5000m World Record Splits: A Progression

From just reading the abstract, it looks like Ashenden didn't look at training or performance at all, but looked at how the changes in altitude bring changes in blood values, which affect his ON and OFF scores.

INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS:

Our results reinforce the notion that caution should be exercised when interpreting blood results from athletes who have recently been exposed to either terrestrial or simulated altitude, and appropriate allowance should be made for the effect of altitude on blood model scores.

High-Octane Dopers wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

When Ashenden writes about “Elite athletes”, he NEVER really tested any REAL Elite, and they were not in a period of hard training.

FWIW, the Kenyan control group of six (6) runners that Ashenden used in the study "collectively won three Olympic medals, five World Championship medals and held numerous World Records."

LM wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

7:20.67 is worth 1300 points = 3:26.19 for 1500m, 3:42.54 for the mile,

12:35.9 for 5,000m 26:14 & 26:14.9 for 10000m

Sorry man, but a calculator like vent's is a hell of a lot better than IAAF tables. The tables are based of what runners have run, not physiology. A good calculator can predict with a few watts (i.e. within 0.5%) how much power you can do at any duration from 30s up to an hour (fatigue resistance is a bit harder to deal with). Same principles apply to running.

Well the IAAF tables are biased against the mile, there should be a c17.3 gap between 1500m & mile. Other than that you do realise that the IAAF employ actual statisticians (not abusive ex-doctors) to look at hundreds of thousands of data entries to conclude their tables? You do realise that the official tables don't think or care about Jim Ryun running 1:39 or 3:24 or that because the runner is Kenyan they should be given at least a 2s better time? It is like arguing about the CPI in court, it is the official governing rule, they ultimately are the referee's decision you have to accept it. Arguing otherwise is silly.

LM wrote:

I wish I had $100k+ I could throw out there, with $20k for a pacer who would run 2:33, 5:06, and 7:39, splits and then $10k bonus for any runners hitting 4k in under 10:15. I'd bet my life you'd see at least 2 sub 12:45s and a host of other sub 12:50s.

Same thing for a 1500 paced at 55, 1:50, 2:18. Bet my life you get one or two 3:26s, and couple other guys 3:28 or better.

Will these runners be regularly tested in the lead up to these hypothetical races?

Mr. Obvious wrote:

You seem to spend an awful lot of time propounding a theory on these message boards which you say you have strong data to back up that theory. Most people, if they really have data which supports an argument will simply provide that data so that other people can look at it. I wonder why you don't do that?

Maybe he doesn't have the data after all? My question: Renato seems very well studied on this topic and certainly has provided some interesting posts on just this thread alone. However...is he, or has he been, compensated by the Kenyan athletes he's trained or by the Kenyan athletic federation? If so, wouldn't that be a conflict of interest & bias on the issue of a performance response by elite Kenyans with regard to EPO? IOW, "don't bite the hand that feeds you."

800m : 1’40”91 (WR) – 1’43”81 (-2,87%)

1500m : 3’26”00 (WR) – 3’31”94 (-2.88%)

5000m : 12’37”35 (WR) – 13’00”41 (-3.04%)

10000m : 26’17”53 (WR) – 27’12”37 (-3.48%)

3000m Steeple : 7’53”63 (WR) – 8’11”80 (-3.84%)

Marathon : 2:02:57 (WR) – 2:06:16 (- 2.70%)

➡the 2017 World Championships 800m was won in 1:44.67.

➡outside of Monaco, most elites aren't running faster than 3:31 these days.

➡how many sub13 times have occurred in the last two seasons?

➡Rupp isn't elite, I love it.

800m :

Sepeng (RSA) 1’42”69 (20th) Nandrolone - Laalou (Mar) 1’43”25 (52nd) Furosemide

➡you forget about Longo, the Italian National record holder, he did Nandrolone.

➡Sepeng was top tier.

1500m :

Saidi-Sief (Alg) 3’29”51 (23rd) but he could demonstrate he used a supplement containing steroids without information, and won the trial against the Company, that had to refund the money he didn’t win during the period of ban.

➡Saidi-Sief in mid-2000 was on fire. Notice he never ran anywhere near these times when he came back. He is third all time over 3,000m!

