That they all did it in one race in a sport where the former head of WADA acknowledges antidoping is "ineffective" is enough reason to be sceptical. Kenyans aren't the only athletes doping.
Like I said, zero evidence. That’s drawing a very long bow. I know one of them that ran a big PB and can assure you he is not doping.
That isnt evidence either - just your opinion. But what is evidence is that doping is throughout the sport and most dopers aren't being caught. We have that on the authority of antidoping.
Like I said, zero evidence. That’s drawing a very long bow. I know one of them that ran a big PB and can assure you he is not doping.
That isnt evidence either - just your opinion. But what is evidence is that doping is throughout the sport and most dopers aren't being caught. We have that on the authority of antidoping.
It's better evidence than you have. I have watched the guy train for 10 years. My sons trained in that squad for 8 years each. They are not doping, my boys would know about it if they were or anyone in the squad was.
You have a completely general statement that some people are doping and are not being caught. Well done Einstein, obviously that's the case, for any number of reasons.
That is still no evidence at all that these 200 finalists are doping. Zero.
Without trying to be too personal, I'd hate to be you, expecting everyone who runs a PB to be doping.
That isnt evidence either - just your opinion. But what is evidence is that doping is throughout the sport and most dopers aren't being caught. We have that on the authority of antidoping.
It's better evidence than you have. I have watched the guy train for 10 years. My sons trained in that squad for 8 years each. They are not doping, my boys would know about it if they were or anyone in the squad was.
You have a completely general statement that some people are doping and are not being caught. Well done Einstein, obviously that's the case, for any number of reasons.
That is still no evidence at all that these 200 finalists are doping. Zero.
Without trying to be too personal, I'd hate to be you, expecting everyone who runs a PB to be doping.
If you know for sure who is or isnt doping you are better informed than WADA. They should come to you for help.
The evidence that these athletes could be doping is, firstly, the uniform improvement they made in one race - they virtually all recorded best times within allowable wind limits - coupled with two other facts, that doping is throughout the sport at the top levels, and that very few are caught. The former head of WADA has only recently reiterated that, when he said doping control is "ineffective" and intentional dopers "are getting away with it". You only have your wishful thinking they aren't doping.
It's better evidence than you have. I have watched the guy train for 10 years. My sons trained in that squad for 8 years each. They are not doping, my boys would know about it if they were or anyone in the squad was.
You have a completely general statement that some people are doping and are not being caught. Well done Einstein, obviously that's the case, for any number of reasons.
That is still no evidence at all that these 200 finalists are doping. Zero.
Without trying to be too personal, I'd hate to be you, expecting everyone who runs a PB to be doping.
If you know for sure who is or isnt doping you are better informed than WADA. They should come to you for help.
The evidence that these athletes could be doping is, firstly, the uniform improvement they made in one race - they virtually all recorded best times within allowable wind limits - coupled with two other facts, that doping is throughout the sport at the top levels, and that very few are caught. The former head of WADA has only recently reiterated that, when he said doping control is "ineffective" and intentional dopers "are getting away with it". You only have your wishful thinking they aren't doping.
You clearly don't know what evidence is. The fact that a lot PB'ed in one race is not evidence. Your assertion is simply speculation, or at best conjecture. Where are the regular positive tests from other Aussie athletes to out of comp testing, like they have in Kenya?
It looks like your wishful thinking that they are doping without, as I said, any evidence at all, just speculation.
If you know for sure who is or isnt doping you are better informed than WADA. They should come to you for help.
The evidence that these athletes could be doping is, firstly, the uniform improvement they made in one race - they virtually all recorded best times within allowable wind limits - coupled with two other facts, that doping is throughout the sport at the top levels, and that very few are caught. The former head of WADA has only recently reiterated that, when he said doping control is "ineffective" and intentional dopers "are getting away with it". You only have your wishful thinking they aren't doping.
You clearly don't know what evidence is. The fact that a lot PB'ed in one race is not evidence. Your assertion is simply speculation, or at best conjecture. Where are the regular positive tests from other Aussie athletes to out of comp testing, like they have in Kenya?
It looks like your wishful thinking that they are doping without, as I said, any evidence at all, just speculation.
The "evidence" is of a performance by nearly an entire field that has Gault and others here speculating how it is possible, and it has occurred in the context of a doped sport.
If you rely on positive tests you will never see evidence of doping. Only 1% of tests are positive but many more athletes are doping - athlete surveys suggest it could be more than 1 in 2 at the higher levels. Most dopers aren't caught. We have that from the former head of WADA.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
You clearly don't know what evidence is. The fact that a lot PB'ed in one race is not evidence. Your assertion is simply speculation, or at best conjecture. Where are the regular positive tests from other Aussie athletes to out of comp testing, like they have in Kenya?
It looks like your wishful thinking that they are doping without, as I said, any evidence at all, just speculation.
The "evidence" is of a performance by nearly an entire field that has Gault and others here speculating how it is possible, and it has occurred in the context of a doped sport.
If you rely on positive tests you will never see evidence of doping. Only 1% of tests are positive but many more athletes are doping - athlete surveys suggest it could be more than 1 in 2 at the higher levels. Most dopers aren't caught. We have that from the former head of WADA.
The "evidence" is of a performance by nearly an entire field that has Gault and others here speculating how it is possible, and it has occurred in the context of a doped sport.
If you rely on positive tests you will never see evidence of doping. Only 1% of tests are positive but many more athletes are doping - athlete surveys suggest it could be more than 1 in 2 at the higher levels. Most dopers aren't caught. We have that from the former head of WADA.
