thatand wrote:
I think there are also so many new supplements out that push the boundaries of those grey areas
And what are these new supplements ?
-
01
-
Mack M wrote:
Sloops wrote:
Are El G and Komen owed an apology?
Back then there wasn't a hemotocrit limit, no biopassport, no HGH test, new EPO test around that time that caught absolutley nobody.
Now there's super spikes, L-carnitine, testosterone cream, better testing for blood doping and EPO + biopassport, and pacing lights.
I'm not convinced overall training is that much better, maybe more mileage, more threshold, less Seb Coe ran <30 miles per week lies. Double threshold? El G was doing two runs at around 5:00/mile most days so I'd call that double threshold combined with double blood doping. The shoes are the biggest change, making up for hematocrit and biopassport.
Certainly you mean training shoes. Can't be racing shoes because 800m records are not being threatened.
52 -
querious wrote:
Coommmon sense wrote:
Who would risk being caught when stored samples and retro testing is the new norm.
A lot of athletes.
How many would think that they would not be positive from retro testing?
And if you think it would still be loads what on earth would give them confidence to do so?
01 -
xendurance, science in sport, complement, ketone etc.
01 -
The statistics. Over 40% of the athletes doped at the 2011 World Championships. They are safe now from being retested.
How many of those were caught? 3%? 5%? There's your answer.
Plus, retesting doesn't help with blood transfusions.
00 -
Coommmon sense wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Technology doesn't beat doping. That almost inevitably doped records are being beaten is because of doping. It remains further ahead of testing than any time since the '90's.
Do you have the remotest evidence that doping is ahead of testing other than your assumption that all top performances are drug based?
Dopers have always been ahead of testers.
Lance was probably the most tested athlete of all time. Never tested positive. Ditto Marion Jones, etc.
The best way to avoid detection is to simply avoid the test. Other than that, don't dope during competition. You dope during training.
Alan
60 -
armchair expert wrote:
20+ years of training/racing knowledge/discussions contained on these boards 24/7
Yes!!!!! This is the reason. Specifically, training based on AI analysis of Ventolin's (RIP) prediction algorithms and psycho-doping by utilization of his hate-speech.
20 -
If everyone was forced to run barefoot and surfaces never changed, records would still be broken. Humans are frighteningly good at finding ways to defeat each other.
I'm not denying the effect of doping or technology, but if we could magically eliminate doping, and hold technology where it is today, I would bet my life that in 100 years, every world record standing today would be broken.
81 -
learn the history wrote:
The statistics. Over 40% of the athletes doped at the 2011 World Championships. They are safe now from being retested.
How many of those were caught? 3%? 5%? There's your answer.
Plus, retesting doesn't help with blood transfusions.
Where is the evidence that 40% doped at the 2011 WC ?
Drug testing moved on in the last ten years; looks to retro testing for Olympic Games results.
10 -
Runningart2004 wrote:
Coommmon sense wrote:
Do you have the remotest evidence that doping is ahead of testing other than your assumption that all top performances are drug based?
Dopers have always been ahead of testers.
Lance was probably the most tested athlete of all time. Never tested positive. Ditto Marion Jones, etc.
The best way to avoid detection is to simply avoid the test. Other than that, don't dope during competition. You dope during training.
Alan
So no evidence then of the current situation.
Have you not noted the AIU and whereabouts bans over recent years.
10 -
Coommmon sense wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
Dopers have always been ahead of testers.
Lance was probably the most tested athlete of all time. Never tested positive. Ditto Marion Jones, etc.
The best way to avoid detection is to simply avoid the test. Other than that, don't dope during competition. You dope during training.
Alan
So no evidence then of the current situation.
Have you not noted the AIU and whereabouts bans over recent years.
20 -
Coommmon sense wrote:
learn the history wrote:
The statistics. Over 40% of the athletes doped at the 2011 World Championships. They are safe now from being retested.
How many of those were caught? 3%? 5%? There's your answer.
Plus, retesting doesn't help with blood transfusions.
