Drug Cheat Lombard Crushes Cragg

I think the reason that Cathal brings out the hate in people is not just cause of the cheating. Are you Irish? Were you part of the Irish running community in 2003/4? This guy came from nowhere to run phenomanal times and people's initial reaction was to be delighted that there was a great new Irish talent - not an imported talent like Cragg - but a home grown club runner. This initial delight gave way to skepticism - which is a shame - but was proved to be correct.

But what made it worse is Cathal took all this publicity and started throwing down everyone's throat how his great new regime had led to such big increases in time. I know of at least 4 sub 14.20 Irish runners who approached lombard for advice and whilst not completely changing their training - took on some of what he said. when basically it is just bollix. it is probably those guys who are on here and I think they have a right to hate.

I think English coach frank horwill had a comment something like - running wont make you into someone if youa are not someone anyway. This is a guy with few friends who quietely went around his business. He loved the new publicity - loved teh fact he was in the independent every week. all done under false pretences.

And also the post about no residual effects. I'm not a physiologist so cannot argue but as Cragg alluded to i'm sure he is getting mental benefit.

To the poster who said he finished high up in irish nats before. tehre is a big difference between a top 5 and winning. the depth at the top is usually not the best. and the year he finished second he was probably on the drugs already.

I grew up in Ireland (Dublin) and ran Leinster schools against people like Derek Carroll, Gerry Finnegan, Martin and John Greene (all Clonliffe), and guys like Gerry Redmond (Avondale) and Dick Hooper (Raheny Shamrocks). I saw how far athletes like Danny McDaid (Clonliffe) could go working full time. In his best years McDaid was a truck driver in Dublin, and later became a postman in Letterkenny, Donegal. Always worked full time, but managed to run 100 or more miles a week - and he ran 2:13 marathon, and also finished 11th in the World Cross in Limerick (when Treacy won).

Des McGann was another interesting character. He ran for Civil Service (Dublin), and worked as a groundsman. Had a very basic education. His reading level was very low. He was a simple man, who loved to run 10-15 miles 'eyeballs out' in the Phoenix Park every day. Those who could keep up with Des knew they were going well, because Des never ran slower than 6 minute mile pace. Des ran for Ireland in cross country and around 14:00/29:00 for 5000/10,000, but with a more planned training program would have gone even faster.

Back to Lombard - the problem people have with Cathal is that they feel their dream has been destroyed. That is - that a guy with good (but not oustanding) ability could reach world class in running. Cathal would be the first to admit that he does not have the talent of Treacy, Coghlan, Carroll and others, but he reached a very high level, only to be caught for cheating.

The sad part of it is that I am convinced that Cathal would have improved a lot even without taking EPO. He was in fact changing his training, and incorporating a lot of extra stuff into his workload which he had learned from observing world class athletes in Font Romeu, France.

He might not have run 13:18 and 27:33, but I think he would have still run very well as a clean athlete, but greed and impatience got the better of him - pity as he was on track to improve by a lot.

He has now shown, clean, that he does in fact have very good potential and talent. He may not have the 'wheels' that Carroll and Coghlan have, but through hard work he has proved himself to be a 'diesel' type runner, in the same way that Francesco Panetta showed some 20 years ago.

Thankfully, some people are willing to give Cathal a chance to redeem himself and get on with his career. It is time we turned the page.

Ghost in Korea

www.gifle.go.kr

(apply now, good conditions and savings potential). c.moulton

Interesting to compare the difference in treatment to Chambers compared with Lombard. Chambers was cheered by the British fans in Valencia (World Indoor), and Warner and other UK athletic chiefs have welcomed him back. A minority have not welcomed him back (Coe, De Voos, and 'Lady' Holmes - and Holmes, I suspect, was not 100% clean, judging by her phenomenal physical transformation over the years, but that's another story).

Lombard is now running well after serving his ban, just as Chambers has been running well. It looks like Chambers will go to the Olympics 'clean' and people, in general, have forgiven him. Good on him.

Interestingly, Chambers has shown that he is able to run at top level without the use of drugs, just as Lombard has now shown top form on the cross circuit. Chambers talks about 'muscle memory' - and Lombard, also probably operates along the same line. But one thing, that has been established, is that no benefits can be derived on a physical level, from having taken EPO so long ago.

People state that Lombard was more in denial compared with Chambers, but the two cases are similar, except that Chambers was being manipulated by others (Korchenoy and Conte) while Lombard - the "educated white man" - was doing stuff on his own.

