El Guerrouj 2k WR - Incredible 3:49 Mile pace

Armstronglivs wrote:

As is your study.

Meanwhile, countless athletes continue to find reason to dope. It's called results.

Again -- your reasoning is your words.

My study is not really "mine" as such. I did not quote my words.

But it does show experts saying that it is not enough to talk about oxygen getting into the blood.

Here's the current list:

https://www.worldathletics.org/records/all-time-toplists/middlelong/1500-metres/outdoor/men/senior

Armstronglivs wrote:

I have had this experience before, of someone on my doorstep trying to explain that Noah's Ark existed and the world was made in 7 days. But they were more scintillating than you - even if just as absorbed in their delusions.

I have no doubt you have had many religious experiences which have little do with elite performance. This is why you frequently jump to analogies rather than staying on topic.

Shopping hour wrote:

The funny thing is that the rest of the study seems more intent on proving that EPO doesn't work and it's full of all sorts of contorting that would make ol' rekrunner squirm with delight.

Yet they still added that paragraph because they have some sense of reason and logic

GOOOOOOAAAAALLLLLL!

The mistake is attempting to reduce the conclusion to the false dichotomy of "it works" or "it doesn't work".

What they observed, in these recreationally active subjets, is that sometimes it "works", as hypothesized, and sometimes it doesn't, inconsistent with their hypotheses, suggesting other factors beside O2 are relevant.

I agree that sometimes "it works", and sometimes it doesn't, depending on O2 factors, and other factors besides O2.

Armstronglivs wrote:

How inconvenient. But despite running significantly faster were they breathing harder - indeed were they breathing at all - the question that has been unresolved for our resident nutjob over 26 pages.

Who ran significantly faster? The recreationaly active subjects in this study were cycling.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I have read these studies but I dont keep a record of them to assist someone who is too lazy to get off his backside and read this material for himself. We are not your personal researchers here. But not that it would make any difference. You will never depart from your little lunacies.

I guess we have to take your word that you have read any study then.

But the offer still stands, and if you do not take me up on the offer, then you can only blame yourself for any alleged confirmation bias on my part.

Speaking of lazy, in the meantime, there were 6 studies recently linked in another thread -- studies not selected by me, but by a critic of Jon. We are talking about one of them now. I have read all six studies, and I agreed with the findings, and limitations, of all six studies. finding no "contradictory evidence" in any of these studies which I have not ignored, and was not "too lazy" to read.

I do not ask you to do personal research for me, but for you to lend credibility to your otherwise non-expert ideas, perceptions, and personal interpretations of things you have allegedly read. As we have seen, one of them clearly shows that your simpleton explanation of "more oxygen in the blood with each breath" is just one piece of a large puzzle.

Armstronglivs wrote:

The suggested improvement of 3s for an elite athlete over 1500m would convert El G's 3.26 wr to about 3.29. Or his 4.44 time over 2k to about 4.48. Pretty much on the money, I would say.

Or ... the suggested improvements convert to 3:23 and 4:40.

Armstronglivs wrote:

If the study didn't include elite athletes you are unable to claim they wouldn't have benefited. Shoot yourself in the foot again. I'll go with the fact that they continue to use EPO as well as anything else that's available.

I didn't claim that elite athletes "wouldn't have" benefited.

You are disputing a claim I don't make.

It is not me shooting my feet. It is a scarecrow.

I agree that many athletes, even elite ones, use EPO and other drugs and supplements.

rekrunner wrote:

I have read all six studies, and I agreed with the findings, and limitations, of all six studies. finding no "contradictory evidence" in any of these studies which I have not ignored, and was not "too lazy" to read.

Fixed for clarity:

I have read all six studies, and I agreed with the findings, and limitations, of all six studies, finding no "contradictory evidence" in any of these studies -- studies which I have not ignored, and was not "too lazy" to read.

The significance is that you presented a scenario that you thought should not happen in an acceptable study and it did.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You could always read more widely and not just to reinforce your confirmation bias.

I just did, and you didn't like the result, because it highlighted the incompleteness of your previous explanation that ignored the muscles.

I have read both altitude studies and EPO studies finding not seeing your alleged "significantly greater" difference.

I will ask once again -- do you have any suggestions for reading that show the expected improvements for high altitude versus EPO?

This would solve any suggestion of confirmation bias on my part.

