Jeff Wigand wrote:
It was timed by Omega. You had foreign correspondents there. The track had been used for the 1990 Asian Games. The men didn't run at any level above what would be expected.
I would appreciate watching the races in their entirety but doing so wouldn't prove anything beyond what we already know.
The men broke several national records.
113 wrote:
The men broke several national records.
None of which still stand today.
Where can we see the men's times? I can't find them.
And it possible to compare the men's times from outside of China (or at least outside of that week)?
yeah right wrote:
2:47 for last K of the 10000, that's 27:55 pace folks
That's not crazy, actually.
But what was crazy was that she slowed down from the previous 2K, each run in 2:45.
She closed in 8:17 (while the 3K record was 8:22 at the time). That's closing the final 3K in 27:38 pace.
Here are the given splits:
1km 02:54.7 02:54.7
2km 05:56.6 03:01.9
3km 08:59.2 03:02.6
4km 12:02.8 03:03.6
5km 15:05.7 03:02.9
6km 18:10.1 03:04.4
7km 21:14.4 03:04.3
8km 23:59.9 02:45.5
9km 26:44.8 02:44.9
10km 29:31.8 02:47.0
Through 7K she is on 30:20 pace, just shy of the 30:13 world record pace.
Then she bursts from 3:04's to 2:45's, a 19 second pick up. She's putting more than a straightaway's distance on her own already fast pace per 1K for the last 3K.
To this date, only 6 women have run faster in an open 5000 then her closing 14:26 that day.
In comparison, more than 60 men have under the 12:57 that Bekele closed in for his 2003 10K and Bekele's overall time was 30 seconds slower than the 10K record.
Just giving the numbers.
bumfeeler wrote:
BoulderSucks, yes I'm a native English speaker. Just prone to the odd typo.
Overstretched Sphincter, great username.
Everyone else, stop speculating on the length of the track.
I want a challenge to be mounted from athletes to have these videos released. Why have the top female runners never gotten together to make this happen before? The 1500, 3000 and 10,000 records are out of site... why do they not share our curiosity / frustration?
I don't see any reason why women's athletics can't give China a nudge on this one.
I don't think you read my earlier post very well.
Once again, the runners themselves do NOT have the power to make ANY demand like that from the IAAF. Especially because the demand would induce a retroactive evaluation of previously ratified results 20 years after the fact.
Please understand that this. The IAAF is NOT making headlines for keeping 20-year-old Chinese Records that are obviously under suspicion of drug use. In fact, it has kept records from many individuals whom we know were DEFINITELY stimulated from drug use. However, the IAAF WILL make headlines if they decide to retroactively negate previously ratified records 20 years after they were originally ratified. There is NO situation in which the IAAF will actually benefit from this.
If they HAVE videos that demonstrate something suspicious went on at the meet, then they will be virtually torn apart by accusations of having been involved in the a "conspiracy", or being corrupt and bought off by the Chinese. If they do NOT have the videos and demand them from China, they will be blasted for being an inept governing organization that seems to be selectively doubting records of women from a specific nationality. THIS is why women's athletics cannot "give China the nudge on this one". The average newsreader will NOT understand how incredible the records actually are. All they'll see is that the IAAF appears to be selectively targeting 3 specific records, all set by Chinese individuals.
The IAAF has FAR more to lose from either of these situations than they have for Dibaba or Defar, or Radcliffe to keep complaining about how the records are illegitimate. Moreover, it is quite likely that many of the runners do not even care enough to make the demand.
bumfeeler wrote:
Where can we see the men's times? I can't find them.
And it possible to compare the men's times from outside of China (or at least outside of that week)?
Had to shorten the link
http://tinyurl.com/mda4fyjI completely understand your point and the position of the IAAF. I just meant why do the female athletes themselves not make more of a push to sort this out. If the top athletes grouped together and pushed the issue via the media, rather than via the IAAF, surely China would at least defend it's corner.
And from another thread...
The mens times in Beijing
http://www.betterhealthchoices.com/cordyceps8.html
100: 10.24 (+2.0) =NR
200: 20.92
400: 45.85 NR
800: 1:49.27
1500: 3:48.68
5000: 13:32.46
10000: 28:40.81
100H 13:59
400H 49:29
The fastest Chinese mens times 3 months later in Shanghai (East Asian Games)
800: 1.48
1500: 3.56
5000: 13.54
10000: (3rd place Korean in 29.41 - China outside of top 3)
If those times are anything to go by, you'd have to say the men had an incredible games too. Huge margin in the 10,000!
