Solomon suddenly world class and Rupp soloing 3.50 indoor miles - Come on Letsun, ask the questions!

Makh-Daddy wrote:

fair point, but he also didn't race many miles back then...being in sub-4 shape is one thing, doing/getting in the right race is another.

i'd be interested to see his 06-08 PRs and if they suggest he was in sub-4 shape, or they are equivalent to sub-4 performances by various tables.

rojo wrote:

. As recently as 2008, he was still a 4:01 guy. Sort of reminded many people of Ryan Hall - fast in HS but maybe he's really a long distance guy.

He finally breaks 4:00 for first time in 2009. Now 4 years later, he's a 3:50 indoor miler.

This is interesting but I think it misses the point a bit. From 2006-08, salazar's goal was to get Rupp to the Olympics. Rupp's best chance was the 10000. To make it he had to be able to run 27:30s. He did that and made the team. After that, the focus was on being competitive in the London 10000. He began running mile races so he would have the speed required in the last 800. Many on here made fun of it but Rupp eventually broke 4:00 and has done 4 years of speedwork so that he would have the strength to close a 10000. It's not a sudden progression. He went 4:00 to 3:57 to 3:53 to 3:51. The last few seconds are a bit surprising but it's not a 3:48. There are maybe 50 guys in the world who can run that this year. Of course Rupp could be on something but I think he mainly got into great shape at the right time. Right now, there are not many guys in the world who can run 26:40. A few years ago there were. Rupp medaled when Bekele was no longer at his peak, Sihine was done and Jelian and Merga were out. If he comes up against a fresh set of 26:30 guys, Galen may not look that dominant. It may look more like a Diamond League 5000 for him - In the mix with a small chance at the win

Makh-Daddy wrote:

fair point, but he also didn't race many miles back then...being in sub-4 shape is one thing, doing/getting in the right race is another.

i'd be interested to see his 06-08 PRs and if they suggest he was in sub-4 shape, or they are equivalent to sub-4 performances by various tables.

I almost don't want to answer this as you and people like Alberto will say that I'm saying he's dirty. I'm not saying that. I'm just answering the question with facts that show your argument just isn't based in reality.

The best way to answer your question is to look at the last year he didn't break 4 for the 1st time. 2008. That was the year Rupp redshirted. He ran the mile a ton and never broke it or came close to it.

As for his equivalent performances in events over 1500/miles?? Let's just be clear - they were WAY WAY BETTER THAN equal to sub 4. In 2008, Rupp was 13th in tHE Olympics in the 10,000. He ran 27:36 in the heat/smog of Beijing. He also won the NCAA xc title that fall. Those are way better than sub-4.

But in the winter/spring, not close to breaking 4 and he had 5 high quality chances to do it. Here they are.

2008:

Jan 26. Boston. He runs 4:02.02 at the Boston indoor games. Admittedly the winning time was over 4 - Pablo Solares at 4:00.34. Loses by 1.68 seconds.

Feb 1 - Rupp runs 4:02.17 at Millrose. A tight track but the winning time was Lagat in 3:57.51. Loses by 4.56 seconds.

Feb 16. Runs a 1,500 in England. No where close to 4:00 equivalent. Rupp runs 343.96 and finishex next to last in a race that Lagat won in 335.23. So he lost by 8.73 seconds.

April 25. At Oreogn. Rupp runs 4:03.13 to finish 6th in a race where Wheating win sin 3:58.16. Loses by 4.97 seconds.

June 21st Rupp runs 3:43.33 and finishes 3rd to last in a race that Taylor Milne wins in 3:36.00. Loses by 7.33 seconds/

In 2008, Rupp was getting killed in mile/1500s. He was still viewed as a guy with no speed/kick. Now, it's the opposite. His kick is seemingly lethal and if he ran say a world indoors, some are wondering if he could win it at 1500 like Haile G did back in teh day. The transformation from great distance runner iwth no prayer at 1500/mile to world beater is remarkable.

What legally could explain it?

1) I always always truck how as recently as 2-3 years ago, Rup said he hated continuous tempos/long intervals. To me, that is distance running. When I read that, I was like, the honest thought htat entered my head was, HE's not even training." If he wasn't doing that and was that good, that's like not being trained as a runner and being that good. So he starts doing that and he starts runnign 110+_ verus 80 mpw + and you get a big improvement.

