Technically the topic is Kenyan busts, but why not answer the question then just for Kenya? What do you think how many of the top 1000 (100) distance runners from Kenya are dopers?
Why don't you answer some questions like that one before you ask 25 more every day?
The fact is that doping is throughout Kenyan running; the probability is that any given runner at the top is doping.
The way you use certain vague words renders your posts meaningless, floating in the ether with no obvious anchor point back into reality to give proper perspective.
"throughout": The fact is that doping is throughout worldwide running. Kenya is not unique. It brings no added value to say that doping is throughout Kenyan running. On the contrary, it takes away value from any point about top runners.
"probabilty": The probability is what? Small? Likely? More likely than not? Without knowing how many runners are tested, and how many top runners are tested, the microscopic window that the AIU provides through busts does not give us any clear indication of the probabilty of doping among top runners.
Your understanding of English is hopeless. Doping is "throughout" the world but only an idiot imagines Iceland and Kenya are therefore equivalent. But that is you.
Again, you have no idea about what is "probable" or not. We see Kenyans being caught for doping violations like commuters coming off an escalator. It is known that testing catches only a very small fraction of dopers. Therefore many more Kenyans dope than are caught. Their sport is dirty to the core. But not to a doping-denying equivalent of a flat-earth moron.
Technically the topic is Kenyan busts, but why not answer the question then just for Kenya? What do you think how many of the top 1000 (100) distance runners from Kenya are dopers?
Why don't you answer some questions like that one before you ask 25 more every day?
Because questions like that don't interest me. Kenyan sport is dirty. I'm not interested in debating how dirty. There's nothing about it that can now be trusted.
Technically the topic is Kenyan busts, but why not answer the question then just for Kenya? What do you think how many of the top 1000 (100) distance runners from Kenya are dopers?
Why don't you answer some questions like that one before you ask 25 more every day?
I usually answer the questions that are asked of me, so the question doesn't really seem applicable to me.
Note also that was "restrunner's" question, not mine.
But here, I'm not the one making claims about what "probability says ...". I am only asking how to calculate that probability from the one who claimed it, when the necessary data is not available, and getting the predictable whack-a-mole responses.
Your understanding of English is hopeless. Doping is "throughout" the world but only an idiot imagines Iceland and Kenya are therefore equivalent. But that is you.
Again, you have no idea about what is "probable" or not. We see Kenyans being caught for doping violations like commuters coming off an escalator. It is known that testing catches only a very small fraction of dopers. Therefore many more Kenyans dope than are caught. Their sport is dirty to the core. But not to a doping-denying equivalent of a flat-earth moron.
I didn't say or even imagine that Iceland was equivalent.
I'm not the one who claimed to know what was probable or not -- if anything, I argued "you have no idea what is 'probable' or not", and I let you prove it by failing to explain the probability you said exists.
We also know that testing is not catching many non-Kenyan dopers. Kenya is still not unique. The dirt is throughout the sport, throughout the world, except to doping deniers like you.
Why don't you answer some questions like that one before you ask 25 more every day?
Because questions like that don't interest me. Kenyan sport is dirty. I'm not interested in debating how dirty. There's nothing about it that can now be trusted.
I don't think the question was adressed to you.
Interesting that someone who has posted well over 10000 times (!) regarding the subject of doping (anybody at the top dopes...) is not interested in the question, how many dopers there are in the various countries.
Interesting that someone who has posted well over 10000 times (!) regarding the subject of doping (anybody at the top dopes...) is not interested in the question, how many dopers there are in the various countries.
If you were to have a guess, would you suggest that a country with a near zero number of doping positives or a country with dozens upon dozens of doping positives has a bigger issue with doping?
Are you suggesting the country with near zero is probably 'just as bad' as the country that has athletes dropping like flies?
Interesting that someone who has posted well over 10000 times (!) regarding the subject of doping (anybody at the top dopes...) is not interested in the question, how many dopers there are in the various countries.
If you were to have a guess, would you suggest that a country with a near zero number of doping positives or a country with dozens upon dozens of doping positives has a bigger issue with doping?
Are you suggesting the country with near zero is probably 'just as bad' as the country that has athletes dropping like flies?
Curious questions.
With no other information available, I would bet that the country with the many positives has the bigger doping issue. For sure I could be wrong.
No. I have not suggested anything, why do you ask this?