Former Columbia runner and American citizen Lisa Nemec (runs for Croatia) positive on doping control

Good post. Some women like Flanagan are roughly 30 seconds per miles slower for the marathon than for the 10,000. I called John Kellogg about this and he said one could consider it on a percentage basis so someone like Nemec would likely slow down more in terms of seconds per mile.

If we take 30 seconds off of Nemec's marathon pb (5:33 pace), we get 5:03 pace which converts to 31:26 for 10,000. If you take 20 seconds off (Radcliffe), you get 32:24.

Yes my brother improved A TON after college. Based on times along, I'd be suspicious as hell about something like that. A few key things about his improvement.

1) Weldon ran in college when collegiate running was awful. Training was much worse back then. He improved a lot by having a much better training plan after college. Nowadays collegiate running is much better. In Nemec's defense, Stublic sort of ran at the end of the bad times in college/good times in college.

2) Weldon barely ran in HS. He did 4 years of HS xc and one of track. A year-round runner for only senior year. Do you know how serious Stublic was in HS? Someone said she was already a FL finalist.

3) Weldon worked very hard on his academics at college. Nemec strikes me as very intense. Perhaps she was distracted by academics? Do you know how hard she studied?

4) We were late developers. We looked like we were 12 when we were 16. People used to honk their horns and laugh at us when we were driving in HS as at traffic lights they thought a 12 year old was driving.

5) Altitude was huge for him. HUGE.

PS. Why the need for not mentioning your name? It always strikes me as weird that so many people rip us for having an anonymous messageboard but even when people are writing posts defending people, they still choose to remain anonymous.

I was registered here a few years ago and got banned, probably due to someone not liking my politics and reporting me. I never bothered to follow up and get reinstated. My registered name was ZachL. I ran at Columbia in the 1980's. And as for why I preferred anonymity, this is Letsrun...do you really have to ask?

Being a bit more objective about this now, I still defend Lisa but, as I questioned the Croatian drug testing agency and their motives on the one hand, I would also have to wonder about her coach. I have no knowledge about him at all, certainly he appeared to do great things with her. It would be useful if someone who understands drug testing could weigh in here on how, a couple of weeks after a race, a result could be a false positive. Due to rest?

So I was at the Berlin Marathon, and this doesn't surprise me. At all. Without even considering her improvement.

Her coaching situation is shady. The two of them (her coach, and manager-husband) hovered over her every minute. She's this tiny thing, and they talk down to her constantly. Or, they're whispering and pointing at people. I never saw her speaking, just nodding. During the race, her husband was biking next to her for long stretches screaming instructions - pretty much enough to get DQ'd on its own.

If you think this is normal, well, it isn't. At least, it's exceedingly rare. Of course people aren't discussing their strategies or goal paces with anyone, but all of the secretive conversations you'll have are done before and after the elite athletes are convened. If that's how they're acting in front of everyone, imagine the private conversations.

And ... I hate to stir the rumor mill, but screw it, it's a fact ... very noticeable acne on her shoulders and face. You don't notice this stuff if you don't see it in person.

And I will say, hers weren't the only coaches whispering. I watched another contingent walking into alleys to talk after their runner went by. At a spot where there was literally only myself and a pair of teammates for the runners. They're not looking at their watches or talking on the phone, either. And it wasn't English. And it was a language you'd expect.

If she's not guilty of doping, then I'll apologize for posting anything at all, even if it's factual. Obviously nothing I've said points directly at doping. But I've been around the sport for a long time, and people should know what it looks like on the inside. Some people are shady shady shady.

I think the former Columbia runner makes some valid points, but comparing Nemec's half-marathon time to marathon time is ridiculous. The half time is from the same period when she ran 2:25, and is therefore also suspect. The whole point of the exercise was to compare times at 10K, or times from college, and see if those efforts give any indication of her potential to run 2:25 in the marathon.

Casually Observing,

We're really descending here, I can't go into specifics but I will say you made one potentially valid point but if you know this athlete you would realize your mistaken on that point.

Your criticism is valid. But on the other hand the lack of 10 k's over several years goes to show the specificity of her training over several years. She does run 10 k's but they're clearly training run efforts, results in the 33's and high 32's. Hers is marathon specific training.

rojo wrote:

PS. Why the need for not mentioning your name? It always strikes me as weird that so many people rip us for having an anonymous messageboard but even when people are writing posts defending people, they still choose to remain anonymous.

That should only matter if the poster is saying something like "trust me" (As in, trust me, I am a teammate. or Trust me, I am her neighbor).

