who else?
If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 6:09PM Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Here's a list of the fastest miles ever run:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_mileok.htm

The only people ahead of Webb are El G, Ngeny, Morceli, Cram, Komen, and Vénuste Niyongabo. Since most people agree EPO was rampant in the 1990s and we all but know the british trio were doping, wouldn't that mean Webb would be the clean WR holder if indeed he was clean?
tfgyh
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 6:22PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
For the love of god, stop talking about a "clean" WR.
lmda
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 6:31PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
"we all but know the british trio were doping"

We do? Do provide us with your proof oh wise one.

It would be hilarious if Cram was on drugs after his Makhloufi comments.
i kinda like running
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 6:48PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Ok, I've never heard of Niyongabo. How is it possible there's a 3:46 miler I've never heard of?
coach d
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 6:49PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Where is the evidence that El Guerrouj was doping?
whoisthisguy?
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 7:00PM - in reply to i kinda like running Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

i kinda like running wrote:

Ok, I've never heard of Niyongabo. How is it possible there's a 3:46 miler I've never heard of?


Never heard of him either.

Olympic gold in 5k in Atlanta too!
Bad Wigins
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 7:01PM - in reply to coach d Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
If any of them was that fast by natural means, it would be Komen. The way he ran, it made sense that he was fast.
flying a kite
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 7:11PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

who else? wrote:

Here's a list of the fastest miles ever run:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_mileok.htm

The only people ahead of Webb are El G, Ngeny, Morceli, Cram, Komen, and Vénuste Niyongabo. Since most people agree EPO was rampant in the 1990s and we all but know the british trio were doping, wouldn't that mean Webb would be the clean WR holder if indeed he was clean?


Another we do do we??!!
Nothing indicates that Ovett, Coe, Cram, Elliot or Moorcroft took anything. ALL trained under (with) different coaches/people and it shows what can happen (as is happening to a limited degree in the US now, except too many people think it should be from 2-3 training groups, which makes suspicion even higher) when talented people in the same country want to make National teams. e.g. Morcroft moved up to 5000m (WR 13.00, 30 years ago in 1982) since he couldn't make a National team in the 1500m, after winning the CG 1500m in 1978, from 1980 onwards. Cram wasn't even the fastest 1500m/miler his age, his competition (Graham Williamson) also ran the equivalent of 3.53 for the mile (like Webb) as a Junior (3.36 1500m, which is the British Junior record), yet this kid couldn't make the National squad either!! That kind of depth (much like the Africans who can keep fast marathoners off the Olympic teams when they could easily make those of other countries) is what makes athletes at the WC level. Unfortunately for Britain those days are gone (save for Mo Farah).
Just because EPO exists doesn't mean everyone has to take it, only the losers (and XC skiers/Cyclists) who haven't the balls to train limit themselves to it. I know guys who are sub-elite (~13.20 for 5000m) who had little talent (~15-16min 5k in HS) who trained hard to get to that limited level. No reason why more talented athletes can't get to an even better level.
The problem in the US are there are (obviously) only a handful of coaches who can develop top athletes (all in just a few training groups), when there should be hundreds of coaches given the system supported by the NCAA. That there aren't even more athletes at the top is testament to the weak structure in US development, and it starts with the USATF. NO governing body should be subservient to the College system (as so obviously is the case) in terms of development - the USATF should be telling the Colleges what needs to be done, not the other way around. That is why there is so much wasted talent in the NCAA. That is why guys like Rupp stand out SO much, and that a no-name like Cam Levins can win at that level (NCAA) after being almost an also-ran in a Canadian HS, training in isolated Southern Utah by himself.
Also, as long as the HS/College mindset of the "team is everything", at the expense of individual development persists, then you get what "you pay for". Good for Mary Cain for bucking that trend (and Ajee Wilson) maybe they will escape the Bermuda triangle known as the NCAA experience (good for a few, bad for too many).
BALLS
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 7:47PM - in reply to flying a kite Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

flying a kite wrote:


who else? wrote:

Here's a list of the fastest miles ever run:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_mileok.htm

The only people ahead of Webb are El G, Ngeny, Morceli, Cram, Komen, and Vénuste Niyongabo. Since most people agree EPO was rampant in the 1990s and we all but know the british trio were doping, wouldn't that mean Webb would be the clean WR holder if indeed he was clean?


