The article was initially entiteld, "Zane Robertston!!!!" but we changed it to make it more descriptive. Here is our article on his bust and fake excuses (he said he went to a hospital for a COvid-19 vaccine but they gave him EPO instead) which points out that in 2016 he expressed frutation at the amount of doping in the sport:
There was never any reason for you to wait for me. You had the information three months ago. The real question is why you denied it for so long.
That isn't the real question. It never is with you. It is why has Kenya become one of the worst dopers in the sport and can that be changed?
Sorry -- I just can't get past your collosal failure to perform a simple search for basic information from the 1960s and 1970s. Plus, the whole time you already had the information you demanded, but could not remember, nor find for yourself with a 5 minute search.
Now you want to pretend you are old enough to be knowledgeable about what was going on in the 1960s and 1970s, after your failure to actually know what was going on the 1960s and 1970s?
The real question is, where is your shame, after such a lengthy humiliating display of incompetence and ignorance?
Apart from the UK, all over Europe metric distances were run. Even at the Commonwealth Games for the last time in 66 imperial distances were run.
The last WRs in the 3 Miles and the 6 Miles which were not intermediate times, were set in 65.
Not old enough? I know that books and statistics are something unknown to you.
Europe wasn't dominant in the sport in those years (outside the Finns in the late twenties). As I explained, it was the English-speaking world that dominated distance-running through to the '60's. The imperial records set in the mid-sixties lasted because they were very good records - set by athletes like Ryun and Clarke (whose metric records weren't similarly not beaten until well into the seventies). But you need to have some experience of the sport in that era in order to recognize that. You don't. You are unable see beyond your very limited personal horizon.
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
Maybe it's time to get this thread back on track. This thread is about Zane Robertson -- a New Zealander subject to New Zealand testing.
New Zealand is currently facing serious questions from the AIU for their lack of testing. Maybe that's why Zane thought he could get away with it. New Zealand might become the next Category A country most at risk of doping.
If we are raising questions about Kenyan doping between 1964-1979, wouldn't it also be fair to raise the same questions for New Zealand between 1961-1976?
Athletics NZ issued with “please explain” letter by sport’s watchdog agency after failing to meet international testing standards in its anti-doping programme.
Indeed -- even New Zealand recognizes the extra financial burden of becoming a Category A country:
"If Athletics NZ were to be listed as a category A federation, it would be hugely embarrassing for New Zealand’s international reputation as a leader in the sports integrity space and create a number of financial and administrative headaches."
That isn't the real question. It never is with you. It is why has Kenya become one of the worst dopers in the sport and can that be changed?
Sorry -- I just can't get past your collosal failure to perform a simple search for basic information from the 1960s and 1970s. Plus, the whole time you already had the information you demanded, but could not remember, nor find for yourself with a 5 minute search.
Now you want to pretend you are old enough to be knowledgeable about what was going on in the 1960s and 1970s, after your failure to actually know what was going on the 1960s and 1970s?
The real question is, where is your shame, after such a lengthy humiliating display of incompetence and ignorance?
What you can't get past is the question I raised above.
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
Maybe it's time to get this thread back on track. This thread is about Zane Robertson -- a New Zealander subject to New Zealand testing.
New Zealand is currently facing serious questions from the AIU for their lack of testing. Maybe that's why Zane thought he could get away with it. New Zealand might become the next Category A country most at risk of doping.
If we are raising questions about Kenyan doping between 1964-1979, wouldn't it also be fair to raise the same questions for New Zealand between 1961-1976?
Europe wasn't dominant in the sport in those years (outside the Finns in the late twenties). As I explained, it was the English-speaking world that dominated distance-running through to the '60's. The imperial records set in the mid-sixties lasted because they were very good records - set by athletes like Ryun and Clarke (whose metric records weren't similarly not beaten until well into the seventies). But you need to have some experience of the sport in that era in order to recognize that. You don't. You are unable see beyond your very limited personal horizon.
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
As you are a propagandist for Kenyan sport I can rely on you to misrepresent everything about running.
This post was edited 41 seconds after it was posted.
Europe wasn't dominant in the sport in those years (outside the Finns in the late twenties). As I explained, it was the English-speaking world that dominated distance-running through to the '60's. The imperial records set in the mid-sixties lasted because they were very good records - set by athletes like Ryun and Clarke (whose metric records weren't similarly not beaten until well into the seventies). But you need to have some experience of the sport in that era in order to recognize that. You don't. You are unable see beyond your very limited personal horizon.
