Renato CANOVA: congratulations for BEKELE!

Post of the week anyone?

Renato Canova wrote:

In London, when I suggested Kenenisa to run with the second group (it was a pace under 2:06, optimal for his current shape), after one minute of thinking, he answered "My mind is not ready for running with weak runners".

Excuse me, quote of the week. Post too, maybe.

I went the first time to Mueller Wolfhart with Shaheen in 2006, after his injury in his left knee due to an impact with the door of his car.

Mueller Wolfhart used the system of Mesotherapy, with many injection of the some substance using a short needle, in a small area, in order to make the absorbtion of the substance better. Mueller Wolfhart didn't work alone : he had an equipe including a physio, able to teach right exercises for solving problems of balance in the body, a specialist of investigation for MRI and similar tests, a nutritionist and, when in the month of January 2008 all this equipe was not able to provoke any improvement in Shaheen's situation, a doctor able in 24 hours to do a surgery in the knee, in a town 80 km far from Munich.

For me, according my experience, Mueller Wolfhart is a doctor of great experience, using clean systems based on the knowledge of omeopatic substances, but especially on the knowledge of trigger points when doing injections.

When I was there, I met Asafa Powell, and the sprinters / hurdlers working with Francis (Simpson and Foster), coming from injuries in their muscles.

Mueller Wolfhart has a great experience for every kind of injury, working with top players and athletes from very long time, and in this case the main quality of a doctor is the knowledge of the injury, the reaction of the body and the credibility of the therapy for the athletes.

Nothing of strange that the most part of the best athletes in the World (and the most part of the best soccer players) go to meet Mueller Wolfhart from everywhere. Don't speak about doping, speak about a superior specific experience for solving physical problems connected with the body structure.

Like many years ago every athlete who had problem in Achille's tendon went for the surgery in Finland, because dr. Orava was the best in the World, now many athletes go to Mueller Wolfhart when they have injuries, because he was able to solve a lot of problems and is considered one of the best in his field. I don't agree that somebody who is one of the best in the world in his role must be considered an administrator of some illegal substance, only because many of the best athletes go to him when have some physical problem.

Kenenisa went to Mueller Wolfhart when nobody was able to solve his injury, and also Mueller Wolfhart couldn't obtain the final fitness in spite of his therapies. The final solution came when Kenenisa could be treated with continuity by the group of Yannis Pitsiladis, staying long time in Addis for working with him on daily basis.

I don't understand because, when there is some injury, many people make confusion between the therapy and doping. Kenenisa had big problems for about 7 years, trying many come backs with very little training, and creating a situation of continuous pain that didn't allow him to have proper training for long time. Only because of his deep confidence in himself, and the feeling his body could still have something important to give, Kenenisa was able to have the patience and the motivation for continuing his activity, always hoping his body could become better in the future.

To give other interpretations to the period he didn't compete, is something that doesn't exist, and is at the same time a lack of respect for one of the greatest athletes all time, and a total stupidity without any base (but we had in LR some idiots who connected the period without competing of Kenenisa with problems of doping created by a "criminal" imagination).

they took meldonium because they thought it was effective. and nine or ten ethiopians were caught doing it initially. But what saved them was that WADA hadn't realized how long meldonium stayed in the system and how many were taking it. They were saved by the vast # of positives.

Mr. Canova, can you give any more specifics about Kenenisa's training in the build up for Berlin and what you believe he can run in the next 2 years with continual training? Thanks

Renato, it's interesting you bring up Dr. Orava. In a thread about Lasse Viren, a poster had this to say about the doctor

Dr. Sakari Orava is a famous and internationally respected Finnish sports doctor and surgeon, who - unlike some other doctors - isn't considered a pioneer of doping, but that doesn't mean that he had in 1970s no involvement with methods now considered ethically questionable. He is well known in having collaborated on steroids with several Finnish athletes in 1973-1974 before steroids were banned and I've heard the university hospital were he worked been mentioned as a blood doping "research house" in an old newspaper, a fact confirmed privately by two journalists. Of the 1970s doctors, his reputation is perhaps least tainted, as a significant number of doctors were involved with doping research and practices with many having even very noble reasons to do so.

That's not to say he was doping Beckham when he visited several years ago, but just that anyone can be suspect. (And in his case specifically, some corticosteroid use is legal. Not injected steroids, as is the case in some tendonopathy treatments, but other routes are legal). It would be wrong to wholly discount anyone from being involved in doping.

I say that especialy with elite level science and training. You're a science-minded guy, and you know there are no shortcuts to success. So how then, can one man like Wolfhart monopolize success? If only one person can do it, it's not science. And that is what I distrust so much. Because the same narrative was spun around Dr. Ferrari and his "training plans". And Fuentes. Or Conte. But we know what was really behind their "one-of-a-kind expertise". In fact, I can't think of any individual modern doctor, physio, or coach that is both characterized as unquie/one-of-a-kind like Wolfhart, without also being associated with doping in some way. Because this sport is a science, and to reiterate, it's not science if it can't be reproduced.

