[quote]rekrunner wrote:
I guess I'm getting tired that many of my posts are defending myself from things I did not say, or somtimes, pretty much the opposite of what I said.
You accused me of a misconception that "all elites using EPO are potential WR holders". My statement was pretty much asserting exactly the opposite: non-potential WR holders (as opposed to potential WR holders) using EPO was one of the more common scenarios. What is the appropriate response to such a post?
I don't know what you mean or what you are driving at or how answering your questions will lead to something relevant. Do you want to argue that Kalalei should be fourth or fifth tier or more? I don't see where you want to go here with this line of questioning.
Do I have a specific time frame? No. Maybe:
First tier: best of the best
Second tier: best of the rest
Third tier: wanna be among the best, but cannot be, even with dope
If you want to say third tier is too generous, that's fine by me.
Why do I think third tier runners are more likely to take EPO? If you have an athlete who is regularly winning, versus an athlete who is not, the one who is not is more likely to look to external aid and take bigger risks and try to win more.
The exact cutoff of slow isn't so important, because I see it obeying a sliding scale law of diminishing return rather than some clear barrier. A slower runner for sure is a runner that doesn't even appear in an "all-time athletics" website search, where the cutoff for inclusion is 2:10:30 (approx. 3325 best performances).Well...quit being so ambiguous & baiting with your posts then (you pull the same stunt with Casual Observer all the time. ?).
And give me a break here: The athlete "who is regularly winning, versus an athlete who is not, the one who is not is more likely to look to external aid and take bigger risks?" How do you know that the athlete who is regularly winning isn't doped to the gill, especially if they're from the doping culture capitals of the world, such as Kenya & Morroco? Once again, you just can't arbitrarily rule out the regularly winning "doping culture" athlete hasn't achieved that success from PEDs. What are naive or something? ?