Athletics, when doping is the default

Not only "improve their chances of success" but in many cases hit the jackpot. For many doping has been a game changer - these are the athletes who respond very well to PEDs. If they're good they become great...if they're great they become superhuman. Case in point with a few athletes: Marion Jones, everybody's sweetheart when she came out of college, won five freaking gold medals at Sydney (I believe that's a record). She was America's golden girl - the best of the best. Then came the drug bust with her involvement in BALCO using undetectable steroids ("The Clear") and even EPO as part of her cocktail of PEDs.

Then we have the heir apparent to El G, the great Moroccan miler in Rashid Ramzi. Double gold at Helsinki and the prestigious gold medal at Beijing. Though he "officially" ran for Bahrain he was a Moroccan, and the country of Morocco went crazy as they had a new hero to tout who kept the momentum going from the El G dynasty. But a year after that glorious Olympic victory, Ramzi tested positive for the high-octane blood booster CERA and his Kingdom came crumbling down.

And the great Kenyan miler Kiprop with all his Olympic & WC medals, claims to the 3rd fastest 1500 man ever, and who once said dopers should go to jail was busted for EP0 in an OOC test that he couldn't fanagel his way out of. How many young Kenyans aspiring to be like him were devastated by this? Hundreds? Thousands?

Funny thing is that if none of aforementioned athletes were ever busted for doping, very few would have questioned their performances (and if you did you'd be strongly criticized by many...think rekrunner). And if they didn't get busted, all we would have ever heard is: great athletes, super talented, hard workers, dedicated, gifted, special, great coaches, great training system, and so on and so forth.

I say great, dedicated, focused dopers!

There are people out there who actually believe Coleman's excuse on youtube.

Then I have no reason nor data to oblige me to revisit and modify my views about the various causes of elite male marathon performance. Once again, you are bringing nothing of value to the discussion, but only injecting unfounded negative pessimism.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Of course you won't find that data, because dopers don't typically agree to become research subjects into how their doping affects marathon performance, and doping manufacturers and suppliers aren't conducting publicly available research into how their products translate into performance gains in the marathon. So your guesswork can remain intact. And it can all only be educated guesswork at best. But I daresay you would think someone in a laboratory analysing a test tube somewhere is better placed to tell you what the weather is than you simply walking outside and taking a look for yourself.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I don't see how outstanding clean performances can beat the best doped performances

^This.

Even if doping helps only by a couple of percent, with many experts providing higher numbers, and even if only 44% at the top dope, as demonstrated in the only all-including doping study to date, the best clean athletes will almost always lose, and literally never ever get a world record.

The OP acts as if that's the fans' fault. In reality, it's the fault of the system that thrives on doping, and only provides lip service with a couple of exceptions here or there.

Here's my take wrote:

Funny thing is that if none of aforementioned athletes were ever busted for doping, very few would have questioned their performances (and if you did you'd be strongly criticized by many...think rekrunner). And if they didn't get busted, all we would have ever heard is: great athletes, super talented, hard workers, dedicated, gifted, special, great coaches, great training system, and so on and so forth.

Agreed - cases in point are Jakob and Hassan right now, and in part even Coleman and Wilson.

HRE wrote:

Aaleby wrote:

A great post. Fully agree 100%. One thing tho; Cycling cant be compared with anything else. The strain of completing Tour de France is insane. To think a clean cyclist would be able to outrun a field full with filthy cheaters day out, day in would be a new form for naivety. In Athletics you dont get the same strain over a long period of time. That difference is huge doping wise.

Yeah, I know there are differences among sports. But the idea that I need to dope if I want to be competitive because that's what so many others do is pretty much universal. I know a guy who walked away from a professional baseball career because he knew chemicals were going to be needed to go further than he had.

Scuse me? How TF does any drug help a professional baseball player? That is utterly ridiculous. The mindset of this belief is like a religion, completely irrational.

The OP was not saying it is the fans' fault, but questioning how you can be considered a fan of the sport when every success is considered a failure.

casual obsever wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I don't see how outstanding clean performances can beat the best doped performances

^This.

Even if doping helps only by a couple of percent, with many experts providing higher numbers, and even if only 44% at the top dope, as demonstrated in the only all-including doping study to date, the best clean athletes will almost always lose, and literally never ever get a world record.

The OP acts as if that's the fans' fault. In reality, it's the fault of the system that thrives on doping, and only provides lip service with a couple of exceptions here or there.

That is a funny thing. So you suggest: - It is very few who question performances of athletes not busted for doping? - It is very many who would strongly criticize these very few? When I think the number of threads and comments I've seen, of not busted runners, like Rupp, Farah, El G, the Dibabas, Bolt, Paula, Ritz, Kara, some 90+% of East Africans, etc., it doesn't strike me as true that "very few" question their performances. If it is very few, then they are a very noisy few. And in this forum, it also doesn't strike me as true that very many are stepping up to strongly criticize these frequently expressed doubts about the performances of non-busted runners. If there are very many, it must be a silent majority.

Here's my take wrote:

Funny thing is that if none of aforementioned athletes were ever busted for doping, very few would have questioned their performances (and if you did you'd be strongly criticized by many...think rekrunner). And if they didn't get busted, all we would have ever heard is: great athletes, super talented, hard workers, dedicated, gifted, special, great coaches, great training system, and so on and so forth.

casual obsever wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I don't see how outstanding clean performances can beat the best doped performances

^This.

