This Guy here wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
The textbook fan response for every off-the-charts achievement before the bust.
We’ve found one of the failed D1 coaches/runners...
So you have to be a failed athlete/coach to see the error in your arguments? That doesn't speak very highly of you. But it isn't surprising, since your deduction skills are hardly those of Sherlock Holmes. I am neither of you categories.
Ding ding ding wrote:
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
Whatever happened to innocent unless proven guilty? Or does that only apply to white people?
Yup if she were white they would be saying how confident and courageous she was to race the way that she did. Sadly, she’s not white so it’s not celebrated.
When race is your argument you have no argument.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Ding ding ding wrote:
Yup if she were white they would be saying how confident and courageous she was to race the way that she did. Sadly, she’s not white so it’s not celebrated.
When race is your argument you have no argument.
WRONG...When race is a legitimate factor as it has shown to be in how people are labelled, you do have an argument. When you show impartiality regardless of race, then race will no longer be an argument.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
When race is your argument you have no argument.
WRONG...When race is a legitimate factor as it has shown to be in how people are labelled, you do have an argument. When you show impartiality regardless of race, then race will no longer be an argument.
Proof of my point.
Happy when Vetter runs well.
Armstronglivs wrote:
LM wrote:
You're still dodging my first point. Just throwing that out there. Yet to hear a satisfactory answer on how to handle that.
As for this response I did not miss the point. You just acted as if being female is somehow discrete and their are are only a few categories with defined testosterone ranges. Also many hormones besides testosterone matter. They all exist on an a analog continuum. You can have all kinds of genetic variation within an XX human yielding varying levels of testosterone. Variation leading above 2 are certainly possible due to genetic and epigenetic factors. Many other hormones can also vary as can body structures and of course talent (VO2/efficiency/fractional utilization).
All of this means we can have a wide variation. Given the decent number of women that have run near 14:11 it's unlikely they were all 1 in a billion outliers at the absolute tip of everything being maxed out.
Same for guys. We know guys like Bekele or Kipchoge or Froome from cycling are no other near optimal humans. They don't have 85-90 VO2 combined with 25% GME combined with a fractional utilization approaching 90%. An athlete like that is 10% or more beyond the best we've seen from even king dopers like Lance.
So, again, I ask....how do you know Hassan isn't that level of talent? How do you know Kipchoge isn't that level of talent? How do you know Bekele isn't that level of talent?
Yes, of course the odds are much, much greater that these are all doped.
The problem I have is that even the most insane doped performances are still well within the level of what's achievable using top human physiological values.
What happens when that person comes along with that talent and blows everyone way by 20s in the 5000?
You are confused. XX females cannot have anything like the testosterone levels of a male. This is not a continuum - there is no overlap between XX and XY when it comes to T-levels; male levels are 15 times those of XX females.
Hassan is not androgenic; if she has high testosterone that's courtesy of Alberto but if it's above 5nml she'd certainly fail the biopassport.
I'm not aware of any other point you have made. Whatever it might have been, it wasn't relevant to this discussion.
Nobody claimed the bolded. Why even mention it?
The rest is obviously relevant to the discussion. Your claim is that Hassan IS doping (and implicitly, everyone excited is delusional or at least willfully ignorant for not agreeing). That's a very different claim from mine, which is that it's quite likely that Hassan is doping.
Your assertion that Hassan is doping is quite an extraordinary claim, especially for someone producing performances that are believable from the parameters we have of athletes. And, it goes much further than that because you've been constantly mocking performances of other athletes, and those excited about those performances.
The extent of your claim is, "they ran fast, and therefore are certainly doping". If you said likely doping, and acknowledged it as "I'm suspicious" I would take no issue. History and odds suggest that is without a doubt the case.
But the jump to certainty, and your self righteousness in your certainty is the issue. You have no absolutely no way to claim, with certainty that any performance is likely doped, and no evidence to argue there is an unreasonable probability any one of those performances is clean (actually, maybe such an argument can be made from the sprinters, I don't know power outputs, wind resistances, and efficiencies and what's "believable). It's clear you crucify athletes for being fast. If a clean guy came along and ran 12:30 to win the 5000m by 30s you would surely claim he was doping as well.
Make the case that Hassan, or any other athlete is certainly (not probably, as we all agree there) doping and I'll be interested.
LM wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are confused. XX females cannot have anything like the testosterone levels of a male. This is not a continuum - there is no overlap between XX and XY when it comes to T-levels; male levels are 15 times those of XX females.
Hassan is not androgenic; if she has high testosterone that's courtesy of Alberto but if it's above 5nml she'd certainly fail the biopassport.
I'm not aware of any other point you have made. Whatever it might have been, it wasn't relevant to this discussion.
Nobody claimed the bolded. Why even mention it?
The rest is obviously relevant to the discussion. Your claim is that Hassan IS doping (and implicitly, everyone excited is delusional or at least willfully ignorant for not agreeing). That's a very different claim from mine, which is that it's quite likely that Hassan is doping.
Your assertion that Hassan is doping is quite an extraordinary claim, especially for someone producing performances that are believable from the parameters we have of athletes. And, it goes much further than that because you've been constantly mocking performances of other athletes, and those excited about those performances.
The extent of your claim is, "they ran fast, and therefore are certainly doping". If you said likely doping, and acknowledged it as "I'm suspicious" I would take no issue. History and odds suggest that is without a doubt the case.
But the jump to certainty, and your self righteousness in your certainty is the issue. You have no absolutely no way to claim, with certainty that any performance is likely doped, and no evidence to argue there is an unreasonable probability any one of those performances is clean (actually, maybe such an argument can be made from the sprinters, I don't know power outputs, wind resistances, and efficiencies and what's "believable). It's clear you crucify athletes for being fast. If a clean guy came along and ran 12:30 to win the 5000m by 30s you would surely claim he was doping as well.
Make the case that Hassan, or any other athlete is certainly (not probably, as we all agree there) doping and I'll be interested.
Amen dude, like its one thing to be skeptical but all these people on here talking like its 100% these people are doping. Being fast AF means likely doping not definitely doping its not inherently shady behavior like i dunno missing three tests or something
Armstronglivs wrote:
Ding ding ding wrote:
Yup if she were white they would be saying how confident and courageous she was to race the way that she did. Sadly, she’s not white so it’s not celebrated.
When race is your argument you have no argument.
Collect the comments on Houlihan, Simpson, Stafford and KK vs SH.
All had amazing performances in Doha and in 2019.
Add up all the doping comments for white ladies vs SH.
Are you really surprised that she won the 1,500?
Did you not expect that she would?
She owned the mile world record coming in...
Absolutely no disrespect to the other women.
I’m not a super fan of SHassan - Personally, I’d rank GDS, KK, SH, SHassan and then JS.
I like them all and honestly think that none of them doped.
There’s no effing proof so, I’m not going to spew crap because they had an awesome year/race.
The only suspicious race this year to me was bekele in Berlin- I love bekele but that was nuts.
I hope he’s not doping... that would really suck.
Hope he wins Tokyo and retires... GOAT... until proven otherwise.
divintie wrote:
Amen dude, like its one thing to be skeptical but all these people on here talking like its 100% these people are doping. Being fast AF means likely doping not definitely doping its not inherently shady behavior like i dunno missing three tests or something
As usual, LM is spot on. Consistently one of the best posters on here.
GOAT?...Girl On Androgen Treatment?
Lance Never Tested Positive
Bruinboy wrote:
GOAT?...Girl On Androgen Treatment?
I'm sure Katelyn Tuohy is faster than you as well. Waaaa Waaaa...I have nothing else going for me in life so I take pot shots at genetically superior (from a running perspective) females... waaa waaaaaa
LM wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are confused. XX females cannot have anything like the testosterone levels of a male. This is not a continuum - there is no overlap between XX and XY when it comes to T-levels; male levels are 15 times those of XX females.
Hassan is not androgenic; if she has high testosterone that's courtesy of Alberto but if it's above 5nml she'd certainly fail the biopassport.
I'm not aware of any other point you have made. Whatever it might have been, it wasn't relevant to this discussion.
Nobody claimed the bolded. Why even mention it?
The rest is obviously relevant to the discussion. Your claim is that Hassan IS doping (and implicitly, everyone excited is delusional or at least willfully ignorant for not agreeing). That's a very different claim from mine, which is that it's quite likely that Hassan is doping.
Your assertion that Hassan is doping is quite an extraordinary claim, especially for someone producing performances that are believable from the parameters we have of athletes. And, it goes much further than that because you've been constantly mocking performances of other athletes, and those excited about those performances.
The extent of your claim is, "they ran fast, and therefore are certainly doping". If you said likely doping, and acknowledged it as "I'm suspicious" I would take no issue. History and odds suggest that is without a doubt the case.
But the jump to certainty, and your self righteousness in your certainty is the issue. You have no absolutely no way to claim, with certainty that any performance is likely doped, and no evidence to argue there is an unreasonable probability any one of those performances is clean (actually, maybe such an argument can be made from the sprinters, I don't know power outputs, wind resistances, and efficiencies and what's "believable). It's clear you crucify athletes for being fast. If a clean guy came along and ran 12:30 to win the 5000m by 30s you would surely claim he was doping as well.
Make the case that Hassan, or any other athlete is certainly (not probably, as we all agree there) doping and I'll be interested.
The claim was made earlier that some women can have a hormonal makeup close to that of males, which can explain outlier performances. I pointed out that there isn't a hormonal continuum between male and females - there is a gulf.
The argument that Hassan is likely doping - which I am far from being alone in suggesting - is based on much more than her simply running fast. Hence not every fast runner has raised that question, as her performances have.
However a certain level of performance will be questionable and can be an indicator of doping. Do you accept Flojo's records as genuine, or those of Kratochvilova and Marita Koch? And, yes - I would have difficulty buying a genuine 12.30 5k.
I haven't been this impressed with a distance runner since Elvan Abeylegesse was in her prime.
Doptastic wrote:
I didn’t think she was doping till this performance. It’s too good. After that 10k? After two rounds?
She had a breast reduction, lost weight, got serious and started training like a beast. It's that simple, it's called hard work and dedication.
This is why our sport will never be popular. One of the greatest performances we've seen and you jackoffs are picking it apart. She was no where near Salazar when the events he was busted for took place. Like it or not, Salazar is an amazing coach and he did a great job with Sifan.
She is clean - THE END.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Sifan_Hassan_Beijing_2015.jpghttps://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/OSNm2ZJgHB_Dk9GfU9b.pw--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAw/https://media.zenfs.com/en/pa-sport.com/d9a4ce665fd6a301b55d7637e43457e6[quote]Open your eyes wrote:
ND.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Sifan_Hassan_Beijing_2015.jpg
/quote]
And even back then, with giant tata's and weighing 15 pounds more, she still smoked Jenny Simpson.
Didn't know she was 5'7, fairly tall for an elite African-born female distance runner. But 108 pounds? Sounds unhealthy but it clearly works for her. absolutely perfect build for running economy when it's done in a healthy manner.
Open your eyes wrote:
[quote]Open your eyes wrote:
ND.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Sifan_Hassan_Beijing_2015.jpg/quote]
And even back then, with giant tata's and weighing 15 pounds more, she still smoked Jenny Simpson.
Armstronglivs wrote:
LM wrote:
Nobody claimed the bolded. Why even mention it?
The rest is obviously relevant to the discussion. Your claim is that Hassan IS doping (and implicitly, everyone excited is delusional or at least willfully ignorant for not agreeing). That's a very different claim from mine, which is that it's quite likely that Hassan is doping.
Your assertion that Hassan is doping is quite an extraordinary claim, especially for someone producing performances that are believable from the parameters we have of athletes. And, it goes much further than that because you've been constantly mocking performances of other athletes, and those excited about those performances.
The extent of your claim is, "they ran fast, and therefore are certainly doping". If you said likely doping, and acknowledged it as "I'm suspicious" I would take no issue. History and odds suggest that is without a doubt the case.
But the jump to certainty, and your self righteousness in your certainty is the issue. You have no absolutely no way to claim, with certainty that any performance is likely doped, and no evidence to argue there is an unreasonable probability any one of those performances is clean (actually, maybe such an argument can be made from the sprinters, I don't know power outputs, wind resistances, and efficiencies and what's "believable). It's clear you crucify athletes for being fast. If a clean guy came along and ran 12:30 to win the 5000m by 30s you would surely claim he was doping as well.
Make the case that Hassan, or any other athlete is certainly (not probably, as we all agree there) doping and I'll be interested.
The claim was made earlier that some women can have a hormonal makeup close to that of males, which can explain outlier performances. I pointed out that there isn't a hormonal continuum between male and females - there is a gulf.
The argument that Hassan is likely doping - which I am far from being alone in suggesting - is based on much more than her simply running fast. Hence not every fast runner has raised that question, as her performances have.
However a certain level of performance will be questionable and can be an indicator of doping. Do you accept Flojo's records as genuine, or those of Kratochvilova and Marita Koch? And, yes - I would have difficulty buying a genuine 12.30 5k.
The Russians, definitely not. They were known to have state sponsored doping programs AND ran very fast. That pushes the "probably doping" percentages up into stratospheric levels.
I often find 1 in 1000 works for reasonable levels of when to worry about something. Arbitrary, but it fits well for me. I'd say the odds of either of those two being clean as less than 1 in 1000 by a wide margin. Probably the same for FloJo, but I don't know her history as much.
Hassan, I'd put her (obviously arbitrarily) at around 1 in 500 to 1 in 1000 chance she is clean. I haven't heard much about shady agents or shady training partners or other out there claims. If there are more of those that I haven't been awared of, that would shift my opinion further. Her performances at NOP got much better, but as described she lost weight and her performance improvement is consistent with that. I don't think her doping status changed at NOP. If she was doping, she was doing so before and continued. She did not start at NOP. So enough to be very skeptical, but also at a level where I will still "reserve judgement" and not talk about her as if she is a doper. Many of them eventually fall.
My doping process goes something like this:
1) Fast Times = automatically suspicious, but willing to without hold judgement
Add in the below and I basically think of them as doping:
2) Associations with known dirty training groups/partners - doping
3) Highly inconsistent performances or long disappearances without explanation - more or less think of them as doping
4) History of missed tests
5) Originate/train in Russia/China/ NK/Islamic Countries
Probably some other things too but those are jumping out at me.
I too, would have difficulty buying a 12:30 5k. Even moreso a 12:00 5k. It would depend on many factors, but it's within the realm for possibility for a clean athlete (I'm willing to believe that the 95th percentile of VO2 and of fractional utilization are likely clean values). I'd obviously always be skeptical of such a performance, but hopefully an athlete of that caliber would go above and beyond to prove they are not doping.
Druggggsssss!!!!!!
Pathetic!!!!
Sad !!!!
