Half Marathon WR holder Abraham Kiptum busted by Bio Passport!!!!!!!!

casual obsever wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So how can an utterly dominant athlete like Kipchoge plausibly exist outside and above that framework, and also in an environment where doping has been shown to be rife?

He is roughly 1% better than the next guys, give or take.

With doping providing a boost of say, 3%, he is either

- dirty, and 1% better than the other cheats

- clean, and 4% better than all the cheats

- clean, and 1% better than the other clean guys because no talented marathoners are doping.

Or, one argues that doping does not work at the top, and then it's irrelevant for this discussion.

You can't allocate a specific value of 3% improvement on Peds for all athletes!

It depends on what drugs, dose size, length of use, training on those drugs and response to peds. Every athlete is different and there hasn't been enough research and trials on elite athletes to conclude a blanket 3%. I would suggest that the average is much lower, perhaps somewhere between 1 and 2%. Perhaps there is a sliding scale and that percentage would rise slightly as the distance increases.

How do you explain then Ramzi's amazing jump from 3:39 to 3:30 in little over one (1) year (~4.1%) coinciding with the time he started training with Boulami? And don't forget his insane performance at Helsinki where he won double GOLD, including setting his 800 PB, while running around with astronomically high Off-scores (158/143).

And then there is that little matter when he tested positive IC for CERA @ Beijing winning GOLD and beating another famous doper at the line. Lol. Btw, Ramzi's best time he could muster post-ban was a paltry 3:37.59.

2003 3:39.30 Rabat (MAR)31 MAY 2003

2004 3:30.25 Roma (ITA)02 JUL 2004

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/bahrain/rashid-ramzi-190507

Read this:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2009/may/05/rashid-ramzi-drugs-athletics-steve-cram

rojo wrote:

To say he came out of nowhere may be a tiny bit misleading (although as Jonathan Gault said, "I follow running for a living and I've never heard of him." )

Before the WR he had run 27:44 for 10k, 59:36 for the half and 2:05:26 for the marathon.

The 1st results we see for the 29 year old are in 2015 - 2:11:36 for 3rd in Rabat. In 2016, he ran 59:36 for the half in Copenhagen. In 2017, he ran a road 10k in 27:44, 60:06 for the half and 2:05:26 for martheathon before setting the WR last year in the half and running 2:04:16 in Abu Dhabi.

What is your point caller, all those times are doped.

East African performances are at the point now of guilty until proven innocent. It is a shame but true.

Rato. wrote:

East African performances are at the point now of guilty until proven innocent. It is a shame but true.

Yikes...don't let Canova hear you say that.

trollism wrote:

Think if he comes back Ethiopian he knows that he's just setting himself up for the same humiliation.

Surely one day they'll start testing Ethiopians.

Could start with all 3 Epopians from London marathon. What a disgrace they are, smashing Bekele and Gebs times out of the park, coming from no where, complete scumbags.

I don't see how you can be confused by me referring you to the section 4.1. The document must be well known to you by now, I didn't feel it needed more specificity. Yet, since you ignored most of it, I have included it below in its entirety at the bottom, including footnotes and references to the peer-reviewed papers. What is clear is that "peer-reviewed" Ashenden/Parisotto, describe blood testing as a screening tool, and say it cannot be considered as definitive proof on its own, and questioning the legal surety, while the "Sunday Times" Ashenden/Parisotto argued that blood data alone was sufficient to lead to sanctions. The pre-2009 blood data is reliable for some purposes, like scientific analysis, and can be reliable (but not necessarily) as secondary evidence to extend a sanction. The claim in question was regarding obtaining a sanction on the blood data alone. You are getting desperate bringing up Paula again, but there is no contradiction saying some measurements did not accurately represent true values, while others did.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Ceteris paribus wrote:

When you try to sound clever and fail.

No I typed Ceteris and the autocorrect on this doesn't recognize Latin.

You also typed "paribus" and blah blah?

lolz

What about this wrote:

How do you explain then Ramzi's amazing jump from 3:39 to 3:30 in little over one (1) year (~4.1%) coinciding with the time he started training with Boulami? And don't forget his insane performance at Helsinki where he won double GOLD, including setting his 800 PB, while running around with astronomically high Off-scores (158/143).

And then there is that little matter when he tested positive IC for CERA @ Beijing winning GOLD and beating another famous doper at the line. Lol. Btw, Ramzi's best time he could muster post-ban was a paltry 3:37.59.

Ramzi, he no need to take EPO, EPO no help him. Only your stupidities would think that EPO could make 9 seconds difference in only one year of training with great guy Boulami. Ramzi lazy but EPO has placebo effect with good training it is all Boulami not EPO that makes the difference. Ramzi, 12 hard session per week with Boulami, he descended from Kalanjari tribe, natural genetic talent. But Ramzi, he got lazy again and maybe took EPO after he got caught but not when winning, only you idiots think that it is all peds can make real for lack of Kalanjari talent.

I am neither confused nor do I ignore it. The question was about evidence for your evidently false statement:

False statement, because not only could you not provide a reference, you know finally admitted what I've been saying all along:

Exactly my point. See for example:

The irony is that IAAF, WADA and CAS agree with Ashenden and Parisotto: yes, blood testing results can be considered as definitive proof of doping. Yet you prefer their original opinion.

Exactly, and that's really the only difference in opinion here. The IAAF says the data were good enough - in some cases - to extend a ban, and Parisotto and Ashenden think the data were also good enough - in some cases - to decide on a ban.

