Oh, and btw - the fact that up to 1 1/4 million European slaves were transported to Morocco over several (recent) centuries confirms absolutely that there is today likely very little genetic difference between Moroccans and Mediterranean Europeans. He even just posted a photo of a young Moroccan runner proudly claiming that he was 'whiter than Max Burgin'.
So how he concludes from that fact that the Moroccan domination in the EPO era was due to some kind of genetic advantage for running, rather than EPO, I really don't know.
OK, he said something near unintelligible about the (Moroccan) runner being 'whiter' than my heroes or something. This is the kind of 'lies' that you accuse me of.
A lot of people are asking were is this relief for Aouita, El Guerouj ... and I'm puting this name against all odds Rashid Ramzi (he not less cleaner than a lot people in tracks and fields in the world). Said Aouita tried wit...
Ummm….you guys have totally high jacked my thread, talking about slavery and the distribution of athletes in different sports.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? Lol.
Back to Nick Willis and high level middle distance races, please.
Wasn't your question rooted in you not understanding the doping rules? Seems like that is something easily fixed on your own with a little google research and the right questions.
It's tempting among posters who self-proclaim they are not racist, to think that a positive test in 2017 should be retro-actively punished all the way back to 2008, with no stronger evidence of any pattern, just so the first non-African gets the Gold.
By applying all the same arguments and criteria attempting to explain success with doping -- do you think in the last three decades since the era of greats like Coe and Ovett and Cram, that Nick Willis was the best, without doping?
Asbel Kiprop was just 18 years old in that final. No way he was doping and I’m glad he’s rightly recognised as the Olympic champion.
So no college age kids ever do drugs.
Nobody wins gold then starts doping
No way was he 18 that's why he was went downhill while still relatively young
Another of those "there are no teenagers in Kenya" posts, I see. Kiprop was still in school, attending classes when he won the world junior XC in Mombasa in 2007. He most definitely was 18.
As for going "downhill while still relatively young", he was the world's best 1500m guy from 2007 - 2017. How many middle distance runners have had that kind of consistency and longevity? Automatically one of the most tested athletes due to his medal haul and he only got busted the year he was no longer good enough to make the Kenyan team. Obviously started doping because he couldn't cope with his diminished competitiveness.
Ummm….you guys have totally high jacked my thread, talking about slavery and the distribution of athletes in different sports.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? Lol.
Back to Nick Willis and high level middle distance races, please.
Wasn't your question rooted in you not understanding the doping rules? Seems like that is something easily fixed on your own with a little google research and the right questions.
It's tempting among posters who self-proclaim they are not racist, to think that a positive test in 2017 should be retro-actively punished all the way back to 2008, with no stronger evidence of any pattern, just so the first non-African gets the Gold.
By applying all the same arguments and criteria attempting to explain success with doping -- do you think in the last three decades since the era of greats like Coe and Ovett and Cram, that Nick Willis was the best, without doping?
MM, weird logic on your part Rek. We can only go by what we actually know in this imperfect world. If you get popped you get popped. Thats your fault. We cant just punish everyone or nobody because we are not sure? Thats crazy. What we DO know is he is a cheater. Shall we just assume everyone is a criminal because we dont know? And we need to stop coddling these jerks who ruin other peoples chances at glory that they work on 8 hours a day 7 days a week. You get caught, you should lose everything, just one more deterrent. There is currently too much upside to cheating and not much downside, esp if you are from abject poverty. Stop sticking up for the bad guy.
No way was he 18 that's why he was went downhill while still relatively young
Another of those "there are no teenagers in Kenya" posts, I see. Kiprop was still in school, attending classes when he won the world junior XC in Mombasa in 2007. He most definitely was 18.
As for going "downhill while still relatively young", he was the world's best 1500m guy from 2007 - 2017. How many middle distance runners have had that kind of consistency and longevity? Automatically one of the most tested athletes due to his medal haul and he only got busted the year he was no longer good enough to make the Kenyan team. Obviously started doping because he couldn't cope with his diminished competitiveness.
mmmmeh...not buying it. I could see it the other way, why on earth would you risk a 10 yr career of success, olympic Gold and a future that is set up for you as a result, to start doping now to extend your career a year or 2? That could be true, but he would a colossal idiot. I like the who starts doping after Gold argument. Either way a known cheater.
Ummm….you guys have totally high jacked my thread, talking about slavery and the distribution of athletes in different sports.
Is it that hard to stay on topic? Lol.
Back to Nick Willis and high level middle distance races, please.
Wasn't your question rooted in you not understanding the doping rules? Seems like that is something easily fixed on your own with a little google research and the right questions.
It's tempting among posters who self-proclaim they are not racist, to think that a positive test in 2017 should be retro-actively punished all the way back to 2008, with no stronger evidence of any pattern, just so the first non-African gets the Gold.
By applying all the same arguments and criteria attempting to explain success with doping -- do you think in the last three decades since the era of greats like Coe and Ovett and Cram, that Nick Willis was the best, without doping?
