Have you measured the course distance using Google Pedometer?
Have you measured the course distance using Google Pedometer?
Really wrote:
Could you contact her coach for a 5k PR progression and post here?
I'm not the doubting Thomas here. I've already posted who her coach is. With about 2 minutes research and an ounce of common sense you can obtain both her and her coach's email address, in fact they are both listed on the same page, along with mine. A hint, maybe pay attention to who she runs for.
If you are privy to these details why not just post them? Not doing so gives an appearance of impropriety.
Really wrote:If you are privy to these details why not just post them? Not doing so gives an appearance of impropriety.
I am privy to where to get the details, and gave you ample directions to satisfy your apparently weak thirst for knowledge. I'm simply not your personal research assistant. Asking me to go answer all your questions you have for a 3rd party is a sign of your laziness, not my impropriety.
I don't have any doubts about Linda, you do. I look at the record I already posted and say "that looks like a long history of good performance" you say "not good enough". So now you expect me to ring up Linda and say "hey Linda, Stoneman here, some anonymous jagoff on the internet wants some proof you're not a drug cheat. Can you type up your 5K progression and email it to me so I can post it?"
I'd suggest you try being less of a jerk and simply follow the instructions I already gave you and compose a simple "Hey Linda, impressive performance at SVTT, I'm really interested in your 5K progression and the type of training you do" message. Linda's a nice person, if you ask in a less condescending way than you've been doing so far she'll likely answer you.
"resulted in higher maximal workload, longer exercise time, less angina pain..." Very interesting stuff. You can Google it. I just have to wonder if certain menopausal drugs may be providing and unfair advantage.
"...studied endurance trained women who had been taking estrogen and estrogen plus progesterone, as well as endurance trained women who had not taken hormones. During the graded treadmill exercise, the hormone treated women had the same V02 peak, and peak heart rate but higer peak cardio index....and peak stroke volume index, and lower total peripheral resistance and arteriovenus oxygen difference at peak exercise. The authors speculated the estrogen reduced vascular tone by direct actions on smooth muscle, casuing the alterations in Cardiac function. Taken together, these studies suggest that HRT does not affect overall aerobic performance very much in healthy women, but might allow women to achieve a given Vo2, with less cardiac work because of a reduction in vascular tone."
Women's sports medicine and rehabilitation By Nadya Swedan
Really wrote:
AK-51 wrote:Using your logic then, a PR of 2:30:06 shows a capacity to 15:19 for 5K and 32:07 for 10K.
Isn't that were the calculator breaks down? When there is a large delta in the race distances? That's why I compared 5k to 10k.
I don't care what her PR from 1983 was, she was a well under 34 min runner.
No, your confused, I said her 1983 10k PR of 34:36.
Meaningful discussion with the likes of Really is pointless. It's you're btw.
Note that the "PR" is 10000 m, not 10K. Bet if you dug up some old copies of Running Times from the 1980s and early 90s you'd see some fast 5K, 10K and 10 mile times. Also note that her HM PR is sub 34 pace, for 13.1 miles.
Keith Stone wrote:
Really wrote:We are naturally curious, so it does matter.If she's clean, it would be nice to know what type of training lead to the result.
It's not like Linda or her coach are that hard to get a hold of, so if you're really are curious send her an email and ask. Report your findings. Your and dmb's continued insistence with very little basis that she's dirty until she proves to you otherwise is extremely condescending.
You obviously don't believe what anyone else is going to say anyway so instead of spreading innuendo do something useful and research it yourself.
Hey mental midget, where did I insist she was dirty? A 16:14 for a 48 yr old woman clearly seems anomalous to me. That doesn't mean that she is/was using PEDs.
In the future, I think the fight against doping is going to be a lot more complex than just grabbing random biological samples. Along with a biological passport, I think there will be detailed analysis of performance patterns. Under the right circumstances, this analysis will provide indications of doping that will allow more detailed testing to occur.
