The article was initially entiteld, "Zane Robertston!!!!" but we changed it to make it more descriptive. Here is our article on his bust and fake excuses (he said he went to a hospital for a COvid-19 vaccine but they gave him EPO instead) which points out that in 2016 he expressed frutation at the amount of doping in the sport:
I have not shifted anything just by an inch - liar.
Since months I have stated exactly the same:
In the period 1964 - 1979 (16 full seasons in a row, 4 Olympic cycles) Kenya was the most successful nation in men's track distance running.
What you wanted to say is: this sentence is way beyond your capabilities.
You have shown so dozens of times (you have given women's results, road results, results outside this time frame, you have added results from different nations, you pointed on the most stupid things (no records in the 1000y indoors...), you changed numbers in a dramatically way. And so on. You just proofed again and again to be plain stupid. Unable to search for the most easy results (even now unable to look for some Olympic champions).
So you think the reason for the Kenyan success in the 1960s and the 1970s was only doping? Any argument for this claim? I don't think it to be true, but I will listen to your arguments (if you have any...).
Lets's wait to hear what the letsrun non-checker no. 1 has to say - nothing substantial, I'm sure.
Here is the subject that you avoid as you take refuge in your selective but unconvincing historical statistics. They are an irrelevant smokescreen. This is what Kenyan running is about - and likely always has been.
Nothing, absolutely nothing is selective in the statistics which I listed. I looked at
- Olympic medals - Olympic top 8 placings - Commonwealth Games medals (where also NZ, UK, Australia competed) - World records - Area records - national records of the top nations in a 4 year rhythm - best times over all the distances - number of top athletes - international results of some season
No other nation has had as many Olympic medalists (7) as Kenya (despite the 76 boycott).
You call it "selective" when you just should say: I hate it.
The statistics clearly prove that Kenya indeed was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979. In all of the categories from above, Kenya leads, sometimes to an astonishing amount (Area records (for you: Kenya was just another African country - around 50 African records from Kenya compared to around 20 from all the other 50+ African nations combined), Commonwealth medals).
Finland has more Olympic Golds but is so far behind in any other category, that they are not a serious contender.
Now try to challenge it again, Armbraindeadstupid. Change the numbers from 10 to 2, from 4 to 2 ... (is it just some bad coincidence that you always have the numbers for Kenya lower than they are?). Or: are you just stupid or do you also mainly have bad intentions? For sure I know the answer...
A Kenyan who tests positive in 2022 has some impact on the number of medals six decades ago? Armbraindeadstupid at his best.
Here is the subject that you avoid as you take refuge in your selective but unconvincing historical statistics. They are an irrelevant smokescreen. This is what Kenyan running is about - and likely always has been.
Nothing, absolutely nothing is selective in the statistics which I listed. I looked at
- Olympic medals - Olympic top 8 placings - Commonwealth Games medals (where also NZ, UK, Australia competed) - World records - Area records - national records of the top nations in a 4 year rhythm - best times over all the distances - number of top athletes - international results of some season
No other nation has had as many Olympic medalists (7) as Kenya (despite the 76 boycott).
You call it "selective" when you just should say: I hate it.
The statistics clearly prove that Kenya indeed was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979. In all of the categories from above, Kenya leads, sometimes to an astonishing amount (Area records (for you: Kenya was just another African country - around 50 African records from Kenya compared to around 20 from all the other 50+ African nations combined), Commonwealth medals).
Finland has more Olympic Golds but is so far behind in any other category, that they are not a serious contender.
Now try to challenge it again, Armbraindeadstupid. Change the numbers from 10 to 2, from 4 to 2 ... (is it just some bad coincidence that you always have the numbers for Kenya lower than they are?). Or: are you just stupid or do you also mainly have bad intentions? For sure I know the answer...
A Kenyan who tests positive in 2022 has some impact on the number of medals six decades ago? Armbraindeadstupid at his best.
I don't bother to read your waffle any more. I know what it will say. Garbage.
