Fastest 10,000m since 1970. Introduction of drugs and testing

Ooph....

Do they have a chart for other distances? And for womens events?

I'd say this is more reflective of fewer world class 10,000m races being held. Outside of championship races, which are usually tactical, only Stanford holds a 10,000 every year. Brussels used to, but now it's only occasional. Same with Prefontaine.

ataglance wrote:

Soooo sooo dirty

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bl-zrYCCAAAWxlI.png:large

Though many here probably think that the few guys who have run sub 26:40 may have been on something, this graph is rather silly.

In the past few years since the biological passport, we have seen 12:46i and 2:03.23. And, there have been guys who could've run 26:40 this whole meantime.

Also, I should mention, many posters here probably personally know people who have run under the ~28 minute mark 'when EPO was approved' or whatever and can personally attest to their cleanliness. It's a matter of causation vs. correlation.

In the same vein, people here have probably close or secondary connections to pros and believe they don't dope. Not saying that's enough, but it seems convincing to me. For example, in my case, a guy I know really well ran with a guy in college who trains with a guy who ran a really fast 10K for the USA... now I know that's a stretch but I firmly believe his group is clean and that running extremely fast is possible clean. It's a bit of faith but I believe it, and I think a lot of other people here do too.

Sorry that was quite a lot of rambling.

Soon to eliminate the 10000m altogether, it is no longer an event that needs to be on championship schedules if the marathon is also there. Since few double in the 800/1500m anymore, it is the easiest to double withe 5000m (see Mo Farah) on the distance side. One good 5000m with all the guys (or go to the marathon) should be the ideal.

10000m is becoming like the track 1hour run, technically a record, but rarely contested (in this case outside of championship meets) and only by arrangement to go after the record.

ataglance wrote:

Soooo sooo dirty

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bl-zrYCCAAAWxlI.png:large

You should be looking at multiple performers, not just one, and you shouldn't just look at one event. On top of that, you shouldn't conclude that it's due to one thing when there are other plausible factors -- namely that a good 10k will probably net you a few hundred bucks, while a good marathon will make you rich (for Africa). Convert marathon times to equivalent 10ks and the graph will look very different.

Interesting idea. I've had the same though in the past. Specifically, I've thought: "well I know a woman who ran 15:06 and I would bet my bank account she isn't doping, so it stands to reason that other elite runners also are not doping."or"I know a bronze medalist in the Shotput and I see his positive character attributes every single day and am 100% sure he would never dope, so surely many other elites also don't dope."While part of me believes this, part of me also remembers that the majority of children who are molested are molested by a close friend or family member. Most murders are also done by family or friends. The point is, maybe we are too easily blinded to character flaws in people close to us.To become an elite athlete, you've already had to compromise your career, your family life, your recreation for years, so the temptation to make sure it was all worthwhile is very strong. At the same time, I think if I were at that top level, I ultimately wouldn't dope because that would cheapen it, make it something I was no longer proud of accomplishing, because it wouldn't be me anymore, it would be the drugs.So to sum up, I am with you on this, but I do have my doubts.Also, how does this graph account for the drop in 40 seconds from 1970 to 1973? That is as big as the drop it is trying to ascribe to EPO. Perhaps both large drops in time had to do with competition and training methods, or at least in part. If the contention is that people now can't cheat due to the EPO test, blood doping test, and biological passport, then how do you account for the fact that annual bests today are consistently as good as the early 90s? It makes the whole argument invalid.

introspective... wrote:

Also, how does this graph account for the drop in 40 seconds from 1970 to 1973? That is as big as the drop it is trying to ascribe to EPO.

ataglance wrote:

Cinder tracks were gradually been phased out at around that time, this must have made a difference over 10 000m ...

Wow what an utterly misleading graph.

EPO

same trend in speedskating

records tailed off around 2006

What in the world are you guys looking at?

