I said "largely" and I said "elite", and I said "unproven".Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
enforcer wrote:
rekrunner wrote:For distance running, EPO is largely unproven at the elite level.
See Cathal Lombard.
NotAlia wrote:
coach x wrote:i'd say it was there many many years before 2007
Exactly - and it now we have someone who vehemently denied that anything existed now saying that it has been there since 2006/7. Which is it.
Thats not what he said at all. He said ( and continues to say) that he doesnt think it would have a positive effect on a top level runner. Not that it might not be used but that it wouldnt help.
coach x wrote:
Renato Canova wrote:El Keniano, I think EPO was introducted in Kenya by an Austrian pseudo-manager in 2007.
i'd say it was there many many years before 2007
Daniel Komben. Paul Tergat.
Man I remember watching the "Golden Four" and all these world records in the late 90's.
Insane.
Renato,
Are you referring to Walter Mayer (he is the one fleeing from Torino to the Austrian border in his car)? He is no manager though, but rather a coach...
The other person that comes to mind is Matschiner, he indeed was a manager, for track athletes also, but he wasn't involved in the Torino scandal...
Both were later sentenced in Austria for doping offenses, but their Kenian connection was never mentioned...
Thanks for your insight!
rekrunner wrote:
I looked at all these times -- there is no major inflection point.
For distance running, EPO is largely unproven at the elite level
You are so wrong.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0056151rekrunner wrote:
Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
So what. Most dopers claim that it barely helps them and they could do just as well naturally. That has no bearing on how effective it really is.
Yes, absolutely agree 100%.
We can make endless discussion on kenians , europeans, americans,, but they are nonsense. We are all people no matter what you call us, same morals everywhere, when i hear somebody say oh kenians cant dope cose they have a different morals or no no they dont need, EPO dont have effect on them!!! HA HA HA aren't they human beings? Aren't they made of flesh and blood? The truth is that is the same all over the world , corruption and abomination can happen in africa like in europe or america. As good things can happen everywhere.
The fact is : with EPO and other substances the gain in a Marathon is about 4 or 5 minutes , of course this can change from athlete to another athlete.
Now 4 or 5 minutes is an enormous gain when we talk of a top runner.
I believe to a runner that have been caught with doping and had a
life time ban , He did mistakes paid for those mistakes but He has said the truth about his long time experience
with doping. Said he was able to run 2h14 totally clean,
with doping he made 2h10.
with doping he was able to train harder and harder and never feel tired considering that he was also having an 8 hours job in a factory at the same time.
That he was feeling like wake up in the middle of night and start to run. He had a 6th place in a New York city Marathon.
Of course after been caught he has been like outcast from Italian federation like he was the only doper in Italy!!
HA HA HA!!
Here in Tuscany often I met him at local races where he still run of course without number cos he has a life time ban and at 50 years old and now absolutely no doping he still run very fast and he run cos thats what he has done all his life, just for the joy of run.But I think today he can walk the streets with his head up high. I cannot say the same for many long distance runners so much celebrated of the past and of the present days.
NotAlia wrote:
The fact is Renato has no idea what is going on. I have said before maybe he isn't involved but wants to put performances down to him or his coaching. Time to wake up because this nightmare is only starting.
Ethiopia is even more dirty than Kenya - but they will face this sooner rather than later. New methods of testing are in place that nobody dares to think about - there are a lot of worries faces in New York right now.
I love it when people tell renato he has no idea what is going on. Canova spends almost 100% of his time actually with these athletes in their home countries. I would be surprised if this poster has met a 2:10/2:25 marathoner, I would be even more surprised if he has been to Kenya or Ethiopia. This guy is the equivalent of the football fan calling in to sports talk radio criticizing an nfl coach for not running the plays that work for him on the madden video game. I love LRC, but if this is your only source of info, you might not have all the facts.
And don't say that the study isn't about elites. There should be no difference between the subjects and an elite runners. Hgb would still go up, hct would still go up.
Even if you argue that elites would have higher values and thus be harder to improve (which is not true, elites have recorded natural values from 30-47ish; Armstrong was around 35 before blood doping) keep in mind that the upper limit of someone still able to pump their own blood can reach 62%
http://i54.tinypic.com/2csc5kj.jpg
It is likeVO2. A measurement that only rarely correlates to performance at its starting point (elites with ranges from 65-85+), but will still result in improvement if manipulated
I want to edit my last paragraph: the absolute value is less important than the change. EPO will change your values, elite or not. That change effects in performance gains.
there is a credibility gap opening up here between the reality as i perceive it and renatos explanations of what is going on
i highly doubt that these world class elites like jeptoo are being supplied thru backstreet chemists in downtown nairobi or half-baked austrian quacks
these organizations runs by doctor rosa since 1996 and dubious jos hermens are professional operations
imo the dope or EPO is merely a routine covert business expense
This is rationalization on Lombard's part.
Yes, I agree with this.
Elite athletes cheat. There is no getting around this. If the incentives are there to cheat (which they are), then athletes will cheat. It's part of human nature. And it's not just one or two rogue athletes. I'm sure this explosion in men's marathon performances in recent years is EPO-fueled.
Anybody who remains a fan of distance running because they think their favorite runner is some kind of heroic, stoic, bad-to-the-bone stud, rather than somebody who is just like all the other elites except with a slightly better response to their drug regimen, is living in fantasy land.
