David Epstein/Pro Publica/BBC Story: Former Team Members Accuse Famed Coach Alberto Salazar of Breaking Drug Rules

I think their amateur predecessors were considered dysfunctional but since it was restructured in 2006, UK Athletics is considered an effective, professional organisation.

This was demonstrated by achieving 12 gold medals in the 2014 European Championships compared to 1 in 2006.

kiowavt wrote:

While a few things "exposed" could be troubling, I am actually most astounded that these insiders have so little to share given all their time on the inside. And the Gouchers joining in, running their best, and yet themselves being 100% clean in a coaching situation they suggest is murky--I doubt that more, if it is proven Salazar crossed the line, more than I currently doubt Salazar.

You may see more from those In The Know. The BBC reportedly collected enough pertinent footage concerning the NOP to produce another hour-long show, and they are apparently planning to do so, but there's no word about when it'll be released. For obvious reasons, every inch of every ass involved in this project has to be Teflon-coated.

When will they do the tell-all on Okra?

KMB wrote:

You may see more from those In The Know. The BBC reportedly collected enough pertinent footage concerning the NOP to produce another hour-long show, and they are apparently planning to do so, but there's no word about when it'll be released. For obvious reasons, every inch of every ass involved in this project has to be Teflon-coated.

More people will come out of the woodwork. The BBC, and other organizations, will get new and more revealing information. More programs will be forthcoming.

Mo' to Come wrote:

KMB wrote:

You may see more from those In The Know. The BBC reportedly collected enough pertinent footage concerning the NOP to produce another hour-long show, and they are apparently planning to do so, but there's no word about when it'll be released. For obvious reasons, every inch of every ass involved in this project has to be Teflon-coated.

More people will come out of the woodwork. The BBC, and other organizations, will get new and more revealing information. More programs will be forthcoming.

And more people will and are coming "out of the woodwork" on the people who spoke up against Alberto and Galan. There is a lot of skeletons in the closet for Magness, Goucher, ect.

To clerk, Mr. Magoo, Raysism, and many others.A good argument that EPO doesn't work for top-Africans, is the observation that EPO hasn't helped top non-Africans either.When you look at the Americans, Europeans, Australians, Russians, etc., and the "pre-EPO" records, you see that non-Africans have not improved significantly in the 90's and 2000's, when EPO use was both rampant and easily undetectable. What a missed opportunity!There can be a couple reasons for this:1) Non-Africans didn't take EPO -- this would be an odd claim, considering cycling's history, and the ease and abundance with which their countrymen took EPO2) Non-Africans took EPO, yet could not beat pre-EPO times -- maybe this means EPO isn't effective at the top3) Maybe non-Africans are "non-responders" to EPO, while East Africans are high responders (despite their high altitude environment) -- now that would be an interesting reversalYou all are looking for objective data to support a physiological explanation regarding EPO and lack of performance improvement at the top, when there is a severe lack of objective data (i.e. non-African performances) showing that EPO has worked at the top for anyone, either African or non-African.The conclusion that top East African performance improvements are highly linked with EPO is one without basis.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Seriously? The burden is not on me to produce scientific data that EPO works just as well on 2:05 guys as it does on 2:10 guys; that is the baseline stipulation given what is known about the mechanism of action of EPO. The burden is on YOU to provide evidence that it does NOT work as well on the fastest of the fast (and even then, only Africans).

One huge hole in your argument

The spanish were on EPO and made significant gains from 1500 to marathon

Coach.. wrote:

One huge hole in your argument

The spanish were on EPO and made significant gains from 1500 to marathon

y Dieter Baumann, Regina Jacobs, Russian women (who just went from '80's blood doping to EPO instead.)

Randy Oldman wrote:

I think their amateur predecessors were considered dysfunctional but since it was restructured in 2006, UK Athletics is considered an effective, professional organisation.

This was demonstrated by achieving 12 gold medals in the 2014 European Championships compared to 1 in 2006.

But, that was "Olympic cycle" and a pretty typical scenario in the Olympics. The nation throws some money at the athletes after they win the bid.

It seems like the IOC and IAAF let the doping happen for the home country. They've certainly not sanctioned athletes during the games before. (Salt lake City, EPO variant in XC skiing.) It certainly did exactly that for cycling, with no testing performed by BC (British athletes) for the entire year leading up to the London games.

And we know the IOC has demanded countries not enforce doping rules as a condition of granting a Games bid.

