That those plucky Brits were free to beat the dirty dopers?
BTW, how did you feel about the Olympic boycotts in Moscow 80 and LA 84?
The fact that the Eastern Bloc athletes performed way better behing the Eastern Bloc, and rarely competed on the circuit, indicates that there was quite effective drug testing during that period - outside the Eastern bloc.
"behing the Eastern Bloc" - ??? in the land of the seven dwarfs?
The Soviet Union and the GDR were some of the leading powers of the 1968, 1972, 1976 and 1988 Olympics. Go and check where those Olympics were held and then check which countries belonged to the Eastern Bloc. After this, go and check who holds those World Records and where they were achieved: 400m women 800m women 4x400m women high jump women hammer throw men After this, go and check who holds those European Records and where they were achieved: 400m men pole vault men (european born) shot put men 1500m women (european born) 4x100m women
Yeah, quite effective drug testing outside the Eastern Bloc... I have never heard someone questioning FloJo.
No, you are a moron. Almost everyone on your list is tainted in one way or another, as anyone with a reasonable knowledge of the history of the sport would know, so naming them offers no additional supporting evidence of Coe's guilt. You can basically scratch all the GDR names; Koch was on a Stasi list, as was Beyer and almost certainly all the other German names and East European throwers. Johnson, Reynolds & Issajenko were all later convicted dopers, Kazankina was banned for failing to take a doping test on the circuit, Olizarenko died relatively young from heart issues and was running faster than DSD Semenya some 30 years before her, so that's clearly strong evidence she was doping in 80 with as much testosterone in her system as XY chromosome individuals - same for Kratochvilova.
Aouita was caught advocating drug use to his athletes in Australia when coaching them. Cova and Panetta admitted using blood doping in 84 (when still legal), Konchellah has been done for rape (twice) and named indirectly by Gray on these boards for having boasted about his ped use at the time of his medals. Bile came from a mediocre career in the early/mid 80's to becoming World Champion once he started being coached by Jama Aden; the coach found with vials of EPO in his hotel room a few years ago.
That pretty much covers everyone on your list bar Ngugi and Thompson. The latter being someone who I have never heard any suspicions or accusations against. You chose to list names of those where there is indeed evidence, whether outright or circumstantial, that they doped. You could have chosen Moses, Coghlan, Yifter, Ovett, Rono, Bayi, Boit, Calvin Smith, Nehemiah, Van Damme, Ashford, Cram, Budd, etc., all of whom were champions or record breakers in the same era, none of whom had any evidence tying them to doping apart from being one of the best and fastest in the world in their respective events, just like Coe. fast times and great performances alone are not indicative of doping.
Your argument was, that athletes who competed within the time frame 1975 - 1990 are less likely to have doped. Maybe you explain this.
How many of the East Germans and Russians have been caught? No dopers?
It's a fairly obvious point! Regardless of how effective or ineffective testing is at any time, more athletes are going to take a ped if there is no test for it. Steroids were being used in competition, I would argue mainly in power events at that time, from the 1950's and were only made illegal in 1975, with in competition starting in the 76 Games. It is obvious that at this juncture many athletes (not all) would have at least had second thoughts about doping with steroids due to the risk of being caught. And there were East Europeans duly caught in the '75 - 92 period: - Slupianek, Kazankina (refusal to take test), Bykova, Fuchs, Yershov, Petrova and Marasescu. Of course there would have been other athletes who were cheating and got away with it, but that was/is the case for any era. Certainly more athletes are going to get caught with a test (post 75) than when there wasn't any testing at all. Correct?
It is also interesting that from the list of caught dopers I provided, only 1 is male (and in a power event), the rest being female, where it is believed steroid use was far more widespread as the effects on performance were so more marked.