Clerk wrote:

I say that especialy with elite level science and training. You're a science-minded guy, and you know there are no shortcuts to success. So how then, can one man like Wolfhart monopolize success? If only one person can do it, it's not science. And that is what I distrust so much. Because the same narrative was spun around Dr. Ferrari and his "training plans". And Fuentes. Or Conte. But we know what was really behind their "one-of-a-kind expertise". In fact, I can't think of any individual modern doctor, physio, or coach that is both characterized as unquie/one-of-a-kind like Wolfhart, without also being associated with doping in some way. Because this sport is a science, and to reiterate, it's not science if it can't be reproduced.

Your understanding of science is wrong. If only one person can do it, then yes it can still be science. Every scientific or engineering field has elite researchers that can do things others can't. Physics, medicine, surgery, computers, chemistry, etc.

Hi, M. CANOVA !

Congratulations for every thing you do : training top athlethes, writing books (Marathon Training - A scientific Approach), your big principle for marathon (The most important training is that which is conducted at the speed of the race you want to run. All other training exists solely to support the specific training).

Thanks.

That means 88% of the samples were not suspicious? and 85% of the athletes were never suspicious? We know many of the suspicious ones came from a few events like racewalking, and womens 800m, 1500m, and steeple.With hindsight, we can summarize which claims survived detailed investigations, and which claims failed to gain any traction.Which claims survived -- leading to sanctions:1) Russian athletics leaders collaborated with IAAF leaders, and outside consultants, to cover-up or delay sanctions of Russian athletes, extorting money from the athletes. The IAAF response was three lifetime bans, one 5-year ban, and triggered further investigations.NOTE: These extortion attempts were already starting to fail, because of persistent efforts from dedicated staff within the IAAF, and were the subject of an on-going IAAF investigation that started 8 months before Seppelt's documentary aired, in April 2014.2) Russian leaders were forcing their athletes to dope in order to compete. This triggered the WADA-IC investigation, leading to the ban of all Russian athletes.3) Anything else?Why the claims survived -- two key witnesses provided real evidence:1) The Stepanovas detailing the Russian doping2) The Shubokhovas detailing the extortion and attempted cover-upsWhich remaining claims failed, and seem likely to fail, or need much more investigation:1) All of Seppelt's investigative work in Kenya. He never penetrated any elite doping ring. He fabricated scenarios posing as a rich European agent to poor doctors and pharmacists. He did manage to secretly film non-elite hopefuls taking EPO.2) All of Ashenden's and Parisotto's claims of inaction against the IAAF. On the contrary, the WADA-IC concluded the polar opposite, that the IAAF was doing everything within reason, was extremely active in following up suspicious athletes, and extremely active in developing a robust ABP.3) Virtually ALL of the Sunday Times claims, based on Ashenden's and Parisotto's analysis, and then extended by their own analysis, apart from those involving the Russians.4) Anything from the UK Parliamentary investigation. Actually did they even make a claim? Was there any fruitful outcome? Why did they even do it?Why:1) Different combinations of: Inconclusive evidence, general assumptions when lacking necessary context, a misrepresentation/misunderstanding of applicable standards, selective presentation of statistics, and sometimes direct evidence to the contrary.2) Or... scandal, corruption, cover-up, bribery, hidden agendas, incompetence.

Doping samples wrote:

The Sunday Times investigation first looked at the samples and determined the total number of suspicious samples and the total number of athletes providing suspicious samples.

They came up with 12% suspicious samples and 15% of athletes providing suspicious samples.

Next Ashenden and Parisotto looked at 'multiple' samples from medallists at global championships over a period of time to determine suspicious medals won.

Thank you for giving us your insight. You have a lot of experience with some of the best runners in the world.

We have a lot of trolls here who like to post anonymously and rant about anyone who disagrees with them. I rarely see a positive contribution with "secret knowledge" from an anonymous poster. The whole idea of letting a single person post under multiple names opens this place up to abuse instead of enlightenment.

Clerk, I never knew Orava was involved in some doping. However, when I speak about Orava I'm not interested in this aspect of his activity. He was considered the best surgeon for tendon problems, and built the best equipe able to work on these problems. So, when I speak about Orava I speak about his SPECIFIC ABILITY AS SURGEON, all the other aspects are pure speculations.

The same when I speak about Mueller Wolfhart. These are doctors chosen and selected by the best in the World when they have some problem in their body structure, and this has nothing to do with doping.

Don't mix who works on the ENGINE of the athletes (it's what dopers do) and who works on the BODY STRUCTURE when you have some problem in that direction. It's the same as mixing who is the best for repairing the body of one car after an accident, with the best for repairing the engine when it doesn't work: they are two very different competences, and rarely belong to the same person.

vzxczxf wrote:

Post of the week anyone?

Renato Canova wrote:

In London, when I suggested Kenenisa to run with the second group (it was a pace under 2:06, optimal for his current shape), after one minute of thinking, he answered "My mind is not ready for running with weak runners".

