Half Marathon WR holder Abraham Kiptum busted by Bio Passport!!!!!!!!

rekrunner wrote:

Better than data points of one athlete, many papers that describe the various problems that undermined the ABP, and explain the various models of the ABP, are already available to the public (some might require a fee). Information about misunderstandings and dehydration and calibration is already out there in the public.

Putting aside any judgement of Kiptum -- innocent athletes unlucky enough to be presented with the burden of explaining ABP irregularities need expert scientific and legal support to form a proper defence.

DISCLAIMER: any sympathies and concerns expressed in the comments above are reserved for truly "innocent" athletes, in order to achieve the higher aspirations of fairness and justice. Athletes who violate anti-doping rules should be caught and punished -- no apologies offered.

Too funny. So, the HM WR holder and a 2:04 marathoner is charged for doping on an ABP case and you come up with this mumbo jumbo?

One thing is for certain; this throws your whole "doping doesn't work for those at very top" platform down the toilet. It doesn't get any worse when a WR holder is caught for doping. In fact, there are now 3 Kenyan runners charged with doping on ABP cases in just the last 3 months! It appears the Kenyans were never on the ABP ADAMS program until they got the new state of art accredited-WADA lab in Nairobi last September. No ABP cases against any of their runners the last several years and then all of a sudden 3 in 3 months starting this year. Lol (I noticed you haven't done any of your talking points on the new lab in Nairobi or these 3 recent ABP cases -- too overwhelmed with this Kiptum bust?)

And in hindsight this is a barrel of laughs: ?

Yes, Kiptum was accused, and yes, putting that discussion aside, truly innocent athletes need expert help. That seems universally true no matter what the context. I don't have a "doping doesn't work for those at very top" platform -- this is a strawman. You cannot show cause and effect by example. Adding more examples, even a "HM WR holder and a 2:04 marathoner" does not cure this. I'm pretty sure Kenyans were part of the ABP in 2009 -- participation is not optional. ADAMS is a centralized database for athletes developed in 2005 to help manage whereabouts, and TUEs, as well as doping results. I welcome the new lab in Nairobi, and the new ABP cases. I hope it catches more dopers. They should install more WADA approved labs. I'm not overwhelmed by Kiptum. I have already discussed him.

Who is the 2:04 marathoner? The fastest time I found for Kiptum in the marathon is 2:05:26.

Bad Wigins wrote:

NOT NORMAL wrote:

This is a ridiculous concept, given that elite athletes are already in the 0.01% percentile.

Why compare them to Joe Slow Fattie down the street?

true. I doubt there's enough data on the variation in elites to make claims about the likelihood of a change.

Not enough elite variation because all elites are doping.

rekrunner wrote:

I don't have a "doping doesn't work for those at very top" platform

No? You had in the past...

rekrunner wrote:

You cannot show cause and effect by example. Adding more examples, even a "HM WR holder and a 2:04 marathoner" does not cure this.

And, are you now back to "doping doesn't work for those at very top"?

Aside from that, we had numerous scientists show cause, and now more and more examples, including the very top. It may be time for you to bury that troll handle - was fun for a while though.

rekrunner wrote:

Who is the 2:04 marathoner? The fastest time I found for Kiptum in the marathon is 2:05:26.

Who do you think rekrunner? Kiptum...as in Abraham. The video I linked (How fast can Kiptum run) states he ran a 2:04:16 at the Abu Dhabi marathoner on 120718. And sure enough here's the results from Abu Dahbi (he ran 2nd behind Kipserem):

The other thing that is weird is his WR time isn't listed on the HM all-time list site.

rekrunner wrote:

I don't have a "doping doesn't work for those at very top" platform -- this is a strawman.

hahahahahahahahaha!

Anti-doping experts say that there are hundreds of undetectable doping products available today. Few users therefore need fear being caught. We are also informed that the black market in doping is huge, running into billions of Euros.

So in that massive and largely undetectable environment, who are the users? If the most successful athletes are not doping then that would establish that doping doesn't work, that clean athletes can somehow beat doped athletes of equivalent ability. That is clearly false. If doping doesn't work there would be no market for it. The inference we must draw is that the best are included among those who dope; that is how they become the best, by being able to beat lesser athletes who dope.

So how can an utterly dominant athlete like Kipchoge plausibly exist outside and above that framework, and also in an environment where doping has been shown to be rife?

Armstronglivs wrote:

So how can an utterly dominant athlete like Kipchoge plausibly exist outside and above that framework, and also in an environment where doping has been shown to be rife?

He is roughly 1% better than the next guys, give or take.

With doping providing a boost of say, 3%, he is either

- dirty, and 1% better than the other cheats

- clean, and 4% better than all the cheats

- clean, and 1% better than the other clean guys because no talented marathoners are doping.

Or, one argues that doping does not work at the top, and then it's irrelevant for this discussion.

But you also can't arbitrarily eliminate "cause and effect" by example either. And in ABP cases "cause and effect" is being applied in every case. Medals, titles & times are being annulled for the time frame that encompasses the period of the anomalies.

Recall Jeptoo's doping case from 2014: She tested positive for EPO OOC a couple of weeks before Chicago. Her Chicago results were annulled for the EPO positive and a?4 yr ban given. However, her blood data from Boston 6 months earlier, where she ran a course record and 5th fastest marathon of all time, was analyzed and showed hematological anomalies consistent with evidence for doping. Her title & record time was flushed! No EPO positive from her IC sample post-race but anomalies detected resulting in the annulments.

In addition, Belarusian Aleksandra Duliba finished 6th running a PB and setting a NR (2:21:29). She passed an IC drug test but anomalies were detected in her ABP, from either blood doping or Off-phase use of EPO (high Hgb/low RET%) resulting in a 2 yr ban and annulment of the PB & NR. The decision to flush her PB & NR was soley based on the hematological anomalies absent any AAF for a drug positive. If that's not "cause and effect" being demonstrated then you're either clowning around or trolling. Lol.

How sure? There's been the first ever ABP cases in Kenyan history; 3 athletes in just the last 3 months -- what happened in the previous 9 yrs?

I bett you are overwhelmed by Kiptum. When Rutto blew his passport earlier this month you quickly pointed out that his "13:03" PB was slower than your 90's cutoff. Well...here comes along Kiptum who runs the HM WR last year and has a 2:04 marathon -- 3 mins faster than your 90's cutoff time. ?

casual obsever wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So how can an utterly dominant athlete like Kipchoge plausibly exist outside and above that framework, and also in an environment where doping has been shown to be rife?

He is roughly 1% better than the next guys, give or take.

With doping providing a boost of say, 3%, he is either

- dirty, and 1% better than the other cheats

- clean, and 4% better than all the cheats

- clean, and 1% better than the other clean guys because no talented marathoners are doping.

Or, one argues that doping does not work at the top, and then it's irrelevant for this discussion.

Of course marathon runners dope. Kiptum has just proved that. Doping works on everybody. It doesn't have a cut-off point where it ceases to provide benefit. That's because human physiology works on the same principles for top athletes as it does for those of no particular talent. An example is the use of asthma inhalers by many athletes. Asthma sufferers are generally quite weak and short of wind. The inhaler is a stimulant, and compensates for the asthmatic's natural deficiency. So what is the effect of the inhaler on a top athlete? Exactly the same as for the asthmatic - it acts as a stimulant. Which is why sportsmen and women increasingly claim to be asthmatic.

If an outstanding athlete gains a 1% advantage by doping the results are much more conspicuous than the 1% gain by a middling athlete, who will still improve but not pose a threat to the best. Winning margins are typically small in elite and professional sport. For a top athlete, a1% gain can easily be the difference between winning and not placing.

If Kipchoge is clean then he is at least 2-3% better than his rivals - a huge margin in professional sport - if they are also clean. If they are doping (and some undoubtedly are) he is likely to be 5-6% better than them. In this era, that simply isn't credible.

Armstronglivs wrote:

If Kipchoge is clean then he is at least 2-3% better than his rivals - a huge margin in professional sport - if they are also clean. If they are doping (and some undoubtedly are) he is likely to be 5-6% better than them. In this era, that simply isn't credible.

Geremew finished 18 seconds behind Kipchoge. That's not 2-3% nor 5-6%.

God, you are so annoying with your everyone is doping shit.

Similarly, his marathon time is not listed on the all-time list site, nor his IAAF profile.

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

The other thing that is weird is his WR time isn't listed on the HM all-time list site.

rekrunner wrote:

Similarly, his marathon time is not listed on the all-time list site, nor his IAAF profile.

What do you mean? His 2:05 PR is listed. If you mean his 2:04, Abu Dhabi was short so of course that result wouldn’t appear.

It’s like Ryan Hall all over again.

What I said in the past is nuanced. What I said now is the method of proof by example is wrong -- even when it is more and more examples. Your numerous scientists still have more work to do to confirm their estimates.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I don't have a "doping doesn't work for those at very top" platform

No? You had in the past...

rekrunner wrote:

You cannot show cause and effect by example. Adding more examples, even a "HM WR holder and a 2:04 marathoner" does not cure this.

And, are you now back to "doping doesn't work for those at very top"?

Aside from that, we had numerous scientists show cause, and now more and more examples, including the very top. It may be time for you to bury that troll handle - was fun for a while though.

Yes his 2:04:16 (see discussion above). If it was short, that explains a lot.

Get in my kiptummy wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Similarly, his marathon time is not listed on the all-time list site, nor his IAAF profile.

What do you mean? His 2:05 PR is listed. If you mean his 2:04, Abu Dhabi was short so of course that result wouldn’t appear.

It’s like Ryan Hall all over again.

I don't eliminate "cause and effect" by any method. In ABP cases, "effect" is irregular blood values. My cutoff time was some arbitrary definition of "top" which Rutto almost met, but not quite. He would meet a different definition. Both top runners, and non-top runners dope. This does not overwhelm me. I just learned Abu Dhabi marathon was about 200m short.

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

But you also can't arbitrarily eliminate "cause and effect" by example either. And in ABP cases "cause and effect" is being applied in every case.

...

I bett you are overwhelmed by Kiptum. When Rutto blew his passport earlier this month you quickly pointed out that his "13:03" PB was slower than your 90's cutoff. Well...here comes along Kiptum who runs the HM WR last year and has a 2:04 marathon -- 3 mins faster than your 90's cutoff time. ?

+1

You might want to trying explaining that to rekrunner.

Remember Rekrunner's "It's only women being caught" or his "Those being caught are past it" claims? He needs a new excuse.

As for the video lol, the guy that does these just makes up bs. I was going to start a thread on his Mo Farah video a couple weeks back. He claimed Mo had shrunk his stride and given up speed work since the marathon etc it was all inaccurate. As for Kiptum the guy says Kiptum took up racing in 2016 and in 2 years he was doing 58:12 and the guy wasn't suspicious, utterly ridiculous. See Kiptum in full stride? He is faster than my 100m strides and he is running a half!!! 20 years ago I did 11.2 on grass and are in good shape!