twenty miles a week or more will, in a relatively short period of time, get hurt. The great American distance runner Chris Solinsky is a clear example of this. He’s clearly one of the finest long-distance runners in the world. Unfortunately, the amount of training he needs to do to compete at that level has so far proven too much for his body. I’m guessing there are hundreds of Chris Solinskys out there, all over the world. The limiting factor in distance running is injuries, and the greatest challenge in the sport is finding a way to make the hundred and twenty miles a week manageable. What I don’t understand is how “performance enhancing” drugs help you manage that hundred-and-twenty-mile-per-week burden. Surely the ideal performance-enhancing drug for a distance runner would be a brand-new, perfectly legal, anti-inflammatory. Nothing too complicated. Just a super-charged ibuprofen that would help injuries heal faster. Or am I being naïve?" |
| agip |
| ||
|
well really how many runners of the 5000, 10000 or marathon have tested positive? a handful? the testing evidence seems pretty clear that at over 1500m PEDs are not being used a whole lot. Correct me if I am wrong. |
| heres the deal yo |
| ||
|
at least he is not being close-minded about it. he is not denying his ignorance. but he clearly doesnt understand the concept of EPO and similar drugs and methods. more or less, the idea is to be able accomplish the same results with less training, helping lower injury rates without sacrificing performance. distance runners obviously dont benefit much from taking traditional steroids that add bulk and fast-twitch muscle, so his thinking is correct on that, but thats pretty basic knowledge. hes clearly just unfamiliar with the sport. |
| Hormonal |
| ||
Based on his recent New Yorker article on AlSal, Gladwell won his city-county championship in XC and knows quite a bit about the sport. |
| common |
| ||
|
He is familiar with the sport, but he is wildly unfamiliar with human physiology vis-a-vis doping. |
| ttyrdyjud |
| ||
Based on his recent New Yorker article on AlSal, Gladwell won his city-county championship in XC and knows quite a bit about the sport.[/quote] except apparently the existence of endurance drugs |
| Captain Spalding |
| ||
|
On the other hand, it may be that there's less benefit for someone at the highest levels. To take two doping busts, Rashid Ramzi and Cathel Lombard were both good--but not great--runners who became world-class, rather than world-class runners who became record-breakers. Either way, Gladwell may not be right, but a lot of what people say here is just repeating the dogma of what "everyone knows." As in "everyone knows that taking epo means winning medals/world records." It's nice to have an actual conversation with nuance about the effects of PEDs. |
| sure he is |
| ||
|
He began his response with "I confess that I don’t understand the relationship between long-distance running and doping." So, yeah, he's oblivious. But he doesn't pretend to be anything other than oblivious. He flat out says that he doesn't understand it. I respect a guy who admits his ignorance. Much better to say "I don't really understand this" than to just pretend to be an expert on something you don't understand (as many people would). |
| asdfsadf |
| ||
Look at top level cycling. It is full of doping. Cycling is just like distance running in terms of demands on the body. So it stands to reason that top level distance runners also get a benefit from epo and blood doping. |
| agip |
| ||
|
Look at top level cycling. It is full of doping. Cycling is just like distance running in terms of demands on the body. So it stands to reason that top level distance runners also get a benefit from epo and blood doping. ___ well, sort of. The TDF and Giro are hugely important and put demands on the body unlike anythign in running. In no running event do you race ridiculous distances every day for several weeks. Drugs will presumably help you recover from daily races. There is no distance running equivalent. Plus, arguably, there is a culture of drugs in cycling and not in long distance running. |
| Ontario XC Runner |
| ||
|
Gladwell was a pretty good freshman runner winning the provincial champs for 1500 in 4:05 beating the superstar of the day, Dave Reid. Reid won the provincial xc the fall before. Not sure how far back Gladwell was. I'm pretty sure gladwell didn't race much if at all after grade 9. definitley not the last couple years of high school. His hair was wild. |
| Mittens Romney |
| ||
|
I'm convinced he's playing dumb to sound interesting. |
| asdfsadf |
| ||
|
Personally I find it amazing that anyone is questioning whether top level distance runners dope. It is human nature to take whatever advantage one can. All pro sports dope. Cycling dopes, sprints, jumps and throws dope. Swimming dopes, shooting dopes. Biathlon dopes, cross country skiing dopes. Why in the world would anyone believe that 5 and 10k runners are the only top level athletes in the world that don't dope? |
| Another Ontario XC Runner |
| ||
|
He ran about 3:54 for 1500m while an undergrad at Trinity.
