How fast could a 15:00 5k guy get on EPO?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

derp wrote:

Yeah, that's an average of 5% improvement in 4 weeks. So 14:15 for a 15:00 5k runner in a month. I'd guess a full year of training with EPO would get a 15 5k runner under 14.

I was a 14:50 guy and I just didn't have the top-end speed to run anywhere near 14 flat. EPO doesn't add fast-twitch muscles.

Leg speed stopped you from running 67 second quarters?

semsurrrrrrrr wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I was a 14:50 guy and I just didn't have the top-end speed to run anywhere near 14 flat. EPO doesn't add fast-twitch muscles.

Leg speed stopped you from running 67 second quarters?

It is proportional and a 4:28 was not a comfortable pace for me. We had a 13:50 guy that I'm pretty sure wasn't taking EPO. If he did, could he have broken 13:00 and won a Gold Medal?

5% improvment is obviously impossible.

Would take all 1'46'00 clean runner (there are a lot of them) to Rudisha level. And a 1'44 clean guy (I believe that exists) would go under 1'39 on EPO.

Same with all 3'36 1500 runner going for EG WR.

Unless a guy is very talented but has terrible recovery ability and does these times on 6 trainings a week then with epo can train 12-14times à week, then OK.

Otherwise, for people already training very hard, more like 2% which is already a lot. 2sec at 800, 4-5sec at the mile, 15sec for 5000m.

5% might be realistic with the synergistic effects of the cocktails the hard-core dopers take (e.g., EPO, HGH, T, steroids, SARMs, etc.).

Remember Lance was on a special cocktail of PEDs organized by the legendary doping doctor Ferrari. Lance adamantly states he got a 10% performance boost from the program! ?

Lance must have had something special like genetic doping to go from average climber for a pro to GOAT. I'm sure they did experiments on him.

With the standard things, even with all of them, a very well trained athlete can only gain 2%.

Otherwise we would have plenty of sub 3'28 1500 runners an WR would be 3'19 and 1h55 for marathon.

5% is 3'40>3'27 or 2h06>1h58 that is not possible

In Cases of huge progression with doping there are other factors (average training to training like a pro etc).

No. But the point is that your speed didn't hold you back. Tyler Day ran the fastest 5k in the NCAA this year but hundreds of guys can beat him at the 800 and 50 can beat him in the mile.

Impala31 wrote:

Lance must have had something special like genetic doping to go from average climber for a pro to GOAT. I'm sure they did experiments on him.

With the standard things, even with all of them, a very well trained athlete can only gain 2%.

Otherwise we would have plenty of sub 3'28 1500 runners an WR would be 3'19 and 1h55 for marathon.

5% is 3'40>3'27 or 2h06>1h58 that is not possible

In Cases of huge progression with doping there are other factors (average training to training like a pro etc).

Huh? There are plenty of sub-3:29 guys all ran in the EPO era.

Let's look at Ramzi: Improved 9 seconds in 2 yrs from 3:39 (2003) to 3:30 (2005) = ~4.1%. He chopped another half second or so the next year (2006) running his PB of 3:29.14. He was going high-octane with CERA rocket fuel and was doping in the Moroccan system. After his ban from the positive in Beijing, the best he could muster was 3:40 - which is near identical to his 3:39 in 2003, which I believe was his clean base (3:39/3:40).

And maybe Lance is onto something with the "10%" boost: Irishman Cathal Lombard improved a whopping 3 mins in a little less than 2 yrs going from 30:35 (2002) to 27:33 (2004) = ~10% ?

His improvement in the 5000 was similar over the same time period. He qualified for Athens for both events:

Huge progression seen with some elites wouldn't always be "average training to training like a pro"...because they're already a pro. I think there's a misconception that these guys sit around all day playing video games and all of sudden when they decide to dope they also decide to start training. They've already been training and in many cases training very hard, and are not seeing the improvements they expect. Now they're able to train above and beyond their natural limitations with tremendous recovery and reduction in injuries. And granted a lot of them dope because they worry that their competition is doped and they don't want to be at a disadvantage.