Another we do do we??!!
Nothing indicates that Ovett, Coe, Cram, Elliot or Moorcroft took anything. ALL trained under (with) different coaches/people and it shows what can happen (as is happening to a limited degree in the US now, except too many people think it should be from 2-3 training groups, which makes suspicion even higher) when talented people in the same country want to make National teams. e.g. Morcroft moved up to 5000m (WR 13.00, 30 years ago in 1982) since he couldn't make a National team in the 1500m, after winning the CG 1500m in 1978, from 1980 onwards. Cram wasn't even the fastest 1500m/miler his age, his competition (Graham Williamson) also ran the equivalent of 3.53 for the mile (like Webb) as a Junior (3.36 1500m, which is the British Junior record), yet this kid couldn't make the National squad either!! That kind of depth (much like the Africans who can keep fast marathoners off the Olympic teams when they could easily make those of other countries) is what makes athletes at the WC level. Unfortunately for Britain those days are gone (save for Mo Farah).
Just because EPO exists doesn't mean everyone has to take it, only the losers (and XC skiers/Cyclists) who haven't the balls to train limit themselves to it. I know guys who are sub-elite (~13.20 for 5000m) who had little talent (~15-16min 5k in HS) who trained hard to get to that limited level. No reason why more talented athletes can't get to an even better level.
The problem in the US are there are (obviously) only a handful of coaches who can develop top athletes (all in just a few training groups), when there should be hundreds of coaches given the system supported by the NCAA. That there aren't even more athletes at the top is testament to the weak structure in US development, and it starts with the USATF. NO governing body should be subservient to the College system (as so obviously is the case) in terms of development - the USATF should be telling the Colleges what needs to be done, not the other way around. That is why there is so much wasted talent in the NCAA. That is why guys like Rupp stand out SO much, and that a no-name like Cam Levins can win at that level (NCAA) after being almost an also-ran in a Canadian HS, training in isolated Southern Utah by himself.
Also, as long as the HS/College mindset of the "team is everything", at the expense of individual development persists, then you get what "you pay for". Good for Mary Cain for bucking that trend (and Ajee Wilson) maybe they will escape the Bermuda triangle known as the NCAA experience (good for a few, bad for too many).


tl;dr
Trollist
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 8:01PM - in reply to who else? Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
If Alan Webb was clean, then 3:46.9 is the clean world record.
15mph
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 8:06PM - in reply to Bad Wigins Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Usually people say the opposite about Komen. He was so strong that he must have done EPO. I do agree that he had excellent running form, which some other suspected dopers did not. Form can get worse when you're tired though right, and EPO could reduce that. I'm not on a witch hunt, and the guys videos impress me even if he did dope. I'm just interested in knowing how to spot someone when they do. I notice that he didn't run consistent splits in his two mile record. One lap might be 59, the next 61. Does this point towards him being clean, a doper, or just strong, efficient, but not ideal at pacing himself?
toro
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 8:19PM - in reply to i kinda like running Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Venuste Niyongabo of Burundi was the other guy running under 3:30 in Morceli's prime.
He finished 3rd in the 1995 WC 1500 behind Morceli and El G.
To avoid them, he ran the 5000 in the 1996 Olympics and won Gold (the guy who finished 6th is much, much more famous).
Bad Wigins
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 9:13PM - in reply to 15mph Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
What I mean about Komen is, even in the first couple of laps, you can tell he's not gonna get tired. The way he just kind of springs along shows he gets more speed out of a given amount of energy than anyone else.

El G on the other hand runs with a less economical form but with superhuman stamina. That kind of endurance looks out of place combined with bad form. With good form it makes sense.
kdjdjj
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 9:25PM - in reply to Bad Wigins Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Bad Wigins wrote:

What I mean about Komen is, even in the first couple of laps, you can tell he's not gonna get tired. The way he just kind of springs along shows he gets more speed out of a given amount of energy than anyone else.

