Ramzi B sample positive

uhh wrote:

so if CERA wasn't available in 2005, and we have been able to test for EPO since 2000, then how was 2003-2005 "pretty nuts"?

Oh and then also, why have long distances peformances been "lackluster" since 2005 when CERA became available and no drug test was instituted?

Yeah very strange how the facts suggest the exact opposite of your argument.

No, he's pointing out the anomaly of performances over the past few seasons compared to the late 90's (no EPO test available) and the 2003-5 period, when athletes were running relatively faster times in the middle and distance events.

Perhaps testing became more reliable after 2005, or perhaps athletes felt it was more likely they'd get caught, so stopped doing it as much.

Then you have the case of Lagat's false positive in 2003 and Marion Jones failing an A test then being exonerated with a -ve B test; before it emerges she was indeed doping and (in the evidence of Hunter & Conte) had taken EPO as far back as 2000.

This is an interesting link, claiming the EPO test is very unreliable.

So, maybe WADA/IOC are now using much more sophisticated testing procedures, and previous ones just didn't pick up on all those taking "any" form of EPO.

I can't believe that Ramzi only started using drugs (whatever type) prior to Beijing. Many people on various message boards have cast their suspicions about him as far back as 2004/5. So if he was taking EPO prior to 2008, why wasn't he caught if the test is meant to have been effective from late 2000?

Possible answers:-

1) The test is (or was) more unreliable than WADA claimed (see Lagat & Jones test results)

2) There is corruption somewhere along the line. (see Lagat & Jones test results!)

Nineteen men broke 13 minutes for 5000m in 2006. Fit that into your thesis.

on the runs wrote:

Nineteen men broke 13 minutes for 5000m in 2006. Fit that into your thesis.

You're right. 2006 was a very good year for 5000m. I was just trying to make some suggestions for the dates (-2005) given by the poster I responded to.

I think he was pointing out that whereas between 1997-9, there were nine performances in the top 50 All time list, and there were 13 in the three seasons between 2003-5, there were only 2 between 2000-02; and none at all in 2001 & 2002.

Just having a "quick" look at the 10k all time list, there seems a similar drought in performance in 2000 & 2001, when no one broke 27mins. There may be absolutely nothing in this at all, apart from coincidence, but it's interesting to speculate on trends and possible reasons.

I still think it's strange that Ramzi didn't get caught sooner, and suggested "possible" reasons why.

Ramzi is 100% innocent. Anyone who thinks that drug tests are accurate needs to understand that science is often weak and based on misinformation...(didn't science prove that the world was flat?) Ramzi is the true Olympic champ and all you "nay" sayers ought to be ashamed that you would criticize such an honest and valiant career/individual.

mac1322 wrote:

Ramzi is 100% innocent. Anyone who thinks that drug tests are accurate needs to understand that science is often weak and based on misinformation...(didn't science prove that the world was flat?) Ramzi is the true Olympic champ and all you "nay" sayers ought to be ashamed that you would criticize such an honest and valiant career/individual.

+1

Ramzi won the race, he's the winner of the race, he's the champion.

The drug tests are simply another empire building tool, in this case to take from the athletes and give to the rich, also giving them the power to decide who competes and who doesn't.

behind the scenes wrote:

Ramzi won the race, he's the winner of the race, he's the champion.

The drug tests are simply another empire building tool, in this case to take from the athletes and give to the rich, also giving them the power to decide who competes and who doesn't.

yeah, the man is keeping us down!Chavez for president for life!

Chavez is dead...

i think that there are big names playing with who gets to be on the game and who gets to be out!!! just think all the money that is involve.. look at Bolt how much money he is dragging to the sport.. if a test comes positive all of it goes down and thats something many poeple dont want. well this is just my point of view.

Didn't stop them taking down Jones

mac1322 wrote:

Ramzi is 100% innocent. Anyone who thinks that drug tests are accurate needs to understand that science is often weak and based on misinformation...(didn't science prove that the world was flat?) Ramzi is the true Olympic champ and all you "nay" sayers ought to be ashamed that you would criticize such an honest and valiant career/individual.

Wow, you are the biggest tool of all time! Science is 100% accurate every time. When has science failed us? Don't forget, it was also science that proved the world WASN'T flat! It took them two tries to realize the world wasn't flat but that's exactly why they did two samples on Ramzi.

Don't think for a second there isn't a single pro athlete who isn't doping right now. That's just a fact. I bet 63% of all NCAA athletes are on the juice too, and 98% of all NCAA championship qualifiers. How do I know? Because I was an NCAA ahtlete. I was one of those 37% who never doped, and guess what? I never made it. There is just no way any of those guys could beat me if they weren't drugged up. I was glad to get out of there because I knew there was just too much doping going on around me and I could never beat them. It's disgusting what this world is coming to.

And it's people like you who keep this going. By being such a complete dumbass! You are holding up the process of science by attempting to block it at every move. Quit being such a douche and just accept that doping is way too abundant.