rekrunner wrote:
Andrew Wheating made an 8 second gain at the age of 23 in the 1500m — any thoughts there?
Wheating was clearly a MASSIVE talent moving up in distacne. The guy had made the Olympic team at 800. MUCH MUCH MUCH less suspicious.
rekrunner wrote:
Andrew Wheating made an 8 second gain at the age of 23 in the 1500m — any thoughts there?
Wheating was clearly a MASSIVE talent moving up in distacne. The guy had made the Olympic team at 800. MUCH MUCH MUCH less suspicious.
Progression of Abdelati Iguidir in the 1500m over the years:
https://i.ibb.co/k8nnKHG/Iguidir-Progression.jpg
It took him 10 years to change from 3:35 to 3:29 though the day when he got U20 IAAF championship medal his time was a worldwide junior record.
Of course Katir is doping. It wouldn't surprise me if Mohammed Gammoudi was the last great North African who wasn't on the sauce.
Who knows what percent improvement using EPO? Certainly enough to catapult an average elite runner to a medal contender in many cases. Since EPO can be life threatening, I don't foresee scientists conducting controlled experiments on 3:38 runners any time soon.
Juiced to the Gills wrote:
Of course Katir is doping. It wouldn't surprise me if Mohammed Gammoudi was the last great North African who wasn't on the sauce.
El Bakkali is here to remind you.
Before Gammoudi there was Rhadi Ben Abdesselam and Al Ghazi.
Emily Swatson wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Doping denial always finds a home on this site.
So you think that in order to address the doping problem it's OK to lie?
Dishonest cu.nts like you always find a home on this site.
Dishonest? I am completely frank about my doping views. You, on the other hand, are merely dense.
Bioenergetics for beginners wrote:
High hopes wrote:
He was a reasonably good athlete before his breakout races. He was likely going to the Olympics off the back of those performances anyway. There's every chance he's more of an Alan Webb than a doper - a guy who can occasionally run very well but chokes when it really matters.
I just can't think anyone dopes, with all the inherent risks, just to finish second or third in a couple of minor races (and the DL races are minor events in the grand scheme of sports) that nobody outside of T&F even cares about. If you're going to do it, you do it to win the big one and gain the real rewards that come from having an Olympic medal.
His performance improvement this year is suspect, just like Houlihan's in 2018 and look what happened there. But I'm hesitant to outright call the guy a doper
So does dope give ya more energy? An energy boost beyond human limits?
Or does that question make ya head hurt?
Jon Orange is back.
Bioenergetics for beginners. wrote:
unlogicalstronglivs wrote:
What's the connection between the fact that Coevett is a proved and constant liar and doping genial?
What's the connection between Coevett and Armstronglivs?
There is none. But I can spot a doping apologist at a hundred paces - and these threads are full of them - just like the sport.
restrunner wrote:
Bilbo Baggins the Fourth wrote:
Yep, Keino who was having a terrible season, collapsed in the 10,000m a couple of days before, was seriously ill in hospital, climbed out of his bed against doctor's advice and literally ran to the stadium and made the starting line with seconds to spare, then ran what many consider to be the equivalent of a sea-level 3:26 (in 1968!) and never broke 3:36 again, and was recently charged serious financial fraud (against young Kenyan athletes) but got off after corrupt Kenyan politicians intervened.
Proves so much.
Good to have you back, Coevett! What went wrong for you the last 10 days?
Who believes that Keino's time from Mexico was worth 9 seconds faster?
Well Jim Ryun has claimed that his Mexico run was his greatest ever performance, and he ran nearly 5 seconds slower than his WR (3:33) and was probably capable of 3:30 flat.
I didn't say I believed that Keino's Mexico run was worth 9 seconds faster at sea level. There is an old thread here in which if I recall correctly, several people make similar claims. There is also an article I might look for online that claimed that Kenio's run was better than El G's 3:26 WR.
However, whichever way you dice it, for Keino to literally climb out of a hospital bed in a Third World country quite notrious (still) as being a doper's haunt (hello Aouita and MakhDaddy), 2 days after collapsing, and run what was certainly the equivalent of the the then WR, by a man who never approached such a performance before or after - that's suspicious. Especially 150+ Kenyan doping busts later and the fact that Kenio was recently charged with embezzling funds intended for young athletes into his own bank account, and only got off after Kenyan politicians intervened.
