On September 10, Woody Kincaid, Lopez Lomong, and Matthew Centrowitz ran three of the fastest 5,000 meter times in American history.This film goes inside the...
Why are drugs even illegal in athletics? Is it cheating to use rocket fuel?
You can’t dope your way to gold. You can’t just load up a spike while sitting on your couch everyday trolling lrc and expect to win the turkey trot. You still need to train, mileage, tempos, hill reps, speed work, nutrition, strength training, then you need to peak when it counts, race for the win.
You seem to think the two groups are similar in terms of suspiciousness simply because they both had fast people. I would totally disagree.
Fisher being an all-time US great isn't surprising. He was an all-time great at the US HS ranks who broke 4:00 in HS.
Rupp was good in HS but his coach had ties to Athletics West and his coach coached Mary Slaney when she was popped. Plus Rupp couldn't break 4:00 for much of college and then became a 3:50 miler. His improvement was much more 'suspicious'....
Rupp being an all-time US great at 5k-marathon also is not surprising.
He broke high school records at 2000m, 3000m and Lindgren's 40 year old 5000m record. That he couldn't break 4m mile is mainly because that was never his focus (he's never broken 334 for the 15), and let's face it, 401 mile is still pretty close to Fisher's, despite different training, shoes and the fact that Fisher was running competitively since the 7th grade, earlier than Rupp, so his mile time would advance at an earlier age. Anyway, your "not surprising" argument kinda falls flat here.
Andrew Wheating's 1500 went from 354 to 330 in 5 years (yet is above suspicion), when Rupps only went down to 339 in similar age range. When Rupp finally focused on the indoor mile record, it was prep for 2 miles, 3000m and 10,000AR, all of which have higher iaaf scores than a 350.9 mile, so one could argue it's surprising he didn't run a faster mile. Salazar was never a miler, and it's no surprise his star pupil didn't run his best at that distance either.
You seem to think the two groups are similar in terms of suspiciousness simply because they both had fast people. I would totally disagree.
Fisher being an all-time US great isn't surprising. He was an all-time great at the US HS ranks who broke 4:00 in HS.
Rupp was good in HS but his coach had ties to Athletics West and his coach coached Mary Slaney when she was popped. Plus Rupp couldn't break 4:00 for much of college and then became a 3:50 miler. His improvement was much more 'suspicious'. Plus we don't have photos of a Nike lab document showing Fisher was a testosterone supplement in HS. Plus we've never received any reports that Jerry gave the massage guy a night off before big races or told his athletes to lie about what treatments they've been getting.
Mo Farah's development from World final also-ran to world beater also was much more suspicious than what we've seen from any male pro in the BTC.
Plus Schumacher clearly very quickly moved away from the grey area and Dr. Brown once he realized what it was. He had a very public falling out with the man (Salazar) he used to almost co-coach with.
Now, Shelby's positive test is obviously a big step in the other direction.
But where I part ways with you is when you add Shelby's test in as an afterthought.
It's not an afterthought. It's a positive test. A positive test from another athlete who had a suspicious progression in the sport. From 2015-2017 Shelby was a contender with some good results but fairly mid pack globally. In college, much like Galen was in high school, she was one of the best in her year, but she was no grand stand out the way Jenny Simpson was. Then in 2018, she was unbeatable. Unbeatable in the 1500. Unbeatable in the 5K. Hell, even unbeatable in a 10K on the grass. Her only falter was to Colleen after she doubled up the 2 mile in world indoor. Colleen was far more rested.
The truth is, the BTC has a cloud around them now. Maybe for different reasons but a cloud nonetheless. How come so many athletes come out of college with decent careers and then explode as pros? Elise Cranny? Courtney Frerichs? Shelby? Karissa Schweitzer? All were great athletes but none were ones that I looked at when they suited up as pros and thought "they are going to be huge!" But its just big time results after big times results after big times results. How come we don't see that sort of consistency coming out of any other group?
Agree RE Shelby. Quite suspicious. Think you're being unfair onf Frerichs, Schweizer, and Cranny though.