So, lots of opportunities for the "home team" to win.

rekrunner wrote:

2) Non-Africans took EPO, yet could not beat pre-EPO times -- maybe this means EPO isn't effective at the top

WTF? Yes huge missed opportunity. National records in Europe made zero progress from the late 1980s when EPO was introduced ...

1000 m 2:16.13 Fermín Cacho 6 September 1993 Spain Andújar, Spain

1500 m 3:28.95 Fermín Cacho 13 August 1997 Weltklasse Zürich Switzerland Zürich, Switzerland

3000 m 7:29.34 Isaac Viciosa 9 July 1998 Bislett Games Norway Oslo, Norway

5000 m 12:57.25 Alemayehu Bezabeh 4 June 2010 Bislett Games Norway Oslo, Norway [3]

10000 m 27:14.44 Fabián Roncero 4 April 1998 Portugal Lisbon, Portugal

10 km (road) 27:55 Juan Carlos de la Ossa 22 May 2005 Great Manchester Run United Kingdom Manchester, United Kingdom

15 km (road) 42:51+ Fabián Roncero 1 April 2001 Germany Berlin, Germany

20 km (road) 56:51+ Fabián Roncero 1 April 2001 Berlin Half Marathon Germany Berlin, Germany

Half marathon 59:52 Fabián Roncero 1 April 2001 Berlin Half Marathon Germany Berlin, Germany

30 km (road) 1:29:28+ Fabián Roncero 19 April 1998 Rotterdam Marathon Netherlands Rotterdam, Netherlands

Marathon 2:06:52 Julio Rey 23 April 2006 Hamburg Marathon Germany Hamburg, Germany

3000 m 7:30.50 Dieter Baumann 8 August 1998 Herculis Monaco Fontvieille, Monaco

5000 m 12:54.70 Dieter Baumann 13 August 1997 Weltklasse Zürich Switzerland Zürich, Switzerland

10000 m 27:21.53 Dieter Baumann 5 April 1997 Spain Baracaldo, Spain

10 km (road) 27:47 Carsten Eich 10 April 1993 Paderborner Osterlauf Germany Paderborn, Germany

20 km (road) 59:00 Stephan Freigang 13 March 1994 20 van Alphen Netherlands Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands

Half marathon 1:00:34 Carsten Eich 4 April 1993 Germany Berlin, Germany

25000 m (track) 1:13:57.6+ Stephane Franke 30 March 1999 United States Walnut, United States

30000 m (track) 1:33:35,6 Stephane Franke 30 March 1999 United States Walnut, United States

30 km (road) 1:32:27 Steffen Dittmann 21 February 1993 Ōme 30 km Road Race Japan Ōme, Japan

Marathon 2:08:47 Jörg Peter 14 February 1988 Tokyo Marathon Japan Tokyo, Japan

800 m 1:44.91 Rui Silva 20 August 2002 Spain San Sebastian, Spain

1500 m 3:30.07 Rui Silva 19 July 2002 Herculis Monaco Fontvieille, Monaco

Mile 3:49.50 Rui Silva 12 July 2002 Golden Gala Italy Rome, Italy

2000 m 4:54.66 Rui Silva 7 September 1999 ISTAF Germany Berlin, Germany [3]

5000 m 13:02.86 António Pinto 12 August 1998 Weltklasse Zürich Switzerland Zürich, Switzerland

10000 m 27:12.47 António Pinto 30 July 1999 DN Galan Sweden Stockholm, Sweden

15 km (road) 43:19 Eduardo Henriques 7 November 1999 Portugal Benavente, Portugal

20000 m (track) 57:18.4 Dionisio Castro 31 March 1990 France La Flèche, France

20 km (road) 57:54 Domingos Castro 17 October 1999 France Paris, France

One hour 20942 m Dionisio Castro 31 March 1990 France La Fleche, France

Half marathon 1:00:56 Luís Jesus 4 October 1997 World Half Marathon Championships Slovakia Košice, Slovakia

59:43 a # António Pinto 15 March 1998 Portugal Lisbon, Portugal

30 km (road) 1:29:00 António Pinto 14 April 2002 United Kingdom London, United Kingdom

Marathon 2:06:36 António Pinto 16 April 2000 London Marathon United Kingdom London, United Kingdom

800 m 1:42.53 Pierre-Ambroise Bosse 18 July 2014 Herculis Monaco Fontvieille, Monaco [5]

1000 m 2:13.96 Mehdi Baala 27 June 2003 France Strasbourg, France

1500 m 3:28.98 Mehdi Baala 5 September 2003 Memorial Van Damme Belgium Brussels, Belgium

