Did Sebastian Coe blood dope?

So, should the thread die out and it's the general consensus of the posters here...no evidence of blood doping in Coe's career?

Most ignorant rubbish post in recent times ! Harry Wilson was a successful runner himself . Not that you need to be in order to be a successful coach. Take a look at runners whom he improved such as Jill Hunter, Julian Goater and Tony Simmons to name just 3 . Ask them about Harry's influence . I have. Of course he was self taught ! All successful coaches are. You also don't need a great academic or business history to be successful either. Having a degree in physiology doesn't make a great coach. What I would say is you should definitely not consider coaching

,

MD.. wrote:

Gebresellasie...

Successful businessman in very corrupt country ,so knows how to survive and do what it takes

Maybe that's why he was such a great runner and came out on top?

Got to agree! Harry Wilson was a great coach with a long list of successful athletes! I was fortunate enough to spend a week under his tutelage on the English School's course at Lilleshall in the spring of 1975. There was clearly nothing he didn't know about running - and he very obviously loved the sport and those who seriously participated in it.

He was known to plan training on an individual basis, according to an athlete's strengths and weaknesses. Ovett did do high mileage during the winter; but Tony Simmons won the 1975 National X Country (over 9 miles!) rarely running more than 70 mile s a week. Different athletes, different approach.

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Boe wrote:https://www.slideshare.net/hattersley4/seb-coe-analysis

This analysis says -

Coe - 47.5 miles a week

Ovett - 75 miles a week

Cram - 62.5 miles a week

The analysis also compares the training programmes of all 3 runners.

The guy who made this slideshow is terrible at math, on page 7 he has assumed 1500m is 4 laps and thus has divided El G's 3:26 by 4 to conclude WR 1500m pace is 51.5s laps when really it is 55-56s per lap.

While Peter Coe was innovative, as a general rule it is widely accepted that too many western runners moved away from a Lydiard-Ovett type miles based system towards a Peter Coe speed/rep based system in the late 1980s and Western distance running collapsed. In the last 10 years or so they have moved back towards a bigger base. It is quite possible any system could have worked on Seb Coe.

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

Calculo rot. wrote:

Most ignorant rubbish post in recent times ! Harry Wilson was a successful runner himself . Not that you need to be in order to be a successful coach. Take a look at runners whom he improved such as Jill Hunter, Julian Goater and Tony Simmons to name just 3 . Ask them about Harry's influence . I have. Of course he was self taught ! All successful coaches are. You also don't need a great academic or business history to be successful either. Having a degree in physiology doesn't make a great coach. What I would say is you should definitely not consider coaching

,

I was always led to believe (by Ovett's own words) that he didn't really have a coach and if anything his training partner Matt played an even more important role in what training he did.

Boe wrote:

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

Yes I do to a certain degree.

I wonder if Coe's methods triggered a widespread trend among Western runners, towards emphasizing low volume and high intensity, causing Western stagnation in distance running for nearly two decades.

Boe wrote:

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

rekrunner wrote:

I wonder if Coe's methods triggered a widespread trend among Western runners, towards emphasizing low volume and high intensity, causing Western stagnation in distance running for nearly two decades.

And I wonder whether the improved drug testing in the Western world after Coe's retirement resulted in stagnation in Western distance running for nearly 2 decades?

Boe wrote:

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

Leaving drugs accusations aside, maybe this is because Peter Coe's training system is more dificult to "get right" in any given athlete. You probably need to monitor very carefully how an individual athlete responds to each workout and back off the intensity as needed.

Lydiard/endurance based training may be much easier to implement in comparison.

Hardly seems likely, when you look at cycling in the same Western world during the same two decades. Lance showed us what "improved drug testing in the Western world" really means.

another wonderer wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

I wonder if Coe's methods triggered a widespread trend among Western runners, towards emphasizing low volume and high intensity, causing Western stagnation in distance running for nearly two decades.

And I wonder whether the improved drug testing in the Western world after Coe's retirement resulted in stagnation in Western distance running for nearly 2 decades?

another wonderer wrote:

Boe wrote:

Do you believe Western runners whom have adopted the Peter Coe training method have not succeeded due to lacking the natural speed of Sebastian Coe?

It seems like their method immensely benefited from Coe's natural speed and obviously talent.

Leaving drugs accusations aside, maybe this is because Peter Coe's training system is more dificult to "get right" in any given athlete. You probably need to monitor very carefully how an individual athlete responds to each workout and back off the intensity as needed.

Lydiard/endurance based training may be much easier to implement in comparison.

