Face the fax wrote:
PR had world record form.
Yeah, so did Jarmila Kratochvílová, Marita Koch, LA, FloJo. All dopers the same as radcliffe.
Face the fax wrote:
PR had world record form.
Yeah, so did Jarmila Kratochvílová, Marita Koch, LA, FloJo. All dopers the same as radcliffe.
Flo Jo was clean, as was Paula.
The difference with Paula and the women's marathon, compared to the men:
- Paula got a very helpful wind for her 2003 London performance. Some statisticians (ARRS) have calculated a bigger advantage for the women in London 2003, than the men in 2011 Boston.
- The women's marathon lacks the depth of the men, and the rivalry and competition. No one comes close to 2:15, because they don't need to, to win. Women's marathons are more tactictal, and time trials are quite rare.
- Paula's "head bobbing" and uneven "arm flailing" were more likely compensating for other irregularities, providing improved running economy, rather than costing her energy, much like a counter weight placed on a tire's rim. We know Paula's running economy improved in the period of 1992 to 2003, because much of her data was published, and running economy was identified as a key improvement over that period.
Mr. Dick Straight wrote:
We don't know enough about running yet to write off her form. Seriously.
We do know of things like there is a tendon at the back of the head that apparently goes down the neck that controls head motion for the purpose of running. It is unique to humans. What is also unique is our ability to sweat for cooling and run/jog/walk for extreme distances. Our build and general locomotion style is built for running, walking, hiking, climbing for very long periods of time.
I appreciate your open mindedness.
The thing with Paula is that people can't stop staring at her head, which SEEMS to move a ton. Actually, it's just pivoting at the atlanto-occiptal joint and going up and down. It has the potential to help with balance and breathing.
Look at this clip of her on the final straightaway, no doubt totally exhausted. Her arms look great, her head isn't moving nearly as much as it seems when you look at her as a whole, and her legs, her LEGS! Look how beautifully her feet land under her hips. Almost no crossover whatsoever. Incredibly efficient. The perfect example of good form! Reminds me of Nijel Amos, another phenomenal runner with oft misunderstood form.
She does not come off like a donkey among race horses. Just look at her poise, how she carries herself when she isn't racing. She has better use of her self than most of us will ever comprehend.
That might help!
Wow, she was DEFINITELY doped to the gills. Jesus.
lkf wrote:
Wow, she was DEFINITELY doped to the gills. Jesus.
No she wasn't.
Doped beyond belief.
guy fawkes wrote:
Face the fax wrote:PR had world record form.
Yeah, so did Jarmila Kratochvílová, Marita Koch, LA, FloJo. All dopers the same as radcliffe.
Please provide your proof that PR doped. I won't hold my breathe.
Oh no you dint wrote:
guy fawkes wrote:Yeah, so did Jarmila Kratochvílová, Marita Koch, LA, FloJo. All dopers the same as radcliffe.
Please provide your proof that PR doped. I won't hold my breathe.
Actually, provide your proof that radcliffe is not filthy. Where are the famous frozen samples? It is quite simple: provide the samples. paula is a liar, thief, cheater and doper. She needs to be in prison.
she's a doper wrote:
Oh no you dint wrote:Please provide your proof that PR doped. I won't hold my breathe.
Actually, provide your proof that radcliffe is not filthy. Where are the famous frozen samples? It is quite simple: provide the samples. paula is a liar, thief, cheater and doper. She needs to be in prison.
Gotta love this.
Guilty until proven innocent...
What an idiot...
Unlike Armstrong, Marion Jones etc. etc, Paula Radcliffe was pro-actively anti-doping, she protested in Edmonton, she talked about it openly, she did have samples frozen and her performance data is also public.
None of the above proves she doesn't dope. But if she does (or did), that would make her a bigger psychopath than Armstrong or Marion Jones. And having met her, I don't find that credible.
For the record, I would not be surprised if Mo Farrah had doped, or Christina Ohurogou, or even Colin Jackson. But Paula? No.
No, she did not.
Little Paris Kitchen wrote:
Doped beyond belief.
I am pretty sure after her demonstrating in Edmonton, holding a banner that read "EPO cheats out!" at Yegorova during the 5k, (and her subsequent removal from the area) PR is clean.
