Katir confirms what Ramzi already told us - full throttle EPO improves 1500m times by 8 - 10 seconds

So, he doped to peak at Monaco? What's the point of that? Or is he just dumb? If you're going to dope, isn't the point to be in peak doped condition for the championship where you can make a name, and money, for yourself?

dopergang wrote:

Katir is clearly rocket fueled but you can’t say EPO is worth 8 seconds in the 1500 and a minute in the 5k based on his improvement alone. It’s reasonable to assume he would’ve run faster than 3:36 this year if he was still clean. Also, he cut a minute from his 5k time in three years, not one.

Not sure why you think this says anything about El G considering the top athletes are still doping today and no one is really threatening his marks yet. To suggest he was actually just a 3:34 guy is ridiculous unless you think the clean world record is well over 3:30.

He improved by less than a second from 2019 - 2020 (22-23 yo). Yes, he didn't have many races in 2020, but if you look at his 3:36 he was completely all out and likely was close to his max in 2020. He may have ran 3:35 in 2021 without EPO, but that still means a 7 second improvement in under 12 months. How much more if he had been full throttle doping since he was 16 as El Gl likely was?

El G was a science experiment whose career almost exactly matched the introduction of EPO and the eventual introduction of testing for it. No other elite 1500m runner in history had the opportunity to dop full throttle with EPO from mid-teens to mid-twenties as El G did other than the runners who did get near his times, Ngeny and Lagat. Whether or not all the top guys today are doping, it has to be relatively miniscule compared to El G with the ABP and much more effective tests for EPO and other stuff.

Ramzi was probably capable of sub 3:28 and he was clearly a 3:35 guy or worse without his EPO. Again, it appears his full throttle doping was rather brief to make that improvement, just like Katir's.

No athlete today can dope anywhere near like El G did. Yes he was a 3:34 guy or worse. Not sure on what basis you're making the claim that the clean world record would have to be over 3:30 for that to be the case, unless it's some kind of stupid Casual Observski logic.

Why do you guys give Pissant the time of day? His rebuttals will always be "well Jakob did this", or "Hocker did that". Ignore every single post.

They should hire you at WADA. You have it all figured out without analyzing one urine sample. You are good!!

Armstronglivs wrote:

spade detector wrote:

He’s proven himself to be a liar yet again.

Doping denial always finds a home on this site.

So you think that in order to address the doping problem it's OK to lie?

Dishonest cu.nts like you always find a home on this site.

on the contrary, I think this site gives too much space to doping overraters, and everybody knows this site is the home of doping conspiracies.

Not every doping can improve performances.

Not every doping is voluntary.

Not every whereabouts violation happens for hiding doping.

And, in any case, NEVER can doping give the advantages that people behind a keyboard (but NEVER on the ground with the athletes) assume (including the pseudo-scientists of antidoping).

Without knowing the effects of training, every hypothesis is fried water.

High hopes wrote:

So, he doped to peak at Monaco? What's the point of that? Or is he just dumb? If you're going to dope, isn't the point to be in peak doped condition for the championship where you can make a name, and money, for yourself?

He didn't intentionally peak at Monaco, and he may have been in 3:27 shape a week or two later when he jogged 7:27 at windy Gateshead. If he hadn't doped he would still be a minor Spanish athlete not good enough for the international circuit let alone major championships. He clearly got cold feet as Tokyo approached and he was being scrutinized, and his performances quickly fell away.

He'll likely regress back into anonymity, but he's certainly had his few minutes of fame and made some decent money.

Renato Canova wrote:

on the contrary, I think this site gives too much space to doping overraters, and everybody knows this site is the home of doping conspiracies.

Not every doping can improve performances.

Not every doping is voluntary.

Not every whereabouts violation happens for hiding doping.

And, in any case, NEVER can doping give the advantages that people behind a keyboard (but NEVER on the ground with the athletes) assume (including the pseudo-scientists of antidoping).

Without knowing the effects of training, every hypothesis is fried water.

But WADA says thousands of drugs give you more energy than your body can produce naturally.

Are they smarter than Bioenergetics experts? Endocrinologists? Geneticists?

Or are they the real doping problem, telling kids they will go faster if dey dopes?

