For All Of You Who Don't Think You Can Run 2:03 Clearn, Geoffrey Mutai Has a Message For You

trollism wrote:

I don't think these people see what they're doing as wrong. I think cheating in sport is seen as a means to an end in non traditional sporting nations.

Filthy as you get.

Oh, that's what you think, is it? And what source do you base that astute thinking on? You've spent a great deal of time in these "non traditional sporting countries" I take it? Studied the cultures there closely, I'm sure.

Filthy as you get indeed.

We all know it is impossible to tell and an interview like this means nothing. What bothers me is that the more a sport tests, the more they look guilty. Track tests, punishes and publicizes their cheaters more than any sport. So when PEDs are talked about in the media, everyone's first thought is Track.

At the same time, the NFL (who I believe has more PED users than any sport) is not doing much testing, punishing, and especially publicizing cheaters. They understand the damage it could do to their multi-billion dollar sport.

Couldn't help myself wrote:

Maybe Mutai should try running 2:03 first. On a course that isn't a point-to-point downhill with a gale at his back that is.

+

Boston = PED

well if it weren't true then this would be a message for a bunch of angry feet in the ass, now wouldn't it

To all of you saying the u.s. is dirtier than Kenya need to understand there is a big difference between sprinting and distance running. The U.S. does not have a particularly long list of top distance runners getting caught for anything.

800m Coach wrote:

We all know it is impossible to tell and an interview like this means nothing. What bothers me is that the more a sport tests, the more they look guilty. Track tests, punishes and publicizes their cheaters more than any sport. So when PEDs are talked about in the media, everyone's first thought is Track.

At the same time, the NFL (who I believe has more PED users than any sport) is not doing much testing, punishing, and especially publicizing cheaters. They understand the damage it could do to their multi-billion dollar sport.

Totally agree.

wejo wrote:

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2013/11/geoffrey-mutai-says-can-run-203-clean/

I sent this to my friend who is constantly saying 2:03 guys have to be doping and he wasn't convinced. I thought it was a very strong answer and liked how he talked about his family and values.

I'm nearly 50 and my marathon PR of 2:27 came over 20 years ago. I can't run 2:03 'Clearn' or, clean for that matter.

Maybe you made a decision based on prejudgement. (Actually it was enough to read the quote without watching the video). The video isn't about Geoffrey Mutai denying doping. He wasn't asked about his doping, and he didn't deny doping. He doesn't say he is clean, or not dirty. He says he welcomes the testers. It's unfortunate for all Kenyan athletes that others of his countrymen (and women) doped and got caught, because of the doubt it casts on the nation. But doping control is a good thing. Come into my house. Bring them on! Day or night, blood or urine. I will be there.

Nor does any nation.

bloomington runner wrote:

The U.S. does not have a particularly long list of top distance runners getting caught for anything.

wejo wrote:

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2013/11/geoffrey-mutai-says-can-run-203-clean/

I sent this to my friend who is constantly saying 2:03 guys have to be doping and he wasn't convinced. I thought it was a very strong answer and liked how he talked about his family and values.

Why can't Mutai be doping but unknowingly doing so? And at the same time falsely believe he is capable of running 2:03 clean because he doesn't know any better.

OK, fair enough. But I stand by the statement that a runner either is or isn't cheating. What they say in an interview does not change anything. But watching the video does expose the viewer's vulnerabilites. We want to believe people. We all like to think we are good judges of character. Like, oh that guy said something which is in line with the way I think on this subject. He couldn't possible be being disingenuous or saying what he thinks I want to hear. But really, can we really draw any worthwhile conclusions from the statements of some guy we've never even been around? He could be a Lance Armstrong style sociopath, or he could be somebody that is so convinced that what he is doing is acceptable, he is able to lie without even a hint of falseness.

knower of holes wrote:

typical letsrun wrote:

whats an onus?

A perfectly round anus.

Well done.

So you are trying to justify why you didn't watch the video? OK. Clearly what an athlete says during an interview cannot be accepted at 100% face value. Both the clean and the dirty athlete will say they are clean.Since you mentioned Lance, he had former cyclists, current cyclists, reporters, former employees, former teammates, and French labs, all telling the same story. But Lance become so powerful that he managed to discredit these stories, and destroy careers.That's a major difference. I don't see the same pattern with any Kenyans (or anyone connected to them) in the marathons.Furthermore, while many vouch for EPO in cycling grand tours, and EPO studies have been done on amateur runners in 3K, 5K and 10K distances, EPO remains largely unproven at the marathon distance (not to mention the special case of East Africans -- if there is one). It's not proven that any drug will take any athlete to a 2:03 marathon performance.

Gamera wrote:

OK, fair enough. But I stand by the statement that a runner either is or isn't cheating. What they say in an interview does not change anything. But watching the video does expose the viewer's vulnerabilites. We want to believe people. We all like to think we are good judges of character. Like, oh that guy said something which is in line with the way I think on this subject. He couldn't possible be being disingenuous or saying what he thinks I want to hear. But really, can we really draw any worthwhile conclusions from the statements of some guy we've never even been around? He could be a Lance Armstrong style sociopath, or he could be somebody that is so convinced that what he is doing is acceptable, he is able to lie without even a hint of falseness.

knower of holes wrote:

typical letsrun wrote:

whats an onus?

A perfectly round anus.

LOL!! Awesome!

wejo wrote:

I clearly don't think he settles it but I'd love to have a body reading expert compare his response to those of Lance or Marion Jones.

Really? Why? It's a totally made-up pseudo-science.

Logic wrote:

Why can't Mutai be doping but unknowingly doing so? And at the same time falsely believe he is capable of running 2:03 clean because he doesn't know any better.

Especially considering his manager is a Dutchman, Gerard van de Veen, and both are part of the Volare Sports management group, who have had athletes caught doping, and who "provide medical assistance to our athletes by our team of specialists".

Oh boy, am I that naive? and if so, pretty sad since I thought Mutai gave me an impression he was sincere and honest in his pre-race interview? Maybe that's why I like to cheer for the underdogs?

I'm really curious as to what you expected to get for an answer. Without commenting in any way about cleanliness or dirtiness, did you think his answer would be along any lines other than the ones you got? Essentially, I think anyone could have predicted the his answer, a clean athlete will say he's clean and so will a dirty one, so I really wonder why anyone would ask.

read my thoughts wrote:

wejo wrote:

I clearly don't think he settles it but I'd love to have a body reading expert compare his response to those of Lance or Marion Jones.

Really? Why? It's a totally made-up pseudo-science.

Not really. When you watched Lance, you could tell he was lying couldn't you?