World record holder Daniel Komen didn't understand the concept of Time?

Like most posters on this site who reply to old threads?

I did compete at state level in track in high school, before modern training.

But that is not really relevant.

Besides training, records require talent, incentive, timing and opportunity.

If no one today gets near these records in more than two decades, despite your alleged estimated 50% of doping, how does that reflect on your alleged doping revolution?

Indeed you keep arguing that we cannot tell the difference between the performances of dopers and non-dopers, oblivious to the irony of arguing against alleged superior performances that doping enables via training and racing. Just yesterday you argued:

"it isnt (sic) possible to know how much of any given performance ... is due to doping" (if any)

"in the modern era it is no longer possible to tell the difference"

"cannot - know who is clean and who isnt(sic)."

"50/50 chance of being wrong when you claim an athlete is clean" (or dirty)

If you admit you have a 50/50 chance of being wrong, what explains your arrogance and pompousness? Why contaminate every thread based on a maybe/maybe not?

I did compete at state level in track in high school, before modern training.

But that is not really relevant.

Maybe if my current self coached my younger self, things would have been better.

And once again, you are focused on the OUTPUT of modern training. I made no claims about the expected OUTPUT of modern training, only the significant and incompatible differences between earlier approaches, like Lydiard, and how the principles and guidelines act as an INPUT to deciding training paces and distances, which might appear slow to the ignornant observer.

One of the reasons you lose every argument, besides your demonstrated complete lack of knowledge, and the dearth of supporting facts, and real world observations, is because you always scatter away from the original topic, as a diversion and substitute to hide your inability to back up your original claims, and strongly held beliefs.

You competed at state level? Wow. So your very modest experience is offered as evidence of the efficacy of "modern training" for elites, professionals and world record holders? As a "real world" observation, it does seem a little slim on authoritative data.

I wonder what you base your opinions about "modern training" on. Is there a manual, like a flight manual spelling it out, that runners turn to? If so, do they all follow it? One size fits all? How do you know what any one athlete does - like Komen or Cheptegei? Do they tell you what they do?

Doping began long before two decades ago. But there was no test for EPO two decades ago. That goes some way to explaining why some world marks have not been improved upon. But you still duck the contradiction in your claim, that "modern training" continues to evolve (you say) yet runners don't seem to be getting any faster. So how has it "evolved", and why do we see no evidence of it? Silence. And shifting of the goal posts. Your standby.

That there is a 50/50 chance that any top athlete is doping also undercuts your oft-repeated insistence that there is "no evidence" they are. Based on prevalence alone, your belief an athlete is clean has every chance of being wrong. The sheer prevalence of doping isn't the only evidence of doping, but you practise avoiding seeing such evidence.

You have never "won" an argument. That would require you to address it. You have simply chased the tail inside your own head.

No one but you is talking about the "efficacy of modern training". I offered no real world observation on a topic I did not discuss.

I did not offer my "opinions" about "modern training", so there is no basis for opinions I did not offer.

My competition experience, in an era before modern training, was not offered, and could not possibly be offered, as evidence of "efficacy of modern" training.

I did not talk about the results of modern training, but you still beat down that path of your own making.

In the last two decades, after the EPO test, runners have been getting faster in all distances 5000m and up. I can't duck a contradiction that doesn't exist.

Silence? You think I'm silent?

Your 50/50 chance is also not something real, so cannot undercut anything.

I don't believe every athlete is clean. I think prevalence is significant, but not 50/50. But it's funny how you started at 1 in 10, then inflated that up to 50/50, and now say I have "every chance" of being wrong, for something you say I believe, which in reality, I do not believe. I think I have no chance of being wrong about something I don't say or don't believe.

I didn't say I won any argument, but that you lose every argument, because rather than finding facts to support it, you create a fantasy world where assumptions and conclusions merge into one, and complement that with insults, burden shifting, and projection.

In this post alone, you've constructed no less than six alternate goalposts, all in an elaborate attempt to avoid your burden of linking your ideas to events in the real world, and make it look like your failure is my fault.

So many words on so many pages just to say you haven't offered an "opinion". ("What - me?!") I dread to think what would happen to a thread if you did.

Aboshemane wrote:

Enough talk of the jungle - home is where you were born. What I can tell you about Komen is that he is some sort of a genius in business and farming. His daughter is about to graduate from high school and swept all of the prizes she qualified for - they were all academic. I don't think you'll find running is the biggest thing in his life now. What's not to be admired?

Thank you for this information. I am glad to learn that DK is doing well.

