Stop lying to yourselves about ATHING MU, she has WR potential

Armstronglivs wrote:

Aouita 84 wrote:

Way too much thinking going on and Way too much information being regurgitated.

There is no reason NOT TO BELIEVE that Mu will run and can run 1:55 in a fast race in decent conditions, let alone ideal conditions this season. Give her a couple of years to mature and there's no reason she can't run 1:53...Clean! She clearly has the speed (the toughest to develop), once she improves her endurance it's GAME OVER!

"Go Run One"

Sorry to state the obvious yet again, but if the world record is so achievable for Mu why has no one doped been able to run 1.53 in nearly forty years?

Because Mu was not around in the last 40 years.

Im guessing he’s gonna say actually...

-plenty of prodigies similar to her talent level

-the ones that peaked early (SAMPLE SIZE) never got better

-therefore this exactly applies to MU

Just terrible terrible logic.

jaboukomobile wrote:

Im guessing he’s gonna say actually...

-plenty of prodigies similar to her talent level

-the ones that peaked early (SAMPLE SIZE) never got better

-therefore this exactly applies to MU

Just terrible terrible logic.

It isn't logic - which you have no idea how to use. It is the fact that athletes who achieved more than her at a similar age - like Ryun - never ran any faster. As a poster indicated above, the average improvement by those athletes who recorded times like hers at a similar age was 0.25secs. To project an improvement of 4.5secs is mere fantasy, until it happens.

think first wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Sorry to state the obvious yet again, but if the world record is so achievable for Mu why has no one doped been able to run 1.53 in nearly forty years?

Because Mu was not around in the last 40 years.

The only inference I would draw from that is that she must be doping, because clean hasn't been able to get near a doped record.

Armstronglivs wrote:

jaboukomobile wrote:

Im guessing he’s gonna say actually...

-plenty of prodigies similar to her talent level

-the ones that peaked early (SAMPLE SIZE) never got better

-therefore this exactly applies to MU

Just terrible terrible logic.

It isn't logic - which you have no idea how to use. It is the fact that athletes who achieved more than her at a similar age - like Ryun - never ran any faster. As a poster indicated above, the average improvement by those athletes who recorded times like hers at a similar age was 0.25secs. To project an improvement of 4.5secs is mere fantasy, until it happens.

There is nothing inevitable about dramatic improvements, in any athlete.

There are many reasons for big improvements, especially for young athletes. Do you think Mu is doping now???

Armstronglivs wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

It isn't logic - which you have no idea how to use. It is the fact that athletes who achieved more than her at a similar age - like Ryun - never ran any faster. As a poster indicated above, the average improvement by those athletes who recorded times like hers at a similar age was 0.25secs. To project an improvement of 4.5secs is mere fantasy, until it happens.

There is nothing inevitable about dramatic improvements, in any athlete.

It is the only relevant sample, isn't it? Certainly 18 yo girls who ran 2:07 and improved to 1:59 by 24 are not the closest reference group for someone like Mu who ran world class indoor 600m at 16 and 1:57 at not even 19.

Except for data from Mu herself it is the best data we have. The problem with taking all sub 1:56 runners in history and looking at their progression since 18/19 is that its is more work, so I am not gonna do it and of the 27 female sub 1:56 runners in history 2/3 are highly suspicious 1970s-early 1990s Eastern bloc runners. Of the remaining 9 Semenya and Niyonsaba are now banned from the distance for the known reason. The rest are Jelimo, Quirot, Mutola, Ceplak, Van Langen, Liu and Wilson. I don't know anything about Van Langen but of the others Wilson is the least suspicious.

The main info we get from this list is how incredibly powerful industrial scale Eastern bloc doping was for 800m women, making basically all such marks and probably also progressions problematic.

think first wrote:

There are many reasons for big improvements, especially for young athletes.

Do you think Mu is doping now???

Armstronglivs wrote:

There is nothing inevitable about dramatic improvements, in any athlete.

I wouldn't make that claim. However if she broke the doped world record I would say, yes.

You are arguing here that she will run substantially faster than Caster Semenya, who dominated the event for years without breaking the record. Semenya is a biological male who has the equivalent of massively doped levels of testosterone in a biological female. Semenya is also a 49x sec 400 runner - out of blocks - and a 4min 1500 runner.

As has been shown by numerous other athletes at Mu's level, big improvements are not on the cards - most only improved by 0.25secs. She may improve more but I would bet the house the car and the dog against 4.5secs. And so should you - if you think she is clean.

The conclusion I would draw is that at the very top, talent cannot match doping and especially E Bloc levels.

Doping has a very big effect on female performance. One of the top Russian 800 runners, who turned whistleblower, had a best doped performance of 1.56x. Since then, the best she can do clean is 2.01x. A differential of 5 secs. A huge margin.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I wouldn't make that claim. However if she broke the doped world record I would say, yes.