But, at the end of the day, the two committed similar misdeeds, and both should be given a chance to prove themselves again.

Ghost in Korea

www.gifle.go.kr

(apply now, good conditions and pay)c.moulton

Renato Cova, one of the world's best running coaches, also stresses that EPO does not confer much of an advantage for distance runners. He (Canova) believes that drugs are much more important for strength athletes, not distance runners.

Canova also states, in a recent article, that there is no way that taking EPO will result in 40-70 seconds improvement over 10km.

If you take Canova's statements seriously, we can then question how much of an advantage EPO gave to Lombard in the first place.

I am not stating that Canova is 100% right, but it is, indeed, food for thought, and makes one reflect that the benefits of EPO are probably exaggerated. Canova talks about a bunch of sub. 27 minute 10,000 runners (Nick Kemboi) who have never touched anything.

Canova thinks the limiting factor for endurance runners is injuries and biomechanical deficiencies. The benefits of EPO, according to Canova, are minor.

Ghost in Korea (www.gifle.go.kr) apply now, good conditions. c.moulton

Canova is most likely very wrong. They did some tests among triathletes in Norway and they were flying using EPO.

One of them was so demotivated that he considered quitting afterwards. He would never be anywhere near the same level

irrespective of the training he would do.

Canova is a great coach, but has he any evidence to support his claims? Why the heck do people use it if it wouldn't work

(considering the health risks and the risk of being caught and banned)? It cannot all be attributed to the placebo effect.

15 sec improvement over 5000m means winning grand prix races in 12.50 instead of trailing 15 sec behind and finishing

in a respectable 13.05.

You make a good point, about the 15 seconds advantage in the 5000, but it is not possible to give a precise figure like that, because runners react differently to EPO and other performance enhancing substances.

Take the case of Lombard now - clean - beating Cragg in cross country (not Cragg's best surface, one admits), which suggests that if he can transfer his form to the track and roads, he will run at a high level. The point is that the benefits that EPO gave to Lombard may have been exaggerated, judging by his current form, and Lombard is still far from his best level, having only recently returned to serious racing.

Ghost in Korea (www.gifle.go.kr) apply now, good conditions, c.moulton

I'm sorry - but you say that no way is he getting 40-70 secs over 10k which means you think that Lombard clean is a 28.10 runner. I'm sorry I just don't buy it. Having watched him train really hard (hard but perhaps not smart) and struggle to run 14.30 I fail to see how improving his training can all of a sudden make up able to run 28.10. Using this rational if sub 14 guys like Vinny Mulvey all of a sudden started training like Lombard they'd be running 27.40 free from drugs. Does that seem realistic to you?

Also I guess we could make reference to the larger conspiracy that all the top kenyans and ethiopians are on drugs so then Canova would have it in his interest to play down the role of drugs in distance running.

I think someone mentioned chambers a few pages back. There is another difference - Lombard was nothing before and then when he became 'good' he started preaching to everyone about his rags to riches story. Chambers was a superbly talented teenager and junior athlete, which at time you'd like to think he was clean, and he did not have to explain away any massive improvement.

Something that has not been mentioned - how are people like Mark Carrol meant to feel who invited Lombard to Florida for training in 2004 and now have to accept that Lombard was probably juicing up in his bathroom. Sorry - but what a low life!

Pauldy:

You make some good points. But Cathal got down to faster times than 14:30 without drugs. But that is a detail, that has little relevance now.

If you accept that he is now running 'clean' then we have to concede that Cathal is indeed a pretty good runner, as he showed in the Irish cross. That result right there, is surely worth at least 29:00 level for 10,000, which is not bad. And going from that logic, if he keeps improving, he should be down to about 28:20 level for 10,000 in the summer, and that is decent speed for a marathon man who has his sights on a decent time for the classic distance (2:10-2:12 range). And I think everyone agrees, that Cathal is now clean, and will no longer ever even get near prohibited stuff.

Let us now give Lombard a chance to prove how fast he can run without drugs, and then we can talk again. Maybe Carroll will also show the class that Cragg demonstrated at the Irish Champs.

Ghost in Korea (www.gifle.go.kr) c.moulton

We must accept that Lombard is now running clean, just like Chambers after his initial drug bust.

Ooops.

I've agreed with all that you've said about forgiving, moving on, and so on. But I have a harder time accepting that Lombard is necessarily running "clean," though I am NOT saying that he isn't. I'm sure that he's being tested constantly. But as we've seen countless times, that's no guarantee that an athlete who is juicing will be caught. How many drug tests did Marion Jones pass? I'd make the same comment about Chambers.