14 guys under 3'29 in the history of human mankind lol. That is plenty?

If a 3'39 guy could do sub 3'29 with doping, there would be dozens of sub 3'29 guys every year...

Rashid Ramzy went from 3'45 to 3'39 in one year before 3'30 so his progression was definitely not done yet.

He also run 3'37 years after being caught. And I guess you are not as pro when you are training for winning the regional championship as when you are training to be world champion. So he probably could do better than that.

So he clearly had the ability to run at least 3'35. Even 3'33-32 I believe.

I know nothing about the Irish guy except his spectacular progression. I don't believe the guy was training like a pro to run 14'20/30'. Anybody talented training like a pro would do at least sub 14'/ 29'30.

Anyway, your exemple can't beat the argument of not having better WR and every year top lists.

I know a guy who was running 10k/HM on regional level next to where I leave.

He was talented but lazy. He would train like 5-6 times a week had 30'10/1h07 PR.

He tried the doping shortcut instead of training more. With same training (but I believe he went harder on the workouts) he won 35" at 10k and 1'50 at half in two years. He got caughted one day. Sad to see talented guy doping for nothing...

Would be better off just training more.

smarter than a dummy wrote:

No. But the point is that your speed didn't hold you back. Tyler Day ran the fastest 5k in the NCAA this year but hundreds of guys can beat him at the 800 and 50 can beat him in the mile.

Of course my speed held me back. I ran with other 15:00 guys and runners that broke 9:00 in HS, and the difference between us and them was top end speed. The reason Bekele runs over a minute faster than guys like Virgin and Bedford did is that he can run under 3:50 they couldn't 4:00.

EPO could help by a few seconds, but it's not going to allow you to out run your natural ability. People talk about this Lombard guy, but if he could improve from 30:00 to 27:30, why couldn't a clean 27:30 guy break 26:00?

Bet you could have beaten Day in a 400.

smarter than a dummy wrote:

Bet you could have beaten Day in a 400.

I could barely break 60 and he's run 3:46, so hell no, I couldn't have beaten him in a 400. It's also likely his 1500/mile PRs are a little soft.

You are correct. You are slow. 60 second 400 and 14:50 5k woukd have placed you as an average D3 runner.

smarter than a dummy wrote:

You are correct. You are slow. 60 second 400 and 14:50 5k woukd have placed you as an average D3 runner.

I guess college distance running has become far more competitive. When I was in college, I would have been in at least the top 3 for almost any D-2 team and D-3 pretty much sucked at the time.

BTW, Mr. Elite, how fast did you run in college?

Doping also lets you train more and harder.

1:52 and 4:08. I wasn't fast enough to make the travel squad.

smarter than a dummy wrote:

1:52 and 4:08. I wasn't fast enough to make the travel squad.

With my strength and your middle distance speed we would have been a hell of a 5000 runner.

This thread has gone in some tangents, but my point is that improving from 15:00 to 14:00 does not happen in a vacuum. It's going to require at least a 15 second improvement in the mile and 4-5 seconds in the 400. I don't believe EPO can accomplish that.

Jimmy21 wrote:

I would think it'd depend on your training. If you trained like a professional and had no more room to grow and 15 was the absolute max, epo wouldn't gain that much. If you still had a lot of room to grow and you just haven't trained to your potential due to time constraints or Injury, epo might help a ton.

That's just a guess. Maybe someone with more knowledge on the subject could say if im off track or not

It depends on your current blood values, not much on your training. A guy running 15:00 on 13. 0 of hemoglobin who rises his level to 17.X would benefit muche more than a guy who is currently at a level of 16.0 and rises it to 17.X . It seems so obvious.

It will also help you more over 5k if you're currently a guy with good 400 speed and a better 1500m than your 5k.