LetsRun "Clean or Dirty" Poll Discussion Thread

The "poll" is absolute rubbish, from its attempt at "data collection" onwards.

Rubbish ab initio.

Renato Canova wrote:

The poll can show what people SUPPOSE, which is very far from the reality.

It's like to ask if UFO exists or not. Everybody can have an opinion, but only few people have the real knowledge for a correct answer.

Who is in professional athletics from long time, perfectly knows there were athletes completely clean, and there were athletes completely dirty.

When I see more than 50% supposing Shaheen dirty, when Shaheen NEVER took any supplement in his life, this means that the mentality of many people looks at the fact he WAS ABLE RUNNING FAST, AND HE WAS KENYAN...

This is the real doping : the self convinction that everything is possible, if you have talent and motivation in training.

Renato, I think that 50% suppose Shaheen dirty because they don't know he's actually Kenyan. All the other Kenyan's in the poll, with Kenyan names, had about 80% of people think they were clean. So it would seem that people judge clean or not also by a simple name.

As for the conviction everything is possible, I was speaking with a friend about this last night. There was a time in my life I went a bit crazy and had irrational thoughts regarding my ability. That is when I began to train with great volume and continuity and seemingly changed my DNA expression, as several years later I was national class and people who didn't know me as a youngster would tell me I was "a natural."

does anyone know if the polls on american athletes are going to be released? I feel like it would be interesting to see peoples opinions of people in various training groups

Most Interesting Coach ITW wrote:

Renato, I think that 50% suppose Shaheen dirty because they don't know he's actually Kenyan. All the other Kenyan's in the poll, with Kenyan names, had about 80% of people think they were clean. So it would seem that people judge clean or not also by a simple name.

I thought about this. If it said, "Stephen Cherono" I bet a lot more of our visitors would have said he was clean.

Daniel Komen didn't

Most Interesting Coach ITW wrote:

Renato, I think that 50% suppose Shaheen dirty because they don't know he's actually Kenyan. All the other Kenyan's in the poll, with Kenyan names, had about 80% of people think they were clean. So it would seem that people judge clean or not also by a simple name.

emph added

Renato Canova wrote:

... At the same time, there are athletes ALL THE ATHLETIC WORLD knows were under PEDS : I don't want to give some name here, but it's enough to see at the year of their WR (every WR before 1988 in sprint, hurdles, jumps and throws was illegally aided) ...

Renato

Can you clarify this? You're saying that every World Record prior to 1988 in spring, hurdles, jumps and throws was illegally aided?

How so? Bob Beamon? Hines? Hayes? Calvin Smith?

Renato Canova wrote:

The poll can show what people SUPPOSE, which is very far from the reality.

It's like to ask if UFO exists or not. Everybody can have an opinion, but only few people have the real knowledge for a correct answer.

Who is in professional athletics from long time, perfectly knows there were athletes completely clean, and there were athletes completely dirty.

When I see more than 50% supposing Shaheen dirty, when Shaheen NEVER took any supplement in his life, this means that the mentality of many people looks at the fact he WAS ABLE RUNNING FAST, AND HE WAS KENYAN...

This is the real doping : the self convinction that everything is possible, if you have talent and motivation in training.

Renato, I think that 50% suppose Shaheen dirty because they don't know he's actually Kenyan. All the other Kenyan's in the poll, with Kenyan names, had about 80% of people think they were clean. So it would seem that people judge clean or not also by a simple name.

As for the conviction everything is possible, I was speaking with a friend about this last night. There was a time in my life I went a bit crazy and had irrational thoughts regarding my ability. That is when I began to train with great volume and continuity and seemingly changed my DNA expression, as several years later I was national class and people who didn't know me as a youngster would tell me I was "a natural."

So, which kind of real importance can have the opinion of people deciding if one athlete is clean or not looking at his citizenship ?