A team doctor for a National cycling body informed me back some 20 years ago (he was my personal doctor) when these athletes were getting busted for Nandrolone, that they were taking this drug to strengthen their leg muscles to handle all the extra training they could do while on epo. Strangely athletes thought it was a masking agent, yet they kept getting popped for it.

➡ how many in competition tests do top marathoners per year? 2?

➡ how many elite half marathoners running 58mins are in the IAAF's testing pool?

High-Octane Dopers wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

When Ashenden writes about “Elite athletes”, he NEVER really tested any REAL Elite, and they were not in a period of hard training.

FWIW, the Kenyan control group of six (6) runners that Ashenden used in the study "collectively won three Olympic medals, five World Championship medals and held numerous World Records."

Clearly not elite.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

➡the 2017 World Championships 800m was won in 1:44.67.

Now we know you have never raced an 800.

Not only that, you don't understand the mechanics of an 800m race.

You make some good points sometimes but here?

Please abstain from commenting.

No, there is nothing wrong with hypothesising on potential of athletes in ideal circumstances from extrapolating known data. That is always worth I teresting debate.

There is, however, something wrong when that extrapolating cherry picks who it can be applied to, exaggerates where it suits, and makes up sweeping statements that are not backed up by any independent research or scientific findings.

His ‘analysis’ is woefully biased, littered with errors that are then removed by friendly moderators, and haphazardly and inconsistently applied.

Thanks Renato.

Actually I trained with Ethiopians 25+ years ago and was 99% sure they didn't dope. At that time no East Africans were caught doping but things have changed.

Question in different subject.

What do you think if low carb diet for marathon training.

Maffetone fat burning diet etc

Inquiry minds want to know wrote:

Maybe he doesn't have the data after all? My question: Renato seems very well studied on this topic and certainly has provided some interesting posts on just this thread alone. However...is he, or has he been, compensated by the Kenyan athletes he's trained or by the Kenyan athletic federation? If so, wouldn't that be a conflict of interest & bias on the issue of a performance response by elite Kenyans with regard to EPO? IOW, "don't bite the hand that feeds you."

He asserts that he has the data. I think it is an interesting theory, I've just never seen any evidence to support it.

I think it is in Renato's professional interests to maintain that Kenyans do not dope regardless of who pays him. I kind of disregard that either way.

That's a nice list, but those are confirmed positives. Either these athletes used too high doses near their target competition and went in glowing like a New England lighthouse or they were told that their dope was undetectable. Remember rocket fuel Ramzi? He transitioned to CERA when it became available because he, like many others (particularly in cycling) who were busted, were told that the only means to detect it was via a blood sample. And it wasn't until Roche assisted WADA in developing a urine test for CERA that a rash of positives occurred in 08 & 09. Why CERA?...a 3rd gen ESA with 20x the half life of 1st gen EPO. Probably because the dosing to bring up Hct to desired levels is only once or twice a month. Less injections, less risk of infection, etc...who would have thought.

So, on that impressive list, unless one truly believes in a 100% detection rate during that time frame, it's not representative of nor rules out other top tier elites who may have used EPO and were able to escape detention.

Everyone's looking for an edge wrote:

That's a nice list, but those are confirmed positives. Either these athletes used too high doses near their target competition and went in glowing like a New England lighthouse or they were told that their dope was undetectable.

So, on that impressive list, unless one truly believes in a 100% detection rate during that time frame, it's not representative of nor rules out other top tier elites who may have used EPO and were able to escape detention.

Obviously. Hard to believe that someone still can claim otherwise while keeping a straight face.

We now even have examples of confessed EPO drug cheats who remained undetected. For example, Savinova used a bit too much, and triggered even the generous ABP thresholds, but the experts weren't convinced that that was because of doping - I am still laughing. Even better, Poistogova was a heavy EPO user who sailed completely undetected under the radar of the blood passport (unlike MF, PR, GR who were too greedy) - that is just too sad, even for cynical me, to laugh about. Oh, and we are talking 800 m here, pointed out for those who think doping doesn't help in the 800.

What did we just read in the WADA-approved, peer-reviewed Harvard/Tübingen paper?

"To deter doping among elite athletes, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) oversees testing of several hundred thousand athletic blood and urine samples annually, of which 1–2% test positive. Measures using the Athlete Biological Passport suggest a higher mean prevalence of about 14% positive tests.

