There is a lot of information from a lot of different sources that present a composite picture of the effects of doping. But to see that would require you to remove your doping-denial blinkers.
Drugs have permeated sports from the earliest times and are now so pervasive that professional sport would not exist without them. They are able to change human capacity, since they affect the entire human organism, in a way and to a degree that altering the sole of a shoe cannot. That is why they are used to the extent they are. There is no debate that drugs have transformed sports - except to the doping-denial "flat-earthers" like yourself - whereas the effects of shoe technology are being questioned because some athletes experience no advantage in them. A shoe is ultimately a relatively modest tool. It will not turn an average athlete into a good athlete or a good athlete into an outstanding athlete. Drugs will.
A lot of information from a lot of differents sources? Oh boy. Now we are getting somewhere. Don't stop now. Can you just provide some of that information here? Maybe just the top-5 most important pieces of information relavent to the very fastest elite marathon performances?
Recall I took off the blinkers, and looked at 60+ years of all time performances, looking for these powerful results of all these composite effects all throughout the world. I didn't see Bikila though.
I am not trying to persuade you to anything. That would be like trying to persuade a flat-earther from their beliefs. I merely choose to deride them and state a view that reflects the truth - an alien subject to one who lies to himself as much as you do.
This post was edited 33 seconds after it was posted.
If there are facts, why don't you just provide them, instead of beating around the bush. I would follow the facts.
Note there are two variables: 1) doping; 2) performance. Are there also facts that show that elite marathon performance is throughout professional sport? That would be a compelling argument suggesting one could be related/correlated with, or cause, the other. But when I looked, only 9 non-Africans worldwide surpassed 1980s performances.
You don't look for anything, you merely find what suits what you already believe. Good little flat-earther.
I look for, and look at, everything. You could supplement this search with specific facts, if you had any, but for some reason, you cannot.
Speaking of looking for and finding, I'm sure you will be happy to know that I conducted a (non-exhaustive) search of published papers looking for doping history generally in sport and specifically in the marathon, and selected 7 of them for future reading. I will skim them to see if there is something I didn't already know or hear, if there is something that you keep saying which can be confirmed, and will be especially be on the lookout for any East African findings.
I am not trying to persuade you to anything. That would be like trying to persuade a flat-earther from their beliefs. I merely choose to deride them and state a view that reflects the truth - an alien subject to one who lies to himself as much as you do.
You must be joking. Every post you make in every thread you participate in tries to persuade us that doping in athletics is as bad, or worse, as cycling was, and that it compares to wrestling, body-building, and weight-lifting.
You choose derision, because that is the only thing you can contribute. It was predictable that after claiming "a lot of information from a lot of different sources", you would fail to produce any of it when your bluff was called.
I found his posts more believable than yours which appear to be trolling or merely naive fiction. The drugs are out there. People get popped everyday. Most are African with european agents and management. It's not really hard to figure out really. And not really a lot to argue about.
I am not trying to persuade you to anything. That would be like trying to persuade a flat-earther from their beliefs. I merely choose to deride them and state a view that reflects the truth - an alien subject to one who lies to himself as much as you do.
You must be joking. Every post you make in every thread you participate in tries to persuade us that doping in athletics is as bad, or worse, as cycling was, and that it compares to wrestling, body-building, and weight-lifting.
You choose derision, because that is the only thing you can contribute. It was predictable that after claiming "a lot of information from a lot of different sources", you would fail to produce any of it when your bluff was called.
You are not "us". Most posters are not the deluded doping-deniers that you are. No one will persuade you of anything away from your flat-earthism. It isn't my goal, either. But since you are also ignorant I also point out that it is WADA and not I who have put T and F in the same category for risk of doping as bodybuilding, weightlifting and cycling.
I found his posts more believable than yours which appear to be trolling or merely naive fiction. The drugs are out there. People get popped everyday. Most are African with european agents and management. It's not really hard to figure out really. And not really a lot to argue about.
Sure -- two Catholics would find each other credible, and remain befuddled by the conviction of the atheist. They would believe that their fiction is real, and demonize those who don't share their beliefs.
I am not persuaded by what you find to be believable, but I would only be interested in what data and evidence you considered and evaluated to form these beliefs. Drug busts are only one part of the story when trying to argue the connection between doping and performance.
Sure the drugs are out there, and likely used throughout the world, and people around the world get popped frequently (every day?). Note that European agents and management also exists in Europe.
The main thing that is missing from your figures is when these drugs were strongly correlated, if ever, to faster than natural best performances, in the case of this thread, for the marathon.
