How did El Guerrouj Escape While Many of His Countrymen Got Caught?

curiosssity wrote: Is it possible that El G was the Usain Bolt of the 1500/mile? ... How much faster were other 1500m times on average during the "EPO Era"? Obviously El G ran a ton of times sub 3:30, but how frequently were others cracking sub 3:30 as, say, compared to sub-3:30 times from 2005-present?

That's an interesting question -- we often look at the progression of the very top times, but it's also interesting to look at the progression of depth. Check out these two graphs:

They show the top several hundred performances over 100 and 1500 over the past few decades. You can see that the 100 just keeps getting faster/deeper, whereas the 1500 reaches a peak in about 2001 then starts regressing. It wasn't all about El G -- the whole event has steadily regressed for the past decade. Fairly suspicious.

hold the phone wrote:

They show the top several hundred performances over 100 and 1500 over the past few decades. You can see that the 100 just keeps getting faster/deeper, whereas the 1500 reaches a peak in about 2001 then starts regressing. It wasn't all about El G -- the whole event has steadily regressed for the past decade. Fairly suspicious.

There's nothing suspicious about it. There are several sub 3:30 capable runners currently. But no one wants to take it out. Everyone goes for the sit and kick type of race. Seriously, when's the last time you saw someone not run a sit n kick type of race?

blehhhh wrote:

The top 25 times for the 1500m occurred from 1995-2004.

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_1500ok.htm

Hicham has 14 of them. Lagat 4.

Can't we just accept that Hicham is the best, drugs or no drugs?

Ummm! NO!

If he were on drugs, and I strongly suspect he was, then he should not be deemed the best ever for that fact alone. Doesn't matter how fast and how dominant he was, it invalidates his greatness. The best should be someone who did it clean. Now that's the difficult bit, because there will alays be posters on here who will through some doubt on an athlete's performance, usually based on what another troll has said in the past, without doing much research into it. Others will just make up suspicions based purely on whether they like an athlete or not.

Middle Distance Analyst wrote:

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

Putting aside Ventolin's extreme calculations, Jim Ryun at age 19 was running, with more modest conversions, (on today's tracks, with rabbits, etc) some times not too far off what the best of the 90's ran. So was he doped?

At least Ventolin can support his calculations with mathematical analysis.

LOL. Mentalin is a total crackpot who adjusts times based on the most trivial things like farting mid race.

The poster above, Middle Distance Analyst, is clearly more level headed and living in the real world with his analysis and comments.

I would say though that I don't believe Snell's 1:44.3 on grass (which he said himself was faster than cinders) was worth 1:42. Considering how much he slowed in the last 200 (over 28 secs)it was more likely worth 1:43 low-mid on a synthetic track. A 1:42 runner is unlikely to slow down so much off the pace he was given.

moron

snell was not a fast 400 guy

he was dragged thru in a suicidal 50+, which is probably a 49+ on synthetic & he died a painful death in last 200, but still held on for a magnificent 1'44.3wr

he possibly only had low-47 speed on a synthetic at the time, which meant his split was barely more than 2s outside his open 400 ability, compared to guys with 45/46 speed who can split 49+, having 3 or 4s leeway to their open 400 & can hang on better for 1'40/1'42

snell's run was akin to kip's suicidal 48.3 in zurich in terms of closeness to open 400 ( albeit kip's was probably more like a 3s difference )

if snell had gone out in 51+, he wouda undoubtedly held on better for a 1'43 that day - how fast a 1'43 is debateable

Cycling has clearly shown that peds can transform a donkey into a racehorse

The impact and extent of doping in mid/distance the last 20yrs isn't exposed-

which partly explains the speculation

curiosssity wrote:If we assume that Asbel Kiprop is 'clean,' I don't think doping him to El G proportions would produce the kind of performances El G had.

he's not a million miles from hicham already, but needs some better endurance

his 3'28.8 was uneven race : ~ 55.0 start, low-58 next lap which is far too slow - only 3'33 pace at 800m

he picked it up at the bell finishing with a 53.43 last lap !!!

even more remarkable was he did most of this in last 300, covering it in 39.46, which is 52.61 pace !!!