Where is the evidence that 40% doped at the 2011 WC ?
Drug testing moved on in the last ten years; looks to retro testing for Olympic Games results.
Again, the athletes from 2011 are safe since 2022. Retesting is only allowed for ten years.
10 -
600yd/600m man wrote:
Mack M wrote:
Back then there wasn't a hemotocrit limit, no biopassport, no HGH test, new EPO test around that time that caught absolutley nobody.
Now there's super spikes, L-carnitine, testosterone cream, better testing for blood doping and EPO + biopassport, and pacing lights.
I'm not convinced overall training is that much better, maybe more mileage, more threshold, less Seb Coe ran <30 miles per week lies. Double threshold? El G was doing two runs at around 5:00/mile most days so I'd call that double threshold combined with double blood doping. The shoes are the biggest change, making up for hematocrit and biopassport.
Certainly you mean training shoes. Can't be racing shoes because 800m records are not being threatened.
Maybe the shoes don't make as much of a difference at 800, and the training improvements we're seeing are really only for the mile and up. I don't think we're seeing crazy 800 times in HS/NCAA either, whereas everything longer is blowing up.
Could also be that the 800 responds better to steroids, which are much easier to detect than EPO.
21 -
Ho Hum wrote:
600yd/600m man wrote:
Certainly you mean training shoes. Can't be racing shoes because 800m records are not being threatened.
Maybe the shoes don't make as much of a difference at 800, and the training improvements we're seeing are really only for the mile and up. I don't think we're seeing crazy 800 times in HS/NCAA either, whereas everything longer is blowing up.
Could also be that the 800 responds better to steroids, which are much easier to detect than EPO.
Depends on this steroid. Designer steroids are also a dime a dozen. They are also the true 'training drug' for distance runners and as long as you avoid whereabouts positives there is never any reason you would pop hot.
Steroids have always and will always be the best PED for any athlete.
Alan
50 -
learn the history wrote:
Coommmon sense wrote:
Where is the evidence that 40% doped at the 2011 WC ?
Drug testing moved on in the last ten years; looks to retro testing for Olympic Games results.
Again, the athletes from 2011 are safe since 2022. Retesting is only allowed for ten years.
Never said they were not safe; do pay attention.
I refer to current testing regimes.01 -
Runningart2004 wrote:
Ho Hum wrote:
Maybe the shoes don't make as much of a difference at 800, and the training improvements we're seeing are really only for the mile and up. I don't think we're seeing crazy 800 times in HS/NCAA either, whereas everything longer is blowing up.
Could also be that the 800 responds better to steroids, which are much easier to detect than EPO.
Depends on this steroid. Designer steroids are also a dime a dozen. They are also the true 'training drug' for distance runners and as long as you avoid whereabouts positives there is never any reason you would pop hot.
Steroids have always and will always be the best PED for any athlete.
Alan
Evidence the designer steroids that can not be tested are “ dime a dozen”. Name one?
whereabouts get round is not like it was when USADA gave advance notice.
10 -
learn the history wrote:
Coommmon sense wrote:
Where is the evidence that 40% doped at the 2011 WC ?
Drug testing moved on in the last ten years; looks to retro testing for Olympic Games results.
Again, the athletes from 2011 are safe since 2022. Retesting is only allowed for ten years.
So still no evidence that 40% doped at the WC.
02 -
Runningart2004 wrote:
Coommmon sense wrote:
So no evidence then of the current situation.
Have you not noted the AIU and whereabouts bans over recent years.
All out of date or don’t actually say what is on the tin.
00 -
Coommmon sense wrote:
learn the history wrote:
Again, the athletes from 2011 are safe since 2022. Retesting is only allowed for ten years.
So still no evidence that 40% doped at the WC.
Huh? The article literally says "Study says 44% of IAAF World Champs athletes doped in 2011". That's actually quite old news - have you never read it, or are you just trolling?
20 -
Best reply i have read on the boards so far.
Dont be naive
00
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.