"Female East German athletes were disproportionately subjected to doping. It was less of an effort to spotlight women’s sports under socialism than a cold-blooded calculation to reap medals that were tougher for East German men to win against elite Western competitors." Lucas Aykroyd - Fall of Berlin Wall brought curtain down on GDR's doping program
There was also limited knowledge of just how useful steroid use would be to male middle and distance runners in the 70's and 80's, supported by the fact that there were so few caught in these events, as opposed to sprinters and throwers, regardless of nationality.
By the 1990's the testing of peds was obviously better than 15 years earlier, with the IAAF introducing out of competition testing in 1989 (something the UK had in place from 1983), but then a new endurance based drug emerged in the early '90's, possibly around '92, which was clearly visible from the improvement in world record times in the middle and distance events and in in depth performances. From this point until 2000, there was a drug readily available for middle and distance athletes that couldn't be detected as there was no test for it. Clearly, the many elites took this knowing there was no chance of setection. This likely continued until '05, when the EPO test finally became effective after the intitial one in use from '00 proved to throw up false positives and had a very narrow window of detection.
So, yes, I stand by my comment that more athletes (in the whole of T&F) were likely to have used steroids before 75 than between 75 and 92, especially in the men's middle and distance events, where there is little evidence that it was even regarded as beneficial to these athletes. It is also far more likely that elite distance runners were using peds such as EPO after 92 than between 75 and 92, when such drugs didn't exist.
The other point which I made and you practically ignored, is that I am stating that there is no evidence that Coe doped. In fact you offer no supporting evidence that backs up your claim that he did, apart from offering a long list of athletes, all of whom come with quite a bit of evidence that they likely did dope. Coe has nothing to do with that group (some of whom were convicted dopers anyway) apart from the fact that he was one of the best in his events and competed in the same era. But in terms of evidence of doping, he has nothing in common with anyone else in that group, apart from Perhaps Thompso, who also has no links with doping whatsoever.
Your argument was, that athletes who competed within the time frame 1975 - 1990 are less likely to have doped. Maybe you explain this.
How many of the East Germans and Russians have been caught? No dopers?
It's a fairly obvious point! Regardless of how effective or ineffective testing is at any time, more athletes are going to take a ped if there is no test for it. Steroids were being used in competition, I would argue mainly in power events at that time, from the 1950's and were only made illegal in 1975, with in competition starting in the 76 Games. It is obvious that at this juncture many athletes (not all) would have at least had second thoughts about doping with steroids due to the risk of being caught. And there were East Europeans duly caught in the '75 - 92 period: - Slupianek, Kazankina (refusal to take test), Bykova, Fuchs, Yershov, Petrova and Marasescu. Of course there would have been other athletes who were cheating and got away with it, but that was/is the case for any era. Certainly more athletes are going to get caught with a test (post 75) than when there wasn't any testing at all. Correct?
It is also interesting that from the list of caught dopers I provided, only 1 is male (and in a power event), the rest being female, where it is believed steroid use was far more widespread as the effects on performance were so more marked.
"Female East German athletes were disproportionately subjected to doping. It was less of an effort to spotlight women’s sports under socialism than a cold-blooded calculation to reap medals that were tougher for East German men to win against elite Western competitors." Lucas Aykroyd - Fall of Berlin Wall brought curtain down on GDR's doping program
There was also limited knowledge of just how useful steroid use would be to male middle and distance runners in the 70's and 80's, supported by the fact that there were so few caught in these events, as opposed to sprinters and throwers, regardless of nationality.
By the 1990's the testing of peds was obviously better than 15 years earlier, with the IAAF introducing out of competition testing in 1989 (something the UK had in place from 1983), but then a new endurance based drug emerged in the early '90's, possibly around '92, which was clearly visible from the improvement in world record times in the middle and distance events and in in depth performances. From this point until 2000, there was a drug readily available for middle and distance athletes that couldn't be detected as there was no test for it. Clearly, the many elites took this knowing there was no chance of setection. This likely continued until '05, when the EPO test finally became effective after the intitial one in use from '00 proved to throw up false positives and had a very narrow window of detection.