|
| agip |
| ||
____ well, because to my knowledge hardly any 5k/10k/marathon runners have been caught. Goumri. Hellybruck (sp). Anyone else? That kenyan they caught last week. Maybe a couple russian female marathoners. While in sprinting, cycling, throws, xc skiers, etc there have been hundreds caught. How do you explain the lack of busts in the long distance running events if, as you say, everyone dopes? |
| asdfsadf |
| ||
I freely admit that this is a good question. I can speculate, but who knows. I would remind you though of the post a while ago here of a south american (?) woman's blood values that indicated doping for sure - this is just a small example of what is probably going on throughout the sport. If you look at swimming, cycling and XC skiing as comparable sports in terms of training and racing, and you agree that those sports have lots of athletes that use drugs, then isn't it very hard to believe that 1. the same drugs would not be useful to runner, and 2. that runners are more ethical, or less motivated to succeed (and therefore would want to use drugs)? One theory I have is that marathoners and 10k runners don't race very often. That means there are less chances to be tested in competition. I also wonder how out of competition testing compares between countries involved at a high level in the various sports mentioned above. Any idea? |
| Canova follower |
| ||
I recommend you study some Canova's posts. If you read them you would know very well why there is no advantage of doping in running and that cycling is a lot different than running. |
| asdfsadf |
| ||
I recommend you study some Canova's posts. If you read them you would know very well why there is no advantage of doping in running and that cycling is a lot different than running.[/quote] Seriously? Come on. |
| jjjjjjj |
| ||
|
As Thompson indicates, there have been systematic doping programs for middle distance and long distance runners, but because EPO was not in use until the 1990s and steroids did not have much effect beyond 3k, and because hormones work better on women than men (women not competing above 3k at major competitions other than marathon until the late 80s or early 90s, and marathon only began in the Olympics in 1984 when the Soviet bloc boycotted), the Soviet Bloc did not have great effects on the longer distances (one exception above 3k was obviously the Polish marathoner who won gold in 76 and 80 and was doping). All the women's records through 3k were distorted by doping by Soviet Bloc athletes (and Flo Jo, who may or may not have doped but sure gained a huge amount of muscle and speed at a late date). Then with EPO, the Chinese destroyed all the 1500m/3000m/10000m women's records with the same kind of depth seen under the Soviet Union at shorter events. Above 1500m, you have seen doping cases among the men with small fish like Lombard and Hellebuyck, but also big fish like Ali Saidi-Sief and Mohammed Mourhit, plus Kisorio recently. But with no EPO test in the mid 90s, lots of big fish had no limits on using it, so we didn't get those scandals. More recently, we've had Ramzi at 800/1500m, but why no widespread scandals? Maybe the testing's not caught up or maybe because among the men until the last couple years no non-East Africans were close enough for doping to make the difference and so many East Africans were running fantastic times without clear state involvement that it seemed as if training accounted for it. But it's a good question why not more. |
| asdfsadf |
| ||
I recommend you study some Canova's posts. If you read them you would know very well why there is no advantage of doping in running and that cycling is a lot different than running.[/quote] Sorry my last post was not helpful. So how does XC skiing or speed skating differ from running? Does Canova conveniently explain this too? A major goal of mileage is to improve your body's oxygen carrying capacity. Guess what blood doping does - the exact same thing. If blood doping (and using EPO) does not work in runners, why was it so common prior to being banned? |