What Nordas' defenders here don't really get is that if an athlete is a subject of serious doping speculation - as TL has shown - in a sport in which there is far more doping than can be caught then the debate is already lost. He is no longer trusted to be clean, regardless of what his fans say.
-
36
-
it is double threshold bro wrote:
objectiveobserver wrote:
I don´t think he has been in the system since his teens. I think he started with the Ingebrigtsens in 2019 or 2020. Does someone know exactly when?
But it possibly takes some years to accustom to this kind of training. So the benefits will come later.
Per the words of Nordas in the LRC interview:
“…it’s also correct that I started as a half marathon runner when I joined the group back in 2014, that was the main goal, just running half marathons locally.”
And elsewhere in the interview:
“…I have been working this hard for 10 years”If he was working this hard for ten years then how is it that virtually all his improvement came in the last year, as shown by his 8 second jump in his best 1500 time - from mediocre to world-beating?
62 -
it is double threshold bro wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Gee, I wonder how he does that, when most of them will be doped?
You tell us. What is the protocol?
I’m approaching it from the other direction, analyzing the information provided, to see if it has a chance of making sense. I would hope to analytically parse the supposedly ‘relatively new’ ‘double threshold’ revelation, but I doubt that can be intelligently and appreciatively done on this board without it, sadly, getting mucked up and trampled on by the likes of the voluminous, less analytical discourse on this forum.
10 -
it is double threshold bro wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Gee, I wonder how he does that, when most of them will be doped?
You tell us. What is the protocol?
It is, how does an athlete you claim is "clean" finish faster in the 1500 than naturally faster runners, some of whom will likely be doped?
11 -
it is double threshold bro wrote:
it is double threshold bro wrote:
You tell us. What is the protocol?
I’m approaching it from the other direction, analyzing the information provided, to see if it has a chance of making sense. I would hope to analytically parse the supposedly ‘relatively new’ ‘double threshold’ revelation, but I doubt that can be intelligently and appreciatively done on this board without it, sadly, getting mucked up and trampled on by the likes of the voluminous, less analytical discourse on this forum.
What "makes sense" is that his sudden massive improvement is the result of mid-career doping - like Houlihan.
11 -
You apparently believe and repeat the sport is dirty and corrupt to the core, and drugs are the answer as to how one makes a worlds final. So what is it that separates those on the podium from the others in the race?
00 -
it is double threshold bro wrote:
it is double threshold bro wrote:
You tell us. What is the protocol?
I’m approaching it from the other direction, analyzing the information provided, to see if it has a chance of making sense. I would hope to analytically parse the supposedly ‘relatively new’ ‘double threshold’ revelation, but I doubt that can be intelligently and appreciatively done on this board without it, sadly, getting mucked up and trampled on by the likes of the voluminous, less analytical discourse on this forum.
As an example of the latter, just look at the voluminous (currently 38 pages) thread discussing how to do the new whiz bang ‘mult-threshold’ training on low volume. One of the very first takeaways, when looking at the ‘Norwegian Double Threshold’ system, is basically, how to conduct BIG volume without breaking down. By its very nature, it is not an optimal training system for optimizing low-volume training.
00 -
Nick Kipleri wrote:
it is double threshold bro wrote:
Did you read what Nordas actually said,
“Gjert said that I have been going this far and if you’re this far just give it two more years. He guaranteed me the results will come just give it at least two more years and he guaranteed me.”
Does the not “overcomplicated” rationale you provided line up with what Narve actually said?
So does he mean the results are going to come in 2025?
Guys did he mean that he needs two more years starting from 2023 or the interview was actually older?
01 -
Nick Kipleri wrote:
Nick Kipleri wrote:
So does he mean the results are going to come in 2025?
Guys did he mean that he needs two more years starting from 2023 or the interview was actually older?
C’mon man, I suggest reading/listening to the interview, and looking at the date of the interview. And is it not possible to extrapolate that ‘within’ two years is sufficient for ‘guaranteed in two years’?
The ‘precision’ of “guaranteeing” it working in (or within) two years is ‘curious’, no?
10 -
EDIT: Actually he said at least two more years, rather than within two years; sorry about that.
00 -
objectiveobserver wrote:
I´m surprised that you THL as one of the serious posters here now begin to accuse specific athletes of doping. I´m also surprised that John Wesley Harding is doing the same.
