Craig Virgin's Terrible Decisions

I will post later, but looking at Rojo's article it is clearly skewed. He picked a starting year conveniently just after Ron Clarke shattered both the 5K and 10K records. Then he compared that stretch of time up to '89 with the decade of dominance and breakthroughs by Geb/Tergat from 89 to 99. Well, obviously if one ran a similar comparison back in Clarke's day you could produce statistics suggesting Clarke was a cheater too. Anytime a great athlete shatters records you can produce such statistics.

The key point though is that in the 90s it was Geb/Tergat/Komen and pretty much nobody else producing those performances. Look at the top 25 all-time list and you will see only 6 names from that time frame (89 to 99) in the 10K and 5 names in the 5K. The picture that you get is that it was really three or four super-studs running the incredible times in that decade. That is just as consistent with some great athletes making legitimate breakthroughs as it is with athletes cheating. It is also consistent with a marginal increase in the rate of improvement due to a greater influx of E.African talent. This interpretation is also strongly supported by the fact that there are NO NON-E. AFRICANS on the top 25 all-time list in either the 5K or 10K. This is suggestive to me that genetics plays a larger role than PED.

If EPO was the overwhelming factor, how is it that no non-africans can bust into the top 25? This wasn't the case prior to the 90s...to which you would argue that prior to the 90s EPO wasn't around, and therefore the playing field was even. But this argument would assume that only Africans cheat, which we know is not the case. If PED was the biggest factor, then we would expect to see the rest of the world improving right along with the Africans. But we don't, we see the Africans emerge as dominant, likely due to greater participation and organized training.

For an interesting discussion of some of these issues, check out this post on the Science of Sport blog:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/08/performance-analysis-weapon-against.html

They show some interesting data -- e.g. women's discus performances correlated with the introduction of out-of-competition drug testing in 1988; men's 5000m and 10,000m depth following the commercial introduction of EPO; climbing power in the Tour de France through the 1990s.

They're careful to note that patterns and statistics can never prove that anyone is doping. But it's hard to look at that women's discus data and not come away with the suspicion that something was going on.

On another note, I think it's overly simplistic to cast this debate in either-or terms. To me, there can be no doubt that the influx of African runners in the 1990s changed the face of the sport. Whatever the reasons (genetic, environmental, whatever), they're clearly on a different level. But there's also, in my opinion, some powerful circumstantial evidence that performances may have been skewed by EPO in the 1990s. I have no trouble believing that some individuals -- perhaps even the very best, like Geb and Tergat -- were clean, while the general increase in depth was strongly affected by drugs.

E Smith - as long as you are continuing in a diplomatic manner I will follow along and try to keep it lively.

You ask why is it just a few people from one general area and not widespread if EPO is widely available. I think the answer is simple - its because all the other "civilized" countries have had controlled in and out-of-competition drug testing whereas the African countries barely have a governing body in place let alone the funds to set up a full time testing program.

Just curious. When the Chinese women were all running ridiculous times, breaking the 5k WR during the second half of a 10k, and dominating the top 10 lists - did you suspect anything illegal going on?

Again I ask, do you think ANYBODY is cheating or do you think everybody is clean?

Whitesnake wrote:

Here's your statistical proof...Rojo wrote this in 2000. He cites statistics.

http://www.letsrun.com/rojospeaksmay23.html

That's pretty shoddy analysis by Rojo. Moreover, if one bothers to update the statistics to account for the last ten years, the slim statistical basis for Rojo's speculations pretty much evaporates altogether.

Having observed the East African runners of the '60s and '70s, I always felt that East African runners would obliterate the world records in all of the distance events once they developed systematic training and racing programs. It doesn't surprise me a bit that they've done so. As for claims about widespread use of EPO and other banned substances being responsible for the faster times of the last twenty years, I still haven't seen any explanation for the lack of progress in the last twenty years among non-African distance runners, who have relatively easy access to banned substances and practices.

When lightly-trained African teenagers are running times that are unmatched by any mature athletes from the most technologically advanced and drug-infested countries, I'm inclined to believe that those young African runners are just flat-out better.

Whitesnake wrote:

Again I ask, do you think ANYBODY is cheating or do you think everybody is clean?

Why are you asking such a silly question? Do you really believe that anyone on this thread is suggesting that there are no drug cheats in this sport?

To nobody in particular:

If you are in your teens or twenties, or you just don't follow the sport very closely you won't know this, but it has been well-known by the cognescenti in the 60's, 70's and 80's that all kinds of drugs have been used in athletics. In the power and strength events and in the distance and mid-distance races.

I have TaFnews interviews from the 70's (early, mid and late) where the interviewers ask the athlete point-blank about their steroid use and the athlete (usually a thrower) comments on it. In the same vein that they would about their training.

