Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
So what is the optimal number of red blood cells?
sthdyt wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
You really enjoy being humiliated by rekrunner. You even tease him, waiting for him to school you.
Being proven right is a strange definition of "humiliation". But I guess you haven't been proven right very often. So you, too, are another doping apologist, who doesn't think EPO is performance enhancing? Or just a regular dumb f*ck?
Everyone's an expert wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
So what is the optimal number of red blood cells?
Jon - you've been missed.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
Did you read my response above?
This is not a question for uninformed fans who lack data and real-world observations. They will likely be confused, whatever the outcome.
These decisions are made by a committee of experts based on three factors 1) potential to enhance, 2) potential to harm, and 3) violate the spirit of the sport.
Armstronglivs wrote:
sthdyt wrote:
You really enjoy being humiliated by rekrunner. You even tease him, waiting for him to school you.
Being proven right is a strange definition of "humiliation". But I guess you haven't been proven right very often. So you, too, are another doping apologist, who doesn't think EPO is performance enhancing? Or just a regular dumb f*ck?
Proven right? hahahahahaha You? LOL
You are the only narcissist here claiming never to have been proven wrong. Only a mentally disturbed sociopath like you would say such a thing when they get proven wrong every single day.
You have never run a competitive step or coached a competitive runner in your life. You are way out of your depth here, boyo. Reading biographies and talking to people is no substitute for actual in-person knowledge, which you do not possess.
Your insults only show your lack of arguments. You are like a spoilt child who never grew up.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
Did you read my response above?
This is not a question for uninformed fans who lack data and real-world observations. They will likely be confused, whatever the outcome.
These decisions are made by a committee of experts based on three factors 1) potential to enhance, 2) potential to harm, and 3) violate the spirit of the sport.
+1
Armstronglivs wrote:
Everyone's an expert wrote:
So what is the optimal number of red blood cells?
Jon - you've been missed.
Hi rojo.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Yet if altitude-training isn't banned, why should EPO be banned, when we have it on rekrunner's authority that it isn't performance enhancing of elite altitude-trained athletes? WADA clearly doesn't know what he does.
Did you read my response above?
This is not a question for uninformed fans who lack data and real-world observations. They will likely be confused, whatever the outcome.
These decisions are made by a committee of experts based on three factors 1) potential to enhance, 2) potential to harm, and 3) violate the spirit of the sport.
We know who makes the decisions.
So, in your opinion and not WADA'S, does EPO enhance the performance of altitude-trained elites?
sthdyt wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Did you read my response above?
This is not a question for uninformed fans who lack data and real-world observations. They will likely be confused, whatever the outcome.
These decisions are made by a committee of experts based on three factors 1) potential to enhance, 2) potential to harm, and 3) violate the spirit of the sport.
+1
So you like it when he completely ignores the point he purports to be responding to?
So does EPO aid top athletes? Or are you one of the "uninformed fans" for whom he says this is "not a question"? (Perhaps he is saying he is - as he hasn't offered a view).
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Did you read my response above?
This is not a question for uninformed fans who lack data and real-world observations. They will likely be confused, whatever the outcome.
These decisions are made by a committee of experts based on three factors 1) potential to enhance, 2) potential to harm, and 3) violate the spirit of the sport.
We know who makes the decisions.
So, in your opinion and not WADA'S, does EPO enhance the performance of altitude-trained elites?
Perhaps I shouldn't be asking you this question, as your lack of response suggests you are one of those "uninformed fans" you refer to for whom it isn't a question they can answer. You appear confused, as you say.
sthdyt wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Being proven right is a strange definition of "humiliation". But I guess you haven't been proven right very often. So you, too, are another doping apologist, who doesn't think EPO is performance enhancing? Or just a regular dumb f*ck?
Proven right? hahahahahaha You? LOL
You are the only narcissist here claiming never to have been proven wrong. Only a mentally disturbed sociopath like you would say such a thing when they get proven wrong every single day.
You have never run a competitive step or coached a competitive runner in your life. You are way out of your depth here, boyo. Reading biographies and talking to people is no substitute for actual in-person knowledge, which you do not possess.
Your insults only show your lack of arguments. You are like a spoilt child who never grew up.
But you are clearly above insults.
Everyone's an expert wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Jon - you've been missed.
Hi rojo.
Sorry - no.
Armstronglivs wrote:
So, in your opinion and not WADA'S, does EPO enhance the performance of altitude-trained elites?
In my opinion, the maximum performance benefit can be achieved with legal hi-lo altitude training, not only for elites, but for amateurs too.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Perhaps I shouldn't be asking you this question, as your lack of response suggests you are one of those "uninformed fans" you refer to for whom it isn't a question they can answer. You appear confused, as you say.
What do you mean by lack of response? You asked two different questions.
I answered your first question (why ban EPO and not altitude?) before you even asked it -- that is why I referred you to my previous response.
Then I answered your second question (does EPO enhance performance at altitude?) about 4 hours after you asked it.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
So, in your opinion and not WADA'S, does EPO enhance the performance of altitude-trained elites?
In my opinion, the maximum performance benefit can be achieved with legal hi-lo altitude training, not only for elites, but for amateurs too.
Is that answering my question - which suggested a yes or no response - or have you shifted the goal posts again?
1. Does EPO enhance the performance of those who undertake "legal high-low training" or does it have no effect on their performances?
2. If there is a choice between altitude-training and EPO are you saying altitude-training has the greater performance benefit?
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Perhaps I shouldn't be asking you this question, as your lack of response suggests you are one of those "uninformed fans" you refer to for whom it isn't a question they can answer. You appear confused, as you say.
What do you mean by lack of response? You asked two different questions.
I answered your first question (why ban EPO and not altitude?) before you even asked it -- that is why I referred you to my previous response.
Then I answered your second question (does EPO enhance performance at altitude?) about 4 hours after you asked it.
You answered by saying who makes the decisions on what is banned. That wasn't the question.
Do you agree with the WADA determination that EPO is performance enhancing?
I hear running more increases performance, maybe we should ban that too.
STEVE THE ADDICT^^^^^^""""""""--^' wrote:
Peds such as epo can easily have negative short term and long term health implications. We don't want to encourage and incite athletes using these substances due to that and obviously the unfair playing field it creates.
This will not solve you from East and Nord African dominance in the future.
(presumably those those hated and not swallowed by some)
Here is small example I found today: Hamza Driouch who is ranked as the U20 best performers in 1500m in the history.
And In the last Doha meeting a Moroccan ranked second in the 800m.
I heard they were going to ban Rugby Internationals in Johannesburg, unfair for coastal players to play against altitude trained players at altitude.
If you can't see the difference between injecting a potent medicine reserved for cancer/bone marrow patients and training in the mountains, you shouldn't be allowed to post here.