Anomolous bio passport data, such as Paula's might explain Rhonex's anomolous scores. Brother O'Donnell (his coach) having one of his athletes under the spotlight (for the wrong reasons) doesn't make a lot of sense at the end of a long and illustrious career spanning many decades.
You too are ignoring that the final expert panel has decided that Rhonex's ABP violations were caused by doping not by booze, altitude, illness or dehydration. It's highly unlikely that the DT will overrule the experts' findings, but we'll see in a couple of months.
Paula's cases were different: in 2003 and 2005, all ABP violations just resulted in more testing, which she passed. In her 2012 case, the final expert panel ruled that her ABP anomalies might have been caused by something natural, and thus she was never (not even provisionally) banned.
While waiting for the details in the current doping case, you could read up on Kiptum's or Rutto's or Chepchirchir's ABP cases (and values!), where they all tried to argue - fortunately unsuccessfully - that their abnormal values came from strange natural causes.
Thank you for the update and what you say makes perfect sense because in the first place Paula's values were just slightly over the limit and could have been been explained, as you said, by dehydration and other factors.
If Rhonex willingly crossed the line then it is a huge disappointment not only for him but also for brother O'Donnell, all his fans and followers, and Iten in general, because he was idolized there as the quiet choir boy champion who never put a foot wrong. People on this message board are saying it's a slam dunk case but is it really? May the legal "experts" weigh in please. Rhonex should be retested, just as Paula was, to bring closure to this episode hopefully.
If he (R.K) is subsequently declared guiltless that will be a huge relief for most people concerned. Let's give this kid the chance he deserves as his whole life depends on this. Brother O'Donnell, the amiable priest who has devoted his whole life or most of it to athletics, will also breathe a sigh of relief.
I exclude that, for Kenyans, Ethiopians and Ugandans, the reason of the fluctuetions of blood values can be the altitude. While for athletes normally living and training at sea level, when they go altitude, there is a physiological reaction (in 80% of the cases with production of more erythrocytes), for athletes living and training in altitude there is ADAPTATION, the level of Red Cells doesn't grow, but what is always higher than in athletes from sea level is the MCV (volume of the corpuscle). This means higher percentage of plasma, with consequent reduction of the blood viscosity. My opinion is that for African athletes living in altitude never is possible to explain some value out of the average with the permanence in altitude.
Overlooking that you've mixed up sensitivity when you meant specificity (1 in 1000 sensitivity would be virtually useless and completely cost ineffective), all this talk about specificity is theoretical, based on a handful of ideal assumptions which may or may not be valid for each measurement. It falls apart in the presence of non-doping confounders (e.g. varying altitude or illness).
That is why the passport requires a final subjective assessment by "experts", and a data package that records all the relevant external data.
I was quoting an expert. Clearly, that isn't you.
Actually, understanding mathematical models using a Bayesian approach to compute probabilities is well within my domain of expertise.
And it doesn't take an expert to know that mathematical models can model an ideal world, but do not always reflect imperfect reality.
And surely no expert said "1-in1,000 sensitivity"(sic). At best you were misquoting an expert.
So all these thousands of sportsmen and women doping to the gills, and after 50 years, it just hasn't clicked with anybody that none of it works (other than a strange obsessive on LetsRun who has not even competed at any sport at a high level)?
It takes narcissism of Olympian proportions to suggest, as he does, thousands of athletes with direct experience of doping know less about it and its effects than he does, who has no experience of it and has never used it.
Actually, I was more suggesting that Coevett doesn't know the experience of these thousands of doped athletes. You too. Without properly collecting the experiences, there is no way to determine if the success rate is high, significant, or directly attributable to doping.
Imagine the narcissism to presume to know that the experiences of all of them before and after doping would confirm your beliefs.
What I do know is that the thousands of doped to the gills non-African athletes have not performed much better in the last three decades than their own predecessors of the '80s.
It takes narcissism of Olympian proportions to suggest, as he does, thousands of athletes with direct experience of doping know less about it and its effects than he does, who has no experience of it and has never used it.
Actually, I was more suggesting that Coevett doesn't know the experience of these thousands of doped athletes. You too. Without properly collecting the experiences, there is no way to determine if the success rate is high, significant, or directly attributable to doping.
Imagine the narcissism to presume to know that the experiences of all of them before and after doping would confirm your beliefs.
What I do know is that the thousands of doped to the gills non-African athletes have not performed much better in the last three decades than their own predecessors of the '80s.
