Abraham Kiptum WORLD RECORD 58:18 Half Marathon

Lie #1

Lie #2

Lie #3

Lie # 4

Racist undertones #1

Lie #5

Racist undertones #2

Lie #6

Lie #7

Racist undertones #3 and #4

LOL

Liiee detector wrote:

Coevett wrote:

The fastest 1500m time by a Kenyan, NOT from the EPO free for all era, and NOT at Monaco, and NOT busted for EPO, is AUGUSTINE KIPRONO CHOGE with a 3:29.47 in 2009.

Lie #6

Coevett wrote:

The next fastest is Potato Tim 3:29.77 this year in Paris. Coe, Ovett, and Cram were running these kind of times 30 years ago.

LOL at the potato Tim comment, but me personally if I had to bet on who is the clean 1500m world record holder I would bet on Augustine Choge.

10/10

Coevett goes home devastated.

lmao ??? wrote:

Liiee detector wrote:

Lie #6

LOL at the potato Tim comment, but me personally if I had to bet on who is the clean 1500m world record holder I would bet on Augustine Choge.

Why do you say that? ?

lmao ??? wrote:

Liiee detector wrote:

Lie #6

LOL at the potato Tim comment, but me personally if I had to bet on who is the clean 1500m world record holder I would bet on Augustine Choge.

If I had to bet it would most certainly be Nick Willis.

don't think so wrote:

lmao ??? wrote:

LOL at the potato Tim comment, but me personally if I had to bet on who is the clean 1500m world record holder I would bet on Augustine Choge.

If I had to bet it would most certainly be Nick Willis.

Are you saying that the 2 dozen or so dudes running faster than him are all doped?

Excellent. Straight from the Drumpf playbook: if you repeat a lie enough, sooner or later people start to believe it. It's impossible for him to string a single sentence without loading it with lies.

So, to remind everyone what is straw, and what is real, my initial comment (to Armstronglivs) was "You speak of a high doping prevalence, which means that many non-Africans are doping too, yet still not realizing performances significantly better than what was achieved in the mid-1980s." And you replied "Finally, rek what, no significant non African improvements in the last 28 years? Kidding, right? From 14:23 to 2:15 for the ladies, or 26:44 and 59:33 for the guys, I would call that significant." (This means you were the one who brought Rupp into the discussion). Significant is a relative term requiring perspective. While it can be called "significant" from a non-African perspective, my context is world performances, because top athletes must compete with the rest of the world. 26:44 is not significant compared to 26:17. And 59:33 is not significant, compared to 58:19. What you call significant, actually pales in significance when looking at a bigger picture. The fact that Rupp is the only 10K example, with Solinsky second best, both after the ABP, after two decades of EPO-era, and 26:44 is far from 26:17, raises the question, assuming HIGH prevalence, where was this HIGH effect for non-Africans at the top, in the 25 years between 1989 and 2014? This is also what you call misleading, cheekily suggesting this was proven misleading, as if it could be misleading to compare the less significant progress of a few non-Africans to the much larger progress of many more Africans, despite assumptions of worldwide high doping prevalance, and worldwide high effect, and the reality that EPO was available worldwide to all groups, as well as worldwide lack of testing, or ease of beating tests, for much of this period, until the ABP made it that much harder. I agree with you it would be hard to use Barrios or Rupp in an EPO discussion without first establishing they took it. You suggested Barrios could have in 1989, but this is highly unlikely. In the Barrios/Rupp comparison, it is the lack of examples besides Rupp that is significant. I find no doping/clean combination where assumptions of high prevalance, and a high effect can explain the insignificant progress by an insignificant number of non-Africans, without introducing some contradiction. We would have to assume low prevalence for the top non-Africans (like Coevett assumes near 0% for non-Africans), despite knowledge of countries like Spain, Russia, Ukraine, Egypt, Turkey, Greece, ..., with high prevalence of doping, according to leaked blood results, yet unable to beat Barrios, while a few Americans and Canadians, countries with much lower prevalence, according to leaked blood results, managed to beat Barrios. Or we have to conclude low effect. Or we have to conclude substantially different natural abilities between the different ethnic groups. The only distraction or obfuscation is when you suggested it was proved that I was misleading, or that I produced any strawman argument.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I didn't say you did, but that it is done.