2) One could argue that like Wejo, Rupp looked like he was 12 years old. Maybe he's a late bloomer.

-Rojo

PS. Please don't hate on me for stating facts.

It seems more likely to me that Rupp can run a clean 3:50 mile than it does for him to run what he has for 5 and 10k. Those PRs and his silver medal seem more PED suspect to me.

If I had to bet my bank account, I'd bet that Rupp (and all of the AlSal and Schumacher male and female Nike elites) are doing nothing that is currently illegal, but is something all of us would call doping and cheating. I'd guess that they (because of Nike resources) are years ahead of the game. Based on no facts, this feels more likely to me than this group of people all running "clean."

While maybe unethical (and maybe not), I don't see many of those athletes being competitive with the Africans without innovative pharmacology.

Lance Armstrong anyone?

Goucher Needles wrote:

It seems more likely to me that Rupp can run a clean 3:50 mile than it does for him to run what he has for 5 and 10k. Those PRs and his silver medal seem more PED suspect to me.

If I had to bet my bank account, I'd bet that Rupp (and all of the AlSal and Schumacher male and female Nike elites) are doing nothing that is currently illegal, but is something all of us would call doping and cheating. I'd guess that they (because of Nike resources) are years ahead of the game. Based on no facts, this feels more likely to me than this group of people all running "clean."

While maybe unethical (and maybe not), I don't see many of those athletes being competitive with the Africans without innovative pharmacology.

Interesting. So what is your opinion about non-Nike athletes? Because they do not have Nike's resources they are doubtless "cleaner" (if not totally clean)?

ya, i'm thinking Hall's 2:06:17 (or 59:43) are the best marks by any US runner in recent years. It says a lot that he didn't sign with nike.

[quote]Montesquieu wrote:

I agree entirely with the substance of A Duck's remarks, although I think the tone could have been tempered. However, what must also be noted is that it is impossible for anyone to prove beyond doubt that he is clean. In the case of the Rupp, Farah, and Ritz training group, I'm as confident that I can be that they are all clean. Why? Setting aside their extraordinary potential as exhibited when they were in high school (Rupp and Ritz in particular), there's this: this is not just any training group--this is NIKE'S training group. It is inconceivable to me that Phil Knight and the Nike hierarchy would permit their hallmark long distance athletes, who train on the Nike campus, who are there everyday, to bring shame upon the Nike brand.[quote]A Duck wrote:

Who just got interviewed on Oprah?

Nike, almost from the beginning, has been a win at all costs outfit. I wrote on another thread - probably now long deleted - that Nike in the eighties was principally a pharmaceutical supply house. I really doubt that much has changed. Think about all of the prominent Nike athletes who have been busted in the last 15 years. Lance is only the latest. If the PGA cared about PEDs, Tiger Woods would, I'd wager, be scheduled for a tell-all sit down with Oprah.

Nike is kind of like the mob, or, a cult. They're very powerful, exercise great control over your life, compromise your ethics early, and then, use that as leverage to ensure your obedience.

I wish the hype were true. The ethos evinced in the Nike commercials is inspirational, what sport ought to be about. I wish that was also what Nike was about. Of course, I also wish that politicians only ran for office to make the world a better place.

So what are the odds Rupp is heading for a sit-down with Oprah in the coming years? If NOP is dirty, is there any chance such facts will see the light of day?

I agree with you, I never said anyone in Salazar's group was doping. My point was that Monty, a previous poster, claimed the group being sponsored by Nike gave them saint status and there could be no wrongdoing. He claimed he was "as certain as he could be" they were clean. He layed down the absolute first which is silly to do considering Nike's past history. It is obtuse to think doping does not occur at the top levels of sport just because an athlete has not tested positive.

There is no evidence on either side, clean or dirty, for top athletes anymore. Dopers and non-dopers alike have the same test result 99% of the time which is clean. The tests are too easy to beat and anyone running a good doping program can pass them with ease. Unless governing bodies are serious about retesting samples from 10 years ago, ala Lance, most dopers will never be caught.

Remember that Haile G ran a 3:31.x indoors (2nd on the all-time list I think) in 1998. Between his two 10k wins when he clearly had lots of endurance. So maybe a fast indoor mile is not out of the question for 5k/10k runners?

I don't need to see a sit-down and hear a confession for me to be happy. I know the truth.

All I'm saying is that there is no hope because there is an inequality in the teammates. You can't pair them on a team ever. They run with different motivations and personal ethical requirements.

One competes on a much higher level. If the other athlete refuses to rise to that level and lies again then whatta going to do? It's the way it is and it's best to accept that athlete's choice to live his life that way instead of trying to change it.

I'm sorry: why exactly do you all think Rupp is doping? Because he ran 3:50? Really? 3:50? But where were all of you last year when he ran nearly the same time (converted) at Oxy? And what huge races--Diamond League, World Champs, Olympics, etc.--has he won? By my count none. Nevertheless, he still is a great world class runner, so don't get me wrong, but I don't understand why anyone is raising the red flag over this race. And as for other Nike athletes--yes, several of them dope, as do other athletes sponsored by other companies. However, as I tried to suggest, this case would go beyond that. Lance Armstrong's coach, Marion Jones' coach, etc., were not Nike employees: Salazar is. Armstrong and Jones did not train at Nike--Rupp, Farah, and Ritz do. About Armstrong specifically, when he first starting winning I thought he might be clean, but after a few years I doubted it. When I found out more about the people he was threatening, I felt sure he was. Let me conclude with a question. We know that even some runners who are barely national class are doping, and we know this because they have tested positive. So those who are so willing to accuse Rupp, who isn't doping and how do you know?

The odds of Oprah having a sit-down with Rupp??? Long - measured in light years long. Oprah doesn't know who the heck Rupp is, most likely. And, even if she does, 99% of the viewers of OWN don't.

Could NOP get busted? Maybe. It would take some sort of Shakespearean turn for Nike to sell Salazar down the river and no one outside of Beaverton has the power to force NOP to face the music. But, you know, there's been some really high profile busts the last few years. I'm not so sure that USADA is done with BALCO. Salazar had close connections with BALCO. USADA and the Feds could blow the lid off of NOP and the rest of Nike's dirty operations.

I think, regardless, the larger question is this: What if tomorrow, every dirty athlete was busted - and not just current cheaters, but those who cheated in the past as well. Would the future of athletic competition be clean then? I'm afraid I kind of doubt it.

I never claimed saintly status for them. I merely pointed out what I take to be a very strong incentive for them not to dope and for Nike to be attentive to the issue. Second, I never claimed I was "certain": I claimed I was as confident as I could be. In making such a claim I was taking into account my own limited circumstances. Of course I could be mistaken, but given how close the group is to Nike, given that few of Salazar's athletes have succeeded at the highest level (why, for example, hasn't Ritz run faster, or Ulrey, or Webb, or Adam Goucher [who ran almost the identical time for 5000 that he ran under Wetmore] etc.?

so what do you think these guys are doing that is not legit? Certainly not EPO, as they would be handily caught.

I suggest that training/technology/knowledge has caught up with the EPO sparked performances of 10 - 15 years ago.

Of course, there is always a chance that they are dosing on LSD and have transcended the paradigm that you live in, yes?

good thing it's not a banned substance.

In the case of the Rupp, Farah, and Ritz training group, I'm as confident that I can be that they are all clean. Why? Setting aside their extraordinary potential as exhibited when they were in high school (Rupp and Ritz in particular), there's this: this is not just any training group--this is NIKE'S training group. It is inconceivable to me that Phil Knight and the Nike hierarchy would permit their hallmark long distance athletes, who train on the Nike campus, who are there everyday, to bring shame upon the Nike brand.

Why was my post deleted? Was it that incendiary to ask if Rupp is headed in the direction of Lance given the common Salazar association? Is it so outrageous to question whether NOP would possibly ever be outed as dirty (with the "if it actually is dirty" qualification as originally added)? Are we not for open debate here folks?

boober wrote:

ya, i'm thinking Hall's 2:06:17 (or 59:43) are the best marks by any US runner in recent years. It says a lot that he didn't sign with nike.

I think Hall may have more natural talent than Rupp. But he cannot compete with Nike resources; the conscious decision to forgo said resources (regardless the costs) indeed says something.