Bilbo Baggins the Fourth wrote:

High hopes wrote:

So, he doped to peak at Monaco? What's the point of that? Or is he just dumb? If you're going to dope, isn't the point to be in peak doped condition for the championship where you can make a name, and money, for yourself?

He didn't intentionally peak at Monaco, and he may have been in 3:27 shape a week or two later when he jogged 7:27 at windy Gateshead. If he hadn't doped he would still be a minor Spanish athlete not good enough for the international circuit let alone major championships. He clearly got cold feet as Tokyo approached and he was being scrutinized, and his performances quickly fell away.

He'll likely regress back into anonymity, but he's certainly had his few minutes of fame and made some decent money.

He was a reasonably good athlete before his breakout races. He was likely going to the Olympics off the back of those performances anyway. There's every chance he's more of an Alan Webb than a doper - a guy who can occasionally run very well but chokes when it really matters.

I just can't think anyone dopes, with all the inherent risks, just to finish second or third in a couple of minor races (and the DL races are minor events in the grand scheme of sports) that nobody outside of T&F even cares about. If you're going to do it, you do it to win the big one and gain the real rewards that come from having an Olympic medal.

His performance improvement this year is suspect, just like Houlihan's in 2018 and look what happened there. But I'm hesitant to outright call the guy a doper

So does dope give ya more energy? An energy boost beyond human limits?

Or does that question make ya head hurt?

Renato Canova wrote:

on the contrary...

The site is full of the whinny armada of British/Aussi/NZ company...

They are in their lair in a site with their tongue.

But the 1500m will never go to the lazy people.

African will do everything to not let this happens.

Prove yourself high, then think low.

Emily Swatson wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Doping denial always finds a home on this site.

So you think that in order to address the doping problem it's OK to lie?

Dishonest cu.nts like you always find a home on this site.

All Coevett knows is lying.

Bilbo Baggins the Fourth wrote:

Ramzi's progression was very similar - improving 9 seconds in one breakout season at age 24. We know now what was obvious to everybody except the usual hardened doping apologists here - it was entirely due to EPO.

You are 100 % on the spot that "hardened doping apologists" do think that it is autistic to put every 0.01 s improvement in someone's performance to one factor, be it EPO or something else.

Somehow the scientists also fall into the category of "hardened doping apologists" when they want to have control groups in their EPO-experiments in order to minimize the other factors affecting performance. Their experiences tend to be one-shot attempt time trials or Vo2Max-tests with similar conditions, equipment etc.

Thus far ~5 % boosts in speed have been rare (not totally absent) in the literature, when the strictest scientific conditions have been met.

Renato Canova wrote:

on the contrary, I think this site gives too much space to doping overraters, and everybody knows this site is the home of doping conspiracies.

Not every doping can improve performances.

Not every doping is voluntary.

Not every whereabouts violation happens for hiding doping.

And, in any case, NEVER can doping give the advantages that people behind a keyboard (but NEVER on the ground with the athletes) assume (including the pseudo-scientists of antidoping).

Without knowing the effects of training, every hypothesis is fried water.

There you go wrong, mate. We continue to hear how HARD these athletes are training. And, with NO negative effects on the bodies, might I add. If anything all of that HARD, consistent day-in, day-out training + a couple of form tweaks is working magic in two particular camps. Funny how you make assumptions about people you've never seen, heard of or interacted with. Some of us are more embedded in the sport with actual athletes than you'd imagine.

BTW Canova, some scientists have written studies about the effectness of EPO on Kenyans which you've staunchly disputed and won't recognise. What's your personal Katir connection that you're so defensive of this one, too?

Do you understand that better trained runners use less energy to run faster times than less well trained runners?

It's called efficiency. And it can be measured by oxygen economy.

You probably did know, but you weren't able to rationalize it intellectually. This is the doping problem in a nutshell. Science is supplanted by mystical beliefs.

Armstronglivs wrote:

spade detector wrote:

He’s proven himself to be a liar yet again.

Doping denial always finds a home on this site.

What's the connection between the fact that Coevett is a proved and constant liar and doping genial?

Ding dong Katir is gone wrote:

BTW Canova.

Go get yourself some sleep. Your username is enough suggestive of your low level.

unlogicalstronglivs wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Doping denial always finds a home on this site.

What's the connection between the fact that Coevett is a proved and constant liar and doping genial?

What's the connection between Coevett and Armstronglivs?