Armstronglivs wrote:

So many words on so many pages just to say you haven't offered an "opinion". ("What - me?!") I dread to think what would happen to a thread if you did.

So is it "silence"? or "so many words"?

I did not offer the opinions you ascribe to me about the efficacy of modern training, nor use my competition experience as a basis for something that didn't exist when I competed. In the case of "modern training" I offered two indisputable principles -- only a small subset of "modern training". I know what Cheptegei does, because he told the public in interviews. I don't know what Komen did for training, and didn't say I did.

Your modus operandi is to build fictional fantasy strawmen and then fight with them, like Don Quijote fights windmills.

What do you dread? That you would have nothing to say if you couldn't share your works of fiction, and your artistic creations of straw?

I think everyone would appreciate if you stop making scarecrows and stop constructing straw goalposts, only for me to respond with "I did not actually say anything like that".

This thread is based on extremely out-dated and racist colonialist views.

Also, anyone with a brain can see that Daniel Komen was doped up to his eye balls. Stop trying to explain this by peddling a narrative of a man emerging from the jungle, untarnished by civilization.

Come on! wrote:

This thread is based on extremely out-dated and racist colonialist views.

Also, anyone with a brain can see that Daniel Komen was doped up to his eye balls. Stop trying to explain this by peddling a narrative of a man emerging from the jungle, untarnished by civilization.

So you refute first-hand accounts provided here. Why? Do you have any of your own? Have you spoken to DK? Trained with him? Lived with/near him? Do you have proof he doped?

You are an imbecile.

sthdyt wrote:

So you refute first-hand accounts provided here. Why? Do you have any of your own? Have you spoken to DK? Trained with him? Lived with/near him? Do you have proof he doped?

You are an imbecile.

"First-hand accounts" of colonialists/racists are still colonialist/racist. It doesn't matter that they are "first-hand."

No, I'm not sitting on a positive drug test from Daniel Komen. I don't believe he ever failed a drug test. But EPO was rife at the time and his times are unbelievable. Consecutive sub-4 miles. Get real. And this came after he failed to qualify for the Atlanta Olympics. Seems like he probably upped the doping when he knew he wasn't going. Much less at stake if he got caught.

You address nothing except the nonsense that circulates in your own head. Most of the thread is spent in your saying what you "didnt say".

Armstronglivs wrote:

You address nothing except the nonsense that circulates in your own head. Most of the thread is spent in your saying what you "didnt say".

There was nothing to address. If you didn’t misquote or lie so much, I would not spend any words at all pointing out the mistakes.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You address nothing except the nonsense that circulates in your own head. Most of the thread is spent in your saying what you "didnt say".

If you didn’t misquote or lie so much...

He can't stop doing so. It's his only chance to "survive" such threads without accepting to be wrong on most accounts.

+1 Exactly! Kenyan runners like Komen are little more than racehorses. We always knew here that their bodies were genetically built like racehorses to run fast, but now we know that they even have minds like racehorses. They have no concept of time and probably little of language or even self-awareness. This is why they are so fast. The European trainers and managers just feed them a good meal after they run fast, and they learn to associate running as fast as possible round a track multiple times equals good food afterwards. This is why Kenyans have become so dominant. It has nothing to do with doping. Only racists believe that.

+1 Exactly! Komen was one of the most intelligent and savvy runners in history. He made his fortune in athletics then got out and used his earnings to make long term sound investments in farming and property, as well as his children's education, and now he is one of the richest men in Africa.

About time!

Armstrongisdead wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

If you didn’t misquote or lie so much...

He can't stop doing so. It's his only chance to "survive" such threads without accepting to be wrong on most accounts.

Sorry to disappoint you but I have never been proven wrong by you morons on these threads.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You address nothing except the nonsense that circulates in your own head. Most of the thread is spent in your saying what you "didnt say".

There was nothing to address. If you didn’t misquote or lie so much, I would not spend any words at all pointing out the mistakes.

Says the arch gaslighter.

Clearly, not having a concept of time is an advantage in distance running. And business.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Armstrongisdead wrote:

He can't stop doing so. It's his only chance to "survive" such threads without accepting to be wrong on most accounts.

Sorry to disappoint you but I have never been proven wrong by you morons on these threads.

This guy truly is a narcissistic sociopath.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Armstrongisdead wrote:

He can't stop doing so. It's his only chance to "survive" such threads without accepting to be wrong on most accounts.

Sorry to disappoint you but I have never been proven wrong by you morons on these threads.

You have, undoubtedly.