Almost every single women's record seems questionable, not just the Chinese records.
Flojo's 10.49 is very questionable because of the 0.0 wind reading on a blustery day were other records were broken but not ratified because of the wind reading (Carl Lewis and Willie Banks).
We have good evidence on systematic national doping on the eastern bloc records.
They stripped Marion Jones of her medals in 2000 without a positive test but have left up her PR's from 1998 on the all time list.
Ben Johnson's 9.83 was retro-actively taken away without a positive test.
They can go back and take records away.
I think the Chinese women's records, while being the most suspicious, are the least likely to be taken away.
Other than running incredibly fast, there is no hard evidence against them.
My speculations wouldn't hold up.
But if someone came forward and showed tapes of how the times may have been manipulated, they could take the records away.
But if the tapes and copies have been burned- no dice.
The National Games are what they're peaking for. It makes sense that they would run their best there, or at least make that their focus.
The men's and women's performances from Beijing '93 aren't even on the same planet. How can you even try to suggest that the men had "an incredible games" when 20.92 won the 200m?
Look at their national records. Note that zero current men's records were set at the 1993 National Games and compare that with the women's records:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_records_in_athletics
If the track had been short these men would have run suspiciously fast, too. If the start/finish had been incorrect we would have seen it on the video, Omega would have seen it, the foreign correspondents and all the Chinese people in the stands would have seen it.
Look at the world class results in virtually all the women's events. Women over 7m in the long jump, 6750 pts in the heptathlon, which is better than Heike Dreschler or Hyleas Fountain ever did.
There was nothing wrong with the facility or the measurements.
toro wrote:
But if someone came forward and showed tapes of how the times may have been manipulated, they could take the records away.
But if the tapes and copies have been burned- no dice.
You can't drug test via video.
They "peaked" 3 months earlier?
We're talking 1 LAP slower in the Men's 10,000. That's with at least 3 others in front to drag them round!
That the men's times in Beijing have since been bettered is irrelevant. Different athletes bettered them. The class of '93, however, couldn't hit those times again. Not even close.
What I find most striking about the difference in the men's times between that 3 month period is that the gaps in time widen proportionately as the distance grows... a short track would produce exactly this pattern!
If you had full tapes and there was a malfunction or tampering in the timing, you could just put a stopwatch to the tapes.
If they started from completely wrong lines or didn't run the right amount of laps, you could find this on video.
If they cut the course (like the inside steeple line), you would see it.
An inside steeple lap is 390-395 meters.
You could certainly prove tampering with video.
We don't have footage of a full lap or even a 100m segment of any of the races.
I think 30m of running at a time is the longest clip I have seen.
there is absolutely no way Junxias records are valid (last 3k under the open 3k world record?, gimme a break), and its a travesty the IAAF doesn't do anything about it. /thread
bumfeeler wrote:
They "peaked" 3 months earlier?
We're talking 1 LAP slower in the Men's 10,000. That's with at least 3 others in front to drag them round!
It happens. Galen Rupp was able to run 13:08 for 5000m at the beginning of June but three weeks later could only run 14:54 at the national championships.
bumfeeler wrote:
That the men's times in Beijing have since been bettered is irrelevant. Different athletes bettered them. The class of '93, however, couldn't hit those times again. Not even close.
What I find most striking about the difference in the men's times between that 3 month period is that the gaps in time widen proportionately as the distance grows... a short track would produce exactly this pattern!
Ok tell me how short the track is that Zhou Cunlin, a 20.61 +1.0 man, could only run 20.96? Mu Weiguo runs 1:49 on a short track, but 1:46 NR the next year in Hiroshima?
bumfeeler wrote:
And from another thread...
The mens times in Beijing
http://www.betterhealthchoices.com/cordyceps8.html100: 10.24 (+2.0) =NR
200: 20.92
400: 45.85 NR
800: 1:49.27
1500: 3:48.68
5000: 13:32.46
10000: 28:40.81
100H 13:59
400H 49:29
The fastest Chinese mens times 3 months later in Shanghai (East Asian Games)
800: 1.48
1500: 3.56
5000: 13.54
10000: (3rd place Korean in 29.41 - China outside of top 3)
If those times are anything to go by, you'd have to say the men had an incredible games too. Huge margin in the 10,000!
