Silly. So how about Moorcroft's record? Or Ron Clarke's 36-second improvement on his previous 10,000m WR -- in a single race?
The letsrun.com mob would have burned the place down!
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
It would be interesting to hear why you "knew" that 2:09:56 was too fast for Ruth Chepngetich to run cleanly (as you said in a recent YouTube video). What led you to that conclusion?
After all, 2:09:56 represents a 4% improvement on Paula Radcliffe's 2:15:25 former world best, set in 2003. The men's world best has also improved by exactly 4% during the same period.
So why is it reasonable for the men's record to improve by 4% in 20 years but not for the women's record to improve by same percentage in 21 years?
Was it their previous performances that led you to conclude that Kelvin Kiptum could cleanly run as fast as he did but that Ruth Chepngetich could not?
As we all know, though, athletes have been known to make massive improvements on their previous best, even at the WR level.
"Massive improvements" are a red flag in a dirty sport. The men's records will also have been doped. That obviously includes Kiptum. In fact most of the records for several decades now.
Right. The sport is irredeemably filthy. The Olympic motto -- Citius, Altius, Fortius (Faster, Higher, Stronger) -- should now be "Too fast, Too High, Too Strong."
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
I was getting into running in the 1990s and at the time a lot of the running community suspected that there was some PED use going to set that record. Same for Komen. Since then we have a gigantic pile of positive drugs tests from Africa, especially Kenya so to me it is quite normal that a lot people will suspect PED use when it comes to any record. Blame the PED users for this situation.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
I was getting into running in the 1990s and at the time a lot of the running community suspected that there was some PED use going to set that record. Same for Komen. Since then we have a gigantic pile of positive drugs tests from Africa, especially Kenya so to me it is quite normal that a lot people will suspect PED use when it comes to any record. Blame the PED users for this situation.
How would you have known what the "running community" suspected in 1995? There were no running-related websites then. The first Netscape browser wasn't even released until October 1994.
I followed the sport closely then, and I don't recall anyone in the track press raising doping as a possibility when Haile crushed that record.
And there's a big difference between SUSPECTING PED use and ACCUSING any athlete who does something spectacular of PED use.
Yes, the cheaters are obviously reprehensible and largely to blame for the cynicism that now casts a shadow over the sport. But mindless cynicism of the "too fast!" variety is also to blame.
I was getting into running in the 1990s and at the time a lot of the running community suspected that there was some PED use going to set that record. Same for Komen. Since then we have a gigantic pile of positive drugs tests from Africa, especially Kenya so to me it is quite normal that a lot people will suspect PED use when it comes to any record. Blame the PED users for this situation.
How would you have known what the "running community" suspected in 1995? There were no running-related websites then. The first Netscape browser wasn't even released until October 1994.
I followed the sport closely then, and I don't recall anyone in the track press raising doping as a possibility when Haile crushed that record.
And there's a big difference between SUSPECTING PED use and ACCUSING any athlete who does something spectacular of PED use.
Yes, the cheaters are obviously reprehensible and largely to blame for the cynicism that now casts a shadow over the sport. But mindless cynicism of the "too fast!" variety is also to blame.
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
People weren’t that surprised by Moorcroft because Rono had taken the record from 13:13 to 13:08 then 13:06. Many fans figured they were seeing a generational shift. Smilin’ Haile was different because he went from working and struggling to break 13 to cruising well under the record while looking rather relaxed. All thanks to Hermens and his undoubted reliance on PEDs.
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
IF Moorcroft had blood doped in 1982 he would not have been cheating. Blood doping was legal until 1984 or '85.
No, I can't substantiate the comment from Snell which is why I made sure to say he made it to a mutual friend. I have no doubt that Peter said this to our friend but don't know how Peter learned this. And I don't know exactly when the awareness of blood doping made its way from the Air Force to the track. If Peter was right it got there earlier than most of us knew but didn't hit the mainstream until about the time you said it did. But it was known sooner than that.
I think it doubtful that Snell would have known if Odlozil had blood-doped before the '64 Olympics unless Odlozil had privately admitted it to him - unlikely - or someone in the Czech team said so - also unlikely. What I think is possible is that in later years Snell may have heard from sources that blood doping had been a feature of E Bloc sports at the time of the '64 Olympics and inferred that Odlozil would have been included in the practice. We can't be sure of any of this because, quite apart from the fact we can't corroborate what Snell may have said about Odlozil, there isn't any definitive information about blood doping in track in the '60s. That didn't happen till the '70s.
I do a group run once a week that starts at 6. It is around 4 miles that goes out and around a lake. Most people add on some at end to at least get 5 miles. We started doing the extra bit first and circle back around to the start so can catch anyone who is a few minutes late.
