Really exceptional athletes in their prime running at once? Track performances seem to ebb and flow over the years. Im sure in a few years performances will revert to the mean as the current crop of runners age out and we'll all be complaining about how crappy everyone's running - just like we all were about the 800 the past few seasons.
I think this is mainly due to what I call the bannister-effect where great runners inspire others to chase their times, which creates media hype that attracts more talent.
Really exceptional athletes in their prime running at once? Track performances seem to ebb and flow over the years. Im sure in a few years performances will revert to the mean as the current crop of runners age out and we'll all be complaining about how crappy everyone's running - just like we all were about the 800 the past few seasons.
I think this is mainly due to what I call the bannister-effect where great runners inspire others to chase their times, which creates media hype that attracts more talent.
What was the "Bannister effect" in Paris (which all of a sudden seems to have disappeared for US athletes)?
You are asking a ridiculous question. Of course he can’t provide that evidence. Doping by its very nature is an underground, clandestine activity. Even if it were to be studied, those studying it would be a step or two behind current methodologies, as are the testers.
As for older records, remember the testing wasn’t as rigorous as it is now (even though they are still behind) so practices have had to adapt. Microdosing would not have initially provided the same boost as the open season out of competition use of the past. However, I suspect over time, chemists, coaches and athletes have learnt to refine that practice in order to improve results and still escape detection. Of course the rise of new shoes and new tracks has helped provide a nice smoke screen for this to go on, while explaining a glut of vastly improved performances in recent years. I think there were EIGHT meet records and one world record ( by a ridiculous margin) in the last Diamond league event in Poland…
Do you honestly believe that drug free athletes, even with super shoes and faster tracks, could improve on times set in a widely believed drug era? If so, I have a bridge to sell you.
The "widely believed power of drugs" is the bridge you are trying to sell, and I'm not buying something that hasn't or cannot be seen. Where others blindly jump feet first off of bridges, I hesitate and remain sceptical.
Ridiculous or not, the question is a necessary one, and not half as ridiculous as not having these answers, and still drawing comparative quantitative conclusions that say shoes/tracks aren't even a "fraction" of some quantitative value no one has, or can have. Or pretending that everyone is expected to draw the same conclusion without any of the necessary supporting data. Or suggesting that some continuous evolution of drugs must be the most likely, or only, possible or credible (i.e. believable) explanation for these incredible performances in Paris 2024, despite the extensive and robust and quantitative evidence for the supershoes and superspikes, and the demonstration of continuous development of new tracks based on advanced numerical modeling in recent years from Tokyo, to Eugene, to Paris.
You talk about a "widely believed" drug era -- that is fundamentally my point for more than a decade here -- that we are talking about widespread beliefs, rather than established facts. What I honestly think is that all these baseless conclusions about the power of drugs for elite distance running are things which are "widely believed" without any relevant and representative supporting data -- i.e. faith, myth, hypothesis, conspiracy, gossip, rumor, ....
What's most ridiculous is that this thread is expressly supposed to be a non-doping thread, explicitly requesting non-doping reasons from those few who believe the performances in Paris were clean.
I have to question the intellectual security of those few who ignore this request and insist on spreading their doping gospel in a thread that wants to explore alternative reasons.
What's most ridiculous is that this thread is expressly supposed to be a non-doping thread, explicitly requesting non-doping reasons from those few who believe the performances in Paris were clean.
I have to question the intellectual security of those few who ignore this request and insist on spreading their doping gospel in a thread that wants to explore alternative reasons.
They ran out of non-doping reasons very quickly. But you will keep trying.
What's most ridiculous is that this thread is expressly supposed to be a non-doping thread, explicitly requesting non-doping reasons from those few who believe the performances in Paris were clean.
I have to question the intellectual security of those few who ignore this request and insist on spreading their doping gospel in a thread that wants to explore alternative reasons.
They ran out of non-doping reasons very quickly. But you will keep trying.
What's most ridiculous is that this thread is expressly supposed to be a non-doping thread, explicitly requesting non-doping reasons from those few who believe the performances in Paris were clean.
I have to question the intellectual security of those few who ignore this request and insist on spreading their doping gospel in a thread that wants to explore alternative reasons.
They ran out of non-doping reasons very quickly. But you will keep trying.
The reasons can fit on one hand. How many posts do you need to say "superspikes" and "fast track"?
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.