...

The estimated prevalence of past-year doping was 43.6% (95% confidence interval 39.4–47.9) at WCA and 57.1% (52.4–61.8) at PAG.

...

Doping appears remarkably widespread among elite athletes, and remains largely unchecked despite current biological testing."

Estimated? Do you think the real number is higher or lower? The experts think it's higher:

"The authors also explored a host of scenarios under which the athletes might not have answered the doping question truthfully, or otherwise not complied. “In the great majority of those different scenarios it turns out we would have undershot the actual value,” said Harrison Pope Jr, a co-author of the study from Harvard University, adding that that suggests doping was likely more prevalent than the results suggest."

What do other experts say?

Dick Pound, ex WADA President:

"you can miss two tests simply by not answering the door if you're on something."

"There is no general appetite to undertake the effort and expense of a successful effort to deliver doping-free sport."

"There's this psychological aspect about it: nobody wants to catch anybody. There's no incentive. Countries are embarrassed if their nationals are caught. And sports are embarrassed if someone from their sport is caught."

Paul Scott, the chief science officer of Korva Labs, a testing and research laboratory focused on anti-doping:

"Drug testing has a public reputation that far exceeds its capabilities."

"Sophisticated dopers have come to understand how to work around the Athlete Biological Passport," he warns. "They have evaluated correctly that they need to pare back taking steroids or EPO and they will still get most of the benefits."

Michael Ashenden, SIAB Research Consortium:

"Our treatment regimen elicited a 10% increase in total haemoglobin mass equivalent to approximately two bags of reinfused blood. The passport software did not flag any subjects as being suspicious of doping whilst they were receiving rhEPO. "

Just follow the rules wrote:

For all those demanding an explanation, you may never get a better explanation than this. It's subjective, arbitrary, and does not aspire to be consistent, nor require providing an explanation:

Correct. I just regret that it is so arbitrary and single-sided. That actually hampers efforts to "have a community where ideas are exchanged in a civil manner and people feel open to post", as it is often pointless.

Mr Obvious, I can send you the data about tests with all the Chinese Team during a period of two months in altitude in Duoba, three years ago, week after week.

This is what I have in my computer at the moment.

Other data, regarding Kenyan athletes, are in Italy, and I was not there in the last 4 months (currently I'm in Fukuoka, and go back Kenya on 6th December).

The fact is that my priority is of sure not the one to send data for LR posters, but to coach athletes trying to make them reaching their best possible performance (according to their potential value).

Also, the data I have are written inside a greed that I'm not able to report in the same way in any thread.

So, my request to you is : write to my email (already somebody else made public my address, that is :

renato44canova@yahoo.com

), and I send you all the data I have in my computer about Chinese, immediately.

About your final doubt : I'm not paid by any athlete (Kenyan, Ethiopian or European), and I'm not paid by any Federation (speaking about Kenyan Federation you are laughable : they pay their Head Coach less than 3,000 USD per year...), so I don't have any conflict of interest. Very simply, I write exactly what I know, and what I really think, exercises not very usual in LR, where the most part of posters write what they SUPPOSE to know, with the presumption that is the truth.

About the research of Ashenden, the athletes were tested in a period out of training, so their values were already far from the values reached during the main period of training. And, in spite of many can think, during the period of full training the values were lower than when Ashenden tested them, because the REAL training makes the blood values lower, and the REST makes the blood value higher.

This means that, with little or no training, the values in altitude become higher, and when you go sea level decrease quickly.

But, with full training (and we speak about full training for preparing Olympics or WCh or some attack to WR), the values are already low, and more stable. This means that, going sea level, there are little changes during the first 45-60 days,

This always referred to Hct and Hb. Of sure some other value can change, but unfortunately these values never were investigated, and that's the reason because somebody continues to think there is direct connection between the level of Hct and Hb and the performance, SOMETHING NOT TRUE.

About some difference between sea level athletes going altitude, and athletes born, living and training always in altitude, read the following research :

Effects of various training modalities on blood volume.

Schmidt W1, Prommer N.