No need for all these petty snide remarks from the IAAF and you about Parisotto and Ashenden.

But granted, you succeeded again in getting the discussion off track with your insults towards selected experts. So congrats, I guess.

Peer Mediator wrote:

You can't allocate a specific value of 3% improvement on Peds for all athletes!

It depends on what drugs, dose size, length of use, training on those drugs and response to peds. Every athlete is different and there hasn't been enough research and trials on elite athletes to conclude a blanket 3%.

Correct, which is why I wrote "doping providing a boost of say, 3%".

Of course, the 3% are an estimate. That's why I often say 2 - 4%. Those numbers got attacked as too high by the doping apologists and as too low by the doping alarmists.

Three different sources were given above in this thread, describing gains of up to 30 seconds in the 5000 and 1 minute over 10000 m from blood doping alone. (But then, rekrunner started complaining about these experts, so we drifted off topic.)

For a 13:30 runner, that would be 3.7% from blood doping alone (3.2% for a (female) 15:30 runner), and for a 28:00 min runner 3.6% (3.2% for a (female) 31:30 runner). Yes, the experts said "up to", but

a) those numbers are larger than 3%,

b) those numbers do not include any synergistic effects from adding roids and HGH and the speed peptide.

I bett it’s more than that. Someone a few pages ago linked to this paper which says that EPO/blood doping improves performance by 5-8%.

ytyer wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

No I typed Ceteris and the autocorrect on this doesn't recognize Latin.

You also typed "paribus" and blah blah?

lolz

Yes as I stated I typed Ceteris Paribus but the 2nd part also changed. BNP Paribas is France's biggest bank, Android spell check knows this, and I am a tennis fan. Next time I'll pay more attention, thank you and I forgive you for not having a life.

Kenyan runners are the equivalent of fake nattys in bodybuilding.

What about this wrote:

How do you explain then Ramzi's amazing jump from 3:39 to 3:30 in little over one (1) year (~4.1%) coinciding with the time he started training with Boulami? And don't forget his insane performance at Helsinki where he won double GOLD, including setting his 800 PB, while running around with astronomically high Off-scores (158/143).

And then there is that little matter when he tested positive IC for CERA @ Beijing winning GOLD and beating another famous doper at the line. Lol. Btw, Ramzi's best time he could muster post-ban was a paltry 3:37.59.

2003 3:39.30 Rabat (MAR)31 MAY 2003

2004 3:30.25 Roma (ITA)02 JUL 2004

What is more telling for Ramzi came in a thread here last year when someone pointed out that he was trapped in the 3:39-3:40 doldrums for about 3 seasons. That obviously shows a guy committed to the sport that had reached the limit of his talent and then went, "Stuff this I'm going on the sauce like all the others." Boom! 9 seconds off in next to no time, probably more but he only raced sporadically.

Fake nattys wrote:

Kenyan runners are the equivalent of fake nattys in bodybuilding.

Ha! I had to laugh yesterday, some steriod bodybuilder trolling for followers followed me on instagram. One of his posts was an 'inspirational verse' from Arnold Schwarzenegger. An ape that spent 30 years on roids and was cheating on his wife in the family home.

It's a clear case of a Morrocan full-throttle program that they initiated in the 90s. So, you take a high-responder to 02-vector doping and presto he goes from an also ran to double-gold World champion, Olympic champion and 3:26.14 PB all in a short period of time! (and to see posters like rekrunner say it's more due to a change in training, nutrition, scenery, etc., is comical. ?).

Just think if he hadn't made the fatal mistake of transitioning to CERA from first-gen EPO he would have never been caught. They were told that CERA was only detectable in plasma and with a once/twice a month injection schedule only needed to boost Hgb levels, these dopers thought this was the Holy Grail of ESA's. Lol (thanks to Roche labs for jumping in and assisting WADA with the detection essay to catch these guys back then).

So the IAAF decide who should be outed as dirty .

Paula okay next person not ,

regardless of doping .

They basically decide who dopes with doping loopholes anyway

You are being gaslighted by your psychopathic overlords ,

like semenya , should be case by case decision and always leave so ,

more conflict in future.

If such athlete dominates in events say okay which are not like 400m

Etc still has advantage

Playing u for fool

As for ramzi ,

Cera was a magic ped ,

Much better than epo when at time still couldn't go full throttle.

The very few athletes that got hands on it from aprox 2003 on

were dominating events .

From bekele , race anywhere anytime until had to switch from

Summer 2008 like all athletes

had gebreselassise return to best

wariner in 400m and Richards in female event.

the steeplechaser switcharo.

Aussie 5000m

And Webb .

Select few but only ramsi was sacrificed to doping gods.

How did others know to be off by summer 2008 .

many of these athletes would never dominate same after or depending on ability to continue dope or how much needed decided how faded

IAAF are the drug pushers here.

Cera was to good so had to go .

And

Now got an even better p.e.d for speed but refuse to even mention.

The speed peptide.

And before someone mentions

but cera is epo.

Off course 3rd gen. but guaranteed higher hct if didn't respond as well as on epo and kept constant at mark for longer , just plain better . and could go full max at time and travel easier as less shots .

Why would IAAF not test back to 2006 as obvious ramzi and select few on it then too .

Well that is obvious .

IAAF have sport on lock down

They decide who lives or dies.