Another Kenyan busted

What the heck are you talking about? Just like for Malm and Schumacher, I don't dismiss Salazar's statement. I accepted Salazar's 1999 statement, made long before his world-renowned coaching success, that you quoted, that starts with "I believe that ...". I don't doubt that he may have believed that in 1999, before his experience with NOP.

If I'm dismissing anyone, I'm dismissing your attempts to tell me what it all must mean, as if you are offering some counter-proofs that contradicts me. They only reconfirm what I've said from the beginining and all along: "belief is widespread and even goes to the top".

In the spirit of not dismissing Salazar, he also said, in a 1998 New York Times article that it wasn't EPO, but that the difficulty was that athletes from third world countries were willing to taking steroids and human-growth hormones.

In a 2013 interview with Weldon Johnson, here is what Salazar said when he was a world renowned coach with Olympic medalists:

"I think a lot was psychological. I think Americans and Europeans just gave up. Another big problem I believe was there’s too many people who use the excuse of drugs, that anyone who runs fast is on drugs. The second you start thinking that as a coach or as an athlete you’re basically saying you're not good enough to compete with other people unless you cheat. What I've always told our guys is 'Don’t believe all that bull. Those are the losers that say that.' Rather than trying to change their own training to get better they use that as excuse and it’s a defeatist attitude. A lot of the mind-set for us was 'We can beat these guys. We’ve just got to train smart.'"

In a follow-up question from Weldon asking about this apparent change of heart: "Alberto pointed out that the anti-doping world had changed a lot in the thirteen years since 1999, and the testing was much better so clean athletes could compete in 2012". What was that? What did Salazar say? Clean athletes could compete in 2012!

So tell me, who is arbitrarily dismissing Salazar? Which Salazar should we believe, and which Salazar should we dismiss, and on what basis do we make that choice, if not arbitrarily?

And what did you say that Roberto Barbi said he took? "... from that moment on I did everything: Gh, various hormones, ephedrine... A shopping list ..." So in the end, what helped him? Doping? EPO? Hormones? GH? etc.? Training? Years of marathon training? Placebo?

Instead of cherry-picking who to believe and who to follow, from all this gossip, what is needed to settle the question is "tons of data showing cause & effect".

It is unbelievable that you quote someone on how not to cheat who was subsequently convicted of a doping violation. Your capacity for not seeing what is inconvenient is unmatched.

Don't conflate "popular myth" with "common sense".

I continue to think that dismissing me as a troll is an intellectual cop-out coming from those generally unable to support their beliefs with concrete evidence based arguments.

I don't ask anyone to change their beliefs, but simply to defend them. For most people this means determining who to believe, or what to believe -- a decision made at a time when they possess little knowledge -- and then clinging tightly to this uninformed decision, rather than using their time and resources and mental capacity to increase and fortify their knowledge.

Did he say that with a straight face? Kind a sad, considering that we know that Salazar cheated as an athlete and as a coach.

Dismissing that 2013 quote is not "arbitrarily". It is based on facts.

You shouldn't believe it. It was "Here's my take" who brought a Salazar quote into this Kenyan thread. I'm just wondering which Salazar I am supposed to believe, and which one I am permitted to arbitrarily dismiss.

My memory is getting hazy. Remind me again, which elite NOP athlete commited the rule violation(s) for whom Salazar was convicted of doping?

The thing is -- it always takes two to tango. The ones who respond to me the most are precisely the ones who consistently fail to defend their beliefs.

This is still based on an arbitrary subset of the facts we know.

When we know Salazar "cheated as an athlete", he hadn't been in the top-5 for about a decade.

What we know about Salazar the coach doesn't involve any rule violations of any elite NOP athlete in the top-5.

The Salazar who has lost all credibility is the one who broke the antidoping rules and who received a 4 year ban. Quoting with approval his comments on how not cheat shows how you always leave out that which completely undercuts your arguments.

Rekrunner either your comprehension ability is diminishing or you're trolling: Barbi clearly states that it was the EPO that significantly improved his times making him feel like a "Superman:" 💪

avvenire.it

la denuncia. «La mia corsa fermata dall'Epo»

«La mia corsa fermata dall'Epo»

Link:www.avvenire.it/agora/pagine/corsaferm...

Rekrunner - do you remember another high-profile Kenyan doping case involving Daniel Wanjuri? A 2:05/59 speedster that was busted for hematological anomalies on his ABP?

On the eve of the 2019 London HM, where he smoked the course running 1:01:17 & finishing just a couple seconds behind Farah & Abdi, a blood sample was taken showing a high Off-score of 132.5 & a corresponding high Hgb of 19.4 (58 Hct) - way above his his upper intraindividual limit! 😲

athleticsillustrated.com

Daniel Wanjiru's four-year doping banned upheld by CAS

Athleticsillustrated

Kenyan marathon runner Daniel Wanjiru's four-year doping banned upheld by the Court of Arbitration for Sport

Link:athleticsillustrated.com/daniel-wanjir...