When we speak about doping, there is a funny thing : everybody never accused of anything, but guilty because ran fast, has to prove his innocence.... I Always supposed the prosecutor (in this case WADA and related Agencies) have to prove he is guilty !

In the normal law, you need to prove are innocent when are accused of something, not when you are not accused.

Really strange world, full of morons.

EPILOGUE - dirty/clean pollNow that the dust has settled somewhat, a few thoughts and observations:(1) Public airing of problems from an individual within a group usually results in intense criticism from other members of the group. Think of Jose Conseco and how other baseball players castigated him for going public. Now Brojos knew that discussing this topic and presenting information through their poll about perceptions of drug use would result in this reaction. That's why they were so careful and delayed presenting the results. They chose to present it anyway. And I don't think it was about increasing hits to the site either.(2) Many of the criticisms of the poll were valid (Wtfunny). Certainly any internet poll is not "scientific" and anyone athlete's polling numbers indicating how people feel could be off. Those who don't like the idea of friends being publically rated on likely drug use will focus in on these limitations to try and discredit the whole endeavor. (Wtfunny made good points) But the big picture, the important point isn't that an individual athlete got a 60 percent but really should a 40%. The big issue is that the average fan perceives drug use to be a significant problem and question the validity of so many world records. (3) Poll results just reflect biases people have toward certain types of athletes and countries. To their credit, Letsrun did a great job of teasing out biases and elucidating posters how bias affect their percetions. The bias of familiarity was well explained. Sprinters versus distance runners, American versus nonamerican, older versus newer records. Interesting voting patterns based on age were explained. (Runners of a younger age may have competed against those they felt may have juiced where oldsters and teenagers didn't - it showed in the poll) Casual posters, who may have been more influenced by the title of the poll, rated drug use higher.(4) Some posters asked if this was fair to individual athletes - to be publically rated on drug use - without any evidence or means to change an incorrerct image some might now have of them as a result of the poll. Certainly, this was in no way fair to individual athletes. (5) The most important question: Was this poll good for the sport of running? Without question, I feel that any effort to increase public awareness and discussion of drug cheating is an extremely important and a necessary part of the process. Yes it is painful and yes some of it is unfair to individuals, but drug cheating has been a huge blemish on the sport and there is no easy solution. Its sad when so many records are held in question as to whether they are valid or not. I think Brojos and Letsrun and Eric should be commended for the poll, and for their willingness to take the critisms. I feel bad for athletes incorrectly labelled through the poll but may they can be a voice for better testing. If people become angry about this poll it may not be such a bad thing.This will help highlight and increase public attention to the severity of this problem and the sport will be better for it. C

Wtfunny wrote:

(a), do you really think the "poll" then is meaningful? At all? Given the weight of the subject, don't you think LRC at least owe it the sport and athletes to not discredit them like this, without at least SOME kind of verifiable and measurable information?

I simply think the entire concept of a group of anonymous people voting on whether a world record holder is/was "dirty" or not is beyond disrespectful to the very people this site is largely about.

. IMO.

Let me clarify #4 and why I believe why even athletes unfairly identified as possible drug cheats should still be infavor of this poll.

Lets say a clean athlete reads that 30% of the voters thought he was a cheat. Yes that poll number could increase the number of people who question him.

But the real tradegy for the honest athlete is two fold (1) cheats make it much harder for him to win, and even more tragic, (2) even without polls, others widespread cheating cause many to look skeptically at his honest results. He's robbed twice.

So the more people become enraged and angry about this topic, the more athletes and directors, work to expose and prevent this cheatng, the better it will be for ALL honest athletes. If this poll stirs up the hornet nest, it might help the process of pulling out all the stops to clean things up.

And in the end this poll might help serve the honest athlete.

C

(4) Some posters asked if this was fair to individual athletes - to be publically rated on drug use - without any evidence or means to change an incorrerct image some might now have of them as a result of the poll. Certainly, this was in no way fair to individual athletes.