El Guerrouj is a God Fearing Muslim and we have no evidence he ever resorted to doping.
His workouts, especially at moderate altitude in Ifrane (1600- 2000 +) were legendary and he really pushed the envelope.
He was an outlier in terms of being able to withstand phenomenal amounts of training loads without breaking down.
Ghost in China
I have a good idea how he withstood the training loads
hgh cortisone testosterone steroids epo blood bags
Trust me, he's doping. I know a lot about doping. These idiots who claim to be experts in doping, they hate America, they don't know anything. Complainers, bureaucrats, all of them. I've done more about doping than anybody else and I've been amazing and successful at it. More successful than any of these other Losers. He's a doper, believe me.
Tnfmedia wrote:
He went under 3:30 31 times, 20+ times more than the next guy. That stat alone means he was either the greatest miler to ever walk the earth by a large margin or doped to the gills.
Ghost1 wrote:
El Guerrouj is a God Fearing Muslim and we have no evidence he ever resorted to doping.
His workouts, especially at moderate altitude in Ifrane (1600- 2000 +) were legendary and he really pushed the envelope.
He was an outlier in terms of being able to withstand phenomenal amounts of training loads without breaking down.
Ghost in China
You're the same moron who claimed Islam is not oppressive to women.
Fvck off.
I never said that. Islam, when practiced according to the tenets, is a beautiful, peaceful religion, which stresses family life and values.
Those so called Muslims who oppress women are going against their own religion.
Back to El Guerrouj - no evidence that he ever doped, beyond the fact that he comes from a country which has had some dopers in the past. We sincerely believe that he would have had to much to lose by doping.
Do you guys remember former world 10,000m record holder - Salah Hissou - he also maintained a clean sheet throughout his career.
Ghost in China
Teach English, Learn Chinese,
Volunteer today. Great experience.
Ghost1 wrote:
I never said that. Islam, when practiced according to the tenets, is a beautiful, peaceful religion, which stresses family life and values.
Those so called Muslims who oppress women are going against their own religion.
Islam, when practiced according to its tenets, will have you behaving the way ISIS is behaving.
Here is what you wrote:
Also, Islam allows Muslim males to have 4 wives. Now, this may seem preposterous to Christians and others, but when you think about it - it makes perfect sense. Men will look and covet other women - we are hardwired to do so! Islam recognizes this, and makes provision for us (males) to have 4 wives.
Homosexuality - this is proscribed by Islam. Basically it is unnatural. And those who practice this form of sexuality to the extreme usually reap consequences which can be grave, such as HIV and other illnesses.
Think about it - anything which is 'unnatural' is proscribed by Islam, and this makes sense, in the long run.
Source:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&thread=4228168&id=4229855#4229855Women have rights, but Islam has a different idea about what those rights constitute. For example - women in Saudi should not work in the company of men. This is for the preservation of family and for the permanent nature of marriage. The rationale behind this idea is that men will be tempted to break their marriage vows in the company of unrelated women in the workplace. In Islam, you see, those situations are planned for. A natural feel for the way life should be, you could look it like that. Everything in Islam strives for balance and a natural way to live, devoid of aberration and unnatural practices which result in disaster.
Source:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&thread=4228168&id=4231093#4231093My Saudi colleagues comment that it is not natural for a woman to be in a position of leadership because she does not have the requisite skills to dominate and subjugate a group of people.
Source:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&thread=4228168&id=4232002#4232002Please also be informed, that once a Muslim, you cannot convert to other religions or faiths. This is 'haram' and would be punished by Allah.
Source:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&thread=4228168&id=4228600#4228600Islam is a backwards death cult that worships a pedophile.
What does this religion stuff have to do with doping?
Enjoy the party.
http://www4.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/2007+World+Athletics+Gala+IqtPEwcqMb-x.jpg
http://www.runblogrun.com/images/Radcliffe-Coe2-IAAF07.jpg
There was a lot of drinking that night.
Look at Lord Sebastian Coe (3:47.33 mile PR).
Lord Coe looks tipsy.
In the past I caught a lot of hell for calling Paula Radcliffe a doper and I deserved it. I have no evidence that Radcliffe or El Guerrouj doped and neither do you.
It is true that there was no assay for EPO until 2000, and that the Sydney Olympics was the first major athletics competition that featured testing for EPO. As you know, Mr. El Guerrouj infamously "lost" the Gold in Sydney. Hicham ran his best times, 3:43 for the mile and 3:26 for 1500, before an assay for EPO was developed. Is it *POSSIBLE* that Hicham was using EPO? Of course, but you have no proof.