+1

I love that line. I know KB is a bit of an exception ("a bit" might be an understatement), and I know the US has come a long way at the elite level of distance running over the past few years, but I think this exemplifies the fundamental difference between the best African runners and everyone else.

good wiggler wrote:

We have a lot of trolls here who like to post anonymously and rant about anyone who disagrees with them. I rarely see a positive contribution with "secret knowledge" from an anonymous poster. The whole idea of letting a single person post under multiple names opens this place up to abuse instead of enlightenment.

I am seeing the very opposite of what you are writing on this thread. Someone expressed a relatively mild disagreement with Canova's position on the likelihood on doping in top level atheltes (from Ethiopia). It was Canova who then went into quite an agressive rant mode calling expert scientists "clowns" and implying that people having a different opinion from him on the issue were clueless. Maybe he is being sincere but what he says comes accross as Lance Armstrong bully-boy tactics whenever someone expresses disagreement with him on the issue of doping.

Despite their faults many of the letsun communitiy are very knowledgable compared with general public when it comes to distance running and you should be focusing on what they say rather than whether they are posting anonymously or not. Just because someone puts their name to what they write on a message board does not mean that what they write is any more or less credible.

Could Bekele run a sub 27 10k right now?!

Renato Canova wrote:

[...] about athletes of this level. They have a so strong personality, and so much confidence in themselves, [...] is not that they want to win : is that they DON'T WANT TO LOSE

[...]

and the "mental and psychological branch", where I learnt how the mind of all the top athletes WHO REFUSE TO LOSE works.

[...]

1) The percentage of intervention on the performance for the "self confidence" in these athletes is very high. They are able to collect mental energies that, till few days before, seemed not to have, and because of this attitude they are able to achieve results in the race that, from their training, don't seem possible.

I come back to this point raised by Renato, because the race we saw last Sunday, the way BEKELE came back two times to catch up KIPSANG, and the amazing last 2km195, made me remember of what is (according to me) the most amazing finish of a marathon ever (and I would "only" rank the finish of the latest Berlin marathon in 2nd place) :

And if you know in which condition Sammy WANJIRU was running this marathon (with VERY little training for different reasons, among other still suffering of an intestinal flu just two weeks before - there is a whole chapter about his story and this specific race in "How bad do you want it" by Matt FITZGERALD), perfectly illustrate what the MIND of an athlete that DO NOT WANT TO LOOSE can do (and, of couse, provided you have the exceptional talent he had)...

After the race we saw last sunday, I wanted to pay tribute to Sammy, who was in my opinion potentially the best marathon runner ever, but sadly died before achieving his full potential. I keep wondering what could have been yesterday's race with Sammy into it...

Hi Renato, thank you for the interesting insight into the great man Bekele.

But please, don't call Seppelt a clown. The Kenyan documentary was very bad, no doubt about that. But his work in exposing state-sponsored doping in Russia and corruption within the IAAF was absolutely crucial. Overall, he has done our sport a great service in my opinion.

Can I ask you personally - do you trust Yannis Pitsalidis? Many within the scientific community have accused him of misconduct and of fabricating results for experiments. I don't like the idea of a man like that working so closely with Bekele. What is your opinion?

Renato Canova wrote:

About blood doping, my position is very clear : doping can represent a shortcut for reaching the 90% of the aerobic level an athlete can reach with training only, BUT NEVER CAN BRIN SOME ATHLETE TO REACH THE LEVEL HE CAN REACH WITH THE BEST POSSIBLE TRAINING. And the best possible training and blood doping are not cumulable, so I can say that NEVER a doped athlete can reach the results he could reach WITHOUT DOPING, but with the best possible training (of course, in altitude).

So as a consequence, you believe that Brahim Boulami ran a faster WR than Shaheen not because he was doped, but because Boulami was a more talented and better trained athlete than Shaheen.

Is it what you believe Renato? If not, there is a self-contradiction with what I've quoted above.

Hello M. CANOVA !

I also take your coming here to tell you that I have pinpointed a physiological point that could justify your training method based on your BIG PRINCIPLE : "The MOST significant training is That Which is Conducted at the speed of the race you want to run. All --other training exists solely to the specific media training".

I searched diligently with other colleagues whose BBEN whether others had already used this physiological argument. Apparently not.

I am French and I have produced several substantial documentation in French on this subject.

But I can summarize my point of view in English on half a page.

I am available to send you the summary and / or documents by email.

If you are interested, send me an email at:

nicolas.neff@free.fr

You need to read all what I write :

with the best possible training (of course, in altitude).

Boulami used about 5 months every year of training in Ifrane, which is 1600m (very much different from training all the year at 2400m). The same was for Ramzi and Goumri.

EPO can replace altitude, can't be ADDED to altitude, and when I speak about Kenyans or Ethiopians, I speak of people living and training between 2000 and 2600m of altitude.

I think the optimal altitude is between 2200 and 2700m. When we are at 1700 or lower, the effect of increased affinity between oxygen and hemoglobin doesn't reach the same value, when we are higher than 3000m the body is too stressed with tough training, and the "engine" can destroyed in short time.