Correct. The very definition of a straw man argument, for that had nothing to do with me.

rekrunner wrote:

I explained in detail exactly where my numbers came from -- I don't see how anyone possessing a minimum of intelligence could have been misled, at least not by me.

Also correct. That's rare. But again a distraction, because my point was that the Barrios - Rupp comparison cannot help determining the advantages from EPO doping, not that I couldn't see where those - here useless - numbers came from.

Not surprisingly, you never explained in detail exactly how the Barrios - Rupp comparison would help you here. Instead you went straight to your typical obfuscation mode.

rekrunner wrote:

Significant is a relative term requiring perspective.

Oh? In which dictionary?

See e.g. Oxford:

"sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy.

‘a significant increase in sales’

‘The nurses want a significant increase in their flat fee for agreeing to be on call.’

rekrunner wrote:

I find no doping/clean combination where assumptions of high prevalance, and a high effect can explain the insignificant progress by an insignificant number of non-Africans, without introducing some contradiction.

a) There was significant progress, see e.g. the 26:44.

b) Oh really? As you know, the estimates from the experts were in comparison to a clean baseline, varying from 1%/1.5% (Ashenden) to 3.6% (Schumacher). You are using an arbitrary, self-chosen baseline... If you assume the same doping prevalence pre- and post-1990, then you can easily explain why the progress was less than Schumacher's 3.6%.

No contradiction whatsoever, just consistence, as explained to you several times. Why would current athletes be worse than the ones of the past?

And no, before you start that again: the Ethiopians could not have given themselves blood transfusions in the 80s in Ethiopia.

I'll ignore the tedious false allegations of racism, but I will defend the 'GB as traditional powerhouse of middle-distance running' claim.

GB has more athletes in both the top 50 and the top 100 all time European rankings at 800m than any other country.

GB has more athletes in the top 100 all time European rankings at 1500m than any other country. It has one less (10) than Spain (11) in the top 50 simply because Spain was the most successful European nation in the EPO era (being at the center of the 'dirty triangle').

Four of the top ten 1500m European times are British.

The 800m world record has been broken by three different British athletes, one German, one Belgian, and an Italian.

In the IAAF era, the mile world record has been broken by five different British athletes, two Swedes, and one Finn.

In the IAAF era, the 1500m world record has been broken by three different Brits and three different Swedes (when the GB and the rest of Europe had been exhausted from fighting the most murderous war in history).

GB has won 6 800m golds, tied with the USA and more than Kenya. The rest of Europe combined (inc Russia) has won 3 800m golds.

GB has won 6 1500m golds, the next best European nation is Finland with 3.

The four greatest European middle-distance runners in history are Albert Hill, Seb Coe, Steve Ovett, and Steve Cram.

The only European to perform the Olympic 800/1500 double is Albert Hill. The only European to defend his 800m gold is Douglas Lowe. The only European to defend his 1500m gold is Seb Coe.

This year eight of the top 20 European 800m times were Brits.

This year seven of the top 20 European 1500m times were Brits.

This year four of the top 20 European 800m times were Brits (and 5 of the top 21).

This year nine of the top 20 under 18 European 1500m times were Brits.

The European record holder (excluding Kipketer) at 800 and 1000 is Seb Coe.

The European record holder at 1500m is Mo Farah.

The European record holder at the Mile is Steve Cram.

In other words - you're a racist moron.

I don't know how I can be more clear. In the context of East African progress in the 10K, 26:44 is not great or important or worthy of attention or noteworthy. As I have explained to you many times, the non-African progress (for male distance running events), relative to the significant progress of the Africans, is insignificant, both in terms of quantity and quality. Don't be confused with my chosen baseline for measuring progress in terms of quality and quantity. This is a different measure than my expectation for individual EPO effect from a well established clean baseline. I also made that clear in my performance thread, that progress of a group was not the same as individual effect. All of these scenarios become much more consistent when you assume a small effect for elite athletes at the top, that is a consequence of expecting diminishing returns from athletes with higher talent, and look for non-doping factors to explain the significant differences between the different groups.

