Solomon suddenly world class and Rupp soloing 3.50 indoor miles - Come on Letsun, ask the questions!

basic physiology wrote:

Lydiard is God wrote:

Err, but it would be alactic, anaerobic, stressing only the immediate energy release systems, with no lactate buildup.

What is so bad about lactate? Do you even know what lactate is? Obviously not.

Lactate is energy, but lactate buildup means it will take longer time to recover, therefore he doesn't want that.

It's a speed workout, it doesn't matter if there is a lactate buildup. And anyway, with long recoveries the lactate is used for that recovery.

Anyway, even with short sprints, there is a lactate build up because creatine will only supply half the energy of a 30-40m sprint and the rest is glcyogenolytic/glycolytic ATP with lactate production.

Like P White I'm bowing out on this thread.

Very few people in this thread have said they think Solomon or Rupp are doping.

There is a huge difference between saying "we should ask questions" and "they are doping."

Yes a few people have said on here they think one of the athletes may be doping. Big deal. That is their right.

There are many more others who think these athletes are clean.

And you know what? We have now way of proving it either way. Yet "A Duck" and others somehow divinely want us to know the "truth."

I say it is far healthier for a clean sport to let people air their questions and sometimes their accusations. When someone on here says "I know so and so is doping." that usually is just sports fan hyperbole meaning "I think so and so is doping."

We got crucified by people for letting threads go on Lance Armstrong. And you know what? The people who said he was doping were right.

At the same time, I let threads go with people saying I was doping. I know I'm clean, but I don't have a problem with people saying they think my progression wasn't natural.

When Cathal Lombard drilled me in a 10k in the UK, people got on here and said he must be on something. I remember laughing and thinking that was crazy. Yet I didn't shut down the thread because I disagreed with it. And you know what he was proven to be a cheat.

The point is I don't know if an athlete is clean or dirty and neither do you. It is ok to have the discussion. Do some people get a little overheated. Of course. That is how sports fans work.

This thread shows what we know about sports. Fans don't like their own teams or players being criticized. Ray Lewis is a thug, for many outside of Baltimore, but to those in Baltimore he's "passionate". Dallas Cowboys are "America's Team" to some and a joke to others.

It's ok to ponder about athlete "X" and drugs but if you ponder about athlete "Y" it is inappropriate.

Take out the names. "RE: AAAAAA suddenly world class and BBBBB soloing 3.50 indoor miles - Come on Letsun, ask the questions!"

That to me is a perfectly legitimate thread. I have not hidden behind this view point. Some of you disagree. That is fine, but just be consistent with your logic.

Wejo, I've always found fault around the notion that someone's "progression" is proof or even an indication of doping. Most of the busted runners in our sport have had gradual progressionsm and most of the people who have major breakthroughs (uneven progressions) are as clean as Mother Theresa. Rupp's sudden breaktrough in the last 18 months isn't proof of anything, even though he has had a sudden breakthrough in his speed (1500) and his finishing kick, going from top 8-10 championship material to a world beater. With Rupp and the NOP crew the TUEs and thyroid meds are a flag, and a bona fide reason for suspicion. Also, Rupp's coaches associations with Victor Conte, Dr. Stray-Gundersen (EPO expert) and Mary Slaney are also valid reasons for suspicion. Doesn't make Rupp or Salazar guilty, but is sure doesn't look right.

Bloodhound wrote:

Wejo, I've always found fault around the notion that someone's "progression" is proof or even an indication of doping. Most of the busted runners in our sport have had gradual progressionsm and most of the people who have major breakthroughs (uneven progressions) are as clean as Mother Theresa. Rupp's sudden breaktrough in the last 18 months isn't proof of anything, even though he has had a sudden breakthrough in his speed (1500) and his finishing kick, going from top 8-10 championship material to a world beater. With Rupp and the NOP crew the TUEs and thyroid meds are a flag, and a bona fide reason for suspicion. Also, Rupp's coaches associations with Victor Conte, Dr. Stray-Gundersen (EPO expert) and Mary Slaney are also valid reasons for suspicion. Doesn't make Rupp or Salazar guilty, but is sure doesn't look right.