If the study is repeatable, the next step is to repeat the results with elite subjects. Don't talk to me about blood values or vo2 values, and how 11:00 runners should be identical to elites. If you want to prove something about elites, you have to make controlled measurements with elite subjects. Here we need to measure time. Until then, it is largely unproven.The other problem with a study like this is that real runners aren't time limited to 4 weeks for training. If the control subjects can achieve the same result after 8 weeks, then EPO doesn't necessarily bring improvements that couldn't be achieved clean. If they cannot, ever, that would be a powerful argument.
Clerk wrote:
And don't say that the study isn't about elites. There should be no difference between the subjects and an elite runners. Hgb would still go up, hct would still go up.
Even if you argue that elites would have higher values and thus be harder to improve (which is not true, elites have recorded natural values from 30-47ish; Armstrong was around 35 before blood doping) keep in mind that the upper limit of someone still able to pump their own blood can reach 62%
http://i54.tinypic.com/2csc5kj.jpgIt is likeVO2. A measurement that only rarely correlates to performance at its starting point (elites with ranges from 65-85+), but will still result in improvement if manipulated
At a minimum, his explanation means that a coach of an elite Kenyan cannot be 100% sure that any of their runners are clean, despite the fact that those runners are naturally fast, are not inclined to seek out PEDs, and perhaps would not benefit from doping anyway.
I would agree, that we have no bearing how effective EPO really is. That's precisely my point. If he's the best (only?) example, for proving effectiveness at the elite level, it's a pretty weak argument.
Dolomite wrote:
rekrunner wrote:Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
So what. Most dopers claim that it barely helps them and they could do just as well naturally. That has no bearing on how effective it really is.
[quote]rekrunner wrote:
I said "largely" and I said "elite", and I said "unproven".
Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
[quote]enforcer wrote:
Yes and everything you say is largely naive and mistaken on this subject. You are never going to get an official clinical trial on the effects of EPO in elite athletes and so to hang onto this to support your belief that the effects of EPO are "unproven" at the "elite" level is ridiculous, with all due respect.
No one else from Cathal Lombard's coach's group made the same sort of breakthrough that he did and no one else from that group tested positive for EPO. Yet Cathal Lombard believing that EPO did not work on him is sufficient to convince you that it's effects are "unproven".
If 27-30 for 10000m is not "elite" enough for you, see also Boulami, Mourhit, Ramzi and see how fast they ran when they were no longer taking EPO. Or are maybe they not "elite" enough for you either ...
rekrunner wrote:
Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
I believe this too, in fact that all of his improvements had no assist from any type of drug.
All the time people are surprised that I don't go to any type of doctor, yet they go and then they are sick.
If the drugs help so much, then why do the people get sick when they take the drugs. Huh, answer that for me. Why are all those people in worse condition, than people who never take any drug, and don't even have drugs in the house.
It doesn't take an Einsten to figure out that drugs are not the reason for anyone to succeed in athletics, but rather the reasons are talent, good training and good sense.
In the mid-90s, the 3000m WR dropped nine seconds, the 5000 almost twenty seconds and the 10000 45 seconds. These drops are unprecedented in running history, and all came during the period where there was no test for EPO. My statement stands.
rekrunner wrote:
I looked at all these times -- there is no major inflection point.
For distance running, EPO is largely unproven at the elite level.
Rift Raff wrote:If you look at World Records for all track longer distances (up to 10000m) over the years, there is a major inflection point in the early/mid/90s. This coincides with the availability of EPO. The marathon records lagged for 10-15 years, largely for economic/systemic reasons. Now we are seeing the marathon times on the men's side catch up to the track times of the late '90s/early 2000s.
Here is the bottom line: EPO is the most revolutionary factor in distance running since the invention of the stopwatch. It WORKS, and it's effects are worth a FORTUNE to people who live in 3rd world countries.
Until there are active and effective testing labs in Eldoret AND Addis, we will have not even the slightest knowledge of just how deep the rabbit hole goes.
This bust will dwarf the Ben Johnson '88 in the long term, and if we are lucky we will see an end to this madness of multiple sub-2:04s in every major marathon.
J.R. wrote:
rekrunner wrote:Cathal Lombard himself believes that much of his improvements were achieved without doping.
I believe this too, in fact that all of his improvements had no assist from any type of drug.
All the time people are surprised that I don't go to any type of doctor, yet they go and then they are sick.
If the drugs help so much, then why do the people get sick when they take the drugs. Huh, answer that for me. Why are all those people in worse condition, than people who never take any drug, and don't even have drugs in the house.
It doesn't take an Einsten to figure out that drugs are not the reason for anyone to succeed in athletics, but rather the reasons are talent, good training and good sense.
Drugs don't work on sicknesses? How about in the prevention of polio, tetanus, measles, yellow fever, malaria, Typhoid, and diphtheria, to name a few?
Do you suppose surgical patients benefit from anesthesia? Do diabetics profit from insulin injections? Does aspirin relieve a headache?
Drugs HAVE effects on bodily functions by virtue of chemical reactions to them. That has been demonstrated for many centuries. That you don't want to accept that face is your personal decision, but that does not align with reality.
Too many cheats in the sport now. That will result in those who really are fans of the sport to lose interest and respect for the top performers.