Coevett wrote:

I'll ignore the tedious false allegations of racism, but

But you won't admit you lied and you lie and you lie.

Have you addressed any of the lies I pointed out?

Will you?

Of course you won't, keyboard troll warrior.

I didn't even bother with the drivel you posted.

Go white runners! Nick Willis the 1500m world record holder! Kenyans with receding hairlines, "bloody" age cheat dopers all of them!

You probably feel great there in the Czech Republic, mostly white people around you.

Try visiting Illinois.

Are you sub 25 for the 5K yet? If you are you might win an age group prize in one of the many 5K charity races we hold in Chicago.

But you just suck at running, don't you?

Go Coevett!

Ignore it when your lies are called out!

Defend the whites! Attack the non-whites!

You would be so successful over here...

Coevett wrote:

In other words - you're a racist moron.

PS: One of my parents was born in Africa (black) and the other in the US (white). And I love them both.

So you lose - again.

You need help.

Liiee detector wrote:

Go white runners! Nick Willis the 1500m world record holder! Kenyans with receding hairlines, "bloody" age cheat dopers all of them!

.

Do you believe 3:26 & 3:27 can be run cleanly?

Do you not think that Willis was robbed of an Olympic gold in 2008?

Coevett wrote:

You need help.

You need to stop posting your lies and racist stuff here.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Liiee detector wrote:

Go white runners! Nick Willis the 1500m world record holder! Kenyans with receding hairlines, "bloody" age cheat dopers all of them!

.

Do you believe 3:26 & 3:27 can be run cleanly?

I think rekrunner does? So, how do we reach some conclusions here?

There are only 5 guys in history of this discipline who have run 3:26 & 3:27; El G, Lagat, Kiprop, Morceli & Kiplagat. I believe rekrunner's thesis is they're all times that wouldn't be influenced by EPO because these are the very at the "top elites."

Some history: Out of these top 5 - you have Lagat with an "A" sample positive for EPO back in the mid-00s that was not confirmed with the "B" sample - so rekrunner will say you don't count Lagat as a doping with EPO (?). Kiprop has a confirmed EPO positive from late 2017 and his 3:26 PB was set in 2015. I believe rekrunner has said that Kiprop wasn't using EPO in 2015 because his times started to decline subsequent to this PB and Kiprop's positive is more than 2 yrs post PB (?). Kiplagat was, I believe, listed on the FB leaked WADA document as likely doping/suspicious - but rekrunner puts little value on those classifications unless an actual ABP case is opened up and a sanction is enforced (?). That leaves El G with nothing concrete other than ties to a country with a very strong doping history & culture. Nothing on Algerian Morceli that stands out other than the 4th fastest 15 ever.

So, if the aforementioned athletes achieved those times clean as rekunner probably believes, then those 5 are far more superior in talent than Coe, Cram, Willis, etc. ever were. If, OTOH, they're doped - then would the "3:29's" of Coe, Cram, Willis, etc. be the fastest possible clean times that could ever be achieved by an athlete?

Note: Emphasis is placed on rekrunner's position on this considering his aggressiveness that EPO is marginally or practically ineffective with elites at the very top. If I've misstated his positive on the 5 aforementioned athletes then he can correct my interpretation of his analysis or re-state his position if he changed his views at all on this.

My view on the five mentioned was that Lagat was likely the cleanest given the longevity of his career. And Kiprop is unlikely to be the dirtiest of the 5, yet we know he is filthy. We have to sadly be suspicious of Lagat because Angel Heredia bragged of selling a special 'home brew' epo to North Americans that dissolved in a chaotic disorder, to such an extent that an A sample and B sample from the same athlete wouldn't match (or something taken with the epo). I'm not sure if Coe, Cram, Willis are the fastest clean times, Willis is the only one tested under the ABP, though it might be possible to run faster then them cleanly. The fact is to run 3:27, you have to run through 1km in 2:18 without tiring and then run 50% further again. For 3:26 you have to be even faster again. It seems to stretch credibility.