I agree with most of the earlier posts that the event still lacks the depth at the elite level than other events, and that speedsters over 5k and 10k (the Ethiopians and Kenyans) have yet to take the event seriously.
I think PR was one of the first European women to do altitude training too.
rekrunner wrote:
The difference with Paula and the women's marathon, compared to the men:
- Paula got a very helpful wind for her 2003 London performance. Some statisticians (ARRS) have calculated a bigger advantage for the women in London 2003, than the men in 2011 Boston.
Not true. I ran London in 2003 too. Tell me what the wind direction was?
You don't know nor does ventolin or any other poster here claiming her 2.15 was wind aided.
Met her at NYCM, she is hot hot hot
I'm not going to cast aspersions on PR, because I have no idea one way or the other and honestly, other than seeing cheaters get caught, I don't have a personal reason to HOPE that PR was dirty and that she gets caught one day.
I will say this though:
1) Rojo's witness to her tough training has nothing to do with proving anything. Drugs DO help a person train hard day after day.
2) Her running form (whether you think it was good or bad) has nothing to do with whether she cheated or not..
3) Saying that the women's marathon record isn't challenged because the fields aren't deep and they don't need to run that fast is bogus and proves nothing.
4) She definitely deserves to be suspected. I'm not saying I suspect her, but in a sport where cheating has been rampant, to not suspect the world record holder is silly.
waxerizer wrote:
Unlike Armstrong, Marion Jones etc. etc, Paula Radcliffe was pro-actively anti-doping, she protested in Edmonton, she talked about it openly, she did have samples frozen and her performance data is also public.
None of the above proves she doesn't dope. But if she does (or did), that would make her a bigger psychopath than Armstrong or Marion Jones. And having met her, I don't find that credible.
For the record, I would not be surprised if Mo Farrah had doped, or Christina Ohurogou, or even Colin Jackson. But Paula? No.
Another Briton Linford Christie sported a tee-shirt with the words DRUG FREE
he also stated that drug cheats should be thrown in jail
And he later got busted
Flagpole wrote:
She definitely deserves to be suspected. I'm not saying I suspect her, but in a sport where cheating has been rampant, to not suspect the world record holder is silly.
Her lactate curve shows that she was super efficient at that pace. That mean less glycogen, less oxygen uptake, not more oxgyen uptake as the self appointed experts here will tell you.
Do you know what a lactate curve is Flagpole?
actually... wrote:
Flagpole wrote:She definitely deserves to be suspected. I'm not saying I suspect her, but in a sport where cheating has been rampant, to not suspect the world record holder is silly.
Her lactate curve shows that she was super efficient at that pace. That mean less glycogen, less oxygen uptake, not more oxgyen uptake as the self appointed experts here will tell you.
Do you know what a lactate curve is Flagpole?
Regardless of what stats you can pull out about her, just the fact that she's the world record holder in a sport that is filled with cheaters, she will be suspected. Might not be fair. Might not be right, and I have no dog in this fight, but she remains suspected nonetheless. I have no opinion one way or the other.
True. South Easterly breeze for much of the race. That's a helpful direction, looking at the course map.Were you anywhere near Paula? The men started 45 minutes later. According to the ARRS, the women got a big advantage, but the men not so much more than usual for the fast course. Maybe because it warmed up.According to the London marathon race report still available on their website:"temperatures at a lowly 10C at the start, and rising just 6 degrees during the race" and "Radcliffe also had the assistance of a south-easterly breeze for much of the race".Paula commented to the BBC moments after the race: "We got a good day. It was a bit windy but it seemed the wind was behind us more than it was in front of us."Paula, along with about 20 other elite women, performed way faster than the ARRS expected.
not true wrote:
rekrunner wrote:The difference with Paula and the women's marathon, compared to the men:
- Paula got a very helpful wind for her 2003 London performance. Some statisticians (ARRS) have calculated a bigger advantage for the women in London 2003, than the men in 2011 Boston.
Not true. I ran London in 2003 too. Tell me what the wind direction was?
You don't know nor does ventolin or any other poster here claiming her 2.15 was wind aided.