OnPoint wrote:

Rojo and others - I also really hope this is a false-positive because it takes what would be a great, positive, and inspiring story and turns it entirely around.

...

OnPoint, it will sound like I'm attacking you, but I'm not. I'm only using your post as an example of an incredibly dangerous mindset.

If Lance Armstrong hadn't said it, it would sound too hollywood:

"I’m sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. I’m sorry you don’t believe in miracles. "

No. miracles don't happen. Hard work happens, yes. Improvement happens, yes. Underdogs happen, longshots and darkhorses. But miracles don't happen. As far as sports go, especially this sport, it it is too good to be true, it is.

Buying into the feel good story only perpetuates the problem. If the fans of the sport had some critical thinking capacities, athletes wouldn't be able to pull the shit that they do. But the more you choose to buy into their lies, stories and miracles, the longer we're going to be disappointed, cheated, and robbed of the sport we deserve.

Hello Former Columbia Runner -

I'll freely admit that what I said isn't direct evidence of doping, and it's probably pretty weak circumstantial evidence to some people. I only posted it because from my observation, the behavior of her coach and manager really stood out as being overbearing and secretive - in a pretty public way. It didn't sit right with me.

And also, if the point is about the acne - yes, it's insensitive and I know she's had it for a while. I shouldn't have mentioned it.

My whole post is just about a "gut feeling" - Throw in the improvement, and I'll still say I'm not surprised.

Former Columbia Runner wrote:

Casually Observing,

We're really descending here, I can't go into specifics but I will say you made one potentially valid point but if you know this athlete you would realize your mistaken on that point.

When was the last time you spoke to her? Saw her in person? Saw her training throughout a season?

You're sticking up for someone you know, but that is a dangerous, dangerous move.

You're answering the imaginary quesiton "Would she ever dope?" That's the wrong question. The right question is "Could she be convinced to dope?" Did she put total faith in her coaches? Did she make incredible sacrifices to improve? Did she do everything to live up to her team's/coach's/family's/whatever's expectations? How does she respond to pressure? Does she feel pressure being Croatia's only olympic marathoner, ever? Does she feel cheated by the other dopers? Did she come through experience to realize it is not a level playing field, and that others were doping? Did it feel impossible to beat the doped athletes without doing it herself?

You're vouching for her in ways that I can't reliably accept. I'd be very careful doing so without really understanding the situation she was/is in.

Former COlumbia runner and others-

I think it's very questionable to bring up a training method as an explanation.

She discovered this "magic" training idea to run slowly and improve fat burning and this magically shot her PR's through the roof!

Add in some great "breathing techniques" and other mumbo jumbo and you get magic improvement.

There are no secrets. Yes, there is crappy training, but Lisa was likely well coached at Columbia. They have a solid program that goes to NCAA's during that time frame.

Secondly, you're saying that no one else has discovered this secret for the marathon except some lone rogue coach in the marathon capital of the world, Croatia...

It doesn't work like this. Flanagan, Davila, etc. in the US and many others around the world have as much or more of an understanding in training for the marathon as Stublic or her amazing coaches.

Anytime someone references some "innovative" training method as their reason for success, it just reminds me of Cathal Lombard and his insistence that plyos were the key to jumping minutes in the 10k. Yes, it's as if no one knew to do Plyo's before this...

I don't know if she's dirty or not, but the fact she tested positive, the secretive nature of her coach, and the sudden drop upon moving to croatia doesn't help.

"3) Weldon worked very hard on his academics at college.

4)...People used to honk their horns and laugh at us when we were driving in HS as at traffic lights they thought a 12 year old was driving."

Good thing one of you two was academically serious in college.

I think its inappropriate to question or call into question someone solely based on their performance rather than their coaching, country, other past history as has been done in Paula's case many times on this site. Paula never tested positive, her coach was never involved with doping, there was no history of large systemic doping or organized coverups of doping involving the UK.

The abnormalities in her blood tests also were well within normal natural limitations and are common after a hard training stint or marathon. There is simply no reason to question her based on these facts and one would have to do it based only on her performances.

I've watched Paula since she became professional and the clearest thing about her talent is how long her legs are and efficient her long strides seem to be that make her a different runner than most women. If you have seen her run its clear that she is just different in this respect, there is no other way to say it.

As a former Ivy League runner I also watched the former Lisa Stublic run on a few occasions. She was well above average but not exceptional; she was also on a very good team that included multiple all americans. She seemed very talented in that respect, always a threat at heps certainly a top scorer that could change their team's outcome. However she was never fast on the track, a fact which is also usually typical of marathoner's.