See comment above...this is a waste of time
Repeating your comment doesn't improve it. Doping exists, even though you can't see it. A raft of stand-out performances in a doped sport is totally a red flag. Gault has called it, but he is questioning the accuracy of the times. Too good to be true.
Going from knowing doping exists in the sport to all athletes in that race must have been is a non-sequitur. All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs.
Going from knowing doping exists in the sport to all athletes in that race must have been is a non-sequitur. All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs.
In this context that is a false analogy. It isn't being argued that because some athletes are dopers that all will be. But there are performances that are more suspicious than others. In a dirty sport a bunch of exceptional performances, all in one race, cries out doping. Some have tried to suggest the time wasn't accurate or there was a special kind of wind assistance - because the alternative is likely to be drugs. Lightning might have struck for the winner - but for almost all the rest of the field as well? Too good to be true.
Aidan Murphy just split 44.0 and held off the bronze medallist from last year’s WC. That makes his 19.8 more believable (if it had to be). Reece Holder split 43.1 but that’s another matter.
I believe Murphy will go sub 20 again, maybe not another PB.
Gout, on the other hand will have a dozen or more sub 19.80, including making semis over 200 in the next Olympics, then the final in his home Olympics. There has been 154 performances sub 19.80 in history.
Your point, however, I can’t make sense of. care to elaborate/reformulate?
19.67 by a guy like Gout, considering all the other times, the event, etc is believable to me to be clean. Not saying it is, just that it is believable. Again, I could see him at 19.75-19.85 this season. Neither do such a time, nor does his progression, indicate use to me.
Gout isn't the only one who pr'd. Most of the runners in this race did. Are they all believable, too?
If this took place amongst a bunch of Jamaicans or Ugandans (or in a women's race in the US - not mentioning anyone in particular) would it all still be believable?
And all within allowable wind limits and in a sport where the former head of WADA has warned dopers aren't being caught. "Sceptical" reads better than "believable".
Armstrong you're all over the place. Read what I wrote closely, and you will see how your response is nonsensical.
I'll put it differently: Gout's 19.67 in this race was in my opinion 19.9-20.0 under legitimately legal conditions, and I can see him going 19.75-19.85 this season, again under legitimately legal conditions.
Neither his 19.67 clocking in this questionably-timed and measured race, nor his progression, indicates use to me.
As I have said, we now wait for more information to come from his future races, same as we do with all athletes--for instance, Kennedy has now verified his sub-10 100m, with his recent 10.01 (0.6) performance in Shanghai where he basically tied with Bromell in the top half of a quality field, only 0.04 behind the winner, just behind Bednarek, Omanyala, and Leotlela, and ahead of Simbine, Tebogo, and Coleman.
Quality field, "normal" conditions, believable times. Kennedy's early 9.96 (0.2) is a believable clocking based on this performance, imo. I offer no opinion on whether he is clean or not, I don't know enough about him.
So now we wait for Gout to race 200m under similar quality conditions, in a similar quality venue, and against a similar quality field, as did Kennedy in Shanghai. We get to see Kennedy again, against basically the same field, in Xiamen, in a few days, for more information.
Gout isn't the only one who pr'd. Most of the runners in this race did. Are they all believable, too?
If this took place amongst a bunch of Jamaicans or Ugandans (or in a women's race in the US - not mentioning anyone in particular) would it all still be believable?
And all within allowable wind limits and in a sport where the former head of WADA has warned dopers aren't being caught. "Sceptical" reads better than "believable".
Armstrong you're all over the place. Read what I wrote closely, and you will see how your response is nonsensical.
I'll put it differently: Gout's 19.67 in this race was in my opinion 19.9-20.0 under legitimately legal conditions, and I can see him going 19.75-19.85 this season, again under legitimately legal conditions.
Neither his 19.67 clocking in this questionably-timed and measured race, nor his progression, indicates use to me.
As I have said, we now wait for more information to come from his future races, same as we do with all athletes--for instance, Kennedy has now verified his sub-10 100m, with his recent 10.01 (0.6) performance in Shanghai where he basically tied with Bromell in the top half of a quality field, only 0.04 behind the winner, just behind Bednarek, Omanyala, and Leotlela, and ahead of Simbine, Tebogo, and Coleman.
Quality field, "normal" conditions, believable times. Kennedy's early 9.96 (0.2) is a believable clocking based on this performance, imo. I offer no opinion on whether he is clean or not, I don't know enough about him.
So now we wait for Gout to race 200m under similar quality conditions, in a similar quality venue, and against a similar quality field, as did Kennedy in Shanghai. We get to see Kennedy again, against basically the same field, in Xiamen, in a few days, for more information.
The race wasn't "questionably timed". It was well within the permissable limits. There's no suggestion at any official level of a timing defect. The only reason it is "questionable" is if he and all the other runners who ran pbs had some other form of assistance.
Because it was entirely obvious that the discussion was based on a defect AT the official level, and because you seem capable of apprehending that fact, I conclude that you are simply looking for any opportunity, no matter how cumbersome or ridiculous, to re-state your narrative. It’s lame. Although I agree with your basic premise that most if not all recent and current top athletes are using, I cannot abide by this method of expression thereof.
Because it was entirely obvious that the discussion was based on a defect AT the official level, and because you seem capable of apprehending that fact, I conclude that you are simply looking for any opportunity, no matter how cumbersome or ridiculous, to re-state your narrative. It’s lame. Although I agree with your basic premise that most if not all recent and current top athletes are using, I cannot abide by this method of expression thereof.
Speculation of an alleged defect at an official level is not supported by any facts. It is only speculation. Nothing official suggests let alone confirms it. What is also a fact is that top athletes are doping and getting away with it - in the words of Howman. That can better explain this race than either an imaginary timing issue or a capricious wind that followed the runners around the track.