jemima sumgong went from being a 2.29 marathon runner ,to 2.20.are these improvements normal for an EPO user?

Renato, no dopers deserve any credit. You don't deserve any credit either. It's like you're humblebragging. Drugs help you train harder. /END

Renato,

A big issue many rightfully have trouble letting go of is the fact she had a big improvement and there is no way to know when she began using EPO. No one is doubting that she began training harder. However, we do know that EPO aids in an athlete's ability to train and ultimately compete at a higher level. The issue is the fact she has been using EPO for an unspecified period of time which aided in her ability to train harder than she previously had. Plenty of posters on these boards are very aware that EPO and other PEDs work to their maximum benefit if an athlete pushes themselves to their limit. An excellent example is Lance Armstrong, there is no doubt he trained harder than anyone else. The problem arises in the fact he was able to train harder because of the drugs he was using.

Bottom line is Jemima Sumgong is a very talented, hard working athlete who used EPO to reach an elite level she otherwise would not have obtained.

HandWringingLiberal wrote:

Metoo wrote:

That doesn't sound like a big difference, considering that it's over a marathon

Agree. I improved by 25 min. To sub 3, By losing weight and finding more time to train and recover.

Whatever happened to Aunt Jemima.

My first year of college xc, I improved my 5k PR by 1:30. And that's over a much shorter distance.

I did use the word TRAINING. She is training under a no nothing coach using EPO. You are the one that pointed out that these husbands are not good coaches for TRAINING. So what was it. Training harder under a no nothing husband coach because the placebo effect makes you recover faster is better than TRAINING under Renato Canova or some other great coach? Do you think these cheaters only recently had got access to two meals a day? The coach before the husband did not make sure they were eating? The up and coming ones don't matter , the winning cheaters do , so lets stick to that. That is bringing us back to drugs. In any sport amateurs using drugs is about imitation of professionals, not some other phenomena.

What many people really think, and quite reasonably so, is that many of these athletes absolutely max- out TRAINING, maybe several cycles. Pretty damn good training, with good coaches, and they couldn't be winners, so they cheated. And then, when many athletes were successful that way it becomes a culture. I am not calling you a liar, but it is more logical than what you are saying, which on the face of it sounds ridiculous.

I think you should quit what appears to be a very defensive stance. Just let your athletes never get caught( easy if they are clean) , or else whats the point or making all these claims and defenses?

The first few times you attributed remarkable performances by dopers to changes in training I gave you the benefit of the doubt. You're obviously more knowledgeable of the sport than most LRC posters, but the fact that you don't even consider that doping helps performance, when all these top performers are getting busted after unprecedented improvements, diminishes your credibility.

I hear she makes a damn good maple syrup

What costs more in Kenya, Two meals a day, or EPO?

It's no coincidence the #1 women in the olympics was abusing EPO, I would NOT be one bit shocked if 90% of the field was using EPO. I also wouldn't be shocked if 95% of all Ethiopians and Kenyans racing internationally abused EPO.

When you are bored sometime look this up, go take at the last few years worth of results for The Illinois Marathon in Champaign, it's a well known fact that a big group of super doped up kenyans sign up last minute steal all the prize money and then call it a day, it's happened for numerous years at this point. I think doping is a way bigger issue than people actually think.

You didn't take my point, or maybe I explained my thought in wrong way.

I don't defend Jemima, and I don't say she didn't take EPO. I say that it's not possible to have suspicions only looking at particular jumps in some moment of the career of an athletes in his performances, because practically there are a lot of reasons for this, also without doping.

You speak about "professional athletes". Do you think the Kenyans running in the road races in US are professional, in the way we intend this word ?

They are entered in some road race by local managers, normally connected with some European manager who uses a local Kenyan contact for recruiting athletes that sometimes never met in his life.

These athletes fly to US, stay in some house charged 20 USD per day, need to pay their food (no organizers of Road Races offer hospitality longer than the day before and after the competition), many times are in towns with problems to train, and don't have any physiotherapic assistance. Normally they don't have money, and frequently don't eat because don't have money enough.

Whem they go home, maybe have 1000 USD from their competitions, after paying all the expenses they have to face.

In this situation, an athlete running 31'15" in 10000m demonstrate to have big talent, and the first marathon in 2:29 is the product of talent only, practically without training.

If, and when, an athlete like this starts REAL training, she can obviously easy improve of 6-8 minutes in the marathon, without using any doping.

I don't discuss the specific case of Jemima, I discuss the wrong behavior to consider only the succession of the performances of an athlete for deciding, if able to improve in short time, that this happened because of doping.

