Because the attitude of calling people out for doping is ridiculous. Why not congratulate people for their performance instead of calling them out? Let's face it: Sawe's marathon was extremely impressive regardless of whether he was doping or not. Either be positive or quit wasting your time spamming stupid posts like these.
What you don't appear to understand is that doping is a serious problem in the sport and that top athletes are getting away with their doping - this from the former head of WADA. So no performances can be assumed to be dope-free - they could well not be.
If you can recognize there is a doping issue in the sport that problem will be far wider than we can see because it is conducted in secret. Most of it we don't see because it isn't detected. That is why Howman says antidoping is "ineffective".
Sawe has tried to anticipate scepticism about his performance by talking about how often he has been tested, but doping today is far ahead of the testers. He may be clean but he cannot prove it. No athlete can. It always remains possible they aren't.
With expertise in analytical chemistry (another area you are out of depth on), it is far easier and more likely to find a positive
Most shoes allow you to run faster than barefeet ,,,the barefoot running craze died ages ago.
In my opinion, the reason shoes should not be banned is that they do not provide an external energy source. They don't. They simply allow less energy loss at each footstrike.
Maybe Armstrong belives that there is a motor that flicks the carbon plate at each strike
That is the illusion of those who appear to think the shoes are as good as a machine - or rocket propulsion.
That is literally the opposite of what I said, and in fact 'your ' belief. You are twisting arguments in a troll like fashion now, come on.
The shoes are a blank object containing now energy source. It cannot propel on its own and for you to benefit you have to use your own energy. You will not gain additional energy at all but may have reduction in energy losses.
{To the mods...my previous response has been deleted. The poster twists my argument so what should I call that? Ignorance or something more permanent?}
What you don't appear to understand is that doping is a serious problem in the sport and that top athletes are getting away with their doping - this from the former head of WADA. So no performances can be assumed to be dope-free - they could well not be.
If you can recognize there is a doping issue in the sport that problem will be far wider than we can see because it is conducted in secret. Most of it we don't see because it isn't detected. That is why Howman says antidoping is "ineffective".
Sawe has tried to anticipate scepticism about his performance by talking about how often he has been tested, but doping today is far ahead of the testers. He may be clean but he cannot prove it. No athlete can. It always remains possible they aren't.
Your negativity isn´t going to get you anywhere in life. Just sayin´.
Try to congratulate people for their performances instead of call them out for things that we cannot even prove.
I explained why performances in top level sport can't be trusted to be clean. I prefer realism over naivety.
I find it amusing that you are telling someone in their seventies they won't get anywhere in life.
What you don't appear to understand is that doping is a serious problem in the sport and that top athletes are getting away with their doping - this from the former head of WADA. So no performances can be assumed to be dope-free - they could well not be.
If you can recognize there is a doping issue in the sport that problem will be far wider than we can see because it is conducted in secret. Most of it we don't see because it isn't detected. That is why Howman says antidoping is "ineffective".
Sawe has tried to anticipate scepticism about his performance by talking about how often he has been tested, but doping today is far ahead of the testers. He may be clean but he cannot prove it. No athlete can. It always remains possible they aren't.
With expertise in analytical chemistry (another area you are out of depth on), it is far easier and more likely to find a positive
But you aren't in the business of antidoping. They find it very hard to obtain a positive. Very few dopers are caught. That is why antidoping has turned to the biopassport and why blood samples are kept for 10 years. Athletes know how to mask their doping. Despite your "experience in analytical chemistry" you don't appear to know this.
This post was edited 6 minutes after it was posted.
That is the illusion of those who appear to think the shoes are as good as a machine - or rocket propulsion.
That is literally the opposite of what I said, and in fact 'your ' belief. You are twisting arguments in a troll like fashion now, come on.
The shoes are a blank object containing now energy source. It cannot propel on its own and for you to benefit you have to use your own energy. You will not gain additional energy at all but may have reduction in energy losses.
{To the mods...my previous response has been deleted. The poster twists my argument so what should I call that? Ignorance or something more permanent?}
You are the one who claimed that I think the shoes are like a motor. I dont - but others might.
All this talk about "energy" still doesn't provide unequivocal data on what the shoes do, in terms of the actual improvements in times runners may experience. If it did the discussion would have been resolved long ago - especially since the shoes have been available for nearly a decade now.
As I said, no one who understands what doping can do suggests drugs may only enable the same level of improvement that you say the shoes do, of "1-2 secs" for a top athlete over the 1500.
Your excuses for both Ramzi (changed his "coaching and training" - rubbish - he doped) and Katir (ducked 3 tests because he was doping) show once again you refuse to accept the likely effect drugs had on the performances of those convicted of violations. That is doping denial - and you do nothing else on these threads.
But who are these no ones, and what do they understand what doping can do, and which drugs, and what may they enable, for which events, for which athletes?
How can you be so certain, when you cannot be specific about one single fact?
What do you think I am denying, when everything you say is pure mythology?
I just explained, no one with any knowledge of doping suggests that most it could do is take a second off a top athlete's 1500 time (and this while you have claimed the shoes offer greater benefit than any drug). A good night's sleep could do more than a second. You show you are either utterly ill-informed or just wedded to your denial.
You certainly show the latter when you try to suggest it wasn't the drugs they took that shot both Ramzi and Katir to prominence.
With expertise in analytical chemistry (another area you are out of depth on), it is far easier and more likely to find a positive
Now that's interesting. Curious what you think about the theoretical possibility of athletes using exogenous forms of natural substances like testosterone with carbon isotope ratios matching the endogenous values. This would be more expensive than run-of-the-mill doping, but is it possible, and can it be detected?
With expertise in analytical chemistry (another area you are out of depth on), it is far easier and more likely to find a positive
But you aren't in the business of antidoping. They find it very hard to obtain a positive. Very few dopers are caught. That is why antidoping has turned to the biopassport and why blood samples are kept for 10 years. Athletes know how to mask their doping. Despite your "experience in analytical chemistry" you don't appear to know this.
Quit trolling people, get a life, and maybe focus on the postive aspects on life instead of calling out other people´s success as ¨not legit¨. Put the chips away. Take off the trump hat. Turn off the tv. Go run some miles. You cannot try to take down the accomplishments of others, and that´s for your own good. Until you can accomplish great things yourself, posts like these should not be made.