So, yes, I stand by my comment that more athletes (in the whole of T&F) were likely to have used steroids before 75 than between 75 and 92, especially in the men's middle and distance events, where there is little evidence that it was even regarded as beneficial to these athletes. It is also far more likely that elite distance runners were using peds such as EPO after 92 than between 75 and 92, when such drugs didn't exist.
The other point which I made and you practically ignored, is that I am stating that there is no evidence that Coe doped. In fact you offer no supporting evidence that backs up your claim that he did, apart from offering a long list of athletes, all of whom come with quite a bit of evidence that they likely did dope. Coe has nothing to do with that group (some of whom were convicted dopers anyway) apart from the fact that he was one of the best in his events and competed in the same era. But in terms of evidence of doping, he has nothing in common with anyone else in that group, apart from Perhaps Thompso, who also has no links with doping whatsoever.
Your argument was, that athletes who competed within the time frame 1975 - 1990 are less likely to have doped. Maybe you explain this.
How many of the East Germans and Russians have been caught? No dopers?
It's a fairly obvious point! Regardless of how effective or ineffective testing is at any time, more athletes are going to take a ped if there is no test for it. Steroids were being used in competition, I would argue mainly in power events at that time, from the 1950's and were only made illegal in 1975, with in competition starting in the 76 Games. It is obvious that at this juncture many athletes (not all) would have at least had second thoughts about doping with steroids due to the risk of being caught. And there were East Europeans duly caught in the '75 - 92 period: - Slupianek, Kazankina (refusal to take test), Bykova, Fuchs, Yershov, Petrova and Marasescu. Of course there would have been other athletes who were cheating and got away with it, but that was/is the case for any era. Certainly more athletes are going to get caught with a test (post 75) than when there wasn't any testing at all. Correct?
It is also interesting that from the list of caught dopers I provided, only 1 is male (and in a power event), the rest being female, where it is believed steroid use was far more widespread as the effects on performance were so more marked.
"Female East German athletes were disproportionately subjected to doping. It was less of an effort to spotlight women’s sports under socialism than a cold-blooded calculation to reap medals that were tougher for East German men to win against elite Western competitors." Lucas Aykroyd - Fall of Berlin Wall brought curtain down on GDR's doping program
There was also limited knowledge of just how useful steroid use would be to male middle and distance runners in the 70's and 80's, supported by the fact that there were so few caught in these events, as opposed to sprinters and throwers, regardless of nationality.
By the 1990's the testing of peds was obviously better than 15 years earlier, with the IAAF introducing out of competition testing in 1989 (something the UK had in place from 1983), but then a new endurance based drug emerged in the early '90's, possibly around '92, which was clearly visible from the improvement in world record times in the middle and distance events and in in depth performances. From this point until 2000, there was a drug readily available for middle and distance athletes that couldn't be detected as there was no test for it. Clearly, the many elites took this knowing there was no chance of setection. This likely continued until '05, when the EPO test finally became effective after the intitial one in use from '00 proved to throw up false positives and had a very narrow window of detection.
So, yes, I stand by my comment that more athletes (in the whole of T&F) were likely to have used steroids before 75 than between 75 and 92, especially in the men's middle and distance events, where there is little evidence that it was even regarded as beneficial to these athletes. It is also far more likely that elite distance runners were using peds such as EPO after 92 than between 75 and 92, when such drugs didn't exist.
The other point which I made and you practically ignored, is that I am stating that there is no evidence that Coe doped. In fact you offer no supporting evidence that backs up your claim that he did, apart from offering a long list of athletes, all of whom come with quite a bit of evidence that they likely did dope. Coe has nothing to do with that group (some of whom were convicted dopers anyway) apart from the fact that he was one of the best in his events and competed in the same era. But in terms of evidence of doping, he has nothing in common with anyone else in that group, apart from Perhaps Thompso, who also has no links with doping whatsoever.