According to that graph, with the advent of testing (EPO, blood doping, etc.) world leading times have remained roughly where they were without the testing. And this is supposed to show that folks were using PEDs? It looks like it shows just the opposite.

ataglance wrote:

Soooo sooo dirty

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bl-zrYCCAAAWxlI.png:large

Interesting. Look at the graph. What happened in 1993? Epogen was approved for market in April.

From wiki:

For several years, epoetin alfa (Epogen, Procrit) has been the single greatest drug expenditure paid for by U.S. Medicare. In 2010, Medicare paid $2 billion.

malmo wrote:

What happened in 1993?

a new generation of super-athletes were born

time-trialling and performing like never before

What the What wrote:

What in the world are you guys looking at?

According to that graph, with the advent of testing (EPO, blood doping, etc.) world leading times have remained roughly where they were without the testing. And this is supposed to show that folks were using PEDs? It looks like it shows just the opposite.

It doesn't tell you anything. It's like looking at the height of the tallest man in the world and concluding that people are getting taller.

Sky Blue wrote:

Wow what an utterly misleading graph.

I'll say, look at the scale of he time units 26.5 minutes. 26:30 has only been broken 6 years: 97, 98, 03, 04, 05, 08

Talk about a meaningless chart. It barely even hints at any reasonable correlation between "key events in drug detection" and slower times, and of course leaves out so many other confounders.

Yes, there is a small bump up after "epo detection established", but then the line moves right back down again, with the best of the best, Geb and Bekele, running incredible 10,000's after this (including their epic Paris battle. Remember, that race doesn't get counted on the chart, because it wasn't a "world best" because of the slow first half, but it was as good as any 10,000 ever run).

And then after blood doping and bio passports introduced, there has been a slight leveling off. So what?

a) there have been other leveling off periods, this means nothing

b) it has as much to do with Bekele being injured and moving to the marathon as anything else

c) it has a lot to do with the best talent going straight to the marathon

d) it has a lot to do with Farah not attempting a time trial 10k, or few others attempting such a race

Whoever created that graph is a fooking idiot. Clearly they didn't understand how to format date by time in Excel, so they called 26:30 = 26.3, 26:40 = 26.4, 26:50 = 26.5

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

Yes, there is a small bump up after "epo detection established", but then the line moves right back down again, with the best of the best,

you do know that the only thing that changed after 2000 was that you had to back off epo for 3days prior to a test,to show up clean?

and that epo microdosing is stil freely practised today as it doesn't trip the ABP whatsoever

Historian wrote:

Cinder tracks were gradually been phased out at around that time, this must have made a difference over 10 000m ...

The world record was 27:39 set in 1965 (on cinders). i don't know what you are talking about (neither do you) cinders being "phased out" -- by 1970 virtually no one was running on cinders, especially at the championship/international level.

introspective... wrote:

Also, how does this graph account for the drop in 40 seconds from 1970 to 1973? That is as big as the drop it is trying to ascribe to EPO.

There is no huge second drop. The x-axis time scale is all fooked up. the top time in 1970 was in the low 28s. Bedford set the 10k WR in 1973 with 27:30. Look where it fits on the graph.

it's clear that the guy who created the graph isn't very good at using Excel. He converts 27:30 to 27.3. So 27:59 will convert to 27.6. 28:00 will be 28.0

Compare annual 10k bests 1980-2005 to the graph.

introspective... wrote:

Interesting idea. I've had the same though in the past. Specifically, I've thought: "well I know a woman who ran 15:06 and I would bet my bank account she isn't doping, so it stands to reason that other elite runners also are not doping."

or

"I know a bronze medalist in the Shotput and I see his positive character attributes every single day and am 100% sure he would never dope, so surely many other elites also don't dope."

While part of me believes this, part of me also remembers that the majority of children who are molested are molested by a close friend or family member. Most murders are also done by family or friends. The point is, maybe we are too easily blinded to character flaws in people close to us.

..............

I'm with you here. I know a girl who has run about 14:30 in the 5k and, like you, I would bet everything I have she isn't doping. It's one of the things that makes me still have hope for T&F.