Half Marathon WR holder Abraham Kiptum busted by Bio Passport!!!!!!!!

I bett that this is the biggest doping bust ever!

deathinparadise wrote:

yes ABP violations are not as "clear cut" as positive doping tests but they still take a lot of work by top experts, so no reason to doubt them.

The fact that samples have to be manipulated quite a bit by "experts" before a decision is made says it all, plus the fact that there are no specific standards for biological passports. This is a bogus way to test athletes, and should not be used.

It's true that it's going to be hard for someone handed a violation to prove he didn't do anything wrong.

Of course. The system is set up that way, so no one can argue that they're clean.

"Well you failed our bogus test, so now prove that you're clean." No one can do that, not you, not anyone.

Coevett wrote:

[Kiptum] Has same Spanish agent as Dibaba.

Which proves he's clean, since Dibaba is clean, has been tested many times and always has passed.

How could they though? wrote:

deathinparadise wrote:

yes ABP violations are not as "clear cut" as positive doping tests but they still take a lot of work by top experts, so no reason to doubt them.

The fact that samples have to be manipulated quite a bit by "experts" before a decision is made says it all, plus the fact that there are no specific standards for biological passports. This is a bogus way to test athletes, and should not be used.

It's true that it's going to be hard for someone handed a violation to prove he didn't do anything wrong.

Of course. The system is set up that way, so no one can argue that they're clean.

"Well you failed our bogus test, so now prove that you're clean." No one can do that, not you, not anyone.

Judging by the IAAF list of 'likely dopers' it seems you have to have hit some pretty sketchy numbers before they consider you for a ban. Even 'up to his eyeballs' Kiprop didn't do enough for a ban and we all know what happened there.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

Just because Paula was likely dirty as hell and got away with doesn't give others who are dirty as hell as free pass.

Coe and Cram were as dirty as hell too.

Is he actually a ginger though?

Phantasy Star wrote:

Still small potatoes compared to clown-shoes man. Would love to see him fall next, but the Nike/advertisement connections are too strong.

You mean mo...er, sir mo...!

Letsrun knuckleheads wrote:

It would still take massive talent and dedication to get to that point. Not like Wejo could have gotten to the Olympics with a solid doping regiment and he was awesome.

!

Soldiers doing drugs? Whatever next?

Ulterior motives ... wrote:

Nocleanathletes wrote:

Paula had 3 abnormal blood results, but her buddy Seb Coe helped her out. She played the game and won. Women who are on drugs can’t get within minutes of her WR.

When Radcliffe starting breaking records the British did the same thing, got runners from other countries banned for doping with ZERO valid evidence in order to obscure her misdeeds. Later it came out that none of those women had been doping. Now they're doing the same thing to try and divert the attention from Mo Farah. I'm absolutely convinced that Farah is the reason Kiptum was banned.

I had the same exact thought.

trollism wrote:

Judging by the IAAF list of 'likely dopers' it seems you have to have hit some pretty sketchy numbers before they consider you for a ban. Even 'up to his eyeballs' Kiprop didn't do enough for a ban and we all know what happened there.

It's even worse than that. It's a 4-step-system:

1) not suspicious

2) suspicious

3) likely doping

4) ban

Kiprop's ABP was only judged as "suspicious", yet he later tested positive for EPO. Meaning, all the "likely doping" athletes had sketchier numbers...

From Ashenden et al. we know that you need to raise your Hct suddenly by more than 10% to get flagged as "suspicious".

El K is done?

Can another insider then please tell me whether Kiptum is an unknown in Kenya like Rutto?

dunes runner wrote:

The biological passport has always been total BS and it continues to be total BS.

Kiptum has been busted, not because he has used any drugs, but because his values went up and down in a normal fashion.

I like Kiptum and have been looking forward to his race.

Big Pharma is destroying athletics, and they don't care in the least what happens to anyone.

This is a really sad event, based 100 percent entirely on politics, and has nothing to do with healthy athletics.

In fact it's the opposite. This is a really sad day for athletics.

+1. The whole AIU & "bio-passport" are just used against undesirables as deemed by IAAF and their cohorts in the geopolitical battle that sports/running have become. Look at the list, Russians & Kenyans... why, cui bono? you have to ask, even while so many Westerners "slip under" the radar............

Everyone knows you keep replying to yourself.

trollism wrote:

Everyone knows I keep replying to myself.

Which is why people don't respond to your ridiculous arguments.

Troll makes admission wrote:

trollism wrote:

Everyone knows I keep replying to myself.

Which is why people don't respond to your ridiculous arguments.

How many times have you posted on this thread crying about some other athlete that hasn't been busted for being a filthy cheat?

I don't care that Farah is also a doper, Farah being a doper has absolutely no bearing on the runaway cheat fest that is East Africa.

deathinparadise wrote:

Wow that's a bit of a blow. He did sort of come out of nowhere as has been detailed in this thread...and it seemed he wasn't in great shape since Abu Dhabi,

This fella reminds of Dennis Kimetto, 2:02:57 marathon WR, came virtually out of nowhere in late twenties and never really kicked on from there, never got pinged though, but we were supposed to believe he was clean.

trollism wrote:

How could they though? wrote:

The fact that samples have to be manipulated quite a bit by "experts" before a decision is made says it all, plus the fact that there are no specific standards for biological passports. This is a bogus way to test athletes, and should not be used.

Of course. The system is set up that way, so no one can argue that they're clean.

"Well you failed our bogus test, so now prove that you're clean." No one can do that, not you, not anyone.

Judging by the IAAF list of 'likely dopers' it seems you have to have hit some pretty sketchy numbers before they consider you for a ban. Even 'up to his eyeballs' Kiprop didn't do enough for a ban and we all know what happened there.

Yeah they really give the "benefit of the doubt" pretty much till the end. Having said that cyclist Kreuziger prevailed after the ban was overturned by the Czech federation and both the UCI and WADA finally pulled their CAS appeal...

Banana Bread wrote:

El Keniano goes home DEVASTATED. MF Coevette goes home DELIGHTED

Oh no!

IF there are people who will go home DEVASTATED, I am clearly one of them.

This is heartbreaking. I have lost the taste for this race.

NativeSon wrote:

This is heartbreaking. I have lost the taste for this race.

Don't be so all encompassing. They are not all bad.