It is hard to argue that a guy that holds 7 of the top ten mile times (until today) is guilty of doping, especially when those times have been run over a four year span. Most of the cases of doping have been one-offs where suddenly someone who has never run one of the top 50 fastest times runs a world record or near a record. Ngeny seems more suspect given his lack of consistent times. I don't think his second best time cracks the top 100 times. But, without evidence of doping for either, I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
Track has long shown, like many other sports, that it doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. It will be a given now that the "best" will be juiced to the gills, along with most behind them.
Neither of the two best in the race yesterday have tested positive and that is all we know 😊
No, it isn't. We also know that only 1% of tests are positive but, as confidential athlete surveys have shown, far many more athletes are doping than are caught - quite possibly in excess of 50% of competitors at championship level. Since we also know that drugs can substantially increase performance the best inference is that the most successful athletes are doping. So it will be with Ingebrigtsen and Nuguse, and the athletes behind them.
I can't believe after the spread of doping in the sport over more than half a century that we are still asking such questions as that posed by the thread. There is no record or championship title in the sport that has been accomplished without drugs for decades. The only way this would not be so is if drugs were not present in the sport - because they don't work. But they do, and they are everywhere, and so that effectively ends the argument. It's no different from posing the question of whether you think a professional bodybuilder uses steroids. And, by the way, WADA sees track and field as no different from bodybuilding in terms of how doped the sport might be.
This post was edited 35 seconds after it was posted.
So when you use drugs so that you can train far beyond what normal humans can do, you dont count that as aiding performance? Got to disagree on that. If you can't do 5 workouts/week without EPO and some roids, you physical limit isn't where you are on 5 workouts. It is back at 3. Getting injured is a limit. Getting burned out is a limit. And so on.
Just to clarify, I DO view what I described as aiding performance. I would agree with you here.
It is hard to argue that a guy that holds 7 of the top ten mile times (until today) is guilty of doping, especially when those times have been run over a four year span. Most of the cases of doping have been one-offs where suddenly someone who has never run one of the top 50 fastest times runs a world record or near a record. Ngeny seems more suspect given his lack of consistent times. I don't think his second best time cracks the top 100 times. But, without evidence of doping for either, I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
Track has long shown, like many other sports, that it doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. It will be a given now that the "best" will be juiced to the gills, along with most behind them.
Then the first of them would be Peter Snell and Herb Elliot and all of the dinosaures that extincted and that they try desperately to revive.
it is in my opinion that how well a runner run is not based on their fastest times but based on their championship performance during their time. jakob has smarter training and better shoes while hicham was living in an era that likely had more cheating due to inferior drug testing. even with that said, they were both the best of their times and even if both sides lost their advantages of their time, they likely still would be the best because the playing field evens across the board. i often use this same logic when talking about bolt in the 100/200, rudisha in the 800, and bekele in the 10000. drugs and shoes aside, they were extremely dominant and it was rare that they ever lost.
with that said, jakob is more likely to be clean so yes, it was probably the fastest clean mile
The main question here is whether Jakob is clean or not. Because if he is clean, then it's obviously the fastest clean time ever.
I Think he may actually be clean, as he has trained his whole life for this and it's proven that his family has great genetics. But still can't be sure. Very suspicious of nuguse, he should not be able to run that time clean ebem though he was paced all the way
Elaborating, I think drugs are a shortcut to maximizing your talent, but can't push you beyond your limits. Drugs let you reach your max while staying fresh/injury free.
The way I see it, everyone has a "ceiling" to what they could physically achieve in hypothetically perfect conditions (no injuries, no burnout, body can handle all the training you put on it, etc.). But, everyone also has limits that prevent them from necessarily hitting that ceiling: they get injured, burned out, body can't handle the training, etc.
Yes, drugs can be a "shortcut" to reaching this ceiling, but in many cases it may be impossible for someone to bypass their physical "limits" without using drugs.
