Why do many here believe Jakob I is doping?

Because his brother, Henrik, was flagged as “likely doping” on the Fancy Bears leak. I think it’s a fair assumption that the whole trio is on the same “program”. A family that trains together, dopes together.

"Mads Drange, a former tester for Anti-Doping Norway, writes in his book Den Store Dopingbloeffen (The Great Doping Bluff) that the athletes must have been doping because they had exceptionally high variations in their blood profiles.

Although Drange would not say which athletes he was referring to, speculation has focused on winter sports, such as cross-country skiing.

"I don't want to create a witch hunt. It is just to show the system doesn't work because even here in Norway where there is a good testing regime it is easy to cheat," Drange told The Associated Press. "There is no testing in most countries in the world, or the testing is no good. People might talk about Jamaica or Kenya but you don't have to look any further than Europe."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47415803

https://www.rt.com/sport/418239-norwegian-olympic-skiing-asthma-diagnosed/

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kjaergaard-confesses-to-doping-while-at-chicky-world-and-us-postal/

jeff tallon wrote:

Because 19 year olds cannot run a 3.28 1500,not without a lot of chemical help.Yes,hes talented,and always has been, but nobody is that good.Im pretty sure he uses EPO plus some other drugs.Whatever the kenyans,moroccans and others are using,hes also on.Theres nothing grey area about his doping,and he is not genetically superior.If a bevy of hugely talented africans are on cocktails of drugs,then so is he.How else would a 19 year old from a low altitude be able to keep to them? its not through eating turtle soup,and dog stew.

Lol. Right. His one older brother tried multiple times and could not go lower than 3:30. The other brother couldn't go under 3:31. Jakob is on track to go 3:26. All on the same "program"

No, there is nothing genetic about this.

Fool.

There's nothing in his progression over 1500m indicating a sudden improvement, it's (although fast) steady improvement since he was 14. Last year he was capable of 3.29, why wouldn't he be capable of 3.28 now?

Because of common sense. Doping, especially blood doping and epo, are at epidemic levels in endurance sports. The benefits and incentives are too significant, the dangers of getting caught too low, and the levels of denial so pervasive that nothing short of an outright confession will get apologists to admit that an athlete is doping. I still have debates with people on other forums about whether Pantani and Indurain were doping when the evidence is overwhelming.

If it seems like doping, it is. Especially when someone is runnning mutant times faster than other known dopers. If something seems unusual (East German women swimmers suddenly dominating the sport, Jamaica with a population less than 3 million producing multiple world record sprinters at the same time, Bolt beating known dopers but mysterious losing his last race, the British Sky team, the mutant times of Flo Jo and Kersey) then it gets no benefit of the doubt.

It's true that many get lower with training, Jakobs father who has never done very much endurance training got higher levels than his sons. A skier and half his family had way higher than normal although only he trained.

I am not saying I am 100% sure he isn't doping, but if he is then I believe he is on something else

I have read the report. Will try to fin the link to the atlethes later. Many of them had variations that support the idea that they used epo, but I can see why training in the cold leads to asthma

superior genes, is that what you say? wrote:

reasonable middle of road wrote:

WTF?

WTF what?

You did not know that physiologists measure track talent by 200 metre time trial?

Hi I'm a graduate level exercise physiologist and you're wrong.

I'm always impressed by the mental gymnastics necessary to defend our favorite athletes from doping accusations.

-He's really talented and has great genetics!

-He's got great coaching!

-He's really focused and trains hard!

Etc. etc. Therefore he doesn't need to dope.

Hard-working, talented, well-coached athletes are all capable of using drugs. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if JI, the fastest 19 year old in history, is a doper. That said, I can't BELIEVE he is doping until something like evidence actually emerges.

El G,! Which side are you on?

FinnJ wrote:

I could understand if you believe he is taking something else, but not epo, which many people here believe. Why is it so hard not to see that people have different genes? His father has hem 17,5+ with Jakob slightly lower. It shows us that the family got a rare genetic makeup or else his father is also doping

Why do many here believe Jakob I is doping? Is it multiple choice? Here are some possibilities:

- Because ... Lance.

- A strong faith in the role of drugs as a potential significant factor with respect to elite performance.

- Ignorance of the role and degree of other causes of elite performance.

- "Fans" were duped once, or several times, so they over-react and dupe themselves differently, continuing to form opinions and draw conclusions without any real information.

- "Fans" hate the sport so much that they must turn every successful athlete, or coach, into a villain.

jeff tallon wrote:

Because 19 year olds cannot run a 3.28 1500,not without a lot of chemical help.

This begs the question whether athletes exist who cannot run 3:28 without chemical help, but can run a 3:28 with chemical help.

About 15 athletes in history have run sub-3:29.

i believe jakob's been on a drug regime since he was 16.Hes more talented than his brothers,but there is no way in hell a clean teenager could keep up to doped africans.

Norwegians have been doping since they were Vikings. A lot of their raids and wars back then were dirty as hell and they were lucky not to get banned.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Hemoglobin doesn't mean much. Sedentary I was high, around 16-17 and almost 50% HTC. With training, it got lower, and lower, and lower, and recently I measured the lowest values ever (~13 & 42%) despite being in the best shape/a lot faster.

Training increases blood volume, so relative HB count and HTC will drop significantly. The way to continue to get better then is to increase the counts again, either by altitude, or in professional sports, also doping (EPO).

Elite cyclists, with the massive amount of aerobic training, should be in the low 40% range due to the massive blood volume they have. But they are all around 47-49%, just before the cut-off of 50%. Guess how many of them do it.

Good post LRP.

One thing on elite cyclists - their baselines are not that high. One study by Mørkeberg et al has them at ~43% pre-competion/OOC dropping down to the low 40s in-competition. Lance's baseline was reportedly in the low 40s. That's why the 50% cut-off was implemented - with the exception of some outliers the UCI was pretty confident that a cyclists over 50 was doping.

RVK wrote:

Fnoob wrote:

What is "Hem 17.5+" ?

Haemoglobin of17.5 (top “normal” is ~15.8)

Note that normal HgB levels are 14.0-17.5 for men; so"top normal" isn't 15.5 as you state.

I think a lot of us are just generally skeptical of all elite endurance runners at this point. Just look at history.

jeff tallon wrote:

i believe jakob's been on a drug regime since he was 16.Hes more talented than his brothers,but there is no way in hell a clean teenager could keep up to doped africans.

Tell me how EPO delivers more oxygen than a healthy V02 max and circumvents thermoregulation and I'll give you $10,000.

HOOWIE wrote:

I think a lot of us are just generally skeptical of all elite endurance runners at this point. Just look at history.

With good reason too. But you won't get an intelligent debate from Exercise Physiologists because most of them are very poorly educated in basic science. This is a huge part of the problem.