Abstract

It is controversially discussed whether soccer games should be played at moderate (2001-3000 m) and high altitudes (3001-5500 m) or should be restricted to near sea level and low altitude (501-2000 m) conditions. Athletes living at altitude are assumed to have a performance advantage compared with lowlanders.

One advantage of altitude adaptation concerns the expansion of total hemoglobin mass (tHb-mass), which is strongly related to endurance performance at sea level.

Cross-sectional studies show that elite athletes posses approximately 35% higher tHb-mass than the normal population, which is further elevated by 14% in athletes native to altitude of 2600 m.

Although the impact of this huge tHb-mass expansion on performance is not yet investigated for altitude conditions, lowland athletes seek for possibilities to increase tHb-mass to similar levels.

At sea level tHb-mass is only moderately influenced by training and depends more on genetic predisposition.

Altitude training in contrast, using either the conventional altitude training or the live high-train low (>14 h/day in hypoxia) protocol for 3-4 weeks above 2500 m leads to mean increases in tHb-mass of 6.5%.

This increase is, however, not sufficient to close the gap in tHb-mass to elite athletes native to altitude, which may be in advantage when tHb-mass has the same strong influence on aerobic performance at altitude as it has on sea level.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

A team doctor for a National cycling body informed me back some 20 years ago (he was my personal doctor) when these athletes were getting busted for Nandrolone, that they were taking this drug to strengthen their leg muscles to handle all the extra training they could do while on epo. Strangely athletes thought it was a masking agent, yet they kept getting popped for it.

Fascinating info & research you bring to the table! (you be da man!). And that's what I had read up on is that the strategy with distance running & cycling is EPO for improvements in VO2max, LT, time to exhaustion, etc. and androgens for strength & recovery from the increased training load from EP0.

It's time to get to the bottom of this: way too many positives for 19-Norandrosterone & Nandrolone with distance runners over the last 3 decades...they all can't be from "tainted supplements" ?

You dopey idiot, if you know anything about 800m you'd know 1:44 is an elite time. The point I made is if Bosse ran hard out and did this time to win the World Championships then it is obviously an elite time.

The entire theme of this thread is that the EPO era distorted historical times. 3:32 is elite for 1500m as are Ben True (13:02) and Paul Chelimo (13:03) over 5000m. To say they aren't or a 2:08 marathon isn't elite is rubbish.

And this is another research :

Blood volume and hemoglobin mass in endurance athletes from moderate altitude.

Schmidt W1, Heinicke K, Rojas J, Manuel Gomez J, Serrato M, Mora M, Wolfarth B, Schmid A, Keul J.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To determine whether total hemoglobin (tHb) mass and total blood volume (BV) are influenced by training, by chronic altitude exposure, and possibly by the combination of both conditions.

METHODS:

Four groups (N = 12, each) either from locations at sea level or at moderate altitude (2600 m) were investigated: 1) sea-level control group (UT-0 m), 2) altitude control group (UT-2600 m), 3) professional cyclists from sea level (C-0 m), and 4) professional cyclists from altitude (C-2600 m). All subjects from altitude were born at about 2600 m and lived all their lives (except during competitions at lower levels) at this altitude. tHb and BV were determined by the CO-rebreathing method.

RESULTS:

VO2max (mL x kg(-1) x min(-1)) was significantly higher in UT-0 m (45.3 +/- 3.2) than in UT-2600 m (39.6 +/- 4.0) but did not differ between C-0 m (68.2 +/- 2.7) and C-2600 m (69.9 +/- 4.4). tHb (g x kg(-1)) was affected by training (UT-0 m: 11.0 +/- 1.1, C-0 m: 15.4 +/- 1.3) and by altitude (UT-2600 m: 13.4 +/- 0.9) and showed both effects in C-2600 m (17.1 +/- 1.4). Because red cell volume showed a behavior similar to tHb and because plasma volume was not affected by altitude but by training, BV (mL x kg(-1)) was increased in C-0 m (UT-0 m: 78.3 +/- 7.9; C-0 m: 107.0 +/- 6.2) and in UT-2600 m (88.2 +/- 4.8), showing highest values in the C-2600 m group (116.5 +/- 11.4).

CONCLUSION:

In endurance athletes who are native to moderate altitude, tHb and BV were synergistically influenced by training and by altitude exposure, which is probably one important reason for their high performance.