Mile 3:50.33 Eric Dubus 16 August 1995 Weltklasse Zürich Switzerland Zürich, Switzerland

2000 m 4:53.12 Mehdi Baala 23 June 2005 France Strasbourg, France

3000 m 7:30.78 Mustapha Essaid 8 August 1998 Herculis Monaco Fontvieille, Monaco

5000 m 12:58.83 Ismaïl Sghyr 28 July 2000 Bislett Games Norway Oslo, Norway

5 km (road) 13:44 Abdellah Béhar 2 April 1995 United States Carlsbad, United States [6]

10,000 m 27:22.78 Antonio Martins 4 July 1992 Bislett Games Norway Oslo, Norway

10 km (road) 28:05 Abdellah Béhar 7 November 1999 France Paris, France

15 km (road) 42:40+ Abdellatif Meftah 4 September 2010 Lille Half Marathon France Lille, France

20,000 m (track) 58:18.4+ Bertrand Itsweire 31 March 1990 France La Flèche, France

20 km (road) 57:26+ Abdellatif Meftah 4 September 2010 Lille Half Marathon France Lille, France

One hour 20601 m Bertrand Itsweire 31 March 1990 France La Fleche, France

Half marathon 1:00:46 Abdellatif Meftah 4 September 2010 Lille Half Marathon France Lille, France [7]

25,000 m (track) 1:15:56.7+ Dominique Chauvelier 13 June 1992 France La Flèche, France

25 km (road) 1:14:20+ James Theuri 5 April 2009 Paris Marathon France Paris, France

30,000 m (track) 1:31:53.2 Dominique Chauvelier 13 June 1992 France La Flèche, France

Marathon 2:06:36 Benoît Zwierzchiewski 6 April 2003 Paris Marathon France Paris, France

This hole is in the middle, not at the top. Did the Spanish set any European records? By 7%?

Coach.. wrote:

One huge hole in your argument

The spanish were on EPO and made significant gains from 1500 to marathon

I didn't say "national records". I said "pre-EPO" records, and talked about the impact "non-Africans" have made against these records during the EPO-era. Keep in mind, the baseline assumption is that EPO is super effective at all endurance sports, not to mention sprints, is being taken by everyone, and was virtually undetectable until 2008. EPO is presumed by many to be the ONLY explanation for the massive drop in world record times since 1990. Yet for running, it is only used in East Africa (maybe because the cyclists have used it all up in the remaining countries), because they are the only ones with access to rich European coaches.What Renato is being asked to provide a scientific basis for, is his repeatedly expressed opinion that EPO is ineffective for distance running performances "at the top". If Carlos Lopes runs a 2:07:12 marathon in 1985, and the best European statistic you can produce is a 2:06:36 15 years later, you are effectively arguing that EPO accounts for, at most, a 36 second improvement over a marathon, assuming the performance improvement is solely due to EPO. This is an upper bound of 0.47%. While Mark Daly found a 7% improvement from micro-dosing EPO over 7 weeks, Europeans "at the top" have an upper bound potential of 0.47% from macro-dosing EPO over 30 years.What is the scientific/physiological basis that explains why EPO only gives Europeans a 36 second advantage, while giving East Africans a 3:53 advantage (6.5x) over the same timeframe? Why would altitude dwelling East Africans be high responders to EPO, while Americans, Europeans, Australians, Russians, Asians, etc., are not? If East Africans are physiologically no different to non-Africans, or to amateur triathlete/journalists, what is the physiological explanation for the "high response" of EPO for East Africans?So, why do we think EPO is effective at the top, for distance running? If it is so ineffective for non-Africans, what is the basis for EPO explaining East African performance at the top, for distance running? Is there a precedence that doesn't involve borrowing from other sports with different physiological demands?

Whacko Stato wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

2) Non-Africans took EPO, yet could not beat pre-EPO times -- maybe this means EPO isn't effective at the top

WTF? Yes huge missed opportunity. National records in Europe made zero progress from the late 1980s when EPO was introduced ...

(wikipedia stats deleted)

rekrunner wrote:

EPO is presumed by many to be the ONLY explanation for the massive drop in world record times since 1990.

No it's not. It's presumed to be part of the drop in world record times since 1990.

Better training, better tracks, better diet, more prize money and more participation (particularly in East Africa) have all contributed.

And I wouldn't call the drops in the men's records since 1990 particularly massive compared to the previous 25 years, 10,000m excepted.

rekrunner wrote:

This hole is in the middle, not at the top. Did the Spanish set any European records? By 7%?

