The article was initially entiteld, "Zane Robertston!!!!" but we changed it to make it more descriptive. Here is our article on his bust and fake excuses (he said he went to a hospital for a COvid-19 vaccine but they gave him EPO instead) which points out that in 2016 he expressed frutation at the amount of doping in the sport:
You're wasting your time with rektum; he'll never accept that there is a doping problem in Kenya as he'll continually fudge the numbers to suit his stance.
I'm sure he'll equally dismiss as being without foundation and, probably, also accuse the AIU of discrimination or of not understanding (their own) numbers.
Athletics Integrity Unit suspects criminal systematic doping cover-up operation in Kenya An anti-doping disciplinary tribunal convened by Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) has concluded that there is a "medically-savvy operation helping athletes to try and cover up doping offences" after similarities were found in at least two recent tampering cases involving Kenyan athletes. The behaviour amounts to "criminal conduct involving frauds", the AIU discovered.
"Criminal systematic doping cover-up operation in Kenya" - it isn't necessary to read any further to get the picture. The corruption in Kenyan doping practices goes to the core of their sport. But it doesn't deter their defenders here, who have no understanding of what that phrase above means. They read it as "false positives, accidental contamination from pig offal, and unjust procedures that condemn innocent athletes". Lying, like theirs, is part of that corruption.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
You're wasting your time with rektum; he'll never accept that there is a doping problem in Kenya as he'll continually fudge the numbers to suit his stance.
I'm sure he'll equally dismiss as being without foundation and, probably, also accuse the AIU of discrimination or of not understanding (their own) numbers.
I have accepted without debate that there is a doping problem in Kenya. But the big question is, can you put a number on it? Apparently that answer is no, for both you and Armstronglivs.
I also accepted your number "20", without fudging it, and I used your source "nation.africa", to identify the right number of weeks corresponding to those 20 suspensions, as you insisted, in all sports.
I don't accuse the AIU of not understanding their own numbers -- but accuse some posters of not understanding the AIU numbers.
Your attempts "to put a number on it" is to persuade that there isn't really a doping problem in Kenya. You're the Great Minimiser. Whatever number you choose the fact is that Kenya has a very serious doping problem, acknowledged both by Kenya Athletics and World Athletics. Arguing numbers as you do doesn't change that.
"Criminal systematic doping cover-up operation in Kenya" - it isn't necessary to read any further to get the picture. The corruption in Kenyan doping practices goes to the core of their sport. But it doesn't deter their defenders here, who have no understanding of what that phrase above means. They read it as "false positives, accidental contamination from pig offal, and unjust procedures that condemn innocent athletes". Lying, like theirs, is part of that corruption.
Wait -- aren't you a self-proclaimed legal expert? Is the AIU right to call this conduct criminal? What is your legal explanation of that? If these "at least two" Kenyans are commiting crimes, maybe the AIU should call a law enforcement agency. Fraud is pretty much a crime everywhere -- you think they have a solid case to win in any court using criminal standards of proof?
Amusing they call it "saavy", when they saw right through it, and like with Zane, were easily able to debunk it because of the obvious irregularities.
"On 27 August 1965, Keino lowered the 3000 m world record by over 6 seconds to 7:39.6 in his first attempt at the distance. He won two gold medals (1500 and 5000 metres) at the inaugural All-Africa Games. Later in that year, he broke the 5000 m world record held by Ron Clarke, clocking 13:24.2."
You have just proven my point. Good luck with realizing you are ignorant.
Lots of Kenyan busts. Lots of Kenyan positives. Big fish. Small fish. Something's going on huh? Maybe they're doping. Maybe it works. Maybe that's cheating? They seem to take prize money under false pretences. Isn't that fraud?
Your attempts "to put a number on it" is to persuade that there isn't really a doping problem in Kenya. You're the Great Minimiser. Whatever number you choose the fact is that Kenya has a very serious doping problem, acknowledged both by Kenya Athletics and World Athletics. Arguing numbers as you do doesn't change that.
It was not me attempting to put a number on it, but it was me fact-checking your numbers. If numbers are so unimportant, why make up unsupportably wrong ones to begin with, and why blame me for your inability to count? Why not just stick to colorful non-numeric emotional expressions.
All this talk about "serious problem" is a red-herring to distract from your inability to count, and your intellectual insecurity when called out on it. I would consider more than 10 busts a year a serious problem -- but I don't understand your irrational need to pretend it's more than 100, when fact-checking says it is around 30-40.
Lots of Kenyan busts. Lots of Kenyan positives. Big fish. Small fish. Something's going on huh? Maybe they're doping. Maybe it works. Maybe that's cheating? They seem to take prize money under false pretences. Isn't that fraud?
Lots and lots of maybes and somethings and seems.
Maybe it is fraud, but is it criminal? Fraud is a crime in most countries -- no need to wait for the AIU or seek any other permission to prosecute. Yet how many of these Kenyans have been charged and tried for fraud in a criminal court?