I am never accusing named athletes of doping and this is for 2 reasons:
1. I can´t know with certainty that an athlete is doping. I think it is the same with you and all other posters here.
2. An athlete CAN´T PROVE THAT HE IS NOT DOPING SO IT IS UNFAIR TO ACCUSE HIM.
-------------------------
When this is said I will, however, try to put your accusations into context (AND REMEMBER I AM NOT ACCUSING ANYONE OF DOPING).
You compare Nordaas to Shelby Houlihan. BUT HAVE YOU EVER SCRUTINIZED HOULIHAN´S AMERICAN TEAM MATES´ IMPROVEMENTS (NEITHER THE TEAM MATES NOR THE TRAINER HAVE EVER BLAMED HOULIHAN FOR HER DOPING OFFENCE). Don´t you think that would be more relevant?
Houlihan´s close training partner Karissa Schweizer improved with 8.5 sec in the 1500m from 2019 to 2020 and with more than 17 seconds in the 5000m from 2018 to 2019 and with further almost 19 sec to 2020.. In 2021 and 2022 she ran much slower. (She was one of my favorites).
Mo Ahmed improved in his high twenties with almost 11 seconds in the 5000m from 2019 to 2020.
Grant Fisher improved in the 5000m with about 15.5 sec from 2021 to 2022. This year he has lost his good shape.
These 5000m improvements seems to be more dramatic than the 10 sec explosion Nordaas according to you have made in the 5000m from last year.
Disclaimer: As in every serious "scientific" investigation I will declare that I have no relation to any of the parties. I origin from a Nordic country other than Norway but have lived in the south of Europe for many years.
Karissa Schweizer’s progression occurred in 2019-20. First 2 years on a pro team along with the advent of super spikes. She also ran her 5,000 PBs in the ‘19 Worlds semis and finals. Her next jump was in a glorified time trial in 2020. Most would not call that initial PB run her utter maximum. Her 4:06->4:00 1500 improvement was pre to post super spikes and her PB was from July 2018 after a collegiate season that included a 5K/10K double at Nationals.
She’s definitely not above suspicion but her progression is far more explainable than Nordas’.Mo Ahmed I don’t want to delve too deep into but you know the super spikes effect plus clearly 2019 was a breakthrough year for him even if he didn’t hit a super fast race until 2020. That being said he ran 13:01 in 2016 so we are talking about maybe 5-7 seconds improvement in a 5k not 11.
You also are acting like injuries/off years are impossibilities. Or that Nordas has made only a 10 second improvement in the 5,000 when we all reasonably expect him to be in 12:50-55 shape.
36 -
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
Some have invoked Mo Katir, but Shelby is the correct answer and the similarities are undeniable. Once you see it, you can not unsee it. To whit:
Misplaced Early-Career Focus: Both started with an event far from their ultimate home. Shelby was an 800m runner, Narve was messing around with Half Marathons/10Ks early on.Age: Shelby was age 25 in her breakthrough season, Narve is 24 but turning 25 in a month. These are late ages for such a breakthrough in the 1500.
Early Pro Career/Background: Both were mildly successful 5,000m runners at age 22-23 with a coach they'd had for years. Shelby ran ~15:00 in 2016 and 2017 and made two global finals but was not competitive in her races on the DL/World level. Narve ran 13:16, missing out on global finals, and was not competitive in his races on the DL/World level. They had improved to this level, but seemingly stagnated.
Coaches: Both Gjert and Jerry Schumacher are ferociously loyal to their system (my way or the highway), and believers in very high volume relative to their athlete's event. They're of course both Western coaches with a track record of success, and to the point of these breakthroughs not involved in any athlete ever busted. However, both had an athlete show up as "Likely Doping" in the Fancy Bears hack (Jager and Henrik).
"Found New Event in the 1500": Both broke through in the 1500 after semi-mediocrity in the 5000, flashing huge kicks that stood out vs. the competition while setting massive PBs. Narve 3:36 to 3:29 and a medal. Shelby 4:03 to 3:57 with a huge kick in multiple DLs. Both went from also-rans on the DL to contenders for the win.
The Myth of the New Event Thesis: Sure both had newfound success at 1500 in their breakthrough year, but it wasn't merely finding their event. Nordas just advanced in the gauntlet 5,000 prelim on less than one day's rest as numerous fresher sub-13 runners got bounced. Shelby set an American record and ran 14:33 for the 5K in 2018. Both athletes made gigantic strides and would have been factors in their old event of the 5,000 had they stuck with it as primary event. We can reject the new event notion.