Schweizer aged 22, a back to back NCAA champ, just a month after graduating, pre super spikes, had PRs of 4:06, 15:02, 32:00. That's freaky good. Way better PRs than Houlihan at that age.
Cranny was one of the fastest high schoolers of all time, a real prodigy, before running into well documented eating disorder/REDs/injury problems that dogged her all college. 17 y/o Cranny had a faster 1500 PR than Houlihan at 22. With those behind her she's living up to the hype that used to be around her.
Frerichs, NCAA champ who came 2nd at 2016 trials fresh out of college running 9:20 - a faster PR than Emma Coburn at the same point in time. Was definitely compared a lot to Coburn in terms of potential. Harder to compare directly to Houlihan but suffice to say she wasn't making global finals 2 months after graduation.
It's amazing how LRC tries to downplay Rupp's high school accomplishments like they were nothing special. Sure, he didn't win Footlocker. He ran the still standing 5000m record and broke the 3000m record. Salazar repeatedly stated at the time that they were going to build up his endurance for years before they worked on speed. He ran 4:01 in high school for the mile without working specifically on speed. He did not begin to truly work on speed until his last year or two in college. Once he developed his speed, he had a few brief years where he was a potential threat in any world class race, and then as his speed began to fade, he switched to the marathon. His 5000m PR is pedestrian for a pro long distance runner. He doesn't look like a doper at all unless you somehow thing he was a mediocre talent who got where he did only because of doping, which is probably why LRC is downplaying his high school accomplishments.
I don't find NOP to be any more suspicious than BTC. Salazar was not shy about mentioning he was going to pursue every gray area. The whole point of NOP was to get US runners competitive again. Given that we know there are a lot of doping runners out there, it's obvious that to be competitive you have to use every legal advantage. While Salazar definitely crossed the line and was up to some sketchy things, there's still no clear evidence of widespread rampant cheating. The only true doping offenses involved non-athletes and looked more like unethical science experiments than attempts to cheat.
If we were to go by paper results, I'd find BTC to be way more suspicious. Behind the scenes, there is just as much gray area BTC shenanigan as with NOP. But I truly believe they were both pushing right up to the gray area limits while trying not to cross over. I think BTC looks better (hence more suspicious) because they are the culmination of everything that has happened in USA running over the past 20 years. Salazar's NOP experiment resulted in new methodologies that are working for our runners. Nike's experimentation has led to faster shoes. The professional scene has evolved and the training groups are effective now. Successful methodologies have spread to the NCAA, turning out better developed runners to feed the professional system. Now its spreading to high school (Newbury Park).
In summary, I don't think either the NOP or BTC are guilty of organized doping. We're just finally seeing the results of a couple of decades of dedicated work that has led to a revival of US professional running. Within these teams, with enough numbers, there are eventually going to be some positive tests (Shelby), because there are cheaters in every group.
I think Rupp has gotten an unfair shake for his entire career. Some athletes who are LRC favorites had far more suspicious improvement under Salazar than Rupp did. I think once BTC starts hauling in medals by the boatload, Rupp and NOP will start looking far cleaner than you give them credit for.
Let's get behind out amazing USA runners instead of tearing them down.
There was a thread about Galen Rupp which outlined how, among some other very minor things, his "grey area" infringements and the general suspicion around alsal have lead many to struggle to root for him.
i've seen plenty of people also extend that same mis-trust to BTC post-burritogate. I'm curious, however, why it seems to be less prominent. Maybe its the shorter duration of the overall suspicion? Maybe its because the brojos love Jerry and censor the board to his credit? Or is it something else?
I'm curious, because BTC is putting up some crazy numbers this spring, and it raises my excitement for the outdoor season (worlds!). i want so badly to believe Rupp and the BTC folks are clean, and i want so badly to root for them all! what do you think?
Is there less suspicion about BTC than Oregon Project? Both get lots of criticism since the burrito scandal
Don't buy that the Rupp/Farah improvements are of a different kind from what we've seen in BTC. Also I think the fact that Salazar had been coaching Rupp for like 6+ years already when he finally developed some speed in 2008-09 makes that a lot less suspicious than when someone joins a new group and chops a ton of time off in every event. Rupp's breakthru was having a kick, not dropping huge chunks of time in rabbitted races.
