Dominguez detained in doping investigation

Do you have a satellite TV too?

J.O. wrote:

I know more about pro cycling than you will ever know.

ventolin^3 wrote:

psychopath alert wrote:HAHAHAHA!!!

This is getting more and more hilarious for every post! Ventolin thinks he knows more about running than everybody else because he thinks he has watched more TV than everybody else!

eh ??

what "think" moron - i saw them

i'd reckon there are only 2 or 3 other guys here who have seen all those & i may be overestimating

you are clearly an imbecile that believes observing leads to no gain of knowledge, especially for one whose dayjob involves mostly observation

Sorry, but this time you went too far and showed that you´re nothing but a brilliant troller. I hope nobody is stupid enough to respond to your posts from now on.

idiot

how many of those races you seen ?

HAHAHAHA!!!

I´m sorry, but I don´t care if some anonymous crackpot calls me things.

"Hey, I´ve watched every episode of Emmerdale Farm. I know everything there is to know about farming. F*** off, imbecile farmers!"

ventolin^3 wrote:

psychopath alert wrote:HAHAHAHA!!!

This is getting more and more hilarious for every post! Ventolin thinks he knows more about running than everybody else because he thinks he has watched more TV than everybody else!

eh ??

what "think" moron - i saw them

i'd reckon there are only 2 or 3 other guys here who have seen all those & i may be overestimating

you are clearly an imbecile that believes observing leads to no gain of knowledge, especially for one whose dayjob involves mostly observation

Sorry, but this time you went too far and showed that you´re nothing but a brilliant troller. I hope nobody is stupid enough to respond to your posts from now on.

idiot

how many of those races you seen ?

Ventolin, apart my evaluation about your education (of course, not very positive) and the fact you show a lot of presumptuousness that people don't agree, I recognize you have a lot of knowledge, and you are a careful observer of many years of athletics. This doesn't mean other people didn't have the same opportunity to see a lot of events. If you, for example, look at coaches of my age (I was in ALL the Olympic Games from 1972, always in official roles which one time, 1992, a role as commentator of TV for the HD broadcasting in Barcelona, in ALL the editions of WCh from 1983, in ALL the editions og WCCCh from 1969 with the only exception of 1999, in the 80% of the main meetings of Golden Leaugue from its fundation, in the most part of top Marathon because some times I was also the coach of winners, as for example Berlin 2005 wioth Manyim, Boston 2006 with Rita Jeptoo and 2009 with Salina Kosgei, etc...), or at top managers that saw more meetings than myself, you can discover their knowledge about THE HISTORY OF ATHLETICS can be not inferior to your specific knowledge. With a big difference : ALL PEOPLE INSIDE THIS JOB KNOW NOT ONLY WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, BUT OFTEN ALSO WHY SOMETHING HAPPENED. We know the background of the performances, that many times have nothing to do with the official version from newspaper.

When you say that, according to their interview, some athlete was in top shape, I wnat to explain you that the Press conference doesn't mean anything, because it's a must, for the athletes, to say that are in top shape and ready to win. I had personally experiences with some of my athletes, coming from some injury and at 70% of their shape, that I honestly wanted to call out from some marathon where already they had the contract many months before. I personally (or the manager of the athletes) spoke with the organiser, explaining the athletes had problems and was not able to defend the title won the previous year, and the organiser himself asked to go in any case, BECAUSE FOR A MARATHON IS TOO MUCH IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE DEFENDING CHAMPION (and they pay a very good appearance for what the athletes was able to do in the past), not looking for the final result. And, in the Press Conference before the race, always the athlete had to speak about his top shape....

The fact is that you live a VIRTUAL ATHLETIC, full of "may be". May be that, if you run 26'44" on the road, you can run 26'30" on track (and you use a lot of formula that, frankly, nobody understands : the most part of people obviously is not at your level of mathematic knowledge). May be that, if aMarathon was on track, the WR could be under 2:03:00. May be that, if the race was fast from the beginning, 12'50" could become 12'43"27. May be that, if Quincy Watts finished his semifinal running fast, this could be the real WR. May be that an athlete improving very quickly can be under doping. May be that, if doesn't improve, is because was not under doping. May be that, if your race was at 600m of altitude instead 300m, the advantage could be 0.033.

But the real life, and the real athletics, is not connected with "May be". There are facts, and analysis of the facts. Nothing can change what happened, but the analysis of a fact can change strategies for the future.

Too many variables are not part of your discussions. For example, you don't know anything about the real reasons because an athlete (african or european or american) disappears from top activity quickly : an athlete is, in any case, a person with the normal problems of everybody, can have a family, can be influenced by external situations not depending on their technical activity.

You speak, in this case, about something you don't know. Life is not mathematic, but something different, and athletics is a very complicated part of life. Simply, this is not your World, and you need to build an imaginary World starting from athletics because in athletics the final results is made by NUMBERS, but the road for reaching those results is made of HUMAN AND PSYCHOLOGICAL FEELINGS that never you can measure using some algorhytm.