Even if doping helps only by a couple of percent, with many experts providing higher numbers, and even if only 44% at the top dope, as demonstrated in the only all-including doping study to date, the best clean athletes will almost always lose, and literally never ever get a world record.

The OP acts as if that's the fans' fault. In reality, it's the fault of the system that thrives on doping, and only provides lip service with a couple of exceptions here or there.

You know what the main problem is? You dont have a clue, its all based on your gut feeling. I dont know much about training, but I do know that there are 7,7 billion people living on this earth. 7,7 billion individuals, each with their own mix of genes. What I also know is this; human beings strives for knowledge. Thats what brings the world forward in so many aspects. Better knowledge makes greater athletes. A WR from the eighties can for sure be beaten by a clean athlete of today with an evolved understand of training.

YOU simple dont have a clue wether its possible to beat the WR as a clean athlete. Its an assumptions based on no facts what so ever. In Norway we have Magnus Carlsen, maybe the greatest chess player in all time. From a country with 5 mill ppl where litteraly noone plays chess. It should simple not be possible. Amazing people can arise from anywhere.

Point being; the world aint black/white. You just cant assume that those with the greatest talent always choose the easy way aka cheating. Whats even worse then the blatant assumptions is the arrogance and lazyness that backs it all up. When Jakob can show steady progress from he was 11 years old it doesnt matter. You guys couldnt care less as you cant be bothered to think. Throwing out blind accusations is all you can.

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty"

Missed out the last part:

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty"

Strange, one more try:

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty" What makes us stand away from savages.

PS; irritating as hell that I have to write all this in English as my ability to argue decrease with 30% atleast.

Aaleby wrote:

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty"

That is in a court of law. That’s not really about the truth. The truth doesn’t care about such things. The truth is just the truth.

Naive in Norway wrote:

Aaleby wrote:

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty"

That is in a court of law. That’s not really about the truth. The truth doesn’t care about such things. The truth is just the truth.

You know what the problem is?

The truth is in the eye of the beholder.

jeezus freakin christ wrote:

HRE wrote:

Yeah, I know there are differences among sports. But the idea that I need to dope if I want to be competitive because that's what so many others do is pretty much universal. I know a guy who walked away from a professional baseball career because he knew chemicals were going to be needed to go further than he had.

Scuse me? How TF does any drug help a professional baseball player? That is utterly ridiculous. The mindset of this belief is like a religion, completely irrational.

You need to read pro baseball player Jose Canseco's autobiography, which he interestingly called, "Juiced". He admitted doping and claimed 85% of top players were also doping. You seemed to have missed the doping scandal that hit baseball a few years ago and included many top players like Bonds and McGuire.

rekrunner wrote:

Then I have no reason nor data to oblige me to revisit and modify my views about the various causes of elite male marathon performance.

Once again, you are bringing nothing of value to the discussion, but only injecting unfounded negative pessimism.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Of course you won't find that data, because dopers don't typically agree to become research subjects into how their doping affects marathon performance, and doping manufacturers and suppliers aren't conducting publicly available research into how their products translate into performance gains in the marathon. So your guesswork can remain intact. And it can all only be educated guesswork at best. But I daresay you would think someone in a laboratory analysing a test tube somewhere is better placed to tell you what the weather is than you simply walking outside and taking a look for yourself.

Your response is redundant; as I said, you have no reason to change your mind about anything because you are completely dependent on research data which will not be available. Dopers and doping manufacturers don't provide university research papers on their activities. Your misconceptions remain safe.

Aaleby wrote:

Naive in Norway wrote:

That is in a court of law. That’s not really about the truth. The truth doesn’t care about such things. The truth is just the truth.

You know what the problem is?

The truth is in the eye of the beholder.

That could well be your problem.

Aaleby wrote:

Strange, one more try:

"The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty" What makes us stand away from savages.

PS; irritating as hell that I have to write all this in English as my ability to argue decrease with 30% atleast.

Well, you’ve got at least one English speaker (American) on your side

I find all of these doper skeptics to be a tiresome lot and just simply ignore them. I advise that you do the same.

Congrats on the performances of your fine track and skiing athletes.

Armstronglivs wrote:

jeezus freakin christ wrote:

Scuse me? How TF does any drug help a professional baseball player? That is utterly ridiculous. The mindset of this belief is like a religion, completely irrational.

You need to read pro baseball player Jose Canseco's autobiography, which he interestingly called, "Juiced". He admitted doping and claimed 85% of top players were also doping. You seemed to have missed the doping scandal that hit baseball a few years ago and included many top players like Bonds and McGuire.

I don't need to read anything. I haven't missed anything. It's a doping culture, I know, I don't need to be told that. But you haven't answered my question.

jeezus freakin christ wrote:

Scuse me? How TF does any drug help a professional baseball player? That is utterly ridiculous. The mindset of this belief is like a religion, completely irrational.

I gather you aren't really big on following baseball. Do you really not think that being stronger helps you to hit or throw a ball harder and farther? Drugs and baseball have a long history together. If drugs don't help baseball players why would guys like Maguire, Bonds, Sosa, Canseco, etc. have been taking them? The guy I knew was told by people in the organization he played for that he needed to start juicing if he wanted to keep climbing the ladder.