I got back on here to make one more point I forgot to post and I saw your post.

First I'll address your post. I have never understood the thyroid issue as being evidence of doping. If you get a legitimate TUE for thyroid medication you can use it. It is not doping. Now some want to believe that thyroid medication can give an unfair advantage and should be banned, but if it is allowed and you have a legitimate TUE for it, I don't see how that is doping. I would argue if you think it gives an unfair advantage then you should push for getting the TUE rule for thyroid changed. I think athletes should be transparent about their TUEs. Some may think thyroid medication is against the spirit of sport which I am fine with. Then the rule needs to be changed. I don't want the person with the best doctors to win, I want the best athlete to win.

On another point, Mary Slaney is a drug cheat according to the IAAF. Everytime I write that I get nasty emails but according to the IAAF her ban was never overturned and she is a cheat. Alberto did coach her when she got her ban. Those are facts from what I can discern:

Yes I know Mary and her crew dispute the T/E ratio test.

Does that mean Alberto doped her? Of course not. Athletes dope all the time without their coach's knowledge.

The point I was going to make before seeing Bloodhound's post was that the the "The Super Hot" on Letsrun on the homepage is automatically generated by a computer. If a thread gets so many hits in a certain time period it goes to the homepage. I didn't agree with the title of the thread yesterday about Goucher "Slamming" Alberto but the poster made it that way. Yet "A Duck" somehow wants to use that as evidence of my bias.

wejo wrote:I have never understood the thyroid issue as being evidence of doping. If you get a legitimate TUE for thyroid medication you can use it. It is not doping. Now some want to believe that thyroid medication can give an unfair advantage and should be banned, but if it is allowed and you have a legitimate TUE for it, I don't see how that is doping.

Wejo. It might help if you familiarize yourself with the functions of the thyroid and the hormones secreted by it. Anyone who is manipulating their testosterone and/or EPO production is also changing the secretions of the thyroid hormones.

The thyroid hormones are inextricably linked to the pituitary and hypothalamus, all of which produce hormones necessary to growth, strength and metabolism. As someone else said, once you push one button the other buttons need pushing too.

From the pituitary:

Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH)

Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH)

Luteinizing Hormone (LH) responsible for secreting testosterone (get where they are going yet?)

Growth Hormone (HGH)

ACTH — the adrenocorticotropic hormone (also involved in testosterone production)

From the hypothalamus:

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) (also involved in testosterone production)

Corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) acts to release ACTH

Bodybuilders who take steroids or HGH upset the balance of the other hormones in the body. The body senses too much here so it tries to balance things by cutting back on secretions of complimentary hormones elsewhere which will eventually wreck the body. Along comes modern science so that doctors who are monitoring androgenic/anabolic hormones will also manipulate and restore FSH, TSH, CRH etc. to their normal levels.

If you're taking EPO and your thyroid is all jacked up, aren't you feeling lousy all the time? From what little I know about hypo and hyperthyroidism, it affects people differently, but it isn't conducive to elite training/racing (aches, fatigues, tiredness, sleeplessness, weight loss or gain, etc).

wejo wrote:

I didn't agree with the title of the thread yesterday about Goucher "Slamming" Alberto but the poster made it that way. Yet "A Duck" somehow wants to use that as evidence of my bias.

So thats why the "Adam Goucher slams Salazar" was renamed "Adam Goucher regrets training with Salazar" on the frontpage? Found that to be quite weird.

Stop hating these guys give 100% every single day and fast times come as a result. Just because somebody's good doesn't mean they're on drugs

Alberto Contadoro wrote: interesting posts.

So the IAAF don't put an upper limit on hematocrit levels, just query the variation?, and the UCI have a more effective screening process because they do?.