Are you kidding? -- the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming.

I don't have that visibility. Since taking EPO is a secret, I don't know who is taking EPO, and not improving. I don't know who is improving, and not taking EPO. For those who got caught and improved, how can we rule out a placebo effect? Can athletes already trained at their personal maximum benefit at all? Do certain genetically gifted athletes gain at all? Can changing your training, or your coach, bring the same improvements as doping? There are a lot of "anecdotes" about athletes changing coaches, and breaking through to significant improvements. But anecdotes can not answer any of these questions, because too many variables are uncontrolled. Your selection criteria of anecdotes is a biased sample, not representative of the general population.

So in fact, you've agreed all along with Renato that blood doping for top athletes can not work, because they are already at peak performance. You just wanted to call him an idiot anyway.

J.O. wrote:

If your body needed more RBC's it would produce more wouldn't it?

You don't need more RBC's to run or cycle faster, you need to train and race better.

The problem with Pro cycling is that it is just too hard, riders get huge swings in morale and they have always used drugs to prop up their egos.

So what you're saying is that riders used to ramp their hematocrit up to dangerous levels simply for psychological reasons. Not because having more red blood cells improves performance in any way.

Are you saying that altitude training is pointless and being born and living at altitude isn't a factor when it comes to performance?

psychopath alert wrote:

HAHAHAHA!!!

This is getting more and more hilarious for every post! Ventolin thinks he knows more about running than everybody else because he thinks he has watched more TV than everybody else!

Sorry, but this time you went too far and showed that you´re nothing but a brilliant troller. I hope nobody is stupid enough to respond to your posts from now on.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

you the troll. 2/10=1/5

J.O. wrote:

If your body needed more RBC's it would produce more wouldn't it?

If this were true it would seem to make anemia a pretty difficult condition to come down with.

rekrunner wrote:

Is "psychosomatic" the right word?

Otherwise, I think I would agree in part. I think there is still some physical benefit, but also a mental aspect.

J.O. wrote:

I think that blood doping or EPO are red herrings. Psychosomatic effects only.

I don't agree with Renato on this issue, sometimes he talks as much bullshit as less knowledgeable people do.

Any runner in good health can be the best if he does the right training.

Yes.

–adjective

1. of or pertaining to a physical disorder that is caused by or notably influenced by emotional factors.

2. pertaining to or involving both the mind and the body.

It's not placebo effect, that is different.

trollism wrote:

J.O. wrote:

If your body needed more RBC's it would produce more wouldn't it?

You don't need more RBC's to run or cycle faster, you need to train and race better.

The problem with Pro cycling is that it is just too hard, riders get huge swings in morale and they have always used drugs to prop up their egos.

So what you're saying is that riders used to ramp their hematocrit up to dangerous levels simply for psychological reasons. Not because having more red blood cells improves performance in any way.

Are you saying that altitude training is pointless and being born and living at altitude isn't a factor when it comes to performance?

*************************************************

You have to understand the psychology to understand what I am saying, obviously you don't because you are obsessed with drugs and can't see outside your own little world.

As for altitude training, it doesn't increase RBC mass for those with optimal levels.

Lebid is not a 29 guy in 10,000 track. He is a 13.10/5000 track guy, and sub. 7.40, which is equal to 27.20 10,000 track.

Lebid's strength is his strength. And he focuses on winter running (cross) where he can maximize his earning potential - normal, considering a top running career normally does not last more than 10 years. Lebid's longevity is a testament to his strength and abstinence from the temptation of using illicit products, which might help performances in the short term.

Ghost in Saudi.

www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today.

anecdotal evidence of idiot handling skills

nothing else

you are a fool if you believe guys stuck at 3'35 year on year & then improve to 3'30/3'31 with an epo +ve, that this is significantly due to placebo effect

of course

do you have no clue about haematology at all ???

pump the epo in & the bone marrow which is only working at part of it's capacity even in a 3'35 guy will pump out RBC

go look up rubra vera & see what happens to RBC production from previous normal function marrow

you are asking too many questions consistent with a clueless newbie

you again have some poor grasp of statistical significance idiotically believing all anecdotal evidence is of inconsequential nature : some may be mildly suggestive, some moderately & some greatly suggestive of conclusion - you seem to confuse all of it being 1st category where all the huge weight of anecdotal evidence suggests last category

learn some statistical significance

it seems i am dealing with an idiot

can you not distinguish between law of diminishing return & NO return at all ??

i said a 3'35 guy can look for 4s improvement, a 3'30 one more like 2 - 3s

that is diminishing return NOT NO RETURN

Well, it looks like Bezabeh may get off on technicality. He has never doped, and he only intended to inject blood which he did not believe was doping, even though it is. The judges may take his lack of knowledge and simple nature into account.