Here is the subject that you avoid as you take refuge in your selective but unconvincing historical statistics. They are an irrelevant smokescreen. This is what Kenyan running is about - and likely always has been.
Nothing, absolutely nothing is selective in the statistics which I listed. I looked at
- Olympic medals - Olympic top 8 placings - Commonwealth Games medals (where also NZ, UK, Australia competed) - World records - Area records - national records of the top nations in a 4 year rhythm - best times over all the distances - number of top athletes - international results of some season
No other nation has had as many Olympic medalists (7) as Kenya (despite the 76 boycott).
You call it "selective" when you just should say: I hate it.
The statistics clearly prove that Kenya indeed was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979. In all of the categories from above, Kenya leads, sometimes to an astonishing amount (Area records (for you: Kenya was just another African country - around 50 African records from Kenya compared to around 20 from all the other 50+ African nations combined), Commonwealth medals).
Finland has more Olympic Golds but is so far behind in any other category, that they are not a serious contender.
Now try to challenge it again, Armbraindeadstupid. Change the numbers from 10 to 2, from 4 to 2 ... (is it just some bad coincidence that you always have the numbers for Kenya lower than they are?). Or: are you just stupid or do you also mainly have bad intentions? For sure I know the answer...
A Kenyan who tests positive in 2022 has some impact on the number of medals six decades ago? Armbraindeadstupid at his best.
"The rate of doping positives is off the charts; thirty athletes have been suspended during 2022 alone.
Imagine if 30 Canadian, British, Australian, or American athletes were suspended in a 10-month stretch. For many countries, the athletics program would be decimated. Currently, there are approximately 70 athletes from Kenya serving suspensions for reasons related to anti-doping."
"The rate of doping positives is off the charts; thirty athletes have been suspended during 2022 alone.
Imagine if 30 Canadian, British, Australian, or American athletes were suspended in a 10-month stretch. For many countries, the athletics program would be decimated. Currently, there are approximately 70 athletes from Kenya serving suspensions for reasons related to anti-doping."
With all due respect to Chris Kelsall as a "journalist", he is not a primary source of information, and has not proven to be neutral on the topic.
In 2021, WADA reported that the USA had at least 20 doping positives from USADA alone (so not counting any AIU positives). Did 20 positives decimate USA athletics? Would 30? Canada only conducted 340 tests, 15x less than the AIU and 6x less than the USA. Canada has so few elite athletes, that 30 would surely decimate Canada. Same for Britain and Australia.
I did find Chris Kelsall suggesting Kenyan doping might be a recent problem: "The surge in doping has gone on for at least a decade."
Nothing, absolutely nothing is selective in the statistics which I listed. I looked at
- Olympic medals - Olympic top 8 placings - Commonwealth Games medals (where also NZ, UK, Australia competed) - World records - Area records - national records of the top nations in a 4 year rhythm - best times over all the distances - number of top athletes - international results of some season
No other nation has had as many Olympic medalists (7) as Kenya (despite the 76 boycott).
You call it "selective" when you just should say: I hate it.
The statistics clearly prove that Kenya indeed was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979. In all of the categories from above, Kenya leads, sometimes to an astonishing amount (Area records (for you: Kenya was just another African country - around 50 African records from Kenya compared to around 20 from all the other 50+ African nations combined), Commonwealth medals).
Finland has more Olympic Golds but is so far behind in any other category, that they are not a serious contender.
Now try to challenge it again, Armbraindeadstupid. Change the numbers from 10 to 2, from 4 to 2 ... (is it just some bad coincidence that you always have the numbers for Kenya lower than they are?). Or: are you just stupid or do you also mainly have bad intentions? For sure I know the answer...
A Kenyan who tests positive in 2022 has some impact on the number of medals six decades ago? Armbraindeadstupid at his best.
I don't bother to read your waffle any more. I know what it will say. Garbage.
100% correct ststistics are "garbage" for you if they don't fit what you want to hear. Nothing more to know about you - liar.