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
Moorcroft could have doped in the '80's but he didn't make the kind of ascent that Chepngetich has - he was a top runner long before his record - and he didn't reach the comparatively superhuman levels Chepngetich has (for a woman). His record is merely respectable today and nowhere near the top performances of this era. (So they must all be doped?) Nor did he come from a country that has the kind of stained reputation Kenya now has. Nothing today in Kenyan running can be trusted. Chepngetich has once again proved that.
No, I can't substantiate the comment from Snell which is why I made sure to say he made it to a mutual friend. I have no doubt that Peter said this to our friend but don't know how Peter learned this. And I don't know exactly when the awareness of blood doping made its way from the Air Force to the track. If Peter was right it got there earlier than most of us knew but didn't hit the mainstream until about the time you said it did. But it was known sooner than that.
I think it doubtful that Snell would have known if Odlozil had blood-doped before the '64 Olympics unless Odlozil had privately admitted it to him - unlikely - or someone in the Czech team said so - also unlikely. What I think is possible is that in later years Snell may have heard from sources that blood doping had been a feature of E Bloc sports at the time of the '64 Olympics and inferred that Odlozil would have been included in the practice. We can't be sure of any of this because, quite apart from the fact we can't corroborate what Snell may have said about Odlozil, there isn't any definitive information about blood doping in track in the '60s. That didn't happen till the '70s.
It's entirely possible that Odlozil or some other Czech might have told Peter that Odlozil blood doped. It was not close to being illegal then. There really would be no reason not to have told Peter about it. Again, I don't know how Peter might have gotten this information or even if it's accurate and I only mentioned it, as I did the Air Force experiments, to point out that like many things in life, it was happening before the general public learnt of it.
Having said that, we all knew that the Eastern Bloc countries devoted a lot of research to finding ways to improve the performances of their athletes, biochemically and otherwise. When I heard that it was something done in Finland I was surprised that it wasn't being done in an Eastern Bloc country, especially East German but none would have surprised me. And I still think it may have been the East Germans who really perfected it and the Finns picked it up. There were a lot of sporting contacts between Finland and East Germany then. But you're correct, information about it was pretty hazy until the 70s.
Blood doping was unknown in the mid 60's and EPO as a ped had yet to be invented for another quarter of a century.
In other words, Moorcroft COULD have blood-doped. Yet no one shrieked "too fast!" in 1982, when he blew the 5,000m record to pieces -- at the ripe old age of 29.
Nor did the doping vigilantes take to the Web in 1995, when Haile lopped a FULL 11 SECONDS off the WR, the biggest improvement on that record in history.
These days, though, it seems that ANY exceptional performance gets the knee-jerk cynics chattering. So it's not so much that there are so many more unbelievable performances today; it's more that so many confidently cynical typists know so little about the sport's history.
Moorcroft's age wasn't a big deal, as he'd only just moved up to 5000m since he was getting nowhere against Coe and Ovett. He was already a top-class miler and the same year he very nearly broke the world record for 3000m.
"Ruth Chepngetich’s epic 2:09:56 world record in the Chicago Marathon on Sunday was unequivocally the greatest marathon performance of all time.
And that makes me queasy. In fact, I’m outraged.
I’m going to try to explain as briefly as possible why I am so troubled by this performance. And I admit that I could be wrong. After all, I have no evidence that Chepngetich cheated, as she has never failed a doping test.
I think it doubtful that Snell would have known if Odlozil had blood-doped before the '64 Olympics unless Odlozil had privately admitted it to him - unlikely - or someone in the Czech team said so - also unlikely. What I think is possible is that in later years Snell may have heard from sources that blood doping had been a feature of E Bloc sports at the time of the '64 Olympics and inferred that Odlozil would have been included in the practice. We can't be sure of any of this because, quite apart from the fact we can't corroborate what Snell may have said about Odlozil, there isn't any definitive information about blood doping in track in the '60s. That didn't happen till the '70s.
It's entirely possible that Odlozil or some other Czech might have told Peter that Odlozil blood doped. It was not close to being illegal then. There really would be no reason not to have told Peter about it. Again, I don't know how Peter might have gotten this information or even if it's accurate and I only mentioned it, as I did the Air Force experiments, to point out that like many things in life, it was happening before the general public learnt of it.
Having said that, we all knew that the Eastern Bloc countries devoted a lot of research to finding ways to improve the performances of their athletes, biochemically and otherwise. When I heard that it was something done in Finland I was surprised that it wasn't being done in an Eastern Bloc country, especially East German but none would have surprised me. And I still think it may have been the East Germans who really perfected it and the Finns picked it up. There were a lot of sporting contacts between Finland and East Germany then. But you're correct, information about it was pretty hazy until the 70s.
Since it wasn't illegal why weren't Snell and other top runners that we know of blood doping then? There are none who have been identified - including Odlozil. I would say that athletes either didn't know about it or if they did they probably knew it was still doping - which is why athletes would do it - even if not banned. I very much doubt Odlozil would have told Snell how he gained an advantage that others didn't have that enabled him to medal in the Olympics and pip Snell's countryman, Davies, on the line. Until there is a verified quote attributable to Snell this is just gossip - and not very credible.