El G on the other hand runs with a less economical form but with superhuman stamina. That kind of endurance looks out of place combined with bad form. With good form it makes sense.



There is a difference between having nice form and having efficient form. Because it "looks good" does not mean that it is actually good.
someone had to do it
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 9:50PM - in reply to Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

boso wrote:

Oh well that's compelling evidence. A random 133 page thread on the internet. Don't even bother pointing out anything specific you waste of oxygen.


imbecile

Try reading the first two pages

Your pea brain might learn something
Jeff Wigand
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 10:31PM - in reply to someone had to do it Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

someone had to do it wrote:


boso wrote:

Oh well that's compelling evidence. A random 133 page thread on the internet. Don't even bother pointing out anything specific you waste of oxygen.


imbecile

Try reading the first two pages

Your pea brain might learn something


There's nothing of consequence there.

There's zat0pek telling what I assume is the old story of how Regina's positive in 1995 was put to bed with her withdrawal from the world championships that year. But that's old news and the world is very different today compared to 1995.
someone had to do it
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 10:37PM - in reply to Jeff Wigand Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Jeff Wigand wrote:

There's nothing of consequence there.

There's zat0pek telling what I assume is the old story of how Regina's positive in 1995 was put to bed with her withdrawal from the world championships that year. But that's old news and the world is very different today compared to 1995.


Jeff - I Don't Believe In Doping - Wigand

Read it again

It is very informative, especially the posts Zat0pek makes in the first couple of pages.

More importantly, read the entire thread.

I told the poster I quoted to read the first 2 pages because it is obvious he is an idiot who didn't even bother to read anything

I know you don't believe, for instance, Lagat doped, so I don't know how much good reading that thread is going to do for you in particular

But for people more willing to accept logic and reason it may do good
Jeff Wigand
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 10:47PM - in reply to someone had to do it Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

someone had to do it wrote:


Jeff Wigand wrote:

There's nothing of consequence there.

There's zat0pek telling what I assume is the old story of how Regina's positive in 1995 was put to bed with her withdrawal from the world championships that year. But that's old news and the world is very different today compared to 1995.


Jeff - I Don't Believe In Doping - Wigand

Read it again

It is very informative, especially the posts Zat0pek makes in the first couple of pages.


It doesn't. You're taking about a bygone era. There are absolutely people who are beating the system today. But unlike the old days, there are no free passes (in most of the world, anyway). And it's a hell of a lot harder to do.
someone had to do it
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 10:52PM - in reply to Jeff Wigand Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Jeff Wigand wrote:

It doesn't. You're taking about a bygone era. There are absolutely people who are beating the system today. But unlike the old days, there are no free passes (in most of the world, anyway). And it's a hell of a lot harder to do.


"It doesn't" what?

not sure what you're replying to

And my original post in this thread was referring to someone talking about El Guerrouj who is for sure a doper, like Lagat (someone you give a pass)

If we can't even agree that Lagat is a doper with everything that's out there then we really can't talk
Jeff Wigand
RE: If Webb's 3:46.9 was clean, is it the official clean mile WR? 1/18/2013 11:13PM - in reply to someone had to do it Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

someone had to do it wrote:
"It doesn't" what?



I'm sorry. It should have read, "It isn't," in reply to:

"It is very informative, especially the posts Zat0pek makes in the first couple of pages."

I don't give a pass to anyone. I read the report:

http://www.letsrun.com/2003/lagatsum.doc

A common refrain for those that disregard the findings of the experts that analyzed Lagat's case is that he somehow slipped protease into his B sample, and as protease digests EPO, the B sample would naturally comeback negative, resulting in a not guilty verdict.

The problem with this, of course, is that protease isn't very smart with respect to helping drug cheats, and it can't tell the difference between rhEPO and naturally occurring EPO, so someone that manages to slip this into their urine will give a result that's completely absent of all EPO, and thus trip a red flag as to what they're up to. And that wasn't the case for Lagat. He had normal EPO in his urine, normal EPO that, under the non-lab conditions to which the A sample was exposed to prior to testing, can cause a normal EPO to look more like the synthetic variety.

You may dispute that, but if I were you, I'd bring in an expert to match the one who wrote the report, and not just rely on feeling.