No, you're assuming that they, along with their coaches etc, don't know their own experiences. Which is pretty much close to insanity on your part.
Actually, I was more suggesting that Coevett doesn't know the experience of these thousands of doped athletes. You too. Without properly collecting the experiences, there is no way to determine if the success rate is high, significant, or directly attributable to doping.
Imagine the narcissism to presume to know that the experiences of all of them before and after doping would confirm your beliefs.
What I do know is that the thousands of doped to the gills non-African athletes have not performed much better in the last three decades than their own predecessors of the '80s.
No, you're assuming that they, along with their coaches etc, don't know their own experiences. Which is pretty much close to insanity on your part.
I don't make any assumptions beyond that of athletes, coaches, etc. believing in the powerful performance enhancing effects of doping. It is my lack of assuming their experiences that seems to trouble you and Headstrong.
Whatever they may or may not know -- I'm certain you don't know their collective experiences.
Each may know their own personal experience, but, as a percentage, how many of these thousands and thousands had a "positive" experience? How positive were the best experiences? What else changed? How many had a "negative" experience? No way to tell really, if they aren't telling. It would be presumptuous for anyone to say more than that, and I don't presume to say more than they believe they will have a positive experience when they chose to dope.
But, I do know the history of the best performances worldwide, dating as far back as the '60s. Russia has been doping since the '70s if not earlier. Men, women, steroids, blood-transfusions -- all of it. They are a non-factor in men's distance running and always have been. They've had some limited success with the women, in shorter distances. In longer distances, once you count more than three or so of all athletes in history, the best Russian women are not better than the best Japanese women. They've had some success in men's walking. This is all public knowledge.
Span the 5 continents of descendants outside of Africa over the last few decades, and a similar story unfolds -- the best results of thousands of doped to the gills athletes is not that much better than the generation before.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Reason provided:
Fixed grammar.
I exclude that, for Kenyans, Ethiopians and Ugandans, the reason of the fluctuetions of blood values can be the altitude. While for athletes normally living and training at sea level, when they go altitude, there is a physiological reaction (in 80% of the cases with production of more erythrocytes), for athletes living and training in altitude there is ADAPTATION, the level of Red Cells doesn't grow, but what is always higher than in athletes from sea level is the MCV (volume of the corpuscle). This means higher percentage of plasma, with consequent reduction of the blood viscosity. My opinion is that for African athletes living in altitude never is possible to explain some value out of the average with the permanence in altitude.
Dr Canova: Going by what you say, are we to infer that you believe Rhonex crossed the line on this occasion and possibly resorted to doping? I'm in shock right now but if you can set the record straight that would be good, thanking you.
I don't think Rhonex took some illegal substance, consciously. And I think the Biological Passport can produce, for athletes living and training in altitude, some result that is not really precise. The scientists of antidoping developed the 99% of their research with athletes (normally not strong) training at sea level, and the collected data are 99% for athletes going altitude for short periods of training. But there are still too many factors, specific for people living in altitude, currently in the dark.
One factor is the relation between alcool, training and altitude. This is a great problem for many athletes, in some part of their life, also when for long time they were sober. Everybody in Iten knows Rhonex started to drink during the period of Covid, and that one was the reason of the decrease of his performances.
But, please, don't involve in that situation Brother Colm, who always was near him helping him in any possible way.
I don't think Rhonex took some illegal substance, consciously. And I think the Biological Passport can produce, for athletes living and training in altitude, some result that is not really precise. The scientists of antidoping developed the 99% of their research with athletes (normally not strong) training at sea level, and the collected data are 99% for athletes going altitude for short periods of training. But there are still too many factors, specific for people living in altitude, currently in the dark.
One factor is the relation between alcool, training and altitude. This is a great problem for many athletes, in some part of their life, also when for long time they were sober. Everybody in Iten knows Rhonex started to drink during the period of Covid, and that one was the reason of the decrease of his performances.
But, please, don't involve in that situation Brother Colm, who always was near him helping him in any possible way.
Ok, thank you for the update. I'm relieved that there is still a window of opportunity for Rhonex to explain this situation.
On another note, I was not aware of Rhonex's (temporary) alcohol issues.
Hopefully this whole situation will be resolved soon, and Rhonex back to where he belongs, racing fast and furiously on the roads and on the track.
Grazie mille. Ci vediamo, ci sentiamo dopo. Auguri.