This post was edited 44 seconds after it was posted.
It's entirely possible that Odlozil or some other Czech might have told Peter that Odlozil blood doped. It was not close to being illegal then. There really would be no reason not to have told Peter about it. Again, I don't know how Peter might have gotten this information or even if it's accurate and I only mentioned it, as I did the Air Force experiments, to point out that like many things in life, it was happening before the general public learnt of it.
Having said that, we all knew that the Eastern Bloc countries devoted a lot of research to finding ways to improve the performances of their athletes, biochemically and otherwise. When I heard that it was something done in Finland I was surprised that it wasn't being done in an Eastern Bloc country, especially East German but none would have surprised me. And I still think it may have been the East Germans who really perfected it and the Finns picked it up. There were a lot of sporting contacts between Finland and East Germany then. But you're correct, information about it was pretty hazy until the 70s.
Since it wasn't illegal why weren't Snell and other top runners that we know of blood doping then? There are none who have been identified - including Odlozil. I would say that athletes either didn't know about it or if they did they probably knew it was still doping - which is why athletes would do it - even if not banned. I very much doubt Odlozil would have told Snell how he gained an advantage that others didn't have that enabled him to medal in the Olympics and pip Snell's countryman, Davies, on the line. Until there is a verified quote attributable to Snell this is just gossip - and not very credible.
What's your point with all this? I brought up the story Snell told for the same reason I mentioned the Air Force experiments with it, to show that blood doping was known and used before the late 60s. Is this gossip and not credible? I don't know. If Snell, who raced against Odlozil tells me Odlozil blood doped and you tell me Odlozil did not I'm probably not absolutely sure of anything but I'd take Peter's comment as more credible than yours because, you know, he knew Odlozil at least a bit.
I was getting into running in the 1990s and at the time a lot of the running community suspected that there was some PED use going to set that record. Same for Komen. Since then we have a gigantic pile of positive drugs tests from Africa, especially Kenya so to me it is quite normal that a lot people will suspect PED use when it comes to any record. Blame the PED users for this situation.
How would you have known what the "running community" suspected in 1995? There were no running-related websites then. The first Netscape browser wasn't even released until October 1994.
I followed the sport closely then, and I don't recall anyone in the track press raising doping as a possibility when Haile crushed that record.
And there's a big difference between SUSPECTING PED use and ACCUSING any athlete who does something spectacular of PED use.
Yes, the cheaters are obviously reprehensible and largely to blame for the cynicism that now casts a shadow over the sport. But mindless cynicism of the "too fast!" variety is also to blame.
People still discussed this in real life. In 1995 every serious runner I knew was suspecting doping.
No, I can't substantiate the comment from Snell which is why I made sure to say he made it to a mutual friend. I have no doubt that Peter said this to our friend but don't know how Peter learned this. And I don't know exactly when the awareness of blood doping made its way from the Air Force to the track. If Peter was right it got there earlier than most of us knew but didn't hit the mainstream until about the time you said it did. But it was known sooner than that.
I
'64 Olympics
'60s.
'70s.
You got it?
Hey, Dumb, it seems you got it! Wow, after just 65 years of closely following athletics you are now able to write times and years correctly. Some fast learner you are. Did you understand the meaning of the " ' " sign?
Next step, try logic on child level.
You want to challenge someones claim that no one has done as good as runner A over some given distances in some given time period?
Not helpful: changing the time period, changing the distances, adding the achievements of several others, listing the bads of A
Instead: name B who has done better in your opinion than A over the given distances and the given time period.
You understand? No? If you try hard, you maybe will in 20 years.
Since it wasn't illegal why weren't Snell and other top runners that we know of blood doping then? There are none who have been identified - including Odlozil. I would say that athletes either didn't know about it or if they did they probably knew it was still doping - which is why athletes would do it - even if not banned. I very much doubt Odlozil would have told Snell how he gained an advantage that others didn't have that enabled him to medal in the Olympics and pip Snell's countryman, Davies, on the line. Until there is a verified quote attributable to Snell this is just gossip - and not very credible.
What's your point with all this? I brought up the story Snell told for the same reason I mentioned the Air Force experiments with it, to show that blood doping was known and used before the late 60s. Is this gossip and not credible? I don't know. If Snell, who raced against Odlozil tells me Odlozil blood doped and you tell me Odlozil did not I'm probably not absolutely sure of anything but I'd take Peter's comment as more credible than yours because, you know, he knew Odlozil at least a bit.
None of your points, including your reference to the Airforce, indicate blood doping was being used in sports and particularly running in the early sixties. As I said, it was not speculated to be present in running until Viren's era.
You have also changed what you said earlier about Snell. You previously said you were told by someone else that Snell made the claim you said he did about Odlozil. That is of course hearsay. Snell did not say it to you so you have no idea whether what you were told was true, either about Snell or Odlozil.