rekrunner wrote:
To reach stronger conclusions, you have to stop adding unconfirmed hypothesis to unconfirmed hypothesis.
Stop looking for examples as proof, which you cannot distinguish between the general rule or single exceptions, and cannot draw correlations or show causation.
Start completing with real data, so that conclusions are not drawn from incomplete data combined with assumptions.
Start collecting enough data to draw strong correlations with minimum certainty.
If you are really good, isolate and measure the real mechanism hypothesized to improve performance for elites, to show causation.
I'm not going to repeat my performance thread, but will note that I observed the 1500m was by far the event which changed the least, both in terms of quality and quantity.
Here is another seeming contradiction, based on complete historical data of all time bests, up until Jan. 2018:
If EPO, either alone, or in combination with other drugs, were to have a significant effect for elite runners in 1500m, you might predict a peak in the 1990s, when no test existed, a slowdown in the 2000s after a test was introduced, then further refined, and then again another slowdown in the 2010s, after the ABP was introduced. Here is what we can observe happened in the real world:
- In two years, 1985, and 1986, 4 athletes from 3 countries ran 3:29.77 or faster
- In the next eight years, between 1987 and 1994, when EPO became available, and was slowly introduced into endurance sports, NO athlete ran faster than 3.29.77
- In the next five years, between 1995 and 1999, before the EPO test was developed, and when EPO was widely abused worldwide, 5 athletes from 5 countries, ran faster than 3:29.77
- In the next 10 years, between 2000 and 2009, when EPO tests were improving, before the ABP, 8 athletes from 4 countries ran faster than 3:29.77
- In the next 8 years, between 2000 and 2017, after the ABP was introduced, 13 athletes from 6 countries ran faster than 3:29.77
It's hard for me to see any connection between EPO and EPO testing milestones, and the number of higher quality performances. Looking at annual rates, the trend increases with time:
- Perhaps unfair, but in 1985-1986, the rate was 2 athletes per year. These were the only 4 performances for the whole 1980s.
- In the early years of EPO being introduced into endurance sports, the rate of fast performances dropped 0.
- In the mid-1990s to 2009, when EPO was undetectable, or easy to beat, the rate was approx. 1 athlete (slightly less) per year
- After the ABP, which should have been a deterrent, the rate spiked to more than 1.5 athletes per year
Let's Get To The Bottom Of This (once and for all) wrote:
I think rekrunner does? So, how do we reach some conclusions here?
...