if he'd got even pacing from gun-to-tape, he wouda gone lot faster than 3'28.8

I think I never accused Lance's teammates of jealousy at any point in time. I was thinking more about the media, and general population, especially the French public, assuming that they were accusing Lance with nothing more than his 5, 6, or 7 victories in a row. The first teammate I was aware of that accused Lance was Landis, and by the time Landis accused Lance, I had already read about the 1999 EPO testing, and knew Landis wasn't lying anymore.You also misunderstand what I would accept as hard evidence. Positive test results are not the "only" proof that one is guilty. I just gave you a laundry list of "corroborating" evidence against Lance, and not one of them was a positive result that led to a doping sanction. Lance had dozens of cycling insiders accusing him of doping -- former teammates and competitors. As far as I can see, there is no laundry list with El G. Testimony of former teammates, or competitors, team staff, etc. would carry a lot of weight. Mindless discussion threads pretending to be a debate among anonymous posters who bring no facts carry very little weight. You want me to suspect El Guerrouj? Show me an article where Seb Coe, or Peter Snell, or any former athlete accuses El Geurrouj of cheating. Show me a closer link to El Guerrouj, and his fellow countrymen.You opened this thread to start a discussion. But if the only thing you are bringing to the discussion is fast times, and nationality, there's very little basis for discussion. As I said, these are weak reasons which need some corroboration to move forward. You pretend a case can be made, but in order to make a case, you need to bring enough foundation to build the case. In my opinion, you fall way short. The best you can do is to call others gullible, or fault them for not wondering enough. At least I brought a new fact to the discussion -- the IAAF did out of competition EPO testing in 2002. This is about the same timeframe that the UCI was inviting Lance to explain how doping testing works.

Kyzer Sozenator wrote:

I get what you're saying and I'm glad you admit that I was right about assuming you were one of those individuals who accused Lance's teammates of jealousy when they came out accusing him of doping. I should add that it wasn't your gullibility but your instistence to not wonder about what is going on with these athletes unless there is hard evidence which is obviously unrealistic since the only proof one is guilty of doping is evidence of positive results. It's almost as if you don't leave room for the possibility that there are runners that are passing these tests by means discussed in this thread.

I hope you don't mean me. I never said doping doesn't matter. I agree -- IF he doped, he should be sanctioned just like any other convicted athlete.I'm aware of Golden League victories, but not Diamond League victories.

just sayin wrote:

Jono

i too believe steve cram was clean but your statement that wr's can be broken clean by a big margin is silly

which wr's?

they can't!

cram as you prob know was a big el g fan

i wonder if he still is today with the benefit of hindsight?

i doubt it!

I think all of the current middle and long distance records will continue to fall for a very long time either with or without drugs. You are looking at this from the wrong perspective, a druggie perspective handed down to you and many others by cynics who don't understand real physiology and don't want to learn because it is boring to most people, whereas drug talk is sensationalist and more appealing to most people.

Jono

it's been 13yrs

not exactly a continuation

and i formed my own opinion based on circumstancial evidence available

just sayin wrote:

Cycling has clearly shown that peds can transform a donkey into a racehorse

Not at all true. Cycling, in fact, has shown you can turn a quarterhorse into a thoroughbred, but science has not progressed to the point of turning a donkey into a thoroughbred.

It's like saying you can turn a 17:00 5K guy into a sub 13:00 5K guy with Peds. It doesn't work like that.

ventolin^3 wrote:

curiosssity wrote:If we assume that Asbel Kiprop is 'clean,' I don't think doping him to El G proportions would produce the kind of performances El G had.

he's not a million miles from hicham already, but needs some better endurance

his 3'28.8 was uneven race : ~ 55.0 start, low-58 next lap which is far too slow - only 3'33 pace at 800m

he picked it up at the bell finishing with a 53.43 last lap !!!

even more remarkable was he did most of this in last 300, covering it in 39.46, which is 52.61 pace !!!

if he'd got even pacing from gun-to-tape, he wouda gone lot faster than 3'28.8

Evened out, using 55.0, 1:53.2, 2:35.4, 2:49.4, 3:28.8

you get a few hundredths below 3:28.3.

[quote]rekrunner wrote:

I think I never accused Lance's teammates of jealousy at any point in time. I was thinking more about the media, and general population, especially the French public, assuming that they were accusing Lance with nothing more than his 5, 6, or 7 victories in a row. The first teammate I was aware of that accused Lance was Landis, and by the time Landis accused Lance, I had already read about the 1999 EPO testing, and knew Landis wasn't lying anymore.

You also misunderstand what I would accept as hard evidence. Positive test results are not the "only" proof that one is guilty. I just gave you a laundry list of "corroborating" evidence against Lance, and not one of them was a positive result that led to a doping sanction. Lance had dozens of cycling insiders accusing him of doping -- former teammates and competitors. As far as I can see, there is no laundry list with El G. Testimony of former teammates, or competitors, team staff, etc. would carry a lot of weight. Mindless discussion threads pretending to be a debate among anonymous posters who bring no facts carry very little weight. You want me to suspect El Guerrouj? Show me an article where Seb Coe, or Peter Snell, or any former athlete accuses El Geurrouj of cheating. Show me a closer link to El Guerrouj, and his fellow countrymen.

