Torrence Speaks Out Against Lagat After 5k Final

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

Aye1 wrote:

Mastersrankings show 17 40-44 folks that run the 400 under 54 seconds so, it is doable.

Except those guys aren't doing it at the end of a freaking 5K.

+1 Exactly

Plus of course I was suspicious of Lagat from a long time back but what I'm saying is the fact that he's running this fast, this old, WE'VE NEVER SEEN THIS before in TNF. To me that's even more damning that the 3:26 back in the day. What other 42 year olds have done what Lagat is doing? ZERO.

Wow fast finishing lap off a slow pace. Forget about doping for a second, lagat can still out sprint these 5k-10k runners. I'll bet when he's fifty he will be able to out sprint the traditionally slower 5k-10k runners. Lagat is naturally fast, thats why he was a 1500m runner, calling him out for doping on a race that was a jog and a sprint is idiotic.

Well this is a pretty piss poor rant. You just basically proved my point that as an owner of this site, you have no problem pointing fingers without proof, and no problems saying things which are factually wrong. The A was NOT really positive, for a variety of reasons which you don't want to bother researching. And the B proved it. And how did all those NOP allegations pan out? I'm still waiting. People, he is 41, not 55. At 39 I could run close to my 800m PR from 12 years earlier. If I could do that, then Lagat can do this at 41. Maybe he could have run 12:40 at age 30. Maybe he could have closed in 50.9 a few years ago. It's not like he is a 12:40/3:26 guy now, is it? And this was a 13:35 race FFS.

I disagree. He didn't do it the 'correct way' but it's kind of like the Baltimore riots. They weren't justified but you can bet your damn ass tha tin the future the police won't be throwing people into the back of a van without seat belt.

Torrence could have been more diplomatic but then LetsRun.com wouldn't take notice and agree to do a story on it.

Another thing that bugs me about unsubstantiated finger pointing:

One reason Lagat is so good at 41 is precisely because he was a late starter.

Some of you are too old to remember this but let's talk about Eamonn Coghlan for a minute. Eamonn was the "chairman of the boards" back in the day. He dominated indoor racing. He was a mile specialist. He was also the first master's runner to break 4 min in the mile. I remember watching this race.

At the time. I think this was 1993 ish??, people were blown away that Eamonn as a master runner was able to break 4 min for the mile. Even though his career was stellar. Still an incredible achievement.

Now, here we are in 2016, with Lagat nearing 42, and he CLOSES out a 5K with a 4 min FLAT mile, running 13:35...and some people don't bat an eye. Wtf?

RioLookingbad for US AGAIN wrote:

Some of you are too old to remember this but let's talk about Eamonn Coghlan for a minute. Eamonn was the "chairman of the boards" back in the day. He dominated indoor racing. He was a mile specialist. He was also the first master's runner to break 4 min in the mile. I remember watching this race.

At the time. I think this was 1993 ish??, people were blown away that Eamonn as a master runner was able to break 4 min for the mile. Even though his career was stellar. Still an incredible achievement.

Now, here we are in 2016, with Lagat nearing 42, and he CLOSES out a 5K with a 4 min FLAT mile, running 13:35...and some people don't bat an eye. Wtf?

Its because he has gotten worse as he's aged. Back in his prime i would bet he could have closed that same race in 47 seconds. Use to be called talent, now its just slightly aged talent.

Late starter?? He ran 3:34 in 1998 when he was 22 or 23.

Closing a 5000 in 47? Clean? Hilarious.

Well when you close in 51 off a 12:50 pace, it is pretty suspicious. Especially when you never demonstrated much speed before.

It was a slow race? Really slow? And he was closing against a bunch of guys who really were not anything extraordinary? And he has been known for having a killer kick for about 20 years? Ooooohhhhhh, that is kind of different.

Madmandoc wrote:

Well when you close in 51 off a 12:50 pace, it is pretty suspicious. Especially when you never demonstrated much speed before.

3:26.34

would Bernie be agreeable to taking the MRI lie detector?

It might clear up this matter

it helped resolve the Paula Radcliffe controversy

Isn't that essentially what he said though, minus the emotion?

Certainly Not Skuj wrote:

Another thing that bugs me about unsubstantiated finger pointing:

One reason Lagat is so good at 41 is precisely because he was a late starter.

And the dope, you're forgetting about the doping.

Small matter I know, the late starter thing is the main reason of course. But the minor reason of 'obvious dope cheat' needs to be out there, at least for discussion's sake.

ryan foreman wrote:

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that Torrance all but directly accuses Jenkins of doping too.

Jenkins finished fourth. So it is obviously him who is the real victim of any alleged doping by Lagat. But Torrance skips any mention of Jenkins and instead goes on and on about feeling bad for True. In fact, when one of the others in the video confronts Torrance with the fact of Jenkins 4th place finish, Torrance just smiles a little and says he will not say anything about Jenkins.

Obviously Torrance has some ideas about how NOP operates.

It was right after the race, he probably didn't know who finished 4th vs. 5th. They were showing True's wife on TV.

AW Pharmacy wrote:

This so reminds me of cycling, where for 7 years I watched all the Lance fanboys trash any other posters or professional cyclists who dared to question his results. No proof, never failed a test, a superior genetic speciman, world class since a young age, blah blah blah.

There was a ton of evidence against Armstrong long before Landis and others started to confess. Moreover, the testing protocol at the Tour de France effectively gave a free pass to anyone using recombinant EPO or red blood cell transfusions, as long as their hematocrit didn't exceed 50% at the time of testing. (As I recall, Armstrong's baseline hematocrit was fairly low -- around 43% -- so he had a lot of room to play with before he would hit 50%.)

In Lagat's case, I haven't seen much evidence -- a somewhat degraded A sample of urine in a fairly primitive test in 2003 that was, at best, highly equivocal about the existence of rhEPO, some unsupported rumors about positive tests and various cover-ups and bribes in later years, comparisons of Lagat's progress and that of decidedly inferior athletes, and rather silly speculation about whether, at the age of 41, one of the greatest 1500/5000 runners and fastest closers in history could really run under 53 seconds for the last lap of a pedestrian 5000 (about 13:50 pace through 4600, I believe). (There have also been absurd suggestions that the use of recombinant EPO could provide a performance advantage that persists for a decade or more after its use is discontinued.)

I think that I have a pretty open mind about this matter, so if someone has some good evidence of Lagat's doping. Otherwise, this all sounds like just more tiresome whining and irresponsible accusations.

Avocado's Number wrote:

I think that I have a pretty open mind about this matter, so if someone has some good evidence of Lagat's doping. Otherwise, this all sounds like just more tiresome whining and irresponsible accusations.

"I think that I have a pretty open mind about this matter, so if someone has some good evidence of Lagat's doping, I'd welcome the opportunity to consider it. Otherwise, this all sounds like just more tiresome whining and irresponsible accusations."

It's like half the people in this thread seem to think there's no limit to human performance or that after so many years of track, huge performance gains can still happen. They are limits and huge leaps are extremely suspicious -- both logically and statistically. We're talking about a guy who is closer to 42 years of age also.