EPO improves altitude adapted runners. A study showed this.

rekrunner wrote:

"it worked for us this time under these conditions for these athletes, but it might have worked for other reasons we didn't measure or control, and whatever you do, don't be so stupid as to project these findings onto elite athletes in competition".

.

RFE

High-Octane Dopers wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The suggested improvement of 3s for an elite athlete over 1500m would convert El G's 3.26 wr to about 3.29. Or his 4.44 time over 2k to about 4.48. Pretty much on the money, I would say.

A thought here: I wonder if 3:29xx would be the fastest time possible by a clean athlete? Ramzi's PB is 3:29.14, so his fastest clean time would be in the 3:32's. Also, both Kiprop (confirmed doper) & Lagat (highly suspected) ran 3:26, so they'd be around the 3:29 mark as well. In fact, if you look at all the sub-3:29 times there's a lot of guys from countries with a high prevalence of doping (e.g. Morroco, Kenya, Algeria).

A counter-thought -- what if Ramzi's 3:29:14 is the fastest doped 1500m performance?

Kiprop slowed down in 2016 and 2017.

59% of letsrunners still thought Lagat was clean in a recent poll.

There are a lot of countries with high prevalence of doping that failed to crack 3:30 (e.g. Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Belarus, Bulgaria, etc.)

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

What is the significance of this "exception"?

They studied "Sixteen healthy young subjects (who) were all recreationally active".

"Competitive athletes were strictly excluded from participation in the study."

In this study "works" means: increased VO2peak, increased peak power in incremental ramp test, and increased time to exhaustion.

So with these definitions, I agree that EPO "works" for healthy recreationally active subjects.

This study did not observe elite athletes running 1500m, so any statement about elite athletes running 1500m remains an unsupported hypothesis. This is why they uses words like "similar to", "translates", "predicts", and "likely to be".

The significance is that you presented a scenario that you thought should not happen in an acceptable study and it did.

I presented what scenario that I thought should not happen? I did not say things should not happen, but that I agree with qualified and limited conclusions when they do happen.

This study is precisely the kind of thing I expect to happen -- some things "worked" supporting hypotheses, some things did not "work" contradicting the expected hypotheses, and there could be limitations based on things they did not measure or control.

You said "Except for the last part." and in that last part, none of that actually happened in this study. There was no 1-2% improvement in time trial performance, as there were no time trials. The equivalencies and translations from cycling exercise in recreational athletes to elite athletes running 1500m were not assumptions, observations, findings, or conclusions of this study.

Shopping hour wrote:

EPO improves altitude adapted runners. A study showed this.

"A study"? Wow! Really? "A study"?

But then again, did it? Without limitations?

Did they produce elite times with EPO not possible without?

Shopping hour wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

"it worked for us this time under these conditions for these athletes, but it might have worked for other reasons we didn't measure or control, and whatever you do, don't be so stupid as to project these findings onto elite athletes in competition".

RFE

Radio Free Europe?

The point was that you said they wouldn't speculate and that it would be stupid to do so, and yet they did.

Okay? His PB was in 2015. Maybe scaling down his program, longer time in off-cycles, microdosing vs macrodoping, etc. Dopers are constantly worried about testing positive or blowing their passport. The stop, start, stop again- constantly modifying their program particularly in the era of the ABP. Why do you think there's so many whereabouts violations these days.

Pointless. There's a fair percentage of people that believe the NFL is drug free as well as some people that actually believe pro wrestling is real. Lol. Some people convince themselves to believe their T&F heros are clean when evidence would suggest otherwise. Lagat is considered highly suspicious, IMO.

Right...and their top guys were not nearly as talented as the East Africans to begin with. You probably had considerably slower guys where doping brought them to a higher level but not sub-3:30. Say, for example 3:40/3:39ish guys aren't going to be able break 3:30 with all the doping in the world.

Doubtful because you have two Moroccans running sub-3:30 including the WR holder. Remember Morocco has very high prevalence of doping and was a doping powerhouse in the 90s & 00s. 4 out of their 7 fastest 1500m men have been busted for doping (57%)! Doping & performance are synonymous in Morocco.

rekrunner wrote:

Shopping hour wrote:

EPO improves altitude adapted runners. A study showed this.

"A study"? Wow! Really? "A study"?

But then again, did it? Without limitations?

Did they produce elite times with EPO not possible without?

It's all about making the individual better, whatever their level of talent.

Like Ramzi.