WOW Kenyans really are doped...

Trollism. are you not still in your new Country, North Korea ?

I see you continue with your fanatic and idiotic convinctions.

You are at the same level of some pseudo-scientist of antidoping, who wants to decide without having in his hands the real normal values of the athletes (yes, because for saying that a value is abnormal, before we need to know what is normal FOR THE SPECIFIC PERSON, not considering normality the average) : the level of clowns (with respect for clowns).

Renato Canova wrote:

Trollism. are you not still in your new Country, North Korea ?

I see you continue with your fanatic and idiotic convinctions.

You are at the same level of some pseudo-scientist of antidoping, who wants to decide without having in his hands the real normal values of the athletes (yes, because for saying that a value is abnormal, before we need to know what is normal FOR THE SPECIFIC PERSON, not considering normality the average) : the level of clowns (with respect for clowns).

This isn't 'Oh, this guy has a high hematocrit so therefore he must be doping' though is it?

Training or living at altitude has no real effect on the reticulocyte level compared to training or living at sea level. That's what these abnormal results are all about, their off-scores are obviously pointing toward blood doping (or reticulocyte level pointing toward EPO), the whole 'They're Kenyans so they have different physiology' thing doesn't really work in this case.

dsrunner wrote:

no monetary incentive so you get a training run

Did you watch the 10000?

Dopers are Nervous wrote:

marathon anomaly wrote:

It's not the heat.

These guys are scared to dope for Worlds. They crush ridiculous times at big money marathons then completely disappear when the screws are tightened. This sport is such a farce

Yep. If this keeps up you may see Europeans and others actually become interested in competing (in large numbers). But don't count out the behind the scenes agenda that has allowed E. Africans, Cubans and others to let their top stars dope with impunity for the most part.

Did you watch the 10000? So many opinions thrown out after an insanely hot marathon, and so few retractions after the 10000 showed all of this to be completely inaccurate.

Renato, we were watching what part of the race did not conflict with the heptathlon or hammer qualifying (nice telecast! get your priorities straight, IAAF telecasters) and there were plenty of trees giving shade for a good deal of the course, but it would be off and on, and that kind of shade isn't all that helpful. Certainly in the latter stages there was no shade at all. Temps on the course would be higher, obviously, than in the shade at weather stations, but as you say the Kenyan marathoners really need to train in a place like Florida or Texas or Mombasa if they want to be prepared for championship races.

+1Can't wait to use it!

Peter Andersson wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

The mother of idiots always is pregnant.

LOL! I totally love that metaphor! :-)

"The mother of idiots always is pregnant."

...I've got to remember that one

Retard alert wrote:

Dopers are Nervous wrote:

Yep. If this keeps up you may see Europeans and others actually become interested in competing (in large numbers). But don't count out the behind the scenes agenda that has allowed E. Africans, Cubans and others to let their top stars dope with impunity for the most part.

You don´t know much about sports, do you? Why on earth would IAAF protect a bunch of African marathon runners, who are completely unknown to a larger public and whose market value are close to zero? Instead they bust the most well known T&F athletes of all: American sprinters. You really are an idiot!

International sports federations don´t give a crap about political correctness. All they care about is money, money and money.

Pretty sure USADA busted the american sprinters? Freaking turd bag. BTW, it would help if africans were tested at all when not in competition. I think his underlying point is, well, a good one. The fact that the current and previous world record holders were no where to be seen, is interesting to say the least. Marathoners haven't been subjected to the same type of testing that track and field athletes have, so comparing the two is not logical. A 5000m runner knows how and what he can get away with. A marathon runner pisses in a cup after the race and thats all folks. Well thats how it use to be at least, the landscape is changing quite fast.

Renato Canova wrote:

The explanation of the controperformance of Kenyans is very simple : they continue to train in the same way for every marathon, not considering the different situations they can face in the race.

They train hard, and in many cases well, but one thing never change : the time of their training. So, long runs at 6 in the morning, and normally good training in comfortable situation as weather. ....

They seemed to have done things pretty well for the 10 00m though ... 2, 3 and 4th, to the greatest 10 000m runner in the world right now. Sure, heat's a bigger factor in the marathon, but I'd expect the 10 000m to have some kind of impact too.