This is incorrect. Drugs allow the athlete to push far beyond the speed and/or muscle mass that he/she could achieve absent drugs. It’s not just getting to your genetic ceiling “quicker”, it allows you to be better. This is obvious from the way that performance nosedives when drug tests (briefly) catch up to the users.
It’s obvious in looking at the physiques of bodybuilders. Look at Mr. America winners from the 1940s and 1950s. Then look at Mr. Olympia winners of today. There is absolutely no comparison. Today’s bodybuilders are far far bigger than they could ever hope to be absent drugs.
Track has long shown, like many other sports, that it doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. It will be a given now that the "best" will be juiced to the gills, along with most behind them.
Then the first of them would be Peter Snell and Herb Elliot and all of the dinosaures that extincted and that they try desperately to revive.
I can't believe after the spread of doping in the sport over more than half a century that we are still asking such questions as that posed by the thread. There is no record or championship title in the sport that has been accomplished without drugs for decades. The only way this would not be so is if drugs were not present in the sport - because they don't work. But they do, and they are everywhere, and so that effectively ends the argument. It's no different from posing the question of whether you think a professional bodybuilder uses steroids. And, by the way, WADA sees track and field as no different from bodybuilding in terms of how doped the sport might be.
There would be countries out there where dopers might be a very rare thing,indeed.Mongolia,taiwan,cambodia,bolivia,peru,south korea,bangladesh,malawi,lesotho,laos,myanmar,angola,guatemala,nicuragua,uruguay,honduras,andorra,all spring to mind.
And tell me WHY: Do you think El Guerrouj & Ngeny are clean or not? Do you think Jakob is clean or not?
Also how does this race stack up against the WR race?
I hate to say this but I do think it's the clean WR - but that's pure opinion.
Why do I believe performances 1 and 2 aren't clean? The era. I wrote a post on this a week or so ago about how much the 90's were in terms of an outlier decade for record breaking primarily in the 1500m (which clearly is applicable in the mile). From Bayi in 1974 through to Aouita (^^ and the last record of the 80's) the largest drop we saw in the 1500m record was 1.1 seconds when Cram broke 3.30 for the first time. And even that was an outlier as the record was only ever broken by tenths of a second on the 7 other occasions it occured. In total it went down 2.7 seconds across 17 years. In the 90's, Morceli and El G took 3.46 seconds off that last mark of the 80's across 7 years and it just can't be coincidence that the 90's was the most infamous era in endurance sports for doping - especially with respect to EPO. I loved watching El G run. I once sat next to Ngeny at Weltklasse and we both watched Hicham run under 3.27 - but history has shed some light on what almost certainly was happening back then.
Why do I think Jakob is clean? Because he is part of the smartest coaching setup in history (even more than Coe) and the technology at his disposal caters perfectly to all his strengths. Jakob can sit there and guarantee that Nguse will run at least 3.46 if he sticks to him because he knows what he can run and there is no guess work anymore. They know he can run a certain pace for a certain distance and barring an illness etc, he physiologically will have no problems handling it. And once they know that they request the most impactful tech in the history of the sport to cater exactly to their science and he goes out and executes it. It was so easy to predict what would happen today through 1200m split wise - the only guesswork was how much power he had left to get close to the record. Today it was pretty damn good - not quite good enough. I can't even imagine the confidence this provides to know that there is almost no way you can screw it up. If you know you need to run 56.0 for exactly two laps you can just stay right at the top of those yellow lights and you will run 1.52.0 for 800m (exactly like he did today to the tenth). My point is, I think that people will say "well how can they be so close to dopers times if they aren't doping" - well if those guys back in the 90's had access to the tech available now and had unlocked the science that Jakob uses (knowing his threshold with respect to speed v distance) the records would be considerably tougher. Probably 3.25.0 give or take a tenth in the 1500m and the mile would have been also about a second faster (insane to say this but I believe it). So if you believe that all things equal those records would be at those levels then it becomes highly likely that Jakob is just a super talent without the extra "stimulus" of the 90's.