Exactly. And that is why I believe KB is juiced to the gills.

This remark is slightly off topic and so no one should make a

comment:)

Congrats to Alistair on a fine race. Losing to a doper is nothing to be ashamed of. Looking forward to seeing how his resurgence continues to develop during the outdoor track season. Maybe he'll see Lombard on the oval. I'm sure it will be a very different outcome.

Go Hogs....

Except that Cragg 'lost' to someone that we have to assume is 'clean', as Lombard was in this case.

Yes, Lombard doped in the past, but no longer does so, and, just like Chambers, should be allowed to get on with his career, as he has paid his dues and suffered enough.

Ghost in Korea

www.gifle.go.kr

, apply now, good prospects. c.moulton

[quote]ghost wrote:

and Holmes, I suspect, was not 100% clean, judging by her phenomenal physical transformation over the years, but that's another story).

enlighten us oh great one - or is this a typical cheap shot by someone who thinks they are in the know. This type of behaviour is unbecoming of you. Shame on you. Put up or shut up.

agreed - you're a perverse one ghost - you say we should all forgive and foget about Lombard, then splash around unfounded allegations?

What Physical transformation? Holmes looked well defined pretty much all through her career, from her re-emergence (after dissapearing after school) in 93 onwards - probably because she was a PT instructor in the army. That sort of job tends to require one to be a bit muscular, especially a women who's all of about 5ft2. Which is the second point, whilst Holmes may have looked a presence on the track, you are judging that from a TV screen, or at best from a stand, against other (usually v slim) distance runners. If you're ever seen her up close and in normal dress she looks v petite.

As for your comments about Virinque:

1) I'm not a fan of him either

2) this is a running message board not a cycling one, so if people want to dish out criticism of dopers in running they can, what went on in cycling was obviously mass particpation / organisation of doping, and was ingrained in the culture of the sport unfortunately.

3) most of the posters here appear to be from the US, UK or Ireland, so trying to bring in French forgiveness of Virenque is irrelevant

4) On that point, its pretty hilarious that the French organisations (ASO etc) are now holding themselves up to be the defenders of cycling, but that's for another debate.

If I am wrong about Holmes, sorry. I never suspected anything, until I was alerted to the fact that she had changed a lot over the years in a physical way. The information came from an Irish Marathon International, who shall not be named for obvious reasons. He had observed and trained close to Holmes for many years, and witnessed a big physical transformation.

I too, believed that she had always been a natural 'mesomorph' similar to Maria Mutola.

Perhaps, mentioning her in that way was not prudent, and I recognize the error of that.

Ghost in Korea

www.gifle.go.kr

apply now, good conditions. c.moulton

Would you have said accusing Marion Jones was also a cheap shot?

For you to assume the opposite is just as much a shot in the dark as assuming she is dirty.

Considering that HGH leaves the body within 24 hours and I am sure there are other similar drugs out there with similar life cycles or procedures to mask them from existing tests.

So drug testing basically comes down to this to guarantee a positive test on a drug user.

1) You would need to test an athlete 365 times a year.

2) You need to know exactly where he is at all times for thsi to be possible

3) You would need to ensure that you test for the correct drugs everytime you test him/her.

4) You would need to ensure that there is no corruption in the testing procedure (Bribes / tipoffs / fake samples etc etc)

5) You would need to ensure there was no masking agents present.

6) You would need to ensure the samples dont get spoiled.

7) Factor in the fact that an athlete can miss two tests.

8) After all of that you would need to the test accepted by the federation (not always in their interest to be honest)

9) and finally get passed the legal challenges.

Making presumptions about who is clean or not clean either way just doesnt make factual sense.

ghost wrote:

Those were the pre-epo days, where graft and hard work got you results. I grew up in Ireland in the 60's and 70's and my heroes were Des McGann (Civil Service), Dan McDaid (Clonliffe), Ted Keegan (Naas), Tom O'Riordan, and my schoolboy heroes were Derek Carrol, Gerry Finnegan, the Greene brothers - all Clonliffe, and Gerry Redmond (Avondale) and others.

Ghost in Korea

http://www.gifle.go.kr

(chris moulton), apply now, good conditions and savings of up to $25,000 per year.

Danny McDaid ran for Letterkenny A.C.

Holmes transformation? What are you guys talking about? When she won in Athens, she was at her lowest weight ever. How is that a big physical transformation?