Explanations Behind Their Success: Both credited the accumulation of hard work most of all. Otherwise, they'd talk about marginal improvements in diet, more altitude, slightly more mileage and making their coach's system work better for themselves. Narve has talked about not feeling pressured to run with Jakob, more Gjert focus. There was no talk of anything radically different being done from one season to the next or overcoming major injuries etc. This is unlike a Mo Katir (younger, got a new coach, finally had support, affected by pandemic etc.) or Ciara Mageean (injuries, new coach etc.) for a couple of examples.
Conclusion: There is probably more I am missing, and I want to be clear I don't 100% know/think Nordas is doping or anything like that. But I think if you examine every aspect of it, there is no more comparable situation out there. Pretty much every aspect of their rise and breakthroughs is identical. I like Nordas' personality and would like to believe his breakthrough is 100% clean. I felt the same with Shelby, but was always dubious of it at the time.
You need another hobby.
61 -
THOUGHTLESSLEADER can't compare Nordas to Katir, because he believes Katir is clean as a whistle.
30 -
Coevett wrote:
THOUGHTLESSLEADER can't compare Nordas to Katir, because he believes Katir is clean as a whistle.
Lol hello. Houlihan matches Nordas, care to refute it? I don’t know about Katir, but he was younger in his breakthrough and had a much different background than Nordas from training stability/history to COVID timing.
01 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
interesting post wrote:
Of course Nordas is doping. I would be shocked if anyone in that final was clean. Laros maybe?
At 18? Not a chance.
But you think Jakob doped at 18?
20 -
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
Coevett wrote:
THOUGHTLESSLEADER can't compare Nordas to Katir, because he believes Katir is clean as a whistle.
Lol hello. Houlihan matches Nordas, care to refute it? I don’t know about Katir, but he was younger in his breakthrough and had a much different background than Nordas from training stability/history to COVID timing.
Care to refute it? The problem with such reasoning; this is not the point. You can't make such a broad comparation and then make an empirical statement. Yes, Katir had different background and so had Houlihan. This is just slander.
21 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
it is double threshold bro wrote:
You tell us. What is the protocol?
It is, how does an athlete you claim is "clean" finish faster in the 1500 than naturally faster runners, some of whom will likely be doped?
Funny again. Sure a an athlete can finish faster than naturally faster runners in a hard race. All things equal. Even when the faster runner is doped. A doped naturally faster runner with a PB 3:33 and a runner who is not doped PB 3:31. You fail all the time with your special kind of abstract reasoning. BTW your opinion is that all runner a bit under 3:30 are doped. So you do not have to argue. Though, you have never ever made solid arguments for your claim. Why not all sub 3:31 or sub 3:29???
11 -
KaareV wrote:
Care to refute it? The problem with such reasoning; this is not the point. You can't make such a broad comparation and then make an empirical statement. Yes, Katir had different background and so had Houlihan. This is just slander.
I really don’t think the reasoning is that broad. The original post puts together all the similarities between the two athletes. I didn’t make an empirical statement like Narve is 100% doping, but it doesn’t bode well if a very similar progression by an athlete in a very similar situation ended up in a positive doping case. Narve very well may not have that be his fate. I think we all hope that.
01 -
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
KaareV wrote:
Care to refute it? The problem with such reasoning; this is not the point. You can't make such a broad comparation and then make an empirical statement. Yes, Katir had different background and so had Houlihan. This is just slander.
I really don’t think the reasoning is that broad. The original post puts together all the similarities between the two athletes. I didn’t make an empirical statement like Narve is 100% doping, but it doesn’t bode well if a very similar progression by an athlete in a very similar situation ended up in a positive doping case. Narve very well may not have that be his fate. I think we all hope that.
Curious whether you similarly raved and made a somewhat accusatory thread on Grant Fischer, when he similarly increased his VDOT (measured in the 5k distance) from the age of 24 to 25? If not, why not?
70 -
Armstronglivs wrote:
it is double threshold bro wrote:
Per the words of Nordas in the LRC interview:
“…it’s also correct that I started as a half marathon runner when I joined the group back in 2014, that was the main goal, just running half marathons locally.”
And elsewhere in the interview:
“…I have been working this hard for 10 years”If he was working this hard for ten years then how is it that virtually all his improvement came in the last year, as shown by his 8 second jump in his best 1500 time - from mediocre to world-beating?
If you read the interview, per his answers;
(1) he previously was not concentrating on the 1500m;
(2) it was a 6+ second jump, rather than 8 seconds, and it probably less than that because he felt he was likely in 3:22-3:23 shape last year, but didn’t display that fitness in a race.
10
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.