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:
Since 3 months 16 seasons are the subject: 1964 - 1979. Every such sequence includes 4 Olympic Games (without some "Corona issue").
For you 10 medals at 5 Games is more than 12 medals at 3 Games: Armstrong.
If you include women's events, than NZ has won 12 medals - I knew you proudly will come with this women's medal.
It's a span of years. You only refer to seasons so you can drop the Rome Olympics and reduce the medal tally.
You are so deluded, it's hurting.
1936 - 1976, NZ has won 6 Olympic Golds. 1973 - 1983, Kenya has won 0 Olympic Golds. Absolutely correct, and extremely helpful. A statistic a la Armstrong.
You've posted over 10 million words here defending dopers and the crazy idea that doping doesn't work. And you haven't convinced a single person.
That's not just a delusion of grandeur, that's straight up mental illness.
More false conclusions. I don't defend doping and I believe some doping can "work".
I cannot help what people (what does Armstronglivs call them -- Lilliputians?) are convinced by. I will nevertheless bring facts and data into these discussions. As we have seen, Gulliver doesn't even know how to search for facts, and will argue for months even after having them.
It's a span of years. You only refer to seasons so you can drop the Rome Olympics and reduce the medal tally.
You are so deluded, it's hurting.
1936 - 1976, NZ has won 6 Olympic Golds. 1973 - 1983, Kenya has won 0 Olympic Golds. Absolutely correct, and extremely helpful. A statistic a la Armstrong.
That isn't my statistic. You are obsessed with this silly parlour game. But Kenya's doping violations far outstrip its medals these days. You don't have much to say about that.
You've posted over 10 million words here defending dopers and the crazy idea that doping doesn't work. And you haven't convinced a single person.
That's not just a delusion of grandeur, that's straight up mental illness.
More false conclusions. I don't defend doping and I believe some doping can "work".
I cannot help what people (what does Armstronglivs call them -- Lilliputians?) are convinced by. I will nevertheless bring facts and data into these discussions. As we have seen, Gulliver doesn't even know how to search for facts, and will argue for months even after having them.
But we know that EPO doesn't work on E African runners. And when they get caught they are innocent victims of an unfair system.
1936 - 1976, NZ has won 6 Olympic Golds. 1973 - 1983, Kenya has won 0 Olympic Golds. Absolutely correct, and extremely helpful. A statistic a la Armstrong.
That isn't my statistic. You are obsessed with this silly parlour game. But Kenya's doping violations far outstrip its medals these days. You don't have much to say about that.
It's not my game, it's your game.
95% of this stupid conversations is because of your childish denying of pure facts. What an unbelievable fight until you finally accepted that Kenyans have set 10 WRs in the discussed period. Same with the Gold medals. If you would have some interest in the subject, you would immediately agree that Kenya was extremely successful already before 1980. Then this could be used to further discuss the subject.
I don't believe - like you - that any Kenyan success is the result of doping. But I have never denied or defended doping in any way like you constantly claim - liar.
That isn't my statistic. You are obsessed with this silly parlour game. But Kenya's doping violations far outstrip its medals these days. You don't have much to say about that.
It's not my game, it's your game.
95% of this stupid conversations is because of your childish denying of pure facts. What an unbelievable fight until you finally accepted that Kenyans have set 10 WRs in the discussed period. Same with the Gold medals. If you would have some interest in the subject, you would immediately agree that Kenya was extremely successful already before 1980. Then this could be used to further discuss the subject.
I don't believe - like you - that any Kenyan success is the result of doping. But I have never denied or defended doping in any way like you constantly claim - liar.
Your fixation on Kenyan records before 1980 is irrelevant to the subject of the thread. It is a deflection on your part to avoid the fact Kenya has produced yet another high profile doper with a runner who has for years lived and trained there. He has joined the very long list of runners busted for doping who either are Kenyan or are based in Kenya. What Kenyan athletes did before 1980 has no bearing on that.
The subject of the thread is a doping New Zealander.
Who has lived and trained in Kenya for years and has so joined the constant stream of athletes busted from that country. To be a runner - of any nationality - in Kenya is do as the Romans do - dope to the gills.
95% of this stupid conversations is because of your childish denying of pure facts. What an unbelievable fight until you finally accepted that Kenyans have set 10 WRs in the discussed period. Same with the Gold medals. If you would have some interest in the subject, you would immediately agree that Kenya was extremely successful already before 1980. Then this could be used to further discuss the subject.
I don't believe - like you - that any Kenyan success is the result of doping. But I have never denied or defended doping in any way like you constantly claim - liar.
Your fixation on Kenyan records before 1980 is irrelevant to the subject of the thread. It is a deflection on your part to avoid the fact Kenya has produced yet another high profile doper with a runner who has for years lived and trained there. He has joined the very long list of runners busted for doping who either are Kenyan or are based in Kenya. What Kenyan athletes did before 1980 has no bearing on that.
Absolutely no fixation on Kenyan records before 1980 on my side.
I don't believe that all of the Kenyan success is just the result of doping. Some have argued that their success just has started with the "EPO era". But Kenya was already successful right after they started to compete internationally in the mid 1950s. Shortly after Kenya has become independent in 1964, Kenya immediately was a big force in men's track distance running. With an enormous amount of statistical data, I just have shown that indeed Kenya was the most successful nation in the period 1964 - 1980 in men's track distance running. You have denied any single one of those easily veryfiable statistics to an enormous amount.
Kenya already was extremely successful before 1980. What could have been the reason for this? Just doping? Or maybe not everything which was written about Kenyan running success in the last six decades was nonsense? This should be discussed. Not statistical facts which could be checked in minutes (months in your case).
You've posted over 10 million words here defending dopers and the crazy idea that doping doesn't work. And you haven't convinced a single person.
That's not just a delusion of grandeur, that's straight up mental illness.
More false conclusions. I don't defend doping and I believe some doping can "work".
I cannot help what people (what does Armstronglivs call them -- Lilliputians?) are convinced by. I will nevertheless bring facts and data into these discussions. As we have seen, Gulliver doesn't even know how to search for facts, and will argue for months even after having them.
LOL - elegant change of the statement. El Loony said "defending dopers" and not "defend doping". The former is your routine, and the latter you do thusly indirectly.
And then you argue that you "believe some doping can "work" - but of course not Epo and nothing in the marathon, amirite?
More false conclusions. I don't defend doping and I believe some doping can "work".
I cannot help what people (what does Armstronglivs call them -- Lilliputians?) are convinced by. I will nevertheless bring facts and data into these discussions. As we have seen, Gulliver doesn't even know how to search for facts, and will argue for months even after having them.
LOL - elegant change of the statement. El Loony said "defending dopers" and not "defend doping". The former is your routine, and the latter you do thusly indirectly.
And then you argue that you "believe some doping can "work" - but of course not Epo and nothing in the marathon, amirite?
More false conclusions. I don't defend doping and I believe some doping can "work".
I cannot help what people (what does Armstronglivs call them -- Lilliputians?) are convinced by. I will nevertheless bring facts and data into these discussions. As we have seen, Gulliver doesn't even know how to search for facts, and will argue for months even after having them.
LOL - elegant change of the statement. El Loony said "defending dopers" and not "defend doping". The former is your routine, and the latter you do thusly indirectly.
And then you argue that you "believe some doping can "work" - but of course not Epo and nothing in the marathon, amirite?
"doper" means many things to many people. According to the WADA Code, you can be considered a "doper" by sending emails. You can even be cleared of "doping" (Getzmann, Lawson), but the WADA Code still considers them "dopers". I will defend Getzmann, and technically that counts as defending a "doper". I may try to bring relevant facts into a discussion, but the act of doping with banned substances and/or methods with the express intent to cheat is not something I defend.
Regarding EPO and/or the marathon, I will always listen to sound arguments about when EPO is supposed to "work".
It would certainly explain why altitude based athletes, with naturally stimulated EPO production, generally excel in such large quantites with such high quality in distance events, without the need for taking synthetic EPO.
There doesn't seem to be any science on the marathon, and I'm similarly unaware of any good examples of sea level athletes running fast marathons on EPO, or any other drug.
But someone can always try to make a sound case with data and logic without creating too many assumptions.
LOL - elegant change of the statement. El Loony said "defending dopers" and not "defend doping". The former is your routine, and the latter you do thusly indirectly.
And then you argue that you "believe some doping can "work" - but of course not Epo and nothing in the marathon, amirite?
"doper" means many things to many people. According to the WADA Code, you can be considered a "doper" by sending emails. You can even be cleared of "doping" (Getzmann, Lawson), but the WADA Code still considers them "dopers". I will defend Getzmann, and technically that counts as defending a "doper". I may try to bring relevant facts into a discussion, but the act of doping with banned substances and/or methods with the express intent to cheat is not something I defend.
Regarding EPO and/or the marathon, I will always listen to sound arguments about when EPO is supposed to "work".
It would certainly explain why altitude based athletes, with naturally stimulated EPO production, generally excel in such large quantites with such high quality in distance events, without the need for taking synthetic EPO.
There doesn't seem to be any science on the marathon, and I'm similarly unaware of any good examples of sea level athletes running fast marathons on EPO, or any other drug.
But someone can always try to make a sound case with data and logic without creating too many assumptions.
Well, that clears that up. EPO doesn't help marathon runners. And he has yet to find anyone who has doped "with the express intent to cheat". Most are only sending emails.
Well, that clears that up. EPO doesn't help marathon runners. And he has yet to find anyone who has doped "with the express intent to cheat". Most are only sending emails.
Apparently Zane did.
As I said, I'm prepared to listen to sound arguments based on data and observations. But this requires an ability to search for accurate information. I just recall your failure to perform a 5 minute search for the 10 Kenyan records, insisting for months that it can only be 2, or 4, or finally 6, and then stomping your feet because no one was giving you the right answer, even though someone did three months ago.
Well, that clears that up. EPO doesn't help marathon runners. And he has yet to find anyone who has doped "with the express intent to cheat". Most are only sending emails.
Apparently Zane did.
As I said, I'm prepared to listen to sound arguments based on data and observations. But this requires an ability to search for accurate information. I just recall your failure to perform a 5 minute search for the 10 Kenyan records, insisting for months that it can only be 2, or 4, or finally 6, and then stomping your feet because no one was giving you the right answer, even though someone did three months ago.
You don't construct arguments; you simply brag about how well you construct arguments. You are also wrong.
As I said, I'm prepared to listen to sound arguments based on data and observations. But this requires an ability to search for accurate information. I just recall your failure to perform a 5 minute search for the 10 Kenyan records, insisting for months that it can only be 2, or 4, or finally 6, and then stomping your feet because no one was giving you the right answer, even though someone did three months ago.
You don't construct arguments; you simply brag about how well you construct arguments. You are also wrong.
This doesn't look like a sound argument based on data and observations, but I expect nothing relevant from someone who cannot successfully perform a 5-minute internet search, and instead makes himself look like an ignorant fool for months.