No, it doesn't. But you found two more records now, so at the moment you are at 4. With this rate of improvement, at Christmas 2025 you might have found all 10. Good luck to you.
I'm not a fantasist as you are. There were never 10.
None in the 800/880
None in the 1k
None in the 1500/mile
None in the 2 mile
None in the 3 mile
None in the 6 mile
None in the 10k
None in the marathon.
But they are definitely world leading for doping positives.
No problem, Armstrong. Just take your time. It took you 3 months to correct your 2 Kenyan WRs before 1980 to 4. Still far from beeing correct, but you are on a good track now.
Have you ever thought about looking for such facts? There is a thing called the Internet. You don't have to buy the well known book which covers any WR ever set in detail. Just use google and within a few seconds you get all the record progressions.
10 WRs in track distance running from male Kenyans before 1980. Two more years and you have found them. I'm positive.
I understand that you don't like it, that's OK. But you're probably also not happy to be stupid. But it also can't be changed. It is like it is
Lots of Kenyan busts. Lots of Kenyan positives. Big fish. Small fish. Something's going on huh? Maybe they're doping. Maybe it works. Maybe that's cheating? They seem to take prize money under false pretences. Isn't that fraud?
Well the 3:26 elite runner + cop + drug cheat Kiprop argued that dopers should get jail time, so there is that.
"On 27 August 1965, Keino lowered the 3000 m world record by over 6 seconds to 7:39.6 in his first attempt at the distance. He won two gold medals (1500 and 5000 metres) at the inaugural All-Africa Games. Later in that year, he broke the 5000 m world record held by Ron Clarke, clocking 13:24.2."
You have just proven my point. Good luck with realizing you are ignorant.
So you were talking in your own private code. That's what those who have no mastery of the English language typically do.
I'm not a fantasist as you are. There were never 10.
None in the 800/880
None in the 1k
None in the 1500/mile
None in the 2 mile
None in the 3 mile
None in the 6 mile
None in the 10k
None in the marathon.
But they are definitely world leading for doping positives.
No problem, Armstrong. Just take your time. It took you 3 months to correct your 2 Kenyan WRs before 1980 to 4. Still far from beeing correct, but you are on a good track now.
Have you ever thought about looking for such facts? There is a thing called the Internet. You don't have to buy the well known book which covers any WR ever set in detail. Just use google and within a few seconds you get all the record progressions.
10 WRs in track distance running from male Kenyans before 1980. Two more years and you have found them. I'm positive.
I understand that you don't like it, that's OK. But you're probably also not happy to be stupid. But it also can't be changed. It is like it is
You weren't able to refute any of the facts I posted above listing the lack of Kenyan records in every event from the 800 to the marathon (except the 3k and 5k - Keino and Rono). But I understand your difficulty, as you show with your persistent use of "beeing" that you aren't proficient in even basic English let alone the subject you are attempting to discuss.
This post was edited 48 seconds after it was posted.
Your attempts "to put a number on it" is to persuade that there isn't really a doping problem in Kenya. You're the Great Minimiser. Whatever number you choose the fact is that Kenya has a very serious doping problem, acknowledged both by Kenya Athletics and World Athletics. Arguing numbers as you do doesn't change that.
It was not me attempting to put a number on it, but it was me fact-checking your numbers. If numbers are so unimportant, why make up unsupportably wrong ones to begin with, and why blame me for your inability to count? Why not just stick to colorful non-numeric emotional expressions.
All this talk about "serious problem" is a red-herring to distract from your inability to count, and your intellectual insecurity when called out on it. I would consider more than 10 busts a year a serious problem -- but I don't understand your irrational need to pretend it's more than 100, when fact-checking says it is around 30-40.
I'm glad you see more than 10 busts a year as "a serious problem". So how serious is it when you say it is 3 to 4 times that number? "Very" serious? Now we're getting serious.
"Criminal systematic doping cover-up operation in Kenya" - it isn't necessary to read any further to get the picture. The corruption in Kenyan doping practices goes to the core of their sport. But it doesn't deter their defenders here, who have no understanding of what that phrase above means. They read it as "false positives, accidental contamination from pig offal, and unjust procedures that condemn innocent athletes". Lying, like theirs, is part of that corruption.
Wait -- aren't you a self-proclaimed legal expert? Is the AIU right to call this conduct criminal? What is your legal explanation of that? If these "at least two" Kenyans are commiting crimes, maybe the AIU should call a law enforcement agency. Fraud is pretty much a crime everywhere -- you think they have a solid case to win in any court using criminal standards of proof?
Amusing they call it "saavy", when they saw right through it, and like with Zane, were easily able to debunk it because of the obvious irregularities.
I am not "a self-proclaimed legal expert". I have a degree in law and was admitted to the Bar in my country. That isn't "self-proclaimed". That kind of "expertise" is more your territory, which I understand is essentially that of a bean counter.