Try to work on reading comprehension a bit. Deductive logic doesn't seem to be your strong suit a well.
dmb wrote:
Hey mental midget, where did I insist she was dirty? A 16:14 for a 48 yr old woman clearly seems anomalous to me. That doesn't mean that she is/was using PEDs.
Geez, one of a matched pair of jagoff's comes back. Did you jump up and down and foam at the mouth with insistence? Are you a jerk that's saying such an anomaly means someone has to prove the negative before your pee-brain is satified. Yes. Really.
AK-51 wrote:
Really wrote:Isn't that were the calculator breaks down? When there is a large delta in the race distances? That's why I compared 5k to 10k.
No, your confused, I said her 1983 10k PR of 34:36.
Meaningful discussion with the likes of Really is pointless. It's you're btw.
Note that the "PR" is 10000 m, not 10K. Bet if you dug up some old copies of Running Times from the 1980s and early 90s you'd see some fast 5K, 10K and 10 mile times. Also note that her HM PR is sub 34 pace, for 13.1 miles.
1995 Motorola East McDowell 10K Linda Somers 32:04 1st.
1996 Olympic Marathon trials 2nd.
Her best years were mid nineties. That 1983 race was in her second year of competing after going to UC Davis as a tennis player.
dmb wrote:
Get a grip fanboy and work on reading comprehension. I didn't say she was dirty or lacked class. I think it would be really interesting to know a lot more about how she got from 34:30 in 1983 to 16:14 in 2009 (at 48), yes with 2:30 in between.
This will be an important part of fighting doping. Hopefully you're interested in that rather than telling pointless random stories about you and your cohort's 5k times.
Anyone who claims that it is impossible that she uses PEDs is kidding themselves. (let's state the obvious)
I knew a guy* that faked a disability so that he could run 120 miles a week and clean up in the local master's races. People cheat during marathons all the time for a cheesy finisher's medal
Are you backing down from what you said now? Pathetics! You more than implied it. Either put or shut up.
By the way my story was not pointless because my 'cohort' is running only 30 seconds slower over 5km than he was 20 years ago.
I am a fan of good athletes, is there something wrong with that? If you want to do something about drugs email the IAAF to campaign for longer bans don't pick on any random athlete who runs a fast time.
Why is this site full of scum like you - a failure who just want to drag everyone else down to their own pathetic level, wanker
Really wrote:
http://blog.runningwarehouse.com/?p=7
are you trying to prove you've got the brains of an ant or just spread rumors to that effect? Are you seriously saying that because she ran a 17:15 in a low key 5K at a bar out on the middle of nowhere against mostly her teammates, then later ran 16:14 5K against world class competition in an event 10 times the size that she's a doper? Are you daft?
yes i'm daft kieth. you can win if it means that much to you. good bye.
I don't know if there has been much research in this area but it seems that females might not slow down as much as males when they hit their late 30s/early 40s.
5000 Metres Age Group Records UK Men
40 Mike McLeod 14-15.9 Gateshead 27.5.92
45 Nigel Gates 14-42.67 Solihull 5.9.98
50 Martin Rees 14-53.2 Neath 10.5.03
55 Mike Hager 15-37.0 Coventry 6.5.06
60 Steve James 16-24.0 Jarrow 6.6.98
65 William Marshall 18-02.12 Jarrow 17.7.93
70 Brian Ashwell 19-15.4 Solihull 27.7.03
75 James Todd 20-00.13 Durban 23.7.97
80 Stephen Charlton 22-44.55 Birmingham 28.7.07
85 Gordon Porteous 24-51.7 Edinburgh 18.7.99
90 Gordon Porteous 31-25.45 Birmingham 26.6.04
5000 Metres Age Group Records UK Women
35 Kate Ramsey 16-04.46 Solihull 24.6.06
40 Priscilla Welch 16-13.8 USA 25.1.86
45 Bronwen Cardy 17-09.3 Solihull 11.6.00
50 Jane Laws 17-40.41 Birmingham 28.7.07
55 Sandra Branney 17-52.82 Dunfermline 21.6.09
60 Angela Copson 19-04.03 Birmingham 5.7.09