I don't bother to read your waffle any more. I know what it will say. Garbage.
100% correct ststistics are "garbage" for you if they don't fit what you want to hear. Nothing more to know about you - liar.
I am simply not interested in what you have to say. I prefer the commentary in Athletics Illustrated, that says "Kenya is in a major doping crisis and needs to serve a national suspension". You have nothing to say about that.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
I am simply not interested in what you have to say.
That's why you have responded to me HUNDREDS of times? Because you are not interested in what I have to say? What a clown you are.
The reality: you are not interested to hear the facts which I have presented. You prefer to change them as you have done several times.
All your posts clearly show that you are both stupid and a liar.
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
That's why you have responded to me HUNDREDS of times? Because you are not interested in what I have to say? What a clown you are.
The reality: you are not interested to hear the facts which I have presented. You prefer to change them as you have done several times.
All your posts clearly show that you are both stupid and a liar.
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
Nothing what I have written was wrong. Liar.
The issues are simple. Before 1980 the Kenyans were not as good as you say they were - your statistics are selective - and in the '70's they were likely doping, as they are today. That is how you are wrong.
That's why you have responded to me HUNDREDS of times? Because you are not interested in what I have to say? What a clown you are.
The reality: you are not interested to hear the facts which I have presented. You prefer to change them as you have done several times.
All your posts clearly show that you are both stupid and a liar.
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
So, you have nothing to say about the thread subject?
The issues are simple. Before 1980 the Kenyans were not as good as you say they were - your statistics are selective - and in the '70's they were likely doping, as they are today. That is how you are wrong.
I havn't said a single word about "how good" Kenyans were before 1980. I just gave statistics which clearly show thet Kenya was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979.
For you, they have set 2 WRs - when 10 is correct.
For you, they were slow - despite the fact they have had the best times from any nation.
For you they were losers - despite the fact they have won the most Olympic medals and totally dominated the Commonwealth Games.
Nothing is selective about the statistis which I gave - medals, records, top times.
You just don't like (better: you hate) those facts which were presented to you. But this will not change them.
So you think the only reason for Kenyan track running success in the 1970s was doping? Any confirmation for this?
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
So, you have nothing to say about the thread subject?
I have long ago. But you haven't seen that it is about yet another runner who lives and trains in Kenya caught doping. So Kenyan doping remains the issue.
The issues are simple. Before 1980 the Kenyans were not as good as you say they were - your statistics are selective - and in the '70's they were likely doping, as they are today. That is how you are wrong.
I havn't said a single word about "how good" Kenyans were before 1980. I just gave statistics which clearly show thet Kenya was the most successful nation in men's track distance running in the period 1964 - 1979.
For you, they have set 2 WRs - when 10 is correct.
For you, they were slow - despite the fact they have had the best times from any nation.
For you they were losers - despite the fact they have won the most Olympic medals and totally dominated the Commonwealth Games.
Nothing is selective about the statistis which I gave - medals, records, top times.
You just don't like (better: you hate) those facts which were presented to you. But this will not change them.
So you think the only reason for Kenyan track running success in the 1970s was doping? Any confirmation for this?
They weren't as good as your selective use of statistics say they were but all that is mostly irrelevant in the context of yet another runner popped in Kenya. Kenyan doping is the real issue. If they dope in their numbers today - and they obviously do - they will have doped in the past when drugs were also available. They all come from the same country and culture.
That's why you have responded to me HUNDREDS of times? Because you are not interested in what I have to say? What a clown you are.
The reality: you are not interested to hear the facts which I have presented. You prefer to change them as you have done several times.
All your posts clearly show that you are both stupid and a liar.
So, as I said, you have nothing to say about the article in Athletics Illustrated about the doping crisis in Kenyan running, which is the real issue with Kenyan sport. Your fixation on your data pre-1980 is circular and irrelevant and wrong.
And still nothing to say about the Athletics Illustrated article I referred to. Of course not.