You said that many consider Keino's Mexiko run worth 9 seconds faster, Coevett.
I don't think your Keino drivel has any credibility, Coevett.
Again, what has gone wrong for you in the last days, Coevett?
Armstronglivs wrote:
Emily Swatson wrote:
So you think that in order to address the doping problem it's OK to lie?
Dishonest cu.nts like you always find a home on this site.
Dishonest? I am completely frank about my doping views. You, on the other hand, are merely dense.
Nah. You lie to "prove" your views are correct. You are the dense one when you believe yourself to be smarter than the rest.
I am a fan of Katir's beauty and hope he will be back and better soon.
restrunner wrote:
You said that many consider Keino's Mexiko run worth 9 seconds faster, Coevett.
I don't think your Keino drivel has any credibility, Coevett.
Again, what has gone wrong for you in the last days, Coevett?
OK Rekruner, but why do you need to adopt a different but near identical username to abandon your usual 'cool, analytical, scientific' pretence of a persona?
An even more remarkable performance came a year later when Kip Keino ran 3:34.9 at high altitude to win the gold medal at the Mexico Olympics. Mexico City has an altitude of almost 7,400 feet (2,250m), and the best data suggests that lack of oxygen at that altitude should reduce aerobic power by about 10%. Now Keino was altitude adapted because he had spent his life in the highlands of Kenya, but adaptation only gets you so much. So if we are conservative and adjust his performance by 5% an estimated time just over 3:24 seems “possible”. Old school “point tables” from the 1960s and early 70s also suggest that the 5000m times run by Dibaba and also her world record holding sister equate to times under 3:50.
Good old Ventilo/Calculo always used to speak for many weirdos here, and here's what he had to say.
Keino was certainly in best training shape of his life as for the only time in his life he'd had been let off work duties for a few weeks to train full-time specifically for the games
his epic runs were the proof
he run exactly re-run at sea-level wouda been using above method
~ 3'27.90
& that's with fatigue in his legs of a near 10k, two 5ks & 1500 prelims & a supposed jog to stadium of ~ 1 mile when coach stuck in traffic en-route to 1500 final & then starting 1500 final with jog at the start, extra distance run on 1st bend, significant uneven pace & no drafting 700 - 1100 !!!
That's 3:27 in 1968 on 1968 shoes and tracks, and Ventolin clearly beleives he would have ran much faster if he had been 'let off work dutes', hadn't got 'fatigue in his legs' and ran to the stadium. He doesn't even mention the fact that Keino had dragged himself out of a hospital bed after collapsing a couple of days before.
There are MANY people on that thread and other threads on LetsRun that discuss the 'greatest ever 1500/Mile' performance that agree Ventolin is in the right ball park and that Keino's run at least compares with El G's 3:26, which would itself likely be something like 3:23 on the Tokyo track and in super spikes.
Bilbo Baggins the Fourth wrote:
restrunner wrote:
You said that many consider Keino's Mexiko run worth 9 seconds faster, Coevett.
I don't think your Keino drivel has any credibility, Coevett.
Again, what has gone wrong for you in the last days, Coevett?
OK Rekruner, but why do you need to adopt a different but near identical username to abandon your usual 'cool, analytical, scientific' pretence of a persona?
Sorry, “Bilbo” but you are wrong, again.
I’m only interested in this alleged tidal wave of scientific consensus that only EPO can deliver 9 second improvements for the 3:38 runner, in ways that legal training cannot.
OK, when someone uses venty as the main source for his argumentation it's the admission for not having a good one.
So Ryun, Tummler and Norpoth all would have run sub 3:30 at sea level?
rojo wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Andrew Wheating made an 8 second gain at the age of 23 in the 1500m — any thoughts there?
Wheating was clearly a MASSIVE talent moving up in distacne. The guy had made the Olympic team at 800. MUCH MUCH MUCH less suspicious.