Her recent national record marathon performance put into context, 10 minutes behind the world record seems ordinary. Its a performance that's not unbelievable but clearly better than what she has ever done but not by that wide a margin. I believed it, I still do. A majority of female marathoners hit their best years in their 30's cleanly. There are literally hundreds of marathon times faster than 2:25:44.

It would be a shame if Lisa really tested positive as her performance didn't really indicate it. Perhaps her representing an Eastern European country was a mistake. What this situation appears to be, like many others are involving that part of the world, is in the 'other reasons' category.

This would be a good jumping off point to survey the nation's elite marathon runners and ask them if they monitor their pulse during their long runs. Do they go 30-35 miles in training? Yes, actually I do believe most of our nation's elite are missing the point here. This would mean that a potential 2:12 guy ought to be doing his long runs no faster than 6:15 pace, maybe 6:30. Does that happen? I bet it did for Bill Rodgers, which is why he ran 2:09. But when you read about a Ritz going 5:20 pace or something like that on his long runs, you have to wonder.

What evidence do you have to say she is clean? She was friendly in college?

Compare that to the evidence of her doping: her working with a coach with a history of other athletes doping, her huge improvement (yes that is evidence), and, of yeah, the fact that she tested positive!

This is my last post about this, because this idea is some serious delusion that borders on trolling. I never understand why some person's gut feeling about somebody they met years ago, or even know currently is proof, but all the actual, available evidence is irrelevant.

Former Columbia Runner wrote:

Your criticism is valid. But on the other hand the lack of 10 k's over several years goes to show the specificity of her training over several years. She does run 10 k's but they're clearly training run efforts, results in the 33's and high 32's. Hers is marathon specific training.

Nope, the female marathoners trained by Canova don't get it done the way you say this 2:25 runner is doing it. The capacity to extend the specific endurance workouts takes into account that 10k speed.

Canova would also say that your reference earlier to 9 minute miles is wrong training and unconnected to running fast marathons.

It's almost like you are someone connected to her coach, husband or her with excellent English who is laying down a false trail to divert attention away from what is happening here.

Former Columbia Runner wrote:

This would be a good jumping off point to survey the nation's elite marathon runners and ask them if they monitor their pulse during their long runs. Do they go 30-35 miles in training? Yes, actually I do believe most of our nation's elite are missing the point here. This would mean that a potential 2:12 guy ought to be doing his long runs no faster than 6:15 pace, maybe 6:30. Does that happen? I bet it did for Bill Rodgers, which is why he ran 2:09. But when you read about a Ritz going 5:20 pace or something like that on his long runs, you have to wonder.

This is idiotic. You have several athletes who do their long runs slow. You have some who do their long runs fast. You have some who do 28mile long runs, others who do 22. How do I know? I've seen many of them, I've coached some of them.

Canova states the key to his marathoners success is the really hard and fast long run. We're talking African athletes running near 5min pace for 35-40k.

So which is it?

Again, if you think Stublic and her coach found some new secret, you're barking upt he wrong tree.

Perhaps more americans need fast or slow long runs, but the reality is that most of them do these things at that level. And very very few see the gains from 34:30 10k to 2:25.

Does a 2:25:44 really sound that fast to you?

650 performances are faster.

http://www.marathonguide.com/history/records/alltimelist.cfm?Gen=F

Lisa's time wasn't even in the top 500.

If what I have read in the thread so far is true or even remotely believable its quite obvious whats going on, and very unfortunate.

Why are you trying so hard to make this complicated??!!

Once again, I'm shocked that such experienced, accomplished mid-80's runners have NO CLUE how pervasive PED use is in LIFE, not just sports.

One or two clicks and any chemical you can think of is available from China and repackaged in small amounts by a legion of resellers.

This is NOT the '80's, 90's etc...

Former Columbia Runner wrote:

This would be a good jumping off point to survey the nation's elite marathon runners and ask them if they monitor their pulse during their long runs. Do they go 30-35 miles in training? Yes, actually I do believe most of our nation's elite are missing the point here. This would mean that a potential 2:12 guy ought to be doing his long runs no faster than 6:15 pace, maybe 6:30. Does that happen? I bet it did for Bill Rodgers, which is why he ran 2:09. But when you read about a Ritz going 5:20 pace or something like that on his long runs, you have to wonder.

Almost every elite marathoner checks their pulse. Pulse to pace training is quite common.