Wanjuri was doped to the gills for London finishing less than 2 seconds behind to world-class top elite runners! Lol

So you can't recall either which NOP athlete broke into the top-5 easily with EPO and HGH? Wasn't Salazar busted for doping his non-athlete sons with testosterone, and for pressuring Magness to self-dope with the method of an excessive infusion of a legal substance?

I need a little help with your English. "on how not cheat"? Did Salazar comment "on how not cheat"? Did I approve Salazar's comments "on how not cheat"? I'm pretty sure I was just the messenger here, approving of none of the messages, but simply pointing to various seemingly contradictory statements in 1998, 1999, and 2013 -- wondering which I am permitted to dismiss and which I must arbitrarily accept.

But if Salazar has lost all credibility, my hand is forced, and I must arbitrarily dismiss Salazar regardless -- sorry "Here's my take" -- you lose, according to the Gospel of Armstronglivs because my arguments would be undercut completely.

I do not doubt that athletes like Barbi believe in the powerful performance effects of EPO. Just because Barbi said it is true, that does not make it true. Don't be so naive and gullilble as to keep arguing the same fallacy.

But apparently even Barbi didn't fully believe in the power of EPO alone as he "... did everything: Gh, various hormones, ephedrine... A shopping list ...". Due to the presence of all these confounders, I have to conclude that Barbi has no real clue which of these substances caused his improvements. What we need is a "ton of data showing cause & effect".

Yet another attempt to argue the "proof by example" fallacy? How many examples do you believe are required before arguing a fallacy will suddenly become valid?

Ok, about Wanjiru, what was the measured "effect"? What was the determined "cause"? Based on which data?

Let me throw this around at you for once - since you seem to have all the answers (though most of the time I think you're just clowning around for the sake of arguing with people 🤡).

Can you present any evidence that Wanjuri would have smoked the London half finishing 3rd almost beating Farah clean?

How about the cases of Kiptum, Boulami & Ramzi that I brought up: Can you provide any evidence that either of them would have shattered those WRs or won Olympic gold clean?

So many issues with this seemingly reasonable request (also known as the "burden of proof" fallacy or an attempted "appeal to ignorance" fallacy). One might start to think that it is you trolling me. The short answer is that I shouldn't let you throw this around at me, but I will address it anyway: 1) it is not proper to reverse the burden if you are the one trying to establish an effect exists; 2) reversing the burden only proves my claim that you don't have the data sufficient to establish "cause & effect"; and 3) yes I can present and provide "any evidence".

It is not clowning around to point out the frequently used biases and fallacies that are necessary to prop up widespread beliefs that even the "experts" only speculate with caution (i.e. lacking "tons of data showing cause and effect"). It is the universal reliance on such fallacies that only strengthen my expressed doubts.

I thought that with all the ABP cases and EPO violations, and opinions of experts from studies on blood doping, and performance drops associated with ABP implementation, that you were trying to convince me that "blood doping works". Your reverse "clean" scenario means no doping at all, which would equally eliminate potential non-blood doping confounders.

In math and science, the burden is not only to establish the non-spurious relation between two variables with data, e.g. doping causing faster-than-natural performance, but also to disprove the null hypothesis, i.e. that no relation exists because either there is no significant "effect", or the "cause" is some other variable not being examined. By first assuming the conclusion (another fallacy), and asking me to prove the null hypothesis (prove a negative?) with data, you are effectively conceding you do not have "tons of data showing cause & effect" -- in other words, this exercise also assumes that my claim is true before I even begin the exercise.

Nevertheless, the confounding evidence I can provide against conclusions of blood-doping causing faster-than-natural performances is that 1) WADA legal altitude training also "works", confounding determining blood-doping as the cause, and 2) the nearly complete lack of real world examples from the entire population of sea-level non-Africans of the comparable shattering of the WRs, or even ARs, or NRs, during an era spanning nearly three decades, widely believed to have significantly benefited from the convenience and widespread availability and widespread use of EPO with the express intent to cause the effect of faster than natural performance.

You really are the slimiest debater on these boards. It doesn't have to be proven that any NOP athlete doped for Salazar to be convicted of antidoping offences. Proof of that was that he was convicted while no NOP athletes were. No one is banned for 4 years for doping offences, as he was, without a serious breach of the rules. That is a person who has no credibility in preaching ethical standards to anyone else. And then we have his life ban from Safe Sport for what he did to minors. That you overlook these things to use Salazar to try to shore up your delusions on doping shows that lying through omission is always at the core of your method.

Why don’t you respond to this thread?

None of this seems relevant to the on-going discussion about "blood doping and Human Growth Hormone" and the difficulty of being "among the top 5 in the world".

I predicted that someone would dismiss Salazar's 2013 statement, and you unwittingly instantly provided me with the case in point.

I do not rely on Salazar's changing expressed beliefs or expertise one way or another, but find that they all lack the data which could persuade me that "blood doping works".

I don't "unwittingly" provide anything; I reject your quoting Salazar as an authority on doping ethics or any sporting ethics.