Armstronglivs (and you and astro and many other believers ...) want to preach that doping is "throughout" the sport, and my response is always, not to deny that doping is indeed "throughout" the sport, from athletes "throughout" the world, but to highlight that the fastest performances are not "throughout" the world like doping, but rather restricted to small populations of athletes originating from small regions in East Africa, with a few North Africans, and from the remaining 85-90% of the world population, very few non-Africans.
You must be joking. Every post you make in every thread you participate in tries to persuade us that doping in athletics is as bad, or worse, as cycling was, and that it compares to wrestling, body-building, and weight-lifting.
You choose derision, because that is the only thing you can contribute. It was predictable that after claiming "a lot of information from a lot of different sources", you would fail to produce any of it when your bluff was called.
You are not "us". Most posters are not the deluded doping-deniers that you are. No one will persuade you of anything away from your flat-earthism. It isn't my goal, either. But since you are also ignorant I also point out that it is WADA and not I who have put T and F in the same category for risk of doping as bodybuilding, weightlifting and cycling.
If most-posters are already like minded, you are not persuading them either. They already believe without you providing any supporting facts.
You claimed "A lot of information from a lot of differents sources". When I called your empty bluff, you put down your hand and folded like a cheap suit -- like you always do.
Here's another bluff: Do you have that WADA statement that puts "T and F in the same category for risk of doping as bodybuilding, weightlifting and cycling." I've seen no one else say that but you. I've seen them rank countries by categories of risk of doping (which is also not quite accurate), but not by sport. Athletics does tend to have one of the highest number of doping convictions in WADA reports, but this is mainly due to the much larger pool of athletes, and tests, than other sports, and is not the same as "risk of doping".
Even more than the past 40 years, Abebe Bikila won the marathon (olympic) twice in the 60's barefoot! Beating people from modern countries. Maybe E. Africans are just better at running mid-long distances. Get over it.
David Epstein in his book The Sports Gene talks to a Kenyan HS PE teacher who states how many of his students can run a certain time for 10k and Epstein notes that more HS boys at this one Kenya school can break certain 10k times that all American HS'ers ever have!
Sifan is Amsterdams best runner, Mo Ahmed is Canadas best runner, Mo Farah was Brittain's best runner, Yared Negusse is Americas best miler, Meb was one of Americas great marathoners, shall I keep going. These E. African immigrants running for western countries make up a tiny % of kids/young adults who compete at distance running in America etc, yet are greatly over represented at the top. If Sifan Hassan or Mo Farah grew up in Ethiopia or Somalia do you think they'd be the fastest in their school class? My guess is they would NOT be.
I think there's even MORE talent yet to come out of E. Africa and that it's the modern training, technology, diet, nutrition, data that is available in Western countries that is able to turn 95 percentiler's like Sifan and Mo Farah into world beaters. BUT!!! I think there is a good 5% or more who are living in E. Africa if not more, who are or would be MORE Talented than Sifan Hassan, Mo Farah, Meb Keflezgi, Mo Ahmed, Yared Negusse, etc etc etc.
Therefore where is the real advantage. Speculated doping? Or having all the tool of a modern, rich western society at your disposal.
What's better < 50 ml IV infusions of L-Carnitine or micro dosing EPO below the limit to fail the biological passport. Both probably get you 1.5% improvement. One's doping one's not.
You are not "us". Most posters are not the deluded doping-deniers that you are. No one will persuade you of anything away from your flat-earthism. It isn't my goal, either. But since you are also ignorant I also point out that it is WADA and not I who have put T and F in the same category for risk of doping as bodybuilding, weightlifting and cycling.
If most-posters are already like minded, you are not persuading them either. They already believe without you providing any supporting facts.
You claimed "A lot of information from a lot of differents sources". When I called your empty bluff, you put down your hand and folded like a cheap suit -- like you always do.
Here's another bluff: Do you have that WADA statement that puts "T and F in the same category for risk of doping as bodybuilding, weightlifting and cycling." I've seen no one else say that but you. I've seen them rank countries by categories of risk of doping (which is also not quite accurate), but not by sport. Athletics does tend to have one of the highest number of doping convictions in WADA reports, but this is mainly due to the much larger pool of athletes, and tests, than other sports, and is not the same as "risk of doping".
Unlike you, I don't write everything I think I know in one post and nor am I interested in educating you to what you don't know or haven't read. There is nothing to be gained from trying to prove to the flat-earther they are wrong. Presenting the truth is sufficient - even though they - you - will never get it.