Gidey just ran the single greatest female running performance ever... Give her the black page! Letesenbet MF Gidey 1:02:52

Armstronglivs wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

He will not read and thus the concept of peer reviewing will be alien but he will still lie.

As it happens I agree with you .Wada never judge intent only that drugs are in the body: somehow.

Wrong. In the absence of any accepted alternative explanation intent is presumed - as the Houlihan case showed.

Says the person who won’t read and that includes the rules.

Armstronglivs wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

Lying trolls need removing ; the one in question has contaminated many many threads.

You're a bit harsh on yourself - but true.

Another deliberate lie

khcglhc wrote:

What a performance by Gidey. That’s what this thread is about. Right?

No. It's 3 people trying to have the last word. Makes the thread unreadable and useless.

Another giver of +1 wrote:

khcglhc wrote:

What a performance by Gidey. That’s what this thread is about. Right?

No. It's 3 people trying to have the last word. Makes the thread unreadable and useless.

Every thread with Armstronglivs goes the same way because he lies and refuses to read or acknowledge anything that runs counter to him.Enough is enough.

khcglhc wrote:

What a performance by Gidey. That’s what this thread is about. Right?

Indeed.

It was a performance no doubt aided significantly by male pacemakers and new shoe technology.

It is also a level of performance that is long overdue. I think most fans of the sport greatly underestimate how historically weak women’s distance times are in general, and even moreso in the weaker events like the semi-marathon, where attempts at fast time are rare. The half-marathon is usually a prep-race for an upcoming marathon, and not a showcase for fast times. in and of itself.

The performances we have seen in the last 7 or so years are long overdue, and times before that simply did not reflect the true potential of women. This is due to a combination of factors: 1) women’s fields are rarely deep, and they often do not need to run their fastest to win a race. Most women’s races start out slow and become tactical. More rivalries, and larger packs brought times down for the men in a way that wasn’t possible for women. 2) Cultural and social factors have helped limit the depth and strength of the women’s fields, and left out many countries entirely.

Several times above, I have mentioned the 1987 performance of Ingrid Kristiansen, giving women’s distance running its first step into maturity that was lacking. During her reign, she pushed the women’s times down significantly, but there were still too few women to follow in her footsteps. Just a brief history of the half-marathon. In 2000, Ingrid still held the world-best time. After 2009 (22 years later), she was still #5, with a #6 performance. In 2014, her performance was still #16. Around this time, the times start dropping with fast times from Lorna Kipligat, then later by Joyciline Jepkosgei, before the era of new shoes brought it down another 90 seconds. By my count, including Valencia and 1 doped performance, her performance is now #117 all time.

I appreciate your perspective.

I would add that we may have an even better idea when we look back in ten years time.

I wonder if there is some catching up by women to come within the stadiums.

liar soorer wrote:

I appreciate your perspective.

I would add that we may have an even better idea when we look back in ten years time.

I wonder if there is some catching up by women to come within the stadiums.

I can see the 200m and 3000m being broken soon (far overdue). We will unfortunately still have to wait a little while for the 400m and 800m

The 1500m, 5000m and 10,000m will be destroyed in the next 5 to 10 years.

Sub 14 will become common place

khcglhc wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

I appreciate your perspective.

I would add that we may have an even better idea when we look back in ten years time.

I wonder if there is some catching up by women to come within the stadiums.

I can see the 200m and 3000m being broken soon (far overdue). We will unfortunately still have to wait a little while for the 400m and 800m

The 1500m, 5000m and 10,000m will be destroyed in the next 5 to 10 years.

Sub 14 will become common place

Field events ?

khcglhc wrote:

What a doped performance by Gidey. That’s what this thread is about. Right?

Fixed.

Doping is doing such wonderful things for the sport. As Gidey is currently showing us. And you're their cheerleader.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I am a narcissistic sociopath.

Fixed.

liar soorer wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Doping is doing such wonderful things for the sport. As Gidey is currently showing us. And you're their cheerleader.

I think rekeunner provides an attempt at balance in an area we just can’t assume anything.

Such is not doping cheerleading.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Doping is doing such wonderful things for the sport. As Gidey is currently showing us. And you're their cheerleader.

As you would say, it is impossible to tell.

Dew wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I am a narcissistic sociopath.

Fixed.

I bet you can blow strawberrys, too.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Doping is doing such wonderful things for the sport. As Gidey is currently showing us. And you're their cheerleader.

As you would say, it is impossible to tell.

Proof how dim you really are. I have just said the opposite about her - as I have all thread. But a cranium like yours will never be dented by what you don't want to know.

liar soorer wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

I think rekeunner provides an attempt at balance in an area we just can’t assume anything.

Such is not doping cheerleading.

You confuse "balance" with denial. He never admits or concedes doping. He is the doping equivalent of a Holocaust or climate-change denier. That is about falsehood, not balance.

Armstronglivs wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

As you would say, it is impossible to tell.

Proof how dim you really are. I have just said the opposite about her - as I have all thread. But a cranium like yours will never be dented by what you don't want to know.

It only proves that you contradict yourself. I discard what you cannot corroborate as your imagination.

By your own measure, you prove yourself dim when you feebly attempt to put contradictions in my mouth.

Armstronglivs wrote:

liar soorer wrote:

I think rekeunner provides an attempt at balance in an area we just can’t assume anything.

Such is not doping cheerleading.

You confuse "balance" with denial. He never admits or concedes doping. He is the doping equivalent of a Holocaust or climate-change denier. That is about falsehood, not balance.

On the contrary.

I have often conceded, and concede again now, that many athletes are convicted of rule violations, some of which involve doping with a banned substance, with some of these being intentional doping with the goal of performance enhancement, and that many athletes from many countries dope, according to several official and unofficial sources.

And I concede your point, which you have argued many times, without listing any exceptions like you are trying to do now, and which is supported by at least one peer-reviewed paper, that when the only facts are a fast performance, it is impossible to tell whether such a performance was doped.

When we have facts and imagination, I am inclined to deny the imagination, or even substitute some of my own, on top of all the existing known facts and observations.