Bekele greatest; how about Ngugi?

Okay :-)

yo wrote:

If he doped then the test results that come up negative.

Exactly! Just like with Marion Jones and countless others.

benglois wrote:KB is doped. Ngugi would beat him solidly anytime if KB was clean.

Hilarious!

Firstly, this is one more example (one of about 125 million) of the "classic" attitude here that pretty much anyone good is doped, whether or not there's the slightest bit of evidence.

Secondly, it's somewhat ironic that it was Ngugi--and not Bekele--who was actually banned for a couple years for "dodging" a doping test! The real story is complicated, but he was accused of refusing to give a sample to the visiting tester (former athlete John Whetton, if I remember correctly).

I have all the respect in the world for Ngugi--but his historical stature isn't elevated a bit by slurs on Bekele.

And she got caught didn't she. The point was, you can't confirm or state as fact he is a doper unless it is proven. You can say it but that doesn't make you right. Everytime a major star gets busted an increase in testing should occur. As a multi-time world champion Bekele should be one of the most performers in the world. Unless they find he is doping it is unfair to claim he is. If he is, why aren't people saying the same thin about Haile G. or Craig Mottram? It's because people like them and they are highly biased. Oh well... that's letsrun for you.

Agree completely--except for one point. The one you're responding to is by no means "the first idiot that actually thinks it is a perfectly logical strategy to simply claim something and demand someone else proves your claim wrong." Sadly, there are many such idiots out there (and here).

Actually, all of this drug talk is speculative and boring.

What amazed me most about Ngugi is his awesome strength. Unlike - you start naming them - past XC champions or best of the best in middle or long distances the last 20-25 years - Bekele - Geb - Tergat - Koech - El G - Morceli - and so on - Ngugi did not have quick turnover - in fact - he had virtually "none" - he loped through and an entire race and was so much more powerful that it did not matter that he had "slow" feet and a loping stride. I was just amazed watching him - and the 88 Seoul 5k took the cake - no one today could take off in a world class field in hot, sticky weather and run and hide from the field - yet he did. I remember laughing when he took off in the first 1/3 of the race thinking he was out of his mind - then reminded myself that he was a world champion and it was no flight of fancy.

Bekele is likely the fastest of all time in XC or otherwise - but I always think it folly to compare runners from different eras, and he is of a variant more modern than Ngugi or even Geb or Tergat. His 10k world record is ridiculous - I put it up there with Komen's 3k (another bit of "loper", but no where near that of Ngugi) in terms of difficulty. But that does not detract from the greatness of any of these past champions.

I never understood the "loping stride" argument. Last Olympics I was watching the marathon the commentator was saying that he felt Paul Tergat was at a disadvantage due to his loping stride. What? He had the WR at the time.

albert wrote:

And she got caught didn't she.

Not by the touted testing program. She never had a positive test, did she?

albert wrote:

I never understood the "loping stride" argument.

Ngugi had the most deceiving "slow" turnover I've ever seen (I saw him up close in '92 in Boston in addition to numerous times on TV). It looked like he was taking half as many strides as some of his competitors, but his stride was so long that he still was pulling away. He was working hard all the time, but his "slow" turnover made it seem easy.

I refer to my 2nd post where I respond to Yo:)

I suppose many people claim KB is a doper because they do not

find him as likeable as HG.

benglois wrote:

I refer to my 2nd post where I respond to Yo:)

I suppose many people claim KB is a doper because they do not

find him as likeable as HG.

OK, I see. The problem here is that non-idiots don't need to "stir things up"--there are more than enough true idiots to do that all on their own. There's way too much drug speculation here. In the words of Elvis C., "I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused."

Your supposition (immediately above) is very likely true.

old tymer wrote:

There's way too much drug speculation here.

There's also way too much denial and ignorance regarding how much of a problem drug use is in the sport. Interesting mix going on.

ngugi video wrote:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=LRosAX5sBwE

Absolutely amazing.

Ngugi stirs the heart and soul.

Ostrich Brigade wrote:

old tymer wrote:

There's way too much drug speculation here.

There's also way too much denial and ignorance regarding how much of a problem drug use is in the sport. Interesting mix going on.

Not really. My argument is simply it is inappropriate to claim, or state matter-of-factly, that someone is a doper when you can't back it up with any evidence. No doubt drugs are a problem. But some people seem to suggest it is impossible to be a great runner without drugs and I highly doubt it.

Yeah really, it's an interesting mix.

So you think that posting your argument here is appropriate or useful? Do you really?

Certainly. Perhaps a few people will figure out that just assuming something is so doesn't mean it is. Of course judging by the crowd that isn't likely to happen... it would require thinking before writing something and that is just too hard. I never really noticed how ignorant many runners actually are until hearing them make baseless arguments. Is it jealousy or just stupidity? Can't really be sure. Thanks for the question.

Yep, you're delusional!