You're shifting the goalposts here.

For one thing, I don't think anyone here has necessarily concluded that the East Africans' continued breaking of records is attributable to EPO (well, they probably have, but I haven;t seen this argument offered explicitly). I think there is a lot of legitimate skepticism about the claim that EPO is just plain without efficacy among the creme' de la creme' of distance runners. These are separate concerns.

For another, in bringing up the 7 percent figure, you're introducing a straw man. I know that Mark Daly claims that he himself saw gains that great, but I doubt that any serious observer would extrapolate this figure to top or even decent runners. If EPO could turn a guy like me into a 2:14 guy, well, you'd probably see quite a few more 2:10 to 2:14 guys. But even a gain of a little over 1.5 percent uniquely resulting from the use of EPO would take a 2:06:00 guy down to 2:04:00, which at that level is enormous. It would make a 27:00 guy a 26:35 guy. So even percentile gains that appear on the surface to be trivial turn out not to be trivial at all.

Anyway, it should be plain to you that your assertion that top non-African elites did not appear to have improved much after the advent of EPO is, to be charitable, porous.

Yeah -- I liked that subliminal message.

Yield to PEDs wrote:

Apologies if this had already been shared, but how great is this transition scene when they land in Portland:

http://i.imgur.com/pb7MF8x.png

The 7% gain is peak power output. It is not time improvement. Please understand what the 7% improvement is based on.

7% power output not time wrote:

The 7% gain is peak power output. It is not time improvement. Please understand what the 7% improvement is based on.

[quote]KMB wrote:

I was responding to rekrunner's far-fetched claim that the European or U.S. marks should have dropped by that percentage if EPO had a beneficial effect on the to runners from the countries in question. That level of performance gain has never been in the mix.

No -- the goalpost is "top athletes". The opposite claim has been made, that EPO is not effective at the top, and this is always challenged by many who rely on scientific experiments on amateurs.Why do you speculate about potential 1.5% when we can analyze real performances to create an optimistic upper bound?When looking at real European performances between 1985 to the present, the observed gain is 0.47%, for Europeans who went from 2:07:12 to 2:06:36. This serves as an upper bound, because the 2:06:36 performances have not yet been shown to be EPO aided. The lower bound would be 0%, assuming EPO was not a factor in the 2:06:36 performances.So when looking at top European marathon performances, the measured effectiveness of EPO ranges from 0% to 0.47%. 1.5% might initially sound "conservative", but compared to 0.47% (or less), it's a gross, unjustified and baseless exaggeration.Yet Africans have pulled the marathon record down by more than 3% in the same timeframe.You might think I'm cherry picking Europe and the marathon, but you can pretty much pick any distance, and any non-African population and make a similar analysis against the pre-EPO world record. For me, the two most obvious candidates for conclusions supported by real objective performance data is:1) non-Africans "top" distance runners never took EPO2) EPO is not effective for non-African distance runnersIf we talk about a 2:06:00 guy, the range would be even smaller.Another rational conclusion to draw, is that EPO is also about 0.47%, or less, effective for East Africans, like the Europeans, and the rest of the performance gains have come from other factors.

KMB wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

This hole is in the middle, not at the top. Did the Spanish set any European records? By 7%?

You're shifting the goalposts here.

OK, first of all, autologous blood transfusions were a big hit before EPO came out. They were very popular in the 70 and 80s. They died off when EPO came out, and then became en vogue again when EPO could be tested for. So you shouldn't be comparing to Lopes because quite frankly he could have been using transfusions too, which is essentially the same thing as using EPO.

As for the 7% improvement, like another poster said, that refers to power output; specifically, during a ramp-test to exhaustion that will essentially be called a VO2max test. As a quick primer, a 7% improvement in power output will generally net an increase in speed of approximately 2.66% - 4.34% at that specific output, which would be equivalent to about a 1500-3000m running race.

If one's sub-threshold power output improved at the exact same rate of 7%, we would expect a 2:10 marathoner to run between 2:06:30 and 2:04:20 at the absolute fastest. Somewhere closer to the conservative end is much more likely for an exceptionally well trained athlete who already lives and trains at altitude or one who does several camps a year at altitude.

Not everybody will get a 7% improvement in power. Some will get much more, especially those that are not well trained and that live at sea-level. The gains are less for those who are best trained and live at proper altitude, but to say there are no gains at all is just utter horsesh!t.