Your nickname is Retard or Retarded ? Because it seems the second is more right for you.

Marathon runners are tested exactly how all the other athletes, out of competition. Not exactly, are tested MORE than the other athletes, because there is a blood test in ALL THE MAJORS that is a must (the organizers of any Major Marathon pay the cost of these tests, directly to the antidoping agency).

Before every bi

Marathon, all the top athletes follow the same antidoping regime of the Championships, with blood tests (before the race) and, of course, test of urine after the race.

Put in your mind that blood tests can only give the info that there is some suspicion for the athlete, but, if you want to search the illegal substance, you need to use the test of urine.

This is also one of the reasons because the top Marathon runners are, of sure, not doped : among all the athletes, they are the one having the higher number of blood tests, and this means they can have all the elements for a very precise individual profile, which is the requirement for the Biological Passport.

I don't want to defend the IAAF, but all the Attacks received about the fact to "cover" athletes with suspicious values come from people not knowing how the antidoping works.

You can ban an athlete for two reasons only :

1- You find in the urine illegal substances. In this case, the athlete is doped without any doubt (after controlling the second sample too), and is guilty.

He can explain the reasons, can find some excuse, but at the end of the day is banned, because the fact he used something illegal is not an opinion, but is a fact.

2- You see some suspicious value in the blood tests, and can use the biological passport. This action is very much more complicated :

a) You need a high number of tests, for determining many points for each parameter you want to consider, in order to create a curve called "profile". The tests are not less than 8, but in the case of contestations can be better to have 10-12 points, showing big fluctuation in the parameters.

The problem is legal : since in the urine never it was possible to find any illegal substance, the banned athletes go to some court and start legal actions against IAAF. The IAAF must have a big number of tests, enough for winning the trila in the cort, and this requires TIME.

People must understand that the decision to ban an athlete from his activity

can't be something based on "suspicions" and emotional : this is a LEGAL problem.

This is one of the points because the accusations are "instrumental" and not in "bona fide" : if the two Australian had access to 12,000 tests regarding 5,000 athletes, THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY THIS IS ENOUGH FOR BUILDING THEIR BIOLOGICAL PASSPORTS, and don't forget that in the urine of these athletes NOTHING was found.

I understand that it's a shame the possibility to know the real "official result" of big Championships only after 4-5 years, and that the new winners, meantime, are stripped of the benefits they could have if already medalled athletes : but there is no way to act in different way, if in the urine it's not possible to find DIRECTLY the illegal substance.

That's the reason because, in the case of the documentary of Seppelt, THERE IS NOTHING SCIENTIFIC : when the two "scientists" speak of "abnormal values", they consider as "norm" the average of the values of the athletes, and this is a statistic work without any scientific base, since ther'is a great variety between the basic and normal values of different individuals.

I repeat again : ONLY LONGITUDINAL STUDIES REGARDING ANY ATHLETE CAN SHOW WHICH ARE THE NORMAL VALUES FOR ANY SUBJECT.

And don't do the mistake to think that "abnormal values" are related with very high hematocrit and hemoglobin, Always : there are a lot of values, very far from the norm, that are abnormal because very much lower than the average.

I continue to repeat the same "mantra" : before speaking about the effects of doping, we need to know the effects of training, and these "scientists" about training don't know absolutely anything.

How Einstein said, "Theory is when somebody knows everything, but nothing works. Practice is when something works, but people doesn't know why".

The most part of people thinking of doping and antidoping (scientists, journalists, letsrun posters...) are able to combine theory and practice :

nothing works, and they don't know anything.

The race of 10000m was at 9pm, and the temperature was not bad.

I supposed the athletes could run a little bit faster, so at the end I spoke with Geoffrey Kipsang, with Arne Gabius and with Mo, and everybody told me it was possible to run well, but there were problems breathing because of the pollution. Al them quantified the problem at the level of 1 second per lap, giving to the race a value, in ideal conditions, of under 26'40" for the top 4 athletes.

All the competitions on track are not too much affected by hot and humidity (apart the heats in the morning), because by night the temperature is fresh, and we need to wear a jacket. The real problem is the quality of the air, that can create some problem with different individual impacts.

26:40 seems about right (see my separat post elsewhere).