This is the kind of energy and knowledge we need before expressing opinions based on gut feelings. 8 seconds can happen for many explainable non-doping reasons, and the progression itself is not a strong basis for suspicion. So do we think Katir is like Ramzi, or like Wheating? Why? Based on performance alone, or are there other explicit or implicit factors that make us suspicious?
Maybe closer to home, compare the similar progressions of “wejo” when he “sucked at 10K”, and Cathal Lombard. If in 2022, we have another unknown runner jumping from 30:14 to 28:06, after 5 years of competing at University, do we suspect that this gain can only be “entirely due to EPO”? I’m inclined to think, based on similar studies and performance gains, that whatever can be gained by EPO, can also be gained by hi-lo training, by moving to places like Flagstaff, combined with identifying and correcting problems with the previous training.
restrunner wrote:
OK, when someone uses venty as the main source for his argumentation it's the admission for not having a good one.
So Ryun, Tummler and Norpoth all would have run sub 3:30 at sea level?
Not speaking at all for “Bilbo’s” tales, but as a side note, what I appreciated from Ventolin was the effort to normalize different performances in order to make comparisons of different performances more meaningful. If someone runs in Lane 2 for 1200m, or if paces change from slow laps to fast laps, or if runners are drafted versus running alone, all of these things cost time. He would try to turn the pears, oranges, and bananas into apples in order to make an apples to apples comparison. These efforts to identify lost time often resulted in optimistic estimates about what athletes “coulda” run in a perfect race.
This was also necessary for his calculator, based on SPEED and ENDURANCE, which requires two comparable performances as input.
His bedside manner is another topic…
Emily Swatson wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Dishonest? I am completely frank about my doping views. You, on the other hand, are merely dense.
Nah. You lie to "prove" your views are correct. You are the dense one when you believe yourself to be smarter than the rest.
I don't think there is any doubt I am smarter than you are. I don't have to lie prove my views are correct. But you might.
The difference between a performance in altitude and at sea level is very much less than what is written in every table of comparison.
The best performance in altitude belongs to Ronald Kwemoi, an athlete I coached from when was junior, with 3'30"89, winning Kenyan Trials 2017 in Nairobi. At that time, Ronald was at his top shape, and in my opinion the difference with a performance at sea level could be around 3 seconds.
Also in longer distances, Kenyan athletes showed a big jump of quality in their competitions in altitude. For example, in 2020 Nicholas Kimeli won 5000m in Nairobi (Kip Keino meeting) in 13'08"32 when his PB at sea level was 12'51"78 (17" of difference), and the young Ethiopian Berihu Aregawi was second in 13'08"91 (this year won on the track of 560m in Zurich the DL final with 12'58"65, difference 10 seconds).
Still incredible is the very small difference in 10000m. The Trial this year saw the following result, compared with the PB of the athletes :
1- Geoffrey Kamworor 27'01"06 (PB at sea level 26'52"65) diff. - 8"41
2- Rodgers Chumo Kwemoi 27'05"51 (at sea level 26'55"36) diff. - 10"15
3- Weldon Kipkirui 27'24"73 (at sea level 27'28"05 this year) diff. + 3"32
4- Collins Koros 27'25"56 (at sea level 27'29"41this year) diff. + 3"85
5- Daniel Mataiko 27'27"98 (at sea level 27'03"94 this year) diff. - 24"04
All these data clearly show how much absurd are the table created before the Olympics 1968 in Mexico, that could only give some idea about the difference from sea level to altitude (for athletes training at sea level), not from altitude to sea level (athletes living and training in altitude).
If possible, this is also a further demonstration of how much scientists and researchers are FAR from what happens on the ground. Not knowing the training that best athletes do, that can clearly indicate how it's possible to reach, also in altitude, the above performances, they give invented percentages, based on their TOTAL IGNORANCE of athletics.
And, of course, IGNORANT PEOPLE like the most part of posters (and pseudo scientists, many working for WADA...) believe in stupidities that is very easy to unmask, knowing the REAL DATA.
If you are applying that to Jakob, then you have to apply that to Tim Cheruiyot as well. How do you feel about your strawman argument? Why do you not bring Tim in?
You are racist against all athletes that are white.