I give you the example of Edna Kiplagat. She was a great talent when young (8'53" when 17y old for silver medal in 3000m in World Junior Championships in Sydney 1996). After this, had two years with little training for finishing the school (9'05" in 1998 and 9'22" in 1999).

She went to compete in US in 2001, with good but not exceptional results in road races : 32'14" in 2001, 32'28" in 2002, 32'12" in 2003. After this period, she had the first sun, and didn't compete for two years, coming back in her first marathon in... 2:50'20" !

In 2006 she ran 32'02', in 2007 32'28", and in 2009 32'18". All these times give the impression of a stagnation, seeming 32' her limit.

In 2010, she started training seriously, and immediately her performances totally changed : 31'18" in 10k, 47'57" in 15k, 2:25:38 winning Los Angeles (so, 25' of improvement : what can our posters think ?) and New York at the end of the year (2:28:20). In 2011 was 2nd in London (2:20:46) and won World Championships in Daegu, title she confirmed in 2013 in Moscow.

Now she's 38, and still is one of the best in the world.

So, I don't discuss if Jemima took EPO or not, and of sure I don't defend any doped athlete, but don't accept the logic that when an athlete improves dramatically is because of doping. In my experience, I had athletes as Nicholas Kemboi improving in 50 days from 28'19" to 26'30" when finally we could stay together for all the period and I could discover his real attitudes, changing his training (he was already with me before, but I never had the opportunity to see directly his true qualities), or as Philip Manyim, that in 6 months moved from being the pacer in 3000 steeple for Shaheen to being the winner in Berlin with 2:07.

You created a myth with EPO, overrating its effects, and putting it in any improvement. This is absolutely wrong, because the reality is very different.

Renato,

Unless you can physically prove EXACTLY how much and how well she trained before and at all times for her while career you cannot comment whether her increase in performance was purely down to changing methods.

Lots of athletes have ran better of lower mileage so please don't quote 50 miles is low. Is there a physical study you can show us to show the changes and her performance at this time?

In regards to EPO unless you have physical evidence to show us she didn't use it to improve by 9 minutes reasonable doubt suggests otherwise.

There's also no evidence to suggest she wasn't using EPO before, training badly and then still using EPO and then training better

You are really actually an idiot and clearly trying to defend EPO and it's affects. I would lay money you are involved in some form of drug abuse and probably give your athletes EPO claiming it doesn't work just breaks mental blocks.

I agree! Road pigs who give all the $ to the European manager/coach and travel the non testing road races all weekend. What a pathetic existence.

Don't defend aunt jemima because it does not matter at all how she trained or if she had talent. Renato, no one cares! She's a cheat and if she's smart she'll get a good lawyer and try to keep what she has already stolen. I hope they go back and strip her gold. I for one am glad we won't be watching her mug in London or any race of matter ever again. She can sit in her grass hut and admire her stolen trophies.

Renato Canova wrote:

The reality is very different. Looking, for example, at Jemima (I don't want to say she didn't use EPO : I want to explain something different that changed her career), we need to know that already in 2006, when she had a poor management, and a very little training, was able to run 10 km in 31'15" winning the 10 km on road in Atlanta, and showed good natural ability to recover after hard training, running in two following days two competitions of 10 km, the first on 13th May in Jersey City (2nd in 32'13"), the second the next day (14th May) in Cleveland, when she won with 32'19".

The 10km in Atlanta might have been in July i.e. later than Jersey City and Cleveland.

Knowing what we now know about Sumgong, most blood/doping experts would be suspicious of an athlete that races well over 10km on road on consecutive days. Basically, that is a red flag in itself. She was probably doping off and on over many years.

Please, Renato. She ran 2:28 in 2011, four years after her 2:29 pr. The key is that she has tested positive for EPO, her training partner tested positive for EPO, and about fifty other Kenyans have tested positive for drugs. This positive test is one of the first fruits of WMM finally testing in-country. They've been able to get away with tests only at the major races, among the marathoners, and even those were very limited for much of this period of dominance. The smaller marathons don't test. And the track runners could dope with impunity in country until recently. Ethiopia still lacks testing facilities. Plus, you make a big deal about athletes getting more than one meal a day, but Kenyans aren't typically limited to one meal a day. Average caloric intake is 2030 calories, more than Ethiopia's 1950.

One meal a day? Do you think we're stupid Renato? Are they trading their food stamps for drugs?

Renato Canova wrote:

So, I don't discuss if Jemima took EPO or not, and of sure I don't defend any doped athlete, but don't accept the logic that when an athlete improves dramatically is because of doping. In my experience, I had athletes as Nicholas Kemboi improving in 50 days from 28'19" to 26'30" when finally we could stay together for all the period and I could discover his real attitudes, changing his training (he was already with me before, but I never had the opportunity to see directly his true qualities), or as Philip Manyim, that in 6 months moved from being the pacer in 3000 steeple for Shaheen to being the winner in Berlin with 2:07.