My view now is that a cross between Arch Jelly's system and Ovett's alleged training might be the best mix for westerners. The same milage as Lydiard with more balance and less phasing.

eh ?

rubbish is the nonsense spouted about wilson being some "wonder coach"

he was a nobody before he met ovett & who only got the national coaching job because he was ovett's coach

even then he did bugger all coaching for ovett who mostly coached himself & wilson there as a yes-man

if he wasn't ovett's coach, there was virtually no chance he wouda made head coach

is this a joke ??

he started off as a kickaball player, changed to sprinting & failed at that as his legs were too short then moved to longer distances

he was no great shakes at those either

no you don't but very useful to be a quality runner in the past

wilson wasn't

these with all great respect to their efforts are basically :

who ??

all 3 were plodders with the kick of my grandma

if he'd been any decent coach he wouda manufactured a kick out of them

made them great plodders with 0 kick

& I have seen results on track from his non-ovetts

no kick

eh ?

this was nothing to be proud of

it is shameful

utter joke !!!

coaching at highest level today as shouda been back then requires high-grade academic excellence & concomitant high intellect

coaching today is a quality profession for the top guys

being self-taught is laughable !

it is akin to requiring a heart transplant & instead of going to a highly experienced surgeon in one of the leading hospital's in the world for it, you choose some random guy of the web who's self taught at transplant surgery because he's watched a few surgical videos or lotta CIS !!!

is this a joke ?

woud a top-level athlete go to a coach with degree or multiple in physiology/biochemistry/sports science/etc with top coaching certificates or some school-leaver with no qualifications at all but "self-taught" ???

it will however increase you chances many fold of being a great coach compared to some school-leaver with no qualifications & likely no worthwhile intellect

canova is one of the best 2 middle/distance coaches around along with sal & canova has an in-depth knowledge of physiology/biochemistry frequently using biochemical tests to monitor fitness improvements such as lactate levels at a certain time after a fixed workout

this is "proper" coaching, being able to quantify fitness improvements

it's a quantum leap above basic nonsense of for a miler of wilson's ~ :

"run 70 miles a week in blocks of 5 or 10 miles at 70 or 80% of mile speed, throw in a bunch of 400 reps for speed on a light day & take coupla rest days/week"

does not require the brain of isaac newton to lay-out...

why woud I want to work for peanuts ??

if I decided on altruism & wanted to coach, the academic background is unquestioned but I woud have the decency to not consider any such position until attaining all relevant required certificates, same as all respected coaches

i certainly wouldn't insult an athlete in this day'n'age by announcing myself as a "self-taught coach" !!!

You really are a bitter and nasty little creep.

is this a joke ?

learn some facts

blood doping was banned by IOC in '85 NOT by iaaf

it means coe or anyone running in '85 were under no penalty as games weren't until '88 !!!

coe or anyone else in '85 coud blood-dope all they wanted & they wouldn't have got penalised until seoul & even then, they couldn't be penalised as there was no test for blood-doping !!!

it is even more laughable as no test existed for blood-doping in '80s & not until well into '90's/'00s coud haematocrit-kick be construed as blood-doping

there is no fool-proof test for blood-doping even today other than huge haematocrit surge &/or RBC surge &/or maybe reticulocyte collapse

no

only by IOC not iaaf

& this was 2y before seoul when ban was in effect

there was no way anyone before '88 coud be baned for blood doping unless caught with a cannula in their arm connected to a blood-bag !!!

iaaf mighta followed IOC tried to enforce a blood-doping ban in '85 after IOC ruled it but without being caught in act prior to/at an iaaf meet, it was a nonsense exercise in punditry only

wrong

it was IOC who decided to ban blood doping

nothing to do with iaaf

is this a joke ???

the influence of coe, a non-scientist with business degree from a then clown-college & that incredible colossus moynihan on IOC decision to ban blood-doping was close to zilch

the main decision to ban it was paper of harvey klein :

"blood doping and the iaaf"

definitely good longevity

but it can be argued that blood doping for any possible individual can prolong a career as it hammers a long term endurance into their system

no

it offers nothing

a hand time on a 6-lane mickey-mouse track in an unknown meet

i'm sorry but no way was that a < 1'42 on a proper 8-lane track of zurich/london/berlin/rome/brussels with full auto-timing

anyone attempting to claim a 800 or + WR today on a 6-lane track woud be laughed outta here !!!

even moreso with busted timing !!!

It was ratified by the IAAF, and was home track of their chief statistician, R Quercetani. There were hand timers with back up times of 1:41.6. If he hadn't had to run wide on 3rd bend it would have been 1:41.3/1:41.4. It was significantly below 1:42.

You have never managed to offer any other source that even claims the track was short. Stop clutching at straws.

When did the first test/s able to detect blood doping come into effect?

Kalla wrote:

When did the first test/s able to detect blood doping come into effect?

The athlete biological passport (ABP) debut in 2009, which utilizes a longitudinal profile for each athlete's hematological baseline values. The steriodal module was added in 2014. Abnormal patterns will be flagged by the software & WADA can open an investigation into a suspicious profile. However, an athlete never tests positive in a passport case, but can be sanctioned for anomalies that are conclusive for evidence of blood manipulation: