does anyone think Wang Junxia was clean?

ukathleticscoach wrote:But you've included the 'short track' runs in your calculations as most of her fast times were run in China

no

i did lines of fit which represented her close to perfection & incidentally came off 55.5, with no knowledge of her sprint ability

canova confirmed it as exact down to 0.1s accuracy !

if races were 100m short just at start we'd have incompatible times of ~ 4'06 & 8'20

you can't run 8'20 off just 4'06 - go read paula's book, she herself claims a 4'01tt

Nutella1 wrote:Was Canova in Beijing when this happened?

idiot

learn to read

canova said he spoke to liu, '97wc & then wife of a spanish coach some years after the event

she told him 55.5 not something like 50-flat, which woud be in keeping up with sensationalism

400 splits wrote:

Uncivil Engineer wrote:

Why is it that the Chinese evidently never released any of the splits from any of those WR races?

I believe the 400 splits were published in T&FN at the time.

iaaf official document

1500 :

57.2/2'00.8/3'05.2/3'50.46

or

57.2/63.6/64.4/45.2 (60.3 pace )

in keeping with a suicidal opening, having to slow down considerably for next 2 laps to recover & mustering a quick last 300

3k

2'42/5'29.7/8'06.11

or

2'42/2'47.7/2'36.41

started off a 8'06 pace, slowed 2nd km & put in blistering last km

the opening km is not in keeping with a short start

the 10k can post later

It is actually systemised doping for a lot of them combined with one very dirty agent Makke . A bunch of fat assed women running marathons - little girls running sub 60 for the last lap with muffin tops -

Nutella1 wrote:

This was not a miracle. Was Canova in Beijing when this happened? No? Why not? Because no one from the west was.

That's false. Look who did the timing at that meet.

Looks like the right starting line to me

ventolin^3 wrote:

canova said he spoke to liu

Well if liu says so then it must be right.

ventolin^3 wrote:

iaaf official document

1500 :

57.2/2'00.8/3'05.2/3'50.46

or

57.2/63.6/64.4/45.2 (60.3 pace )

And there is no chance they could have made up those splits later. The video shows the right start but only for like 5 seconds or so.

Care to explain why Qu Yunxia was never able to run faster than 3:57 anywhere else than Shanghai or Beijing?

Not sure how much you know about running but 7 seconds in the 1500 is HUGE.

tgbb wrote:

The Ethiopian women are running almost 14 flat for 5000m so why couldn't Wang have really run her times? Especially if she was doing 140 mpw combined with abusive coaching. I don't understand why some of you can't accept that possibility. Do you run faster or slower with a dog chasing you?

You're a complete fool if you think Defar or Dibaba are clean.

Summary of Possibilities ranked in order of likelihood, imo.

1. Doped to the gills.

2. Short track. The track no longer existing is suspicious.

3. Timing manipulated. If there is no verifiable video, this is a strong possibility, imo. People always snicker at the times reported at the USSR OTs etc and would anyone say the Chinese govt would not stoop to propaganda?

4. Wrong start line. Doubtful, although I suppose the 10K could have been run a lap short.

5. Times were legit. Lol. No chance on earth, imo.

I believe 1 or a combo of 1 and 2 or 3.

worst poster wrote:

1. Doped to the gills.

2. Short track. The track no longer existing is suspicious.

3. Timing manipulated. If there is no verifiable video, this is a strong possibility, imo. People always snicker at the times reported at the USSR OTs etc and would anyone say the Chinese govt would not stoop to propaganda?

4. Wrong start line. Doubtful, although I suppose the 10K could have been run a lap short.

I believe 1 or a combo of 1 and 2 or 3.

No one is denying 1, but as discussed earlier, it doesn't explain everything. Why hasn't anyone ever taken advantage of these drugs, again? If there is really a drug that gets a 30:50 runner to run 29:31, this must be one hellova drug.

re 3 (timing manipulated): difficult, a lot of spectators at meets typically time the runs on their watch. Then again, the Chinese could have just taken away all watches from people upon admission.

What did people think in 93 after it happened? Like who ratified that sh*t. Seriously. The marathon distance is an entirely different game but come on, how does someone clean run 3 minutes faster than anyone else when the people 3 minutes behind her were on PEDs? Answer: It does not happen. If the record was set between late 80s to early 90s through the early-mid 2000s it cannot be trusted. Really should either expunge those records or have a post 2010 (or any other year I guess) class of records. While many believe that all of the pro's are doping, times are significantly slower than what they use to be. 26:17 has not and will not be touched for quite a while longer. Or until Alberto's guys find what they are looking for. Basically, athletes have had to become smarter about how they dope, leading to a less reckless use of PEDs and slower times. Fewer drugs fewer world records. Basically every major world record was smashed between 1998 and early-mid 2000s and then the record breaking stopped (except for the marathon).

Nutella1 wrote:

Care to explain why Qu Yunxia was never able to run faster than 3:57 anywhere else than Shanghai or Beijing?

Care to explain why Webb has only run 3:46 once? Or why Ebuya hasn't been able to repeat his performances? Or several other runners?

'one is denying 1, but as discussed earlier, it doesn't explain everything. Why hasn't anyone ever taken advantage of these drugs, again? If there is really a drug that gets a 30:50 runner to run 29:31, this must be one hellova drug.'

The East German's did similar times over 1500,m who knows what they could have done if they were running the 10,000m in those days. There is doping to get through tests and doping where you are not tested and you are going to get a different level of improvement

Look at the East German 400m and 800m times. People since then have been doping but could not match their times because they are not completely roided up.

As I said before Ventolin's line of fit does not prove or disprove the 'short track theory' as all her fast times were done in China. Whether the 400 is in line is neither here nor there; take out the 10,000m and 1500m times and its meaningless

Most likely to me is not a short track, more that they didn't have to worry in any way about being tested. They didn't run much on the circuit and would have needed to come off the gear earlier for the Olympics

ksjxm wrote:

Nutella1 wrote:

Care to explain why Qu Yunxia was never able to run faster than 3:57 anywhere else than Shanghai or Beijing?

Care to explain why Webb has only run 3:46 once?

Webb has run 3:48, only 2 seconds slower than his PR. He also ran 3:30 1500, which is only slightly worse than his 3:46 mile.

So we're arguing 2 seconds vs. 7 seconds. Big difference, no?

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Most likely to me is not a short track, more that they didn't have to worry in any way about being tested. They didn't run much on the circuit and would have needed to come off the gear earlier for the Olympics

Did you watch the Armstrong Interview? He was never afraid that he could have gotten caught or tested positive. I don't believe much he said, but I believe that part. Until 2005, the chance to test positive was extremely low.

The thing that works (and coincidentally what also broke LA's neck) is the bio passport after 2005 (and CERA testing, I guess).

Anyway, so all athletes had the possibility of using all those drugs at least until early 2000's, then it became a lot harder.

Still no one else has come anywhere close to the 10000 or the 3000 mark.

The short track / short starting line theories are implausible because the suspicious times only came from the women's side. If the track was short then I guess the men were really slow / lazy runners. If the starting line was short, then was it only short for the women? Some kind of conspiracy?

How about this theory: doping + merciless training + super responder = incredible performances. Hmm I think we've seen an example of this recently....someone dominating over all the other doped up competition.

noce wrote:

The short track / short starting line theories are implausible because the suspicious times only came from the women's side.

O no, not again. If a Chinese man runs 28min instead of 29, no one notices.

Does anyone really Wang Chung tonight?