There was also an 8:24 steeple, which was the national and junior record. That was set by teenager Sun Rapeng, who then ran 8:10 at the '97 Chinese National Games in Shanghai, which were also very fishy. That 8:10 still stands at the Chinese national record.
Also, the 20k racewalk is listed as a questionable distance. If they fudged that, were they really above adding an inside lane to the track? I have seen evidence that observers were present, that the correct number of laps were run, and that the timing functioned as it should. I have never seen or heard anyone say that they measured the track itself. If anyone has, I would love to see/hear it.
toro wrote:
If you had full tapes and there was a malfunction or tampering in the timing, you could just put a stopwatch to the tapes.
You're alleging that Omega was bribed (just for the women) and has been able to keep this conspiracy secret?
toro wrote:
If they started from completely wrong lines or didn't run the right amount of laps, you could find this on video.
If they cut the course (like the inside steeple line), you would see it.
An inside steeple lap is 390-395 meters.
You can see the start and finish on youtube. You don't think Track and Field News's correspondent would have mentioned that in his report?
toro wrote:
You could certainly prove tampering with video.
We don't have footage of a full lap or even a 100m segment of any of the races.
I think 30m of running at a time is the longest clip I have seen.
Have you ever seen a clip of Wilt's 100 point game? If there had been no one watching and no outside observers and internal timers then I would say yes, definitely dubious timing, short distance, etc. But that's not the case. I don't need to see a video because I have no reason to suspect that the people who were there and saw it happen are lying.
I am just laying out possibilities.
"You're alleging that Omega was bribed "
Omega is not a person. It is a company.
You can bribe the persons involved with Omega.
Google Chinese bribes and look at all of the results and major articles.
This a possibility, not an allegation.
Seeing the start and finish separately doesn't mean anything. The 1500 start could have been a prelim.
Name the TNFN correspondent. Show the reporting.
There were play by play updates of Wilt's game.
But yes, a video could prove that he didn't score 100 points (if that were the case) just like a video could prove that they didn't run these times (if that were the case).
This video and broadcast of Wilt's game provides more documentation of an event that happened over 50 years ago in small event that what we have seen from this 20 year old event on a major stage.
So there are 3 camps with this:
1) The records are totally legit. Full distance. Correct time. No drugs. The Jason Meyeroff minority.
2) They ran the times. They were just juiced to the gills to the point where it was once in a lifetime.
3) Juiced or not, they still didn't cover the distance and time as reported.
Just too implausible based on what we know about human running.
Jeff Wigand wrote:
It happens. Galen Rupp was able to run 13:08 for 5000m at the beginning of June but three weeks later could only run 14:54 at the national championships.
I accept it happens. In the case of Beijing it happened for dozens of runners. Note also, that in Beijing the 2nd and 3rd placed men followed the leader up by a second in each race. 3 months later... no one was in sight of those times.
"The men didn't have unusually fast times" argument holds no water. By their own standards, yes they did, and considerably so.
Jeff Wigand wrote:
Ok tell me how short the track is that Zhou Cunlin, a 20.61 +1.0 man, could only run 20.96? Mu Weiguo runs 1:49 on a short track, but 1:46 NR the next year in Hiroshima?
The short track would make less difference as the distance shortens. Suppose each lap was 10m short that would be about 5m off the 200m race. Around about .5secs difference? Adding that on to his 20.96 would give 21.46. So about 0.8s off his PB. Feasible.
Applying the same hypothetical measurements to the 800m... what would 20m difference be? Less than 3s?
Jeff Wigand wrote:
bumfeeler wrote:They "peaked" 3 months earlier?
We're talking 1 LAP slower in the Men's 10,000. That's with at least 3 others in front to drag them round!
It happens. Galen Rupp was able to run 13:08 for 5000m at the beginning of June but three weeks later could only run 14:54 at the national championships.
This actually contradicts your argument. We expect to see Galen Rupp run fast times at meets with rabbits and international competition early in the summer. We don't expect to see fast times in domestic-only competitions with no rabbits. The Chinese National Games had no rabbits, no international competition, and were held in September, several weeks after the World Championships. It would be surprising to even see PRs in a meet like that, let along national and world records.