65 Jocelyn Ross 21-37.8 W London 14.8.93
70 Jose Waller 23-21.1 Reading 4.10.92
75 Jose Waller 26-22.55 Durban 22.7.97
US Age Records 5k Men
35-39 13:26.03 Steve Plasencia (36) 1993-Jun-05
40-44 14:17.36 Brian Pope (41) Waltham, MA 2004-Jun-12
45-49 14:34.27 Peter Magill (46) Walnut, CA 2008-Mar-08
50-54 15:41.67 Mike Heffernan (50) 1991-Jul-25
55-59 16:27.1 James O'Neil(55) 1981-Jan-12
60-64 17:19.0 Clive Davies (64) 1980-Aug-02
65-69 18:07.04 Joe King(65) 1991-Jul-25
70-74 18:43.61 Warren Utes(70) 1991-Jul-23
75-79 20:36.80 John Keston77) Seattle, WA 2002-Jul-27
US Age Records 5k Women
35-39 15:15.2 Francis Larrieu (35) 1988-Jul-02
40-44 16:02.27 Carmen Troncoso(40) 1999-Nov-23
45-49 17:33.75 Carmen Ayala-Troncoso(46) San Sebastian,
45-49 16:01.73 (p) Monica Joyce(49) Waltham, MA 2008-May
50-54 17:25.6 Shirley Matson(50) 1991-Sep-26
55-59 18:43.65 Shirley Matson(55) Eugene, OR 1996-Aug-23
60-64 19:14.8 Marion Irvine(60) 1989-Oct-19
65-69 20:27.08 Marie Michelsohn(65) San Francisco, CA 2007-
70-74 23:28.76 June Machala(72) Eugene, OR 2003-Jun-22
It's probably a mistake to try to reason with a moron like you, but let's look at what I said.
Reacting to another poster's assertion that it was "impossible that she took PEDs" I said that anyone who makes a blanket statement like that is kidding themselves. People cheat all of the time and for what seems like stupid reasons from the outside.
My comment was meant to be about doping and performance progression - only your willful misreading of it makes it a personal attack.
But please tell me another irrelevant story about how some guy you know who used to be slower than you and is now faster proves that ... Wait, what were you talking about?
Keith Stone wrote:
dmb wrote:Hey mental midget, where did I insist she was dirty? A 16:14 for a 48 yr old woman clearly seems anomalous to me. That doesn't mean that she is/was using PEDs.
Geez, one of a matched pair of jagoff's comes back. Did you jump up and down and foam at the mouth with insistence? Are you a jerk that's saying such an anomaly means someone has to prove the negative before your pee-brain is satified. Yes. Really.
I'm saying that there have been enough doping scandals to make me wonder every time I hear about a performance like this.
It is a shame and if acknowledging that makes me a jerk in your eyes than I can more than live with it.
But I think the best way to save the sport is to openly question as painful as that is for fanboys.
Those are the track records, not road records.
dmb wrote:
But I think the best way to save the sport is to openly question as painful as that is for fanboys.
and I think the best way to save the sport is not to denigrate the reputation of honorable and decent people by declaring the results of their hard work invalid just because you're too much of a lazy ass to even look at athlinks or anything else that's been posted (except for your fanboy, Really). You just jumped on the fact that she had a good performance and immediately went into a diatribe about PEDs.
So, to someone of your ilk a person that's been in a few Olympic trials, won a major marathon, been in world marathon champs, maybe had a few good runs in the PAs (which is known for it's weak competition) is now a candidate for scrutiny because she has a good day that happens to be a few seconds slower than the 5K equivalent of some of her not so distance half marathon times.
That sir, makes you a jerk of the highest order and you dishonor this sport even approaching a keyboard. If me calling you out for being a lazy ass jerk makes you proud well that's just pathetic. If me defending the honor of a respected teammate with what has got to be the longest trail of breadcrumbs to the facts known to man makes me a "fanboy", well I can more than live with that.
Talk about lazy. You can even bother to read what I wrote. Show me where I 'denigrated' her. You wouldn't give a rats ass if it wasn't your teammate.