You are being such an a**hat. This is not a white vs non-white argument, you clown. RAMZI AND KIPROP ARE CONVICTED DOPERS.
I am a Latino American. If Manzano or Centro tested positive, I would feel the exact same: get those cheaters out, and next man up.
Also, my OP was tongue-in-cheek. I know the rules, but I wanted to start a discussion on this because maybe we should take doping a bit more seriously (i.e. a 1 time offense is a lifetime ban with ALL retroactive results expunged), otherwise the incentive to dope is way, way too high and our sport will never be clean.
Get off your self-important high horse and recognize that legitimate discussions CAN be had, even in the cesspool we call Letsrun. There are smarter people than me on this board, and (many, many) smarter than you.
MM, weird logic on your part Rek. We can only go by what we actually know in this imperfect world. If you get popped you get popped. Thats your fault. We cant just punish everyone or nobody because we are not sure? Thats crazy. What we DO know is he is a cheater. Shall we just assume everyone is a criminal because we dont know? And we need to stop coddling these jerks who ruin other peoples chances at glory that they work on 8 hours a day 7 days a week. You get caught, you should lose everything, just one more deterrent. There is currently too much upside to cheating and not much downside, esp if you are from abject poverty. Stop sticking up for the bad guy.
Kiprop was actually punished with a 4-year ban, so there is no question of not punishing him.
If we are just going by what we know in this imperfect world, we know about 2017, but not about 2008.
I know the rules, but I wanted to start a discussion on this because maybe we should take doping a bit more seriously (i.e. a 1 time offense is a lifetime ban with ALL retroactive results expunged), otherwise the incentive to dope is way, way too high and our sport will never be clean.
Agreed! But I don't think it could ever get done.
In any case, sounds like you have Shalane Flanagan or your side. This is what she said about dopers:
Let’s say someone is working at a bank and they embezzle a bunch of money. The bank says, hey, you embezzled a bunch of money, so we’re going to fire you. You can’t work here anymore. But in, like, five years you can come back. We’re not going to get the money from you. You can keep the money. So you get, like, a five-year vacation. To me, these athletes need to give back the money that they stole from the other athletes and I believe that all the accolades should be erased from that day forward. They should not have any accolades to go with that.
Evidently she doesn't think a mere five year ban is enough (not sure why she said 5, which is a rather rare ban).
You are being such an a**hat. This is not a white vs non-white argument, you clown. RAMZI AND KIPROP ARE CONVICTED DOPERS.
I am a Latino American. If Manzano or Centro tested positive, I would feel the exact same: get those cheaters out, and next man up.
Also, my OP was tongue-in-cheek. I know the rules, but I wanted to start a discussion on this because maybe we should take doping a bit more seriously (i.e. a 1 time offense is a lifetime ban with ALL retroactive results expunged), otherwise the incentive to dope is way, way too high and our sport will never be clean.
Get off your self-important high horse and recognize that legitimate discussions CAN be had, even in the cesspool we call Letsrun. There are smarter people than me on this board, and (many, many) smarter than you.
OK. I'll take that back. For you it's not about giving non-Africans the Olympic Gold, but retro-active lifetime bans.
I could actually support a lifetime ban if I felt that anti-doping results were infallible and the chance of false positives, or worse, intentional sabotage by teammates, spouses, coaches, etc. were 0%.
See for example Hajo Seppelt's most recent documentary "Doping Top Secret: Guilty" where he explores how the principle of "strict liability" means the athlete will be held responsible for many things not reasonably in their control. A lifetime ban, both forwards and backwards seems a bit harsh for the athletes Seppelt interviewed.
See also some of the lengthy write-ups by Prof. Erik Boye (one of the featured guest writers at the "sportsscientists"), deeply examining the cases of Vojtěch Sommer, Steven Colvert, and Benedikt Karus, and the difficulty of these athletes to fairly defend themselves against what looks like obvious errors in the WADA labs, with limited ability for the athlete to have access to the raw lab data, and obtain independent assessments of the results, for the exact EPO urine test that Kiprop was busted for.
You are being such an a**hat. This is not a white vs non-white argument, you clown. RAMZI AND KIPROP ARE CONVICTED DOPERS.
I am a Latino American. If Manzano or Centro tested positive, I would feel the exact same: get those cheaters out, and next man up.
Also, my OP was tongue-in-cheek. I know the rules, but I wanted to start a discussion on this because maybe we should take doping a bit more seriously (i.e. a 1 time offense is a lifetime ban with ALL retroactive results expunged), otherwise the incentive to dope is way, way too high and our sport will never be clean.
Get off your self-important high horse and recognize that legitimate discussions CAN be had, even in the cesspool we call Letsrun. There are smarter people than me on this board, and (many, many) smarter than you.
OK. I'll take that back. For you it's not about giving non-Africans the Olympic Gold, but retro-active lifetime bans.
