There's no way Jakob Ingebrigtsen has achieved his results naturally

facts matter wrote:

facts and reason wrote:

If Henrik is cheating for fast times, then why did he regress and become slower than his 2 younger brothers?

If Asbel is cheating for fast times, then why did he regress and become slower than his countrymen?

1) Asbel did not regress anything like Henrik. He had a down year in 2017 (likely avoiding detection)then got busted and he's running no mo.

2) Mr. Henrik has not been busted for doping. Kind of an important point. (However jealous d-bags will continue to accuse of course).

facts not dumbery wrote:

facts matter wrote:

If Asbel is cheating for fast times, then why did he regress and become slower than his countrymen?

1) Asbel did not regress anything like Henrik. He had a down year in 2017 (likely avoiding detection)then got busted and he's running no mo.

2) Mr. Henrik has not been busted for doping. Kind of an important point. (However jealous d-bags will continue to accuse of course).

No sh!t Henrik hasn't been busted for doping. I was pointing out that the arguments that "facts and reason" was making to defend Henrik could also be applied to someone who has been busted of doping. Something that was apparently lost on you.

facts matter wrote:

Henrik hasn't been busted for doping. I was pointing out that the arguments that "facts and reason" was making to defend Henrik could also be applied to someone who has been busted of doping.

You have a trash argument.

Kiprop had a personal best of 3:26.69 in the year 2015. He was caught doping in 2017.

Kiprop won a gold medal in Beijing 2008.

We can see that over many years, Kiprop has had very good performances.

Henrik specifically used to be the fastest in his family but then later cannot keep up with his brothers in training anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

We know for sure that Lance Armstrong used drugs.

He won 7 Tour de Frances in a row.

Why would Henrik become slower on drugs?

facts and reason wrote:

facts matter wrote:

Henrik hasn't been busted for doping. I was pointing out that the arguments that "facts and reason" was making to defend Henrik could also be applied to someone who has been busted of doping.

You have a trash argument.

Kiprop had a personal best of 3:26.69 in the year 2015. He was caught doping in 2017.

Kiprop won a gold medal in Beijing 2008.

We can see that over many years, Kiprop has had very good performances.

Henrik specifically used to be the fastest in his family but then later cannot keep up with his brothers in training anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

Asbel specifically used to be the fastest in the world but then later cannot keep up with them anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

facts matter wrote:

Asbel specifically used to be the fastest in the world but then later cannot keep up with them anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

You can't answer a question with a question of your own.

Lance Armstrong and Kiprop had a period of 7-8 years of high-level performances. Kiprop claims his EPO result was tampered with.

It's not comparable to the 2-year peak that Henrik had in his career. Why would continuously taking drugs result in slower performance?

My question has not been answered here.

At the same time, Filip can be used as a direct comparison. He's only 2 years younger than Henrik.

If the runners in the family are on drugs, then why is only Henrik noticeably doing worse? It doesn't make sense if you go by numbers alone. You're going to have to show me more proof or plausible reasons why drugs are involved.

The answer to “How could Henrik be getting slower if he’s doping” is the same as the answer to “How could Asbel have gotten slower if he was doping”.

Pointed out to you a fourth time now.

"Why would continuously taking drugs result in slower performance?"

Such a stupid question.....because:

-Maybe taking drugs would reduce the rate at which you get slower

-Maybe the drug you were on was discovered, a test was developed...so now you are on a different, less effective drug.

-Maybe you started running at a high level at a young age and your decline will occur younger as a result

-Maybe the drug scenario is unchanged, but you had general training set-backs or other things in your life needing attention.

facts matter wrote:

The answer to “How could Henrik be getting slower if he’s doping” is the same as the answer to “How could Asbel have gotten slower if he was doping”.

That's not an answer. You are simply making a proposition that "drug-users decline in speed because they are drug-users". It's a circular argument.

That doesn't explain the "how". You didn't answer my question.

dsfsfdf wrote:

-Maybe taking drugs would reduce the rate at which you get slower

-Maybe the drug you were on was discovered, a test was developed...so now you are on a different, less effective drug.

-Maybe you started running at a high level at a young age and your decline will occur younger as a result

-Maybe the drug scenario is unchanged, but you had general training set-backs or other things in your life needing attention.

Thank you for trying to answer my question.