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
Any record lasts until it's been broken. Beyond you, I know.
The last 3 Miles record lasted for 1 year, the last 6 Miles record for less than 3 weeks - until there were much faster intermediate times in metric races. For you: "they lasted". All those damn facts...
Those records were much weaker than the metric records. All the big european meetings (Zurich, Oslo, Stockholm and many more) have had metric distances.
I have to correct an earlier mistake which I did: the 880y record was not always behind the 800m record (Snell, Ryun).
Any record lasts until it's been broken. Beyond you, I know.
What an unbelievable stupid comment, even for you.
You said those records were strong, that's why they "lasted".
Those records were weak and they were beaten very soon even by intermediate times in longer distances.
Your contribution to this forum: giving from informations again and again and denying any corrections.
Sorry -- I just can't get past your collosal failure to perform a simple search for basic information from the 1960s and 1970s. Plus, the whole time you already had the information you demanded, but could not remember, nor find for yourself with a 5 minute search.
Now you want to pretend you are old enough to be knowledgeable about what was going on in the 1960s and 1970s, after your failure to actually know what was going on the 1960s and 1970s?
The real question is, where is your shame, after such a lengthy humiliating display of incompetence and ignorance?
What you can't get past is the question I raised above.
Can't you see this isn't just a one-off failure but permeates all your posts on all topics? You don't back them up with sources, because you cannot even use a search function.
Maybe this explains why you come across as both uninformed and gullible -- you cannot find out information for yourself, so you rely on others to do your homework, and then tell you what they found and what it means, and you believe what you are told because you don't really know otherwise.
How can you fail so badly to know which records were set in the 1960s and 1970s, for months even after you were given all the information, and then pretend you are old enough to be an expert on that era, because you lived it? It's just no credible. It never was.
What you can't get past is the question I raised above.
Can't you see this isn't just a one-off failure but permeates all your posts on all topics? You don't back them up with sources, because you cannot even use a search function.
Maybe this explains why you come across as both uninformed and gullible -- you cannot find out information for yourself, so you rely on others to do your homework, and then tell you what they found and what it means, and you believe what you are told because you don't really know otherwise.
How can you fail so badly to know which records were set in the 1960s and 1970s, for months even after you were given all the information, and then pretend you are old enough to be an expert on that era, because you lived it? It's just no credible. It never was.
You aren't self aware to realise that your responses here are merely a tantrum. I don't argue with a tantrum.
Any record lasts until it's been broken. Beyond you, I know.
What an unbelievable stupid comment, even for you.
You said those records were strong, that's why they "lasted".
Those records were weak and they were beaten very soon even by intermediate times in longer distances.
Your contribution to this forum: giving from informations again and again and denying any corrections.
Your dismissing imperial records - because Kenyans didn't break any, despite running those distances - is what remains "incredibly stupid". But you don't have much to say about their current achievements, which is the doping records they are setting.
Maybe it's time to get this thread back on track. This thread is about Zane Robertson -- a New Zealander subject to New Zealand testing.
New Zealand is currently facing serious questions from the AIU for their lack of testing. Maybe that's why Zane thought he could get away with it. New Zealand might become the next Category A country most at risk of doping.
If we are raising questions about Kenyan doping between 1964-1979, wouldn't it also be fair to raise the same questions for New Zealand between 1961-1976?
So much obsession with how many world records Kenyans set before 1980. That a country with the fraction of Kenya's population set more world records by more runners in an equivalent amount of time - before 1976 - (and with more Olympic medals) shows what a fatuous and irrelevant point it is.
And now over the issue of testing, that New Zealand is being put in the company of one of the worst countries for running doping on the planet shows how far the insanity extends on this thread.
Coming here reminds me of Gulliver's experience on meeting the Lilliputians. You are such little people.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Comparing New Zealand to Kenya is pretty desperate. Kenya has more drug busts in a month than New Zealand has had in its history.
Pretty hard to have any busts when you don't test. As matter of fact, downright impossible.
Old 'thick as a brick' is back. It wasn't claimed that NZ didn't test but that the number of tests (in one year only) was below what was expected. NZ Athletics explained the reason for this was the country was dealing with widespread Covid.
But tell me about all the NZ runners busted for doping in the country's history - a whole two - and I'll tell you about Kenyan busts in a month.