You created a myth with EPO, overrating its effects, and putting it in any improvement. This is absolutely wrong, because the reality is very different.

I find this all quite fascinating. On the one hand, Coach Canova describes the compelling stories of undiscovered, undertrained raw talents: the young(ish) African phenomenons who just need proper nutrition and competent coaching to reach extraordinary levels. I don't deny these stories may be true.

On the other hand, you have the narrative of a cynical veteran athlete who has apparently reached his/her maximal potential and turns to pharmaceutical aids to reach the next level. And with 100's of thousands of dollars of prize winnings potentially at stake (and those sorts of resources at hand to get medical advantages), you don't have to look hard for motivation to cheat. You find this narrative across multiple sports and many nations.

It seems to go to the pathology of a cheater. Why would you cheat when you're experiencing that initial rise to elite status? The temptation becomes harder to resist once you've stalled -- once you realize that you HAVE all the advantages that you're going to get in terms of coaching, nutrition, support, etc. -- and you're not going to get any younger. What are you willing to pay to extend your time at the top?

Again you point everything on the case of Jemima.

I DON'T SPEAK ABOUT THIS SPECIFIC CASE, I SPEAK IN GENERAL.

At in general there are a lot of reasons for a quick improvement after several years of honest, but not big, career.

If you don't accept this, you are really mind limited, and obsessed by the idea of doping.

And, about the fact many runners eat only once per day, this is what really happens in some village on the mountains, from where normally the athletes come.

You continue to speak about something you don't know.

I think you are stupid because refuse to know the reality of many situations.

When I read I defend EPO, you are really not able to understand what I write.

I say that who takes EPO MUST BE BANNED AND MUST LOSE ALL THE RESULTS OF HIS CAREER.

But also I say the effects of EPO on the performances is OVERRATED, and this is the best TESTIMONIAL FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO IMPROVE WITHOUT ANY ETHIC LIMIT.

Life is not only white and black, there are many colors that you refuse to see.

Interesting story about Sumgomg and her development. My quick 2 points on this:

1) very few people know how HARD top end training even for those African B runners (2:07-2:10 Marathon only running at subpar City runs and Marathons) are. I have some contact with the camp of Volker Wagner in Germany (lets not talk about him that much, i respect his accomplishments in the past with Tegla, Rodgers Rop etc. but think that his reputation lately suffered a little bit and dont agree with him on everything) and his athletes are doing 250km a week for marathon preparation! I dont know a single white top athlete who could sustain their training regime over several weeks. And thats only the B or C level Africans collecting some very small money if at all

2) It makes no sense to give someone winning maybe 500$ from winning a small half marathon in europe in 61-62 minutes or 5000$ for a smaller Marathon in 2:09 EPO. There would be no return on this investment. Nevertheless we see nearly no non-african runners doing this kind of performance. This is simply how deep the talent in africa is and how low the performance level of non-africans is at the moment.

Yes is a very good day every time they test somebody positive!!!!

And after Rita Jeptoo another absolutely amazing great Marathon runner Jemina Sumgong but we need more, they got to test positive more and more

By the way just a week ago we watch an incredible Prague half Marathon WR

1h 4' 52" with 10k in 30'04" , ha ha ha ha ha laugh wants kill me ,blowing

away Paula Radcliffe 10k road old world record . How somebody can believe

this kind of performance?? This is the Death of athletics . Thats why I say we need more runners to be tested positive . Why an absolute indipendent agency

dont go there ring the doorbell of these athlets once a week in the two months

before their main event . than take their blood sample and urine and test it in the best more advanced lab. These guys when win the big Marathon they take something like 200.000 or 300.000 $ or even more with sponsor , record , etc. so they deserve to be tested everytime everywhere .

Maybe another way to put what I think Mr. Canova is saying would be that we really have no idea (until tests come back positive or people affiliated with the runner runners are busted) who is clean and who isn't. Even a runner making small incremental improvements which seem more plausible could be doping and it is possible for runner to make big jumps in performance without doping. It is hard to know how much of the improvement comes from the doping itself (which allows the athlete to train harder/ recover faster) and how much of the improvement comes from changes in training, periods of injury or freedom from injury.

My guess is that the benefits from doping are fairly marginal for elite athletes, but again when you are at that level marginal benefits are significant. Athletes who improve dramatically while doping are probably benefiting psychologically as well as physiologically with their training.