No, you're assuming that they, along with their coaches etc, don't know their own experiences. Which is pretty much close to insanity on your part.
I don't make any assumptions beyond that of athletes, coaches, etc. believing in the powerful performance enhancing effects of doping. It is my lack of assuming their experiences that seems to trouble you and Headstrong.
Whatever they may or may not know -- I'm certain you don't know their collective experiences.
Each may know their own personal experience, but, as a percentage, how many of these thousands and thousands had a "positive" experience? How positive were the best experiences? What else changed? How many had a "negative" experience? No way to tell really, if they aren't telling. It would be presumptuous for anyone to say more than that, and I don't presume to say more than they believe they will have a positive experience when they chose to dope.
But, I do know the history of the best performances worldwide, dating as far back as the '60s. Russia has been doping since the '70s if not earlier. Men, women, steroids, blood-transfusions -- all of it. They are a non-factor in men's distance running and always have been. They've had some limited success with the women, in shorter distances. In longer distances, once you count more than three or so of all athletes in history, the best Russian women are not better than the best Japanese women. They've had some success in men's walking. This is all public knowledge.
Span the 5 continents of descendants outside of Africa over the last few decades, and a similar story unfolds -- the best results of thousands of doped to the gills athletes is not that much better than the generation before.
He was right. Your views, in which you claim to know better than thousands of athletes who dope, approach insanity.
I exclude that, for Kenyans, Ethiopians and Ugandans, the reason of the fluctuetions of blood values can be the altitude. While for athletes normally living and training at sea level, when they go altitude, there is a physiological reaction (in 80% of the cases with production of more erythrocytes), for athletes living and training in altitude there is ADAPTATION, the level of Red Cells doesn't grow, but what is always higher than in athletes from sea level is the MCV (volume of the corpuscle). This means higher percentage of plasma, with consequent reduction of the blood viscosity. My opinion is that for African athletes living in altitude never is possible to explain some value out of the average with the permanence in altitude.
And the anti-doping experts excercise caution when interpreting blood values of athletes living & training at altitude, athletes living at altitude but training at sea level, athletes using hypoxia tents, etc.
Actually, understanding mathematical models using a Bayesian approach to compute probabilities is well within my domain of expertise.
And it doesn't take an expert to know that mathematical models can model an ideal world, but do not always reflect imperfect reality.
And surely no expert said "1-in1,000 sensitivity"(sic). At best you were misquoting an expert.
From the article I quoted above:-
"In response, passport analysts use a complicated formula to account for altitude, the athlete’s genetic background, and other environmental factors when parsing passport data. But given the risk of false positives, the analysis is made deliberately insensitive. The current standard is a 1-in1,000 sensitivity, meaning the passport will only result in a false positive in 1 out of 1,000 analyses (over a series of samples, that means the risk of false positive becomes very, very low) but it will also yield many false negatives. A more sensitive analysis—a standard that would yield 1 false positive in 100 tests—would catch more cheaters. Testers may use this standard when deciding which athletes to target with drug tests, but it is the 1-in-1,000 sensitivity that is used to enforce doping bans."(quote)
To anti-doping authorities, it's the best way to ferret out cheaters in a wide range of sports. To cyclists and other athletes, it's a way to prove you're clean when critics claim you aren't.
No, you're assuming that they, along with their coaches etc, don't know their own experiences. Which is pretty much close to insanity on your part.
But, I do know the history of the best performances worldwide, dating as far back as the '60s. Russia has been doping since the '70s if not earlier. Men, women, steroids, blood-transfusions -- all of it. They are a non-factor in men's distance running and always have been. They've had some limited success with the women, in shorter distances. In longer distances, once you count more than three or so of all athletes in history, the best Russian women are not better than the best Japanese women. They've had some success in men's walking. This is all public knowledge.
"Limited" success with the Russian women in the shorter distances?
"Some" success in men's walking?
The Russian women were a force to be reckoned with at the 2011 WC & 2012 Olympics.
Savinova took gold in the 800 & was banned for hematological anomalies & for using the steroid Anavar.
Tomashova took silver in the 15 & had been previously banned for hematological anomalies.
Zaripova took gold in the steeple running a PB & WL and was banned for hematological anomalies & for using the steroid Turinbol.
The Russian men walkers were the most dominant nation around the time period of 2009-13 under infamous doping coach Viktor Chegin.
More the 20 of Chegin's walkers were DQ'd for doping offenses between 2005 - 2015. Chegin coach two WR holders who were banned for doping.