This race was absolutely as good as 1999 and bigger picture even better because of the volume of guys under 3.50 (11!)
I would tend to agree with you, and you always have something valuable to say. Notwithstanding the reality that some Norwegian cross country skiers have been caught transfusing blood in the past, I think Jakob represents a perfect combination of talent and exquisitely detailed training. And Nuguse is just a monster.
But, there’s no doubt in my mind the pace lighting and the shoes are a huge part of this phenomenon. Between the two, I’d say they’re worth a second per lap. When my daughter switched to the “bouncy shoes,” she immediately dropped six seconds in the 1600 and her training times got much faster too. That’s why the unwritten rule in women’s prep distance running, anyway, is 4:50 is the new sub-5:00 for recruiting. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. So, if this new technology is taking an otherwise 3:47 performer and turning him into a 3:43 performer, it’s believable. The same way Laros in now a sub-3:49 performer.
I would not be surprised to see Jakob run 3:25, and it is believable. But it’s also a huge function of better technology too.
3:43 and 7:23 on back to back days. It's been proven time and time again that when something looks too good to be true in sport it usually is. I could just about believe each as a stand alone performance but find it very hard to believe that's possible clean. As for Nuguse, probably on grey area stuff as a minimum like his coach was.
Comparing races, it was about as similar to the WR race as it could have been. That race was set up for El G to run the WR, but Ngeny made him work to even just get the win. I think Nuguse was slightly further back from Jakob throughout the race, yet on the last 200 he actually threatened to pass and made Jakob work to hold him off. The races really couldn’t have been more similar.
I think it’s slightly more likely that Jacob and Nuguse are clean just because 1999 was a different era and I view all times from that era with more suspicion, but I think there‘s about as much chance that El G was clean as that Jakob is dirty (I’d put both around 1/3 to 1/4 or so)
I hate to say this but I do think it's the clean WR - but that's pure opinion.
Why do I believe performances 1 and 2 aren't clean? The era. I wrote a post on this a week or so ago about how much the 90's were in terms of an outlier decade for record breaking primarily in the 1500m (which clearly is applicable in the mile). From Bayi in 1974 through to Aouita (^^ and the last record of the 80's) the largest drop we saw in the 1500m record was 1.1 seconds when Cram broke 3.30 for the first time. And even that was an outlier as the record was only ever broken by tenths of a second on the 7 other occasions it occured. In total it went down 2.7 seconds across 17 years. In the 90's, Morceli and El G took 3.46 seconds off that last mark of the 80's across 7 years and it just can't be coincidence that the 90's was the most infamous era in endurance sports for doping - especially with respect to EPO. I loved watching El G run. I once sat next to Ngeny at Weltklasse and we both watched Hicham run under 3.27 - but history has shed some light on what almost certainly was happening back then.
Why do I think Jakob is clean? Because he is part of the smartest coaching setup in history (even more than Coe) and the technology at his disposal caters perfectly to all his strengths. Jakob can sit there and guarantee that Nguse will run at least 3.46 if he sticks to him because he knows what he can run and there is no guess work anymore. They know he can run a certain pace for a certain distance and barring an illness etc, he physiologically will have no problems handling it. And once they know that they request the most impactful tech in the history of the sport to cater exactly to their science and he goes out and executes it. It was so easy to predict what would happen today through 1200m split wise - the only guesswork was how much power he had left to get close to the record. Today it was pretty damn good - not quite good enough. I can't even imagine the confidence this provides to know that there is almost no way you can screw it up. If you know you need to run 56.0 for exactly two laps you can just stay right at the top of those yellow lights and you will run 1.52.0 for 800m (exactly like he did today to the tenth). My point is, I think that people will say "well how can they be so close to dopers times if they aren't doping" - well if those guys back in the 90's had access to the tech available now and had unlocked the science that Jakob uses (knowing his threshold with respect to speed v distance) the records would be considerably tougher. Probably 3.25.0 give or take a tenth in the 1500m and the mile would have been also about a second faster (insane to say this but I believe it). So if you believe that all things equal those records would be at those levels then it becomes highly likely that Jakob is just a super talent without the extra "stimulus" of the 90's.