People will cynically say that he knew what he was doing, but he (Bezabeh) is really an innocent victim in this whole saga. The whole time he has been in Spain, he has been following 'orders' from coaches and agents, and he does not have much choice, as he is economically dependent on these track officials.

It would be interesting to get Canova's opinion about Bezabeh.

Ghost in Saudi,

www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today.

How do you know any of this ghost? Or are you just making up stuff like usual?

When is Eddy going to give back his ill-gotten gains from when he doped?

ventolin^3 wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

it seems i am dealing with an idiot

Yes, rekrunner. How can you dare to question Ventolin^3? Don't you know he has a magical calculator AND he has watched a lot of track meets on TV?

ghost wrote:

Well, it looks like Bezabeh may get off on technicality. He has never doped, and he only intended to inject blood which he did not believe was doping, even though it is. The judges may take his lack of knowledge and simple nature into account.

People will cynically say that he knew what he was doing, but he (Bezabeh) is really an innocent victim in this whole saga. The whole time he has been in Spain, he has been following 'orders' from coaches and agents, and he does not have much choice, as he is economically dependent on these track officials.

It would be interesting to get Canova's opinion about Bezabeh.

Ghost in Saudi,

http://www.kfupm.edu.sa

, apply today.

He only intended to do it?

You mean that he's lawyered up, and they've realised that they can't prove that he's been at it for years, cheating other athletes out of medals and money.

Launch the reading materials in his direction, and the rest of the filth.

J.0. wrote:

You have to understand the psychology to understand what I am saying, obviously you don't because you are obsessed with drugs and can't see outside your own little world.

As for altitude training, it doesn't increase RBC mass for those with optimal levels.

So I'm struggling with the 'psychology' and you're struggling with the physiology.

Fair enough.

as a phy ed graduate you are not qualified to comment on an ivy league MD education i'm afraid

oh i agree with plenty of people on many things in the sport

i disagree with some who don't tend to put aside bias, emotion & irrationality & assess many situations with requisite cold hard logic & analysis that it requires

i'm sure a lot did, but in 10y of reading various message boards, i've not found any who actually did admit to having seen them - how many went out & bought an expensive motorised satellite dish in late '80s & watched eurosport/dsf/rtl/zdf/sat 1/tv 3/rai uno,etc - access to every german, french, scandanavian, italian sports channels & general channels, to watch prime sporting events ?

you know anyone else who did ?

apart from x-country which i didn't find interesting enough to watch until africans starting to appear in '80s, i watched them also

you missed too many golden league meets

all well & good, but that is your chosen job

personally, life is too short to watch a women's M nowdays unless there is a chance of a <2"20, so i don't watch them anymore

i'm not interested in when an elite runs subpar

i'm interested in when they run their best, which they hopefully do at least once in their career, which is obvious from the clock & manner of performance

see above

i judge it on clock & manner - not platitudes, but when some well known guys say they are in top shape, you listen - when hicham said he was looking for 3'24 in rieti in '02, you watch & he was on schedule for 1200m

you really are clueless

you are talking to an MD of 25+y qualification & you are lecturing me on human social, psychological & physical foibles ???

i'm interested in only what an athlete does at their peak, which is obvious from clock & manner of performance, not their decline - i'm interested in human ultimate ability

25y+ of having seen 10,000+ people with all manners of human ailments & i don't know ???

excuse me

you are a phy ed teacher who presented himself at 1st italian fed & all he got initially was a lowly decathlon coach position ( i wish i even heard of a world class italian decathlete ) & then had the gall to foist himself onto a kenyan training camp - obviously as they weren't paying for your "services" at the time, free, even if it may be turn out to be shit, is better than the nothing before

i'm afraid "your world" is nothing but self-appointment

try & see how far your "self-appointment" technique works in getting a professional job like engineer, architect, doctor, etc

you are a fool

humans at elite level have very little difference - the difference is trivial - even komen is only 0.6% superior to next best at 3k

these can be modelled

i am not out any mission to rewrite any alltime list, i'm interested only in the true merit of an performance under scientific, controlled scenarios which can be applied to most races - perfect pacing, drafting, wind considerations

to give an athlete his true merit & perspective

- jim ryun in '67 coud possibly have run 3'24/3'25 on a synthetic track with perfect pacing to the bell

- kipketer's solo 1'42.67 coud be worth ~ 1'41.15 outdoors with pacer to bell

- kip's 1'41.24 off ridiculous 48.3/52.9 ( 4.6s difference ) wouda been ~ 1'40.8 off standard 2s difference elites are told to aim for

an example to show that kip is still almost certainly still the best 800 runner we have seen as rudisha still needs to run 0.3s faster off presumed ( or corrected ) 2s differential to have a performance intrinsically superior to 1'41.24

if these concepts are too esoteric for you, then don't waste my time