Grant going from a 13:29 5000m PR in 2019, 13:11 in 2020, then dropping a 26:33 in 2022 is WILD, and I think on par with any other suspicious improvement people could come up with. He went from never winning an NCAA title to 5th in the Olympics in 2 years.
Shelby improved from 4:06/15:00 to 3:54/14:34 in 2 years
Galen get's the benefit of the doubt. The fact is that he is the most tested middle distance athlete.
Uh, if Rupp, a marathoner, is "middle distance," then what is long distance? Helpful hint: traditionally, middle distance is 800m-2 miles. 5000 & 10,000 are long distance.
It's amazing how LRC tries to downplay Rupp's high school accomplishments like they were nothing special. Sure, he didn't win Footlocker. He ran the still standing 5000m record and broke the 3000m record. Salazar repeatedly stated at the time that they were going to build up his endurance for years before they worked on speed. He ran 4:01 in high school for the mile without working specifically on speed. He did not begin to truly work on speed until his last year or two in college. Once he developed his speed, he had a few brief years where he was a potential threat in any world class race, and then as his speed began to fade, he switched to the marathon. His 5000m PR is pedestrian for a pro long distance runner. He doesn't look like a doper at all unless you somehow thing he was a mediocre talent who got where he did only because of doping, which is probably why LRC is downplaying his high school accomplishments.
I don't find NOP to be any more suspicious than BTC. Salazar was not shy about mentioning he was going to pursue every gray area. The whole point of NOP was to get US runners competitive again. Given that we know there are a lot of doping runners out there, it's obvious that to be competitive you have to use every legal advantage. While Salazar definitely crossed the line and was up to some sketchy things, there's still no clear evidence of widespread rampant cheating. The only true doping offenses involved non-athletes and looked more like unethical science experiments than attempts to cheat.
If we were to go by paper results, I'd find BTC to be way more suspicious. Behind the scenes, there is just as much gray area BTC shenanigan as with NOP. But I truly believe they were both pushing right up to the gray area limits while trying not to cross over. I think BTC looks better (hence more suspicious) because they are the culmination of everything that has happened in USA running over the past 20 years. Salazar's NOP experiment resulted in new methodologies that are working for our runners. Nike's experimentation has led to faster shoes. The professional scene has evolved and the training groups are effective now. Successful methodologies have spread to the NCAA, turning out better developed runners to feed the professional system. Now its spreading to high school (Newbury Park).
In summary, I don't think either the NOP or BTC are guilty of organized doping. We're just finally seeing the results of a couple of decades of dedicated work that has led to a revival of US professional running. Within these teams, with enough numbers, there are eventually going to be some positive tests (Shelby), because there are cheaters in every group.
I think Rupp has gotten an unfair shake for his entire career. Some athletes who are LRC favorites had far more suspicious improvement under Salazar than Rupp did. I think once BTC starts hauling in medals by the boatload, Rupp and NOP will start looking far cleaner than you give them credit for.
Let's get behind out amazing USA runners instead of tearing them down.
None of your reasons and justifications for their improvement matters at all. Rojo said no one on BTC had improved as much as Mo. That’s false.
The point was that Mo was a world championship finalist prior to coming to Alberto. He wasn’t also some Jo Schmoe ad the narrative would have you believe.
Meanwhile, all the BTC guys were essentially 13:30+ guys.
The difference is that nearly all the BTC guys were COLLEGE 13:30 guys.
To be fair, Rojo was knocking Rupp as suspicious for going from basically 4:01 high school miler and 3:57 miler to 3:51 miler post-collegiately as suspicious. Is a 6 second mile improvement post collegiately more suspicious than a 13:30 to 12:50 5k post-collegiately? I think it's actually the 2nd that is more suspicious (although I don't think either are indicative of doping necessarily). I just think this points to Rojo's bias.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.