Wanjiru's race in 08 was insane!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks, Renato.

Renato Canova wrote:

I'm curious to see where you were during the marathon. In all the course there is not one meter with shadow (trees or buildings). Yes, I exxaggerated, because really the temperature was over 35, after 1 and half hour of competition.

You must understand that the station giving official temperature is located inside the stadium, which is protected till when the sun is not perpendicolar to the track.

Ask the athletes how much the temperature was, and how they felt...

Ok so in Italy you measure temperature in the sun and not in the shade? Interesting.

Even then, how do you explain the difference in humidity, OFFICIALLY between 50 and 61 (very comfortable) and YOUR MEMORY 90%?

The dude bro wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

I'm curious to see where you were during the marathon. In all the course there is not one meter with shadow (trees or buildings). Yes, I exxaggerated, because really the temperature was over 35, after 1 and half hour of competition.

You must understand that the station giving official temperature is located inside the stadium, which is protected till when the sun is not perpendicolar to the track.

Ask the athletes how much the temperature was, and how they felt...

Ok so in Italy you measure temperature in the sun and not in the shade? Interesting.

Even then, how do you explain the difference in humidity, OFFICIALLY between 50 and 61 (very comfortable) and YOUR MEMORY 90%?

Relative humidity is meaningless. Dew Point is what matters. It is a measure of the actual energy in the air. Moot point though, becasue the DP of both 2015 and 2008 was about 62deg. Just fine for running. The runners' enemy was never the humidity nor was it the nominally recorded temps (in the shade). The enemy was the temps out on the street under the bright Sun.

While the conditions in both 2008 and 2015 were similar, there are some notable differences.

1) 2015 was significantly warmer at the start 77.0F compared to 70.0F in 2008. 2015

2) 2015 was significantly windier than in 2008. Both races were run into a headwind but 2015 had steady 8.9mph winds. 8.9mph winds translates to 4.0 meters per second. Twice what is allowable on the track if the wind was at your back. Those windy days on the track when the sprints are recording wind-aided time? Remember how it felt when you ran your race and hit the back stretch. Now double that!

The energy expended running into a headwind is increased by the square of the velocity of the wind. This is significant. At the begining of the race in 2015 the wind was 3x 2008. Midway it was 2x, and near the finish it was 30% more than 2008.

Warmer weather and stronger headwinds make 2015 more difficult than 2008

2015 World Champs Mens Marathon 7:35am August 22, 2015 Clear skies

5:30am Sunrise

7:35 am Start Mens Marathon

Skys were clear

7:30am 77.0 F 62.6 DP NNE 6.7mph

8:30am 80.6F 62.6 DP North 8.9mph

9:30am 82.4F 62.6 DP NNE 8.9mph

2015 Olympic Games Mens Marathon 7:30am August 24 Clear skies

7:30am 69.8F 64.4DP variable 2.2mph

8:30am 77.0F 60.8DP WNW 4.5mph

9:30AM 80.6F 62.6DP North 6.7 mph

Good stuff. Is there a way of predicting the effects of direct sunlight on times depending on variables like time in the sun, time of the day, etc?

Geez...excellent weather analysis. No stone left unturned.

Ironically...it was Renato who said the 2011 Boston marathoners received little to no benefit from the "gale" at their backs. Ever since then, it's been hard for me to have faith in what he says.

As time goes on...it's seeming more and more to me like Renato cares about his athletes a lot more than he cares about the facts...not the worst thing it the world.

edbcb wrote:

Good stuff. Is there a way of predicting the effects of direct sunlight on times depending on variables like time in the sun, time of the day, etc?

You can attempt to, but you cannot predict anything, you can only speculate.

Time of day is one thing, but time of day where? What lattitude? What time of year?

The sun's altitude at start in Beijing was 21 degrees. By finish it was 45 degrees. As the race wears on the Sun's impact on the runners is more. But what if the race is in Helsinki? A much difference set of circumstances isn't it.

Run a 5k race in Doha when its 90 degree F. Why can they run so fast? Because at the equator the Sun sets earlier and additionally the air is very dry. The Dew Point might be only 30-40 degrees..

In the physical world there are so many variables that hinder or help performances it's almost impossibe to codify it into a nice neat formula.