This race was absolutely as good as 1999 and bigger picture even better because of the volume of guys under 3.50 (11!)
I would tend to agree with you, and you always have something valuable to say. Notwithstanding the reality that some Norwegian cross country skiers have been caught transfusing blood in the past, I think Jakob represents a perfect combination of talent and exquisitely detailed training. And Nuguse is just a monster.
But, there’s no doubt in my mind the pace lighting and the shoes are a huge part of this phenomenon. Between the two, I’d say they’re worth a second per lap. When my daughter switched to the “bouncy shoes,” she immediately dropped six seconds in the 1600 and her training times got much faster too. That’s why the unwritten rule in women’s prep distance running, anyway, is 4:50 is the new sub-5:00 for recruiting. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. So, if this new technology is taking an otherwise 3:47 performer and turning him into a 3:43 performer, it’s believable. The same way Laros in now a sub-3:49 performer.
I would not be surprised to see Jakob run 3:25, and it is believable. But it’s also a huge function of better technology too.
Whatever the contribution of the shoes, 18-year-old Laros is within 4 seconds of the best guy in the world today. That’s wild.
Shoes that provide a mechanical advantage aren’t - clean
What does this even mean. Everybody at the top level has always sought out the shoes that they thought would help them to run the fastest possible. You don’t see anybody in the DL Final racing barefoot, nor in trainers. In El G’s day the shoe regarded as the fastest was probably the Jasari (the original version, not the mass produced version). In many elite races every single competitor in the race was wearing it, and it wasn’t because of the pretty colors. Steve Prefontaine quipped something about how when you’re gonna run the last lap under 60 you gotta have spikes on your feet before any of today’s competitors were even born.
Shoes that provide a mechanical advantage aren’t - clean
What does this even mean. Everybody at the top level has always sought out the shoes that they thought would help them to run the fastest possible. You don’t see anybody in the DL Final racing barefoot, nor in trainers. In El G’s day the shoe regarded as the fastest was probably the Jasari (the original version, not the mass produced version). In many elite races every single competitor in the race was wearing it, and it wasn’t because of the pretty colors. Steve Prefontaine quipped something about how when you’re gonna run the last lap under 60 you gotta have spikes on your feet before any of today’s competitors were even born.
Today the shoes are different. Don’t pretend they aren’t. Nobody prior to 2017 ran with carbon fiber springs attached to their feet. It’s making a mockery of the sport.
What does this even mean. Everybody at the top level has always sought out the shoes that they thought would help them to run the fastest possible. You don’t see anybody in the DL Final racing barefoot, nor in trainers. In El G’s day the shoe regarded as the fastest was probably the Jasari (the original version, not the mass produced version). In many elite races every single competitor in the race was wearing it, and it wasn’t because of the pretty colors. Steve Prefontaine quipped something about how when you’re gonna run the last lap under 60 you gotta have spikes on your feet before any of today’s competitors were even born.
Today the shoes are different. Don’t pretend they aren’t. Nobody prior to 2017 ran with carbon fiber springs attached to their feet. It’s making a mockery of the sport.
Every generation’s current best shoe has been better than the ones before it. I realize that the Dragonfly and their ilk are superior to the spikes of yesterday - no question. My point is the spikes of yesterday were superior to the spikes of the day before yesterday, too. If you want to obsess over that, you really can’t compare times from more than a few years apart. Forget about El G. What would Jim Ryun have run on a modern track in a spike like the Jasari? Between the track and the spikes El G certainly had an advantage worth at least a second per lap and probably more. Ne could argue no AR since Ryun was actually better.
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.