I have interviews (in print) of Frank Shorter, Rod Dixon, Bill Rodgers and Marty Liquori where they say (essentially) that (for example) "90% of the distance runners at the next Olympics will be blood doping and/or using steroids". Frank and Bill even recommended that the runners of the US figure out what is most productive and "get on with it". It was well-known that it happened in road-racing also.

So, my point is that Virgin is not the first athlete to give his opinion and have it be that the practice was rife.

In the 60's and 70's there were corticoids, amphetamines, steroids, and blood-doping. The problem was that things were either not illegal, not tested for, or the testing was easy to skirt. At some point HGH became very common. Around 88 or 89 EPO became commonly used. EPO is much more effective and easier to control than blood-packing with your own blood. However, it is easier to detect now.

We can never know HOW commonly used and exactly by who. In cycling the testing is much more serious and they catch a lot more people.

I get a laugh out of people that say the "diet, training, tracks and shoes" have improved so much in 20 yrs and they are responsible for the improvement.

Rono ran 27:22 in 1978. Did he dope? Who cares? He did not use EPO though because it did not exist.

In 10 yrs it dropped just 8 seconds to 27:14. In 10 more yrs (the EPO era) it dropped 49 seconds to 26:22.

It has dropped just 5 seconds in the last 12 yrs.

I can't say that ANYONE used it for sure. But for those of you who say that "diet, training, tracks and shoes" have improved so much ... was it the period from 1989 to 1999 that they improved the most? Because the last 10-12 yrs have yielded the LEAST IMPRESSIVE gains in the WRs at 10k/5k/3k/Steeple/1500 of any 10 year period in track's history.

Is it that the improvement in shoes, training, diet, tracks and rabbiting has now slowed completely or reversed themselves? afterall, the 90's produced a 46 second improvement in the 10k WR, similar jaw-dropping improvements at 1500/3k/5k ... so why has it stopped?

Let’s get back to the most important thing – we don’t care if Craig Virgin or anyone else was cheating 30 years ago. That was then and this is now.

If anyone has any verifiable information about PED use by runners today, they should come forward, otherwise they are cowards.

Who are then next USA runners to break 27:10 in the 10k and 12:55 in the 5k? Some people would have killed to run those times 30 years ago.

Was looking at the WR lists and thinking, "OK, who do we know was doping, or at least who got caught? Vainio, Mourhit, Boulami, are the ones I can name off the top of my head.

But looking at the medalists for the 5k (just at the Olympics!) reminded me of these high-profile runners:

80 Maaninka - admitted doper (yes I know it was not illegal)

84 Auoita - big cloud over this guy

88 Baumann - tested positive, Kunze - big cloud as he is East German

92 Baumann - tested positive

96 Boulami - brother is a CAUGHT doper

00 Seidi-Seif - tested positive

Not many since then because they got more careful, not many before that timeframe because they weren't testing seriously before that.

I realize that some of those are just implication (and quite unfair) but my point is that if you looked at all the finalists in the 1500/Steeple/5k/10k since 1972 at the Oly Games and WC you would find a lot more who tested positive.

Again, it doesn't mean that everyone is using, but it DOES prove that MANY of them are because they got caught!

DaveW wrote:

Let’s get back to the most important thing – we don’t care if Craig Virgin or anyone else was cheating 30 years ago. That was then and this is now.

If anyone has any verifiable information about PED use by runners today, they should come forward, otherwise they are cowards.

Who are then next USA runners to break 27:10 in the 10k and 12:55 in the 5k? Some people would have killed to run those times 30 years ago.

Well DaveW,

I think ALL people would have killed to run under 12:55 and 27:10 in 1980 since those would have been WR's by 14 and 13 seconds respectively at that time. If one could have run at all consistently at or near that level they would have been set for life financially within two years.

They also would have most likely owned the WRs at 3k and marathon as well and been the most famous runner of all time up until that point.

What is it you want to say about specific runners today? I am not interested in hearing speculation about runners 30 years ago ... please leave that stuff for the History Channel .... this could be an active and vibrant sport today, if not for the 1980's cave dwellers. Go get some Tiger therapy.

You sound a lot like Mark McGwire in front of Congress. Those who don't learn history are destined to repeat it.

Whitesnake wrote:

E Smith - as long as you are continuing in a diplomatic manner I will follow along and try to keep it lively.

You ask why is it just a few people from one general area and not widespread if EPO is widely available. I think the answer is simple - its because all the other "civilized" countries have had controlled in and out-of-competition drug testing whereas the African countries barely have a governing body in place let alone the funds to set up a full time testing program.

Just curious. When the Chinese women were all running ridiculous times, breaking the 5k WR during the second half of a 10k, and dominating the top 10 lists - did you suspect anything illegal going on?

Again I ask, do you think ANYBODY is cheating or do you think everybody is clean?