What did I claim, that Coe doped? I didn't, stop posting false information.
So what exactly is your point?
If we take a random top athlete from the period 75 - 92 (where Coe's international career falls in completely) then it's less probable that he/she doped that when we take a random top athlete from 60 - 74 + 93 - 05? What a nonsense. Just non Eastern-bloc? Non USA? I think the 1980s was the most heavily doped up decade in sports history - and now?
What is a middle event? A middle athlete?
"It is also far more likely that elite distance runners were using peds such as EPO after 92 than between 75 and 92, when such drugs didn't exist." I could agree with this keen observation - when a drug doesn't exist, the chances someone takes it are slim.
I miss the old days when the Brits beat the rest of the world regardless of who was taking whatever dope.
I miss the days when Kenyans could make the 1500m final and not come last, and win the World U20 championship (even if the winner would inevitably get busted).
This topic always brings out some oddly off off the mark comments
Coe ran closer to 50/week, plenty of hills with supplemental strength and power work; he communicated as such after his 1mi world record, this fact is well documented. Basically Coe ran Lagat mileage plus or minus. And not too far off Cruz’s base phase mileage for 1:41.7
This topic always brings out some oddly off off the mark comments
Coe ran closer to 50/week, plenty of hills with supplemental strength and power work; he communicated as such after his 1mi world record, this fact is well documented. Basically Coe ran Lagat mileage plus or minus. And not too far off Cruz’s base phase mileage for 1:41.7
Mileage fanatics will always come dragging with made up arguments like "he didn´t count w/u, c/d and morning jogs" - as if one of the most scientifically minded coached of that era shouldn´t write everything down. ridiculous!
Imagine still believing Coe ran low mileage despite himself saying many times over the years that he ran much more than reported lmao
I've heard it from his own mouth at a coaching seminar that his winter/spring mileage was c 70ish and he couldn't fully explain why the 'low mileage' myth just got recycled. I suspect there was a BMC/Horwill angle on that, pre internet at least.
I miss the old days when the Brits beat the rest of the world regardless of who was taking whatever dope.
I miss the days when Kenyans could make the 1500m final and not come last, and win the World U20 championship (even if the winner would inevitably get busted).
I miss the days when you called people cowards for posting under unregistered handles, Coevett.
Everyone I know who claims to train 100 miles a week, only did it once in a marathon block a year ago. They average 70-80 and like to embellish things.
I miss the days when you called people cowards for posting under unregistered handles, Coevett.
Classic hoadie. You ('yooie') shame Deano for allegedly posting under a different handle, report and have my post that points you out deleted, then accuse me of posting under an anonymous handle (under yet another of your anonymous handles). Not to mention derailing another classic LetsRun thread. You bring such a lot of value to this messageboard.
I miss the old days when the Brits beat the rest of the world regardless of who was taking whatever dope.
Back in the 80's, the only hardcore dopers were the Soviet Bloc, and mainly little East Germany, and Kenya. Both countries in 1980 had populations of around 16 million each (with East Germany having a relative shortage of young people), compared to Britain with 56 million. It's hardly suprising that at a time when GB was almost unique in athletics being the number one most popular individual sport, that we were able to produce a handful of superstars able to beat dopers. The GDR was engaged in doping thousands of athletes in dozens of sports to top medal tables. Despite this, Coe, Ovett, and Cram all lost to Beyer, Straub, and Herold in major finals.
We know West Germany was also engaging in something close to state sponsored doping in the 80's. But then we know now when German anti-doping testing is among the best in the world, they absolutely suck at athletics. And again, West Germans were among the few who beat Brits in global finals, such as Wessinghage and Wullbeck.
The argument that 'only dopers can beat dopers' is absolutely trash. I can imagine it might be true in the sprints, where we know nearly all the top sprinters dope and have done so for decades. But the idea that anybody who beat medicore talented GDR athletes who happened to be roided out of their minds, must also have been doping, is just ridiculous.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.