You are arguing here that she will run substantially faster than Caster Semenya, who dominated the event for years without breaking the record. Semenya is a biological male who has the equivalent of massively doped levels of testosterone in a biological female. Semenya is also a 49x sec 400 runner - out of blocks - and a 4min 1500 runner.

As has been shown by numerous other athletes at Mu's level, big improvements are not on the cards - most only improved by 0.25secs. She may improve more but I would bet the house the car and the dog against 4.5secs. And so should you - if you think she is clean.

I absolutely believe that Semenya has been sandbagging in the 800m. Taking her sub 50 and sub 4 into consideration, she should have been able to run at least 1:52. Probably was afraid of the sh*tstorm and repercussions it would have caused.

As for Mu (and probably every other athlete) your stance is clear, either it's a mediocre performance, or it's doped.

Sad for you to be a non believer. I enjoy sports lots more believing in great talent.

There is nothing mediocre about 1.57.

There is also great talent out there. But much of it is doping. That is professional sport.

I'd grant that Mu is the greatestate 800m talent in 50 or 100 years. And clean. But the point is that if the stats of 800m women since 1976 show anything they show that even sub 1:56 is exceedingly rare without doping. And that prodigies with strong sub 20 marks usually don't improve so much further. Sure, some eastern runners maybe trained much harder at 15 or so. But I don't think Mu ran a world class 600m time at 16 without semiprofessional training either.

Here is the list of 800m world recordshttps://www.worldathletics.org/records/all-time-toplists/middlelong/800-metres/outdoor/women/senior It's definitely one of the most corrupt lists of tracks and fields in history. Where are all these Communists and East Europeans runners today? I'm particularly proud that the Moroccan Hasna Benhassi made it to the top 40 of this list with PB: 1:56.43 and 4 medals in World Championship and Olympic Games, three of them Silver.

Jo72 wrote:

But the point is that if the stats of 800m women since 1976 show anything they show that even sub 1:56 is exceedingly rare without doping. .

Passant wrote:

Here is the list of 800m world records

https://www.worldathletics.org/records/all-time-toplists/middlelong/800-metres/outdoor/women/senior

It's definitely one of the most corrupt lists of tracks and fields in history.

Where are all these Communists and East Europeans runners today?

I'm particularly proud that the Moroccan Hasna Benhassi made it to the top 40 of this list with PB: 1:56.43 and 4 medals in World Championship and Olympic Games, three of them Silver.

Jo72 wrote:

But the point is that if the stats of 800m women since 1976 show anything they show that even sub 1:56 is exceedingly rare without doping. .

A Moroccan runner clean? You're joking - right?

think first wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Sorry to state the obvious yet again, but if the world record is so achievable for Mu why has no one doped been able to run 1.53 in nearly forty years?

Because Mu was not around in the last 40 years.

Thank you!

Is that OBVIOUS enough for you Armstrongisdead?

Aouita 84 wrote:

think first wrote:

Because Mu was not around in the last 40 years.

Thank you!

Is that OBVIOUS enough for you Armstrongisdead?

Your ignorance of the issues is excused because you have obviously come late to the thread and followed none of the discussion.

You know this discussion is public, right? Plenty simple to read the entire thing from page 1.. pretty obvious to all you are wrong in this matter & keep digging yourself deeper. Let it go, pal.

Jo72 wrote:

The rest are Jelimo, Quirot, Mutola, Ceplak, Van Langen, Liu and Wilson. I don't know anything about Van Langen but of the others Wilson is the least suspicious.

The main info we get from this list is how incredibly powerful industrial scale Eastern bloc doping was for 800m women, making basically all such marks and probably also progressions problematic.

The whispers on the track back then were that Jelimo & Mutola also had some form of DSD.

Quirot competed in an era under Communist Cuba where state doping was most likely in place.

Ceplak failed a dope test and was banned.

Wilson failed a test the same year she ran that PB. I don't wanna hear all that contaminated food BS, as far as I am concerned she was extremely lucky. Just so happened to run 1:55 the same year she failed a test for anabolic steroids? Hmmmm.

Van Langen was a one-hit wonder. But probably the most likely to be clean, and the one who just so happened to have hit her brief peak at the right time. She had 2x 1:56's that same season, over a second slower, but other than that, she broke 1:58 once in 1990 and then struggle to break 1:59.

Mike bin Salman DDS wrote:

You know this discussion is public, right? Plenty simple to read the entire thing from page 1.. pretty obvious to all you are wrong in this matter & keep digging yourself deeper. Let it go, pal.

It is hard to be "wrong" about something that hasn't happened - and likely never will. Another public admission of failing to understand the issues.