However, your responses don't adequately explain Henrik's situation.

If you are claiming that they they are a close family that trains together and cheats together, then Henrik's decline doesn't match Filip's career. There are only 2 years separating the 2 brothers.

So there are 2 brothers who have eaten together and slept under the same roof. They have trained together under the same coach. You can't just make up excuses based on timing, age, or drug detection.

Plus how do these factors explain how one person is at a peak for 2 years while others like Lance Armstrong are at the top for 7 years in a row? Aren't drugs supposed to prevent injury? It sounds like you're just making up excuses as you go along without looking at Henrik's specific career.

dsfsfdf wrote:

-Maybe taking drugs would reduce the rate at which you get slower

Did you even read my post?

Kiprop won a gold medal in Beijing 2008. Kiprop had a personal best of 3:26.69 in the year 2015.

How can drugs make you slow down less if Kiprop was able to get a personal best 7 years after winning a gold medal? You're just making excuses.

Several possible explainations. Henriks progress has been severely hampered by injuries the last seasons. All the brothers ”could” be doping, but he could also be the least talented one.

How do you explain Henrik's regression compared to his brothers if none of them are doping?

facts matter wrote:

facts and reason wrote:

You have a trash argument.

Kiprop had a personal best of 3:26.69 in the year 2015. He was caught doping in 2017.

Kiprop won a gold medal in Beijing 2008.

We can see that over many years, Kiprop has had very good performances.

Henrik specifically used to be the fastest in his family but then later cannot keep up with his brothers in training anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

Asbel specifically used to be the fastest in the world but then later cannot keep up with them anymore. How do drugs make an athlete slower?

You're wasting your keystrokes. "facts and reason" is consistently posting nonsense on these boards, whether it is thinking he is owning libs by posting a Youtube vid or just failing to understand basic logic. You'll go crazy trying to expect otherwise.

lrclurker wrote:

"facts and reason" is consistently posting nonsense on these boards

If you think being concerned about a teenager getting bone fractures is "nonsense", then that's your opinion.

If you think Nike and Apple workers in other countries making less than $1 per hour is "nonsense", then that's your opinion.

If you think the Ingebrigtsens are cheating without you having to provide proof, then that's your opinion.

All 3 show what kind of person you are. If you don't want to debate me, then the door is right over there. You can step outside anytime you want.

this is fun wrote:

How do you explain Henrik's regression compared to his brothers if none of them are doping?

If I remember correctly, Henrik said he felt that their dad used him as a guinea pig with different training methods. This could have lead to injuries later on.

Gjert Ingebrigtsen has no running experience, so he learned to be a coach as he went along. It's possible Henrik overtrained.

He's also the only one of the 3 running brothers to have children. It's possible that having to care for 2 kids of his own has affected his career.

All of these are possible reasons without any drugs at all involved in the equation.

It's been mentioned on this forum that drugs help you to recover faster, so you can train more. If drugs help you heal from injuries faster, then it's logical to think that Henrik is not cheating on drugs if he cannot heal, recover, and train as well as his 2 brothers.

facts and reason wrote:

lrclurker wrote:

"facts and reason" is consistently posting nonsense on these boards

If you think being concerned about a teenager getting bone fractures is "nonsense", then that's your opinion.

If you think Nike and Apple workers in other countries making less than $1 per hour is "nonsense", then that's your opinion.

If you think the Ingebrigtsens are cheating without you having to provide proof, then that's your opinion.

All 3 show what kind of person you are. If you don't want to debate me, then the door is right over there. You can step outside anytime you want.

Oh don't worry, I've seen enough of your "body of work" to know it's not worth engaging you further. Win for both of us.

facts and reason wrote:

this is fun wrote:

How do you explain Henrik's regression compared to his brothers if none of them are doping?

If I remember correctly, Henrik said he felt that their dad used him as a guinea pig with different training methods. This could have lead to injuries later on.

Gjert Ingebrigtsen has no running experience, so he learned to be a coach as he went along. It's possible Henrik overtrained.

He's also the only one of the 3 running brothers to have children. It's possible that having to care for 2 kids of his own has affected his career.

All of these are possible reasons without any drugs at all involved in the equation.

They are all also reasons that could explain his regression compared to the others if all of them are on drugs. Wow, funny how that works.