At this stage, I'm happy to go with the description of the AIU, as it will not be made carelessly or without foundation. But you will find a way to dispute it, because Kenyan dopers are always innocent victims in your book.
"On 27 August 1965, Keino lowered the 3000 m world record by over 6 seconds to 7:39.6 in his first attempt at the distance. He won two gold medals (1500 and 5000 metres) at the inaugural All-Africa Games. Later in that year, he broke the 5000 m world record held by Ron Clarke, clocking 13:24.2."
You have just proven my point. Good luck with realizing you are ignorant.
I have proven you have no idea what you are talking about.
Wait -- aren't you a self-proclaimed legal expert? Is the AIU right to call this conduct criminal? What is your legal explanation of that? If these "at least two" Kenyans are commiting crimes, maybe the AIU should call a law enforcement agency. Fraud is pretty much a crime everywhere -- you think they have a solid case to win in any court using criminal standards of proof?
Amusing they call it "saavy", when they saw right through it, and like with Zane, were easily able to debunk it because of the obvious irregularities.
I am not "a self-proclaimed legal expert". I have a degree in law and was admitted to the Bar in my country. That isn't "self-proclaimed". That kind of "expertise" is more your territory, which I understand is essentially that of a bean counter.
At this stage, I'm happy to go with the description of the AIU, as it will not be made carelessly or without foundation. But you will find a way to dispute it, because Kenyan dopers are always innocent victims in your book.
I was admitted to many bars in many countries after I turned 21.
Unsurprisingly, you didn't answer the legal question. Surely with your self-proclaimed law degree and bar admission, you are in an educated position to provide much more depth of clarity to the bean counters. There would be no need for you to continue to resort to personal attacks in domains where you actually possess knowledge.
Criminal conduct involving frauds sounds like a serious accusation, and the AIU is just an enforcement agency for sports rules governed by contract law.
Is the AIU disciplinary panel right to say that these attempted tamperings rise to the level of a crime? Wouldn't they have a duty to refer such crimes -- allegedly committed against the AIU, so they have a vested direct interest and standing -- to the appropriate criminal law enforcement agencies under existing criminal statutes?
Seems like you are always the first one to dispute or clarify all things legal, e.g. like how "innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle afforded only to persons accused of crimes, and that such principles would not apply to athletes charged with violating sports rules, presumed guilty by a principle of "strict liability".
If this attempted tampering does constitute criminal conduct, then shouldn't you be the one reminding us that these Kenyan athletes, along with those accused of a sophisticated medically saavy operation, have a moral right to a "presumption of innocence" until it has been proven by the prosecution to a trier of facts beyond reasonable doubt. I believe that's not just my book, but also your books from law school.
Do you suggest that comparing attempted tampering to criminal fraud was not made carelessly or without foundation?
Wouldn't "bean counting" be a degree in Accounting? I have University degrees in Science and Engineering. This included courses in math and logic and statistics and chemistry and physics and biology, so I feel pretty comfortable interpreting numbers in context.
It's comicallly curious to imagine you holding a law book in one hand, and a pitchfork in the other, hopping onto the band wagon, shouting at sceptics and heretics as lemmings drive the bandwagon over a cliff.
You weren't able to refute any of the facts I posted above listing the lack of Kenyan records in every event from the 800 to the marathon (except the 3k and 5k - Keino and Rono). But I understand your difficulty, as you show with your persistent use of "beeing" that you aren't proficient in even basic English let alone the subject you are attempting to discuss.
You are flapping around like a helpless fish out of water.
After ignoring this particular sideshow for months, in about 5 minutes, I was able to find and confirm Kenyans setting 10 different world records before 1980, just looking at lists in Wikipedia.
With that quick search, I am able to refute one of your facts, twice, as the events in your list contains two records. Furthermore, your list of events is incomplete, as four world records were set outside your list of events.
But enough clues. I guess the game is to let you flap like a fish.
It was not me attempting to put a number on it, but it was me fact-checking your numbers. If numbers are so unimportant, why make up unsupportably wrong ones to begin with, and why blame me for your inability to count? Why not just stick to colorful non-numeric emotional expressions.
All this talk about "serious problem" is a red-herring to distract from your inability to count, and your intellectual insecurity when called out on it. I would consider more than 10 busts a year a serious problem -- but I don't understand your irrational need to pretend it's more than 100, when fact-checking says it is around 30-40.
I'm glad you see more than 10 busts a year as "a serious problem". So how serious is it when you say it is 3 to 4 times that number? "Very" serious? Now we're getting serious.
Question -- why did your goalpost of "at least two Kenyans are popped each week" change to "Kenya has a serious problem".
Answer -- because you cannot put a number on it, so you bait and switch -- oh look, something shiny! Let's swim over the trench Dory!
ADAK and the AIU and WADA regularly provide us the official numbers, but you childishly call me an apologist and denier when I compare and contrast your numbers to theirs, without offering any apologies or denials.
It's not too late for you to turn around and leave fantasy la-la land and come back to reality, but you have to take the steps in that direction.