Viktor Mikhailovich Chegin (Russian: Виктор Михайлович Чёгин; born 3 February 1962 in Bersenevka, Lyambirsky District) is a banned Russian racewalking coach. He was responsible for training all three athletes who swept the me...
No, you're assuming that they, along with their coaches etc, don't know their own experiences. Which is pretty much close to insanity on your part.
I don't make any assumptions beyond that of athletes, coaches, etc. believing in the powerful performance enhancing effects of doping. It is my lack of assuming their experiences that seems to trouble you and Headstrong.
Whatever they may or may not know -- I'm certain you don't know their collective experiences.
Each may know their own personal experience, but, as a percentage, how many of these thousands and thousands had a "positive" experience? How positive were the best experiences? What else changed? How many had a "negative" experience? No way to tell really, if they aren't telling. It would be presumptuous for anyone to say more than that, and I don't presume to say more than they believe they will have a positive experience when they chose to dope.
But, I do know the history of the best performances worldwide, dating as far back as the '60s. Russia has been doping since the '70s if not earlier. Men, women, steroids, blood-transfusions -- all of it. They are a non-factor in men's distance running and always have been. They've had some limited success with the women, in shorter distances. In longer distances, once you count more than three or so of all athletes in history, the best Russian women are not better than the best Japanese women. They've had some success in men's walking. This is all public knowledge.
Span the 5 continents of descendants outside of Africa over the last few decades, and a similar story unfolds -- the best results of thousands of doped to the gills athletes is not that much better than the generation before.
I've answered you on this point multiple times already. Are you a bot? Russia has been doping for decades, so we have nothing to compare it with. But times did improve in the EPO era. Why would Russia dominate distance running when distance running is the 156th most popular sport there, as opposed to number 1 (and number 2,3,4,5.)..in East Africa, and it has the worst climate possible for year round distance training??
He was right. Your views, in which you claim to know better than thousands of athletes who dope, approach insanity.
I do think they wouldn't dope if they didn't believe. Why would thousands of athletes dope if they didn't believe in the potential for powerful performance enhancing effects to deliver the improvements they hope for? Your view doesn't make any sense.
The question is, what do these thousands of athletes really know from their experience? Why aren't you able to answer that question? Why do you and Coevett presume to know if they aren't talking? My view is I don't claim to know their experience because, as you said, they don't talk about it.
Compare these limited examples to Kenyan and Ethiopian domination from 1981 to present in events ranging from 800m to the marathon to cross-country to the roads.
Span the 5 continents of descendants outside of Africa over the last few decades, and a similar story unfolds -- the best results of thousands of doped to the gills athletes is not that much better than the generation before.
I've answered you on this point multiple times already. Are you a bot? Russia has been doping for decades, so we have nothing to compare it with. But times did improve in the EPO era. Why would Russia dominate distance running when distance running is the 156th most popular sport there, as opposed to number 1 (and number 2,3,4,5.)..in East Africa, and it has the worst climate possible for year round distance training??
It's not just Russia, but they are historically the top doping country by far. If you are right that performance can only come from doping, we should expect a proportionally significant amount of performance also from Russia. Isn't that what you are Headstrong are trying to convince me of -- this wonderful experience only doping can bring?
In a more intellectual world, if you want to credibly establish a correlation between doping and performance, you have to look at all the countries doping, and all the countries performing -- together, and see if they are the same countries appearing at the top of both lists. It is not just Russia doping but countries from every non-African nation spanning 5 continents. Over the decades, this includes Spain, France, Italy, China, India, Brazil, USA, East Germany, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Belarus, etc. -- when you say "thousands of dopers" this is where most of your "thousands of dopers" are coming from.
I don't think Rhonex took some illegal substance, consciously. And I think the Biological Passport can produce, for athletes living and training in altitude, some result that is not really precise. The scientists of antidoping developed the 99% of their research with athletes (normally not strong) training at sea level, and the collected data are 99% for athletes going altitude for short periods of training. But there are still too many factors, specific for people living in altitude, currently in the dark.
One factor is the relation between alcool, training and altitude. This is a great problem for many athletes, in some part of their life, also when for long time they were sober. Everybody in Iten knows Rhonex started to drink during the period of Covid, and that one was the reason of the decrease of his performances.
But, please, don't involve in that situation Brother Colm, who always was near him helping him in any possible way.
you should get involved directly in the process of blood passport, as an expert with advice,