I'm not sure when EPO testing became active or effective...please inform me if you know. But somehow I doubt that only E.African countries lacked effective EPO testing, especially in the 90s. Regarding Rojo's statistics, its also unfair to compare the average annual % increase for a 20 year period to the average annual % increase for a 10 year period (in the midst of record shattering). So as the other poster pointed out, if we made it apples to apples and compared '69-'89 with '90-'10, the major differences would evaporate. That is due to the lack of improvement in the last decade which some have tried to credit to EPO testing. But that doesn't explain why the Africans continued to dominate but failed to improve times significantly, yet largely maintained the overall level of performance (the top 25 is filled with athletes from the last decade, but only Bekele has eclipsed Geb). To me that points more toward the greatness of Geb/Tergat/El G than it proves that those guys were on something. The natural progression of records is for breakthroughs to happen, and then those records last for a while before another major breakthrough. That seems to be what has happened.

The Chinese women are another issue. I don't have the numbers in front of me but I'm guessing that statistically what they did was far more impressive than what the men did in the 90s, which raises more red flags. They are also from a communist country which raises additional red flags. So yeah, I think they were probably doing something.

I've already said that of course there are some athletes cheating.

E_Smith wrote:

I'm not sure when EPO testing became active or effective...please inform me if you know.

Sydney Olympics

I wonder what it would look like if one did a statistical analysis of individual runners before and after the introduction of EPO. Runners who were competitive both before and after its introduction. We would expect to see a big jump in performance in the distance events, and if that was consistently happening across many runners you could probably make a good case that there was wide-spread doping going on. As it is, all we're looking at is statistical outliers. It's misleading to look at 3 or 4 phenoms and try to just draw a straight line between them.

Ticktock wrote:

I wonder what it would look like if one did a statistical analysis of individual runners before and after the introduction of EPO. Runners who were competitive both before and after its introduction. We would expect to see a big jump in performance in the distance events, and if that was consistently happening across many runners you could probably make a good case that there was wide-spread doping going on. As it is, all we're looking at is statistical outliers. It's misleading to look at 3 or 4 phenoms and try to just draw a straight line between them.

Well another thing to consider is that after the introduction of EPO "on the market" in 1989, the 10K record only improved from 27:13 to 27:08 (Barrios), and only improved to 26:58 by 1993. Geb moved it 26:43 in '95 (26:22 in 98). Aouita's 5K record of 12:58 wasn't broken until '94 by Geb, in 12:56. He continued to drop it through the 90s to 12:39 in '98, consistent with his 10K progression. He traded it with Komen once and Kiptanui once (12:55 in '95).

So it wasn't like the stuff was introduced and people started going apeshit right away. Also, if it really had that big of an effect I would expect to see some more athletes mixing it up and setting records.

I'm with you. I don't doubt that there have been world-class distance runners who have been dopers, but I see little if any evidence that the general progression of world records and world-class levels in men's distance running over the past twenty years has been due to an increase in doping usage in any significant way.

People have been throwing around doping allegations for many decades. If sudden breakthroughs in world records are going to be the basis for doping suspicions, then fingers should be pointing first toward runners like Jim Peters and Ron Clarke, and not toward all of these great East African runners who have demonstrated such phenomenal talent under all kinds of conditions, and often from a very early age.

Avocados Number wrote:

When lightly-trained African teenagers are running times that are unmatched by any mature athletes from the most technologically advanced and drug-infested countries, I'm inclined to believe that those young African runners are just flat-out better.

Agreed.

E_Smith wrote:

Also, if it really had that big of an effect I would expect to see some more athletes mixing it up and setting records.

Not necessarily. If everyone in the world's top 10 or 20 is doping then there's a level playing field for those guys and the guy with the best talent still wins.

You look at the all-time lists for 5,000 and 10,000 meters and it's all Africans, and it's all 1993 or later.

Dieter Bauman doesn't show up until 33rd on the all-time 5k list with his 12:54.

Barrios is 50th on the all-time 10k list with his 27:08

So either:

1) There is widespread systematic doping on the African continent in nations such as Ethiopia, Kenya, Morocco, Qatar, Uganda, and Eritrea AND we can't catch any of these freaking guys (read what I wrote above again - 32 Africans in front of Bauman, 49 in front of Barrios!) When you factor in the marathon, steeplechase, XC, women's events, female juniors, and male juniors, we're talking hundreds of athletes who are significantly faster than their historical and contemporary peers. And again, we're not catching more than a few here and there, I would guess at the same rate as Western countries.

or

2) They've just got it. They've figured this running thing out, due to some combination of genetics, training, and possibly training.

Which seems more likely? Option 1 almost sounds like a conspiracy, with that many athletes consistently getting away with such high caliber performances. Option 2 - well, look at a world class East African run and you'll agree he was built for this sport.

Look at Bernard Lagat. Is he doping? Right now, probably not. But he is still amazing, which supports Option 2. Look at Meb. Is he doping? I'd guess no, so that points to option 2, the man was built to run.