You opened this thread to start a discussion. But if the only thing you are bringing to the discussion is fast times, and nationality, there's very little basis for discussion. As I said, these are weak reasons which need some corroboration to move forward. You pretend a case can be made, but in order to make a case, you need to bring enough foundation to build the case. In my opinion, you fall way short. The best you can do is to call others gullible, or fault them for not wondering enough. At least I brought a new fact to the discussion -- the IAAF did out of competition EPO testing in 2002. This is about the same timeframe that the UCI was inviting Lance to explain how doping testing works.

[quote]Kyzer Sozenator wrote:

So you would consider an article by Seb Coe or Peter Snell stating their suspicion that El Guerrouj might be a doper as good enough? How strange. What is making you put your trust in them? Are there any others you would give them same credibility?

I do stand by earlier label that you come off gullible.

deanouk wrote:Evened out, using 55.0, 1:53.2, 2:35.4, 2:49.4, 3:28.8

you get a few hundredths below 3:28.3.

faster than 3'28.2

his last 100 is 12.8s = 51.2s pace

he is actually speeding up as the last lap progesses

it means he was no way at his limit if his fastest 100 of the race was the last 100

he was in high, perhaps even mid-3'27 shape that day if they couda evenly paced him to a 2'32/2'33 rather than a derisory 2'35.4, when he woudn't have been finishing with 53.43, but a high/mid-55 with something like a 14.0s finish

ventolin^3 wrote:

deanouk wrote:Evened out, using 55.0, 1:53.2, 2:35.4, 2:49.4, 3:28.8

you get a few hundredths below 3:28.3.

faster than 3'28.2

his last 100 is 12.8s = 51.2s pace

he is actually speeding up as the last lap progesses

it means he was no way at his limit if his fastest 100 of the race was the last 100

he was in high, perhaps even mid-3'27 shape that day if they couda evenly paced him to a 2'32/2'33 rather than a derisory 2'35.4, when he woudn't have been finishing with 53.43, but a high/mid-55 with something like a 14.0s finish

So even in 3:27 shape Kiprop has to take a backseat to Jimmy Ryun.

sadly for asbel, it wouda been a thrashing

but he's the best there is nowdays ( depending on when maloofi gets busted )

just sayin wrote:

Jono

it's been 13yrs

not exactly a continuation

and i formed my own opinion based on circumstancial evidence available

El Gerrouj was obsessed with breaking World Records. Since then no-one else has had the same mentality. The racing has been different since then.

Roger Banister thinks that the Mile record will go below 3.30 and I agree with him, and that can be done with or without drugs. Someone was posting about how he could run those times without being out of breath, well that's how you're supposed to race.

I think this (

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/21771213

) is a pretty big story.

Here is the proper link to support the IAAF in their efforts or give the Suggestions:

IAAF Public Suggestion link:

http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/contact-us

.....

For the record, a thread was provided, this AM, with handy, all in one place -- sometimes hard to find information -- but all Publicly Available information -- on how to write and support OR complain to all of the cogent anti doping organizations in the world.

I also provided publicly available (but again, sometimes a pain to find) email and contact information to the governing bodies of the countries most often having athletes test positive, and the countries whose athletes are the most complained about on this website over the years.

I provided direct links and emails - again all publicly available but some a pain to find -- so that those that are anti doping and want to Take A Positive Action...rather than spin their wheels powerlessly here...could do so.

I provided links for you to:

IAAF Public Suggestion Form

IAAF Drug Testing Info and Guide pages

IAAF's Pure Sport initiative page

WADA's info email and Contact Page

USATF Confidential Whistle Blower tel number

USADA public email address and contact page

NIKE's public email, snail mail, tel. and fax numbers

NIKE Legals snail mail

Athletics Kenya's public email and contact info

Ethiopia's public email and contact info

The public email and contact info for Eritrea, Russia, Jamaica, Turkey, Morocco...the most accused home countries of the most accuse athletes on this message board over the past decade.

The IOC Drug Testing Info Contact.

--Evidently LRC does not want you to be able to EASILY take Actual Real World Positive Action to support anti-doping with any or all of these organizations.

Pretty lame, LRC, pretty lame.

I've asked that the thread be restored -- there was and is ZERO private information in that thread.

Further, if Robert and Weldon are REALLY anti-doping they should add a link/button on their front page -- right next to ADVERTISING, where there is plenty of space called SUPPORT CLEAN RUNNING.

And that link should take you to a page with all the type of public information I posted -- and with additional links on how you can support clean running and anti-doping.

If they really care about anti doping and clean sport, they should make it easy for you to "contribute positively" and take positive actions...