The cyclists seem to think it's more effective anyway:

Cycling - At least it's not distance running

Nope. Why do you say you "really" want Rupp to be clean? What would that validate for you? And who would be listening when you would say he passed 5 out of competition tests in the last 8 months and 3 at races? Aside from those folks bored and thus reading this thread, no one. This whole approach is like Lyndon Johnson's take on making his opponent deny what no one could believe. Look it up. And the knowing references to Jos Hermans? Truly pathetic. Study the results from Hengelo 2004 and let's hear the answers to the hard questions.

So what if some people are suspicious of Salazar and his runners? Of course, we do not know either way whether his runners are using PEDs. But speculation is permitted and understandable. Salazar himself has done plenty of speculating about others, so why would he be immune from being on the other end of it? Salazar knows that this is part of the game he plays.

As has been said before, all of Salazar's athletes are not on thyroid replacement therapy.

You are still over-reacting.You throw around a lot of extreme terms like "slander" and "hate crime", but these things simply did not happen.Anyway, I guess you really meant "libel", and not "slander". In any case, for speech to qualify as slanderous, or libelous, you have to show elements of malice, and possibly that there was damage to his reputation. It might be hard to argue that a poster named "Lick my love pump" actually caused damage to an athlete's reputation.You also have the wrong expectations about standards of a public forum. Such behavior did happen all the time in pre-internet days, in every bar, and locker room. Was anyone of the public ever convicted for uttering the same kinds of statements? A largely unmoderated forum is a similar cross-section of the public. Do you have any examples where any bar customer, school child, or message board poster was actually convicted for expressing his unfounded opinions about the sexuality or doping of an athlete? I think a conviction of slander or libel in these circumstances is unprecedented in any free country.Which forums do elite athletes contribute? Actually we might never know how many contribute anonymously. But I think the real reason they don't contribute to this forum is the same reason they don't come to my house or go bowling with me. They have their own life. Why should they mingle with the public? They already have public life, and likely enjoy their privacy when they can.

A Duck wrote:

Free speech doesn't cover slander.

Behavior that has been permitted here, would never be permitted pre Internet.

You're not taking the context of how small this sport is in the USA.

There is indeed a real reason you don't see elite athletes contributing to these forums.

Alberto Contadoro wrote: It is not the athletes fault that they start doping, it is the system. Who would blame a poor boy who spent all his resources the last 10 years at becoming the best runner possible. Encouraged by coaches and parents yelling everything is possile if you want it enough. Then he finds learns that it really isnt true after all, by himself, by a manager, coach or agent.

if what you're saying is true, then that really sucks.

i guess there would have been a snowball effect over the decades, as technology improved and prize money increased.

WBennett wrote:

Stop hating these guys give 100% every single day and fast times come as a result. Just because somebody's good doesn't mean they're on drugs

Just because you really, really want the world to be a fairy tale doesn't mean that it is.

I agree with much of what you are saying. However the real problem is the brainwahsing dogma that makes people believe in so called PED's like you do.

You're 50-55% hematocrit figures are typical, but misguided. Do you realize what that means in terms of lower plasma percentage, think about it, it's simple aritmetic. Now think about how the heart is supposed to pump all of that and ask yourself how it can be more efficient at pumping all of that around the system instead of natural numbers, whereby heart rate and stroke volume can give you all of the oxgyen you need and more. You just have to learn how to use it efficiently.

oatsandbananas wrote:

So Nike is supposed to regulate and rule everyone's individual decisions? I don't live my life in such a controlling way.

Bump. ^This is how it works in real life.

This is a fair point. We have seen a few big improvements and doping busts since this thread. I think Mo Farah's 1500 made it harder to question big PRs. I realize that I tend not to doubt guys like Mo or Haile G because I have seen them so often. Yet, if i saw such improvement late in a career from someone else who I dont know, I might have been more skeptical.There is a gut feel to a lot of this, especially when watching sprinting. It's ok to ask questions.