I saw Hicham ElGuerrouj compete 4 times (two times in Brussels, once in Heusden and once in Zurich, his last ever loss). It was a real joy to watch him run, live and in person. He ran like a cross between a deer and a speeding locomotive.
Until WADA tells us that "We've retested some old urine from the 2004 Olympics and found that Hicham ElGuerrouj was on drugs," we have nothing. He's not a doper until that time.
Peace.
RevolutionaryThinker wrote:
Convince me that El Guerrouj was doping.
Convince me he wasn't.
Passing drug tests is meaningless and not proof that an elite athlete is clean.
What else you got?
Paula Radcliffe has a leaked 'suspicious' blood test that indicates she did an autologous blood transfusion in 2003 at the World 1/2 Marathon Championships which she won.
How much would you have to autologous blood transfuse to increase 2.8 g/dl?
honest question wrote:
How much would you have to autologous blood transfuse to increase 2.8 g/dl?
A lot or you could just be dehydrated.
not positive = negative? wrote:
Why do pppl like to say "never tested positive"?
Why not say "always tested negative"?
Or is there a reason?
What's the difference?
Ghost1 wrote:
El Guerrouj is a God Fearing Muslim and we have no evidence he ever resorted to doping.
His workouts, especially at moderate altitude in Ifrane (1600- 2000 +) were legendary and he really pushed the envelope.
He was an outlier in terms of being able to withstand phenomenal amounts of training loads without breaking down.
Ghost in China
I'm sorry, but what we now know about Diack's regime and bribing athletes who were tested positive not to be revealed, it's totally plausible that EL G and Lagat were known dopers to the IAAF and were kept from being revealed by regular payments from the King of Morroco and the US (privately or otherwise).
How can we trust any performance that happened in an era when Diack was taking bribes?
1. At any distance you have guys better at a shorter distance and other guys better at a longer distance. Cram had a slow 400m time at around 49seconds, but still ran 1:42
2. Renato Canova has talked numerous times about improving your PB by increasing endurance rather than basic speed
2. El G is clearly better at endurance, his 12:50 5k indicates that he's an endurance guy
3. Maybe he did do 1:42.7 in training. It still isn't going to be his best event to compete at even in a meet. If it isn't a true run or he gets boxed, he'd get smoked. Same reason Kipketer or doesn't need to be getting embarrassed running 400s. In a comparison a slow run 5k he wins nearly ever time, they have to hurt themselves turning up the pace to beat him.
3. In the past pre EPO era we had endurance milers. Moorcroft did a 3:49 mile, a 13:00 5k and a 1:46:6 800m. Kip Keino's 3:33 at altitude is massively impressive and he was racing at 3k/5k/10k so probably wasn't that fast at 800.
I don't know if El G doped. I don't much care, it's either widespread or random guys do it. It doesn't take away from the fact he was one of the hardest workers out there.
RevolutionaryThinker wrote:
Some say he did, some say he didn't, but with Kiprop's potential to take down his 18-year-old record, I think it's time we ask this question again:
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1915626&page=1What do his records mean for distance running? What, if he gets it, will Kiprop's?
The secrecy and closed nature of El Guerrouj's training set up is the most damning aspect. There is no need to be so secretive as a distance runner, there are no real secrets in how to train.
When his training base in the Atlas mountains was snowed under one year and his group had to look elsewhere to train in southern Europe, they demanded total lockdown of the facilities.
Blood dEPOr wrote:
RevolutionaryThinker wrote:Convince me that El Guerrouj was doping.
Convince me he wasn't.
Passing drug tests is meaningless and not proof that an elite athlete is clean.
What else you got?
All I have is a desire to believe in this legend; 3:26.00 . . .It looks like El Guerrouj had integrity and good sportsmanship. He was an excellent competitor. It's not like he just front all the time and demolished everyone--sure, some races he did do that. If that happened every single time I might be more suspicious. But the competition had plenty of chances to beat him. Perhaps I'm not cynical enough.
Both him and lagat needed braces to straighten their teeth as adults
Is this normal?
They wouldn't have been wealthy enough to have braces as children most likely. I'm guessing the implication is they took HGH. I don't have straight teeth as an adult and haven't used it.