I could actually support a lifetime ban if I felt that anti-doping results were infallible and the chance of false positives, or worse, intentional sabotage by teammates, spouses, coaches, etc. were 0%.
See for example Hajo Seppelt's most recent documentary "Doping Top Secret: Guilty" where he explores how the principle of "strict liability" means the athlete will be held responsible for many things not reasonably in their control. A lifetime ban, both forwards and backwards seems a bit harsh for the athletes Seppelt interviewed.
See also some of the lengthy write-ups by Prof. Erik Boye (one of the featured guest writers at the "sportsscientists"), deeply examining the cases of Vojtěch Sommer, Steven Colvert, and Benedikt Karus, and the difficulty of these athletes to fairly defend themselves against what looks like obvious errors in the WADA labs, with limited ability for the athlete to have access to the raw lab data, and obtain independent assessments of the results, for the exact EPO urine test that Kiprop was busted for.
Good stuff. Agreed, big changes would have to occur in the way athletes were tested, results were vetted, and records were open to transparency. It is an interesting debate in this arena whether a false positive is a “worse” error than a false negative. On one hand, a false positive can ruin the career, reputation, and more of a great athlete. On the other, a false negative can diminish the accomplishments, reputation, and more of many worthy athletes, but not on the same scale.
Another alternative is to go the way of American football, where PED use is met with a slap on the wrist (6 games / 16 which is only 1/3 of the years salary and in effect a 2 month ban). I’m not in favor of this, but I could understand support for it. This levels the playing field the other way.
I’ll look into your cited article. With certainty, athletes NOW should have full access to all records regarding their own doping tests. We do this for commonplace patients, we should do the same when the results literally make or break a person’s career. Full transparency of the process is a necessity that we somehow don’t have, even after the Salazar debacle.
Good stuff. Agreed, big changes would have to occur in the way athletes were tested, results were vetted, and records were open to transparency. It is an interesting debate in this arena whether a false positive is a “worse” error than a false negative. On one hand, a false positive can ruin the career, reputation, and more of a great athlete. On the other, a false negative can diminish the accomplishments, reputation, and more of many worthy athletes, but not on the same scale.
Another alternative is to go the way of American football, where PED use is met with a slap on the wrist (6 games / 16 which is only 1/3 of the years salary and in effect a 2 month ban). I’m not in favor of this, but I could understand support for it. This levels the playing field the other way.
I’ll look into your cited article. With certainty, athletes NOW should have full access to all records regarding their own doping tests. We do this for commonplace patients, we should do the same when the results literally make or break a person’s career. Full transparency of the process is a necessity that we somehow don’t have, even after the Salazar debacle.
This is a guest post by Norweigian scientist Erik Boye, in which he raises concerns about the imbalance in power in antidoping and how it erodes confidence in the antidoping system
Jon Nissen-Meyer, Erik Boye, Bjarne Osterud and Tore Scotland
Some WADA-accredited laboratories and also sports judges base their conclusions and verdicts on uncertain, inconsistent results and interpretations. That’s fatal for those individual athletes who are innocent and for the cred...
The paper addresses a fundamental challenge facing anti-doping regulation in sport: securing scientific integrity. The importance of evidence in anti-doping is similar to that found across many fie...
Pour activer les sous-titres francais, cliquez sur l'icône de sous titres en bas (sur ordi) ou en haut (sur mobile) à droite de la vidéo !Doping Top Secret -...
MM, weird logic on your part Rek. We can only go by what we actually know in this imperfect world. If you get popped you get popped. Thats your fault. We cant just punish everyone or nobody because we are not sure? Thats crazy. What we DO know is he is a cheater. Shall we just assume everyone is a criminal because we dont know? And we need to stop coddling these jerks who ruin other peoples chances at glory that they work on 8 hours a day 7 days a week. You get caught, you should lose everything, just one more deterrent. There is currently too much upside to cheating and not much downside, esp if you are from abject poverty. Stop sticking up for the bad guy.
Kiprop was actually punished with a 4-year ban, so there is no question of not punishing him.
If we are just going by what we know in this imperfect world, we know about 2017, but not about 2008.
Your opinion is irrelevant, but it does make me realize the inconsistency of the rules.
It is assumed (fairly) that an athlete missing 3 tests is doping and he or she gets banned. It should equally be assumed that an athlete failing a test has been doping the entire length of their career, and thus have all their results annulled and any medals taken away.
No way was he 18 that's why he was went downhill while still relatively young
Another of those "there are no teenagers in Kenya" posts, I see. Kiprop was still in school, attending classes when he won the world junior XC in Mombasa in 2007. He most definitely was 18.
As for going "downhill while still relatively young", he was the world's best 1500m guy from 2007 - 2017. How many middle distance runners have had that kind of consistency and longevity? Automatically one of the most tested athletes due to his medal haul and he only got busted the year he was no longer good enough to make the Kenyan team. Obviously started doping because he couldn't cope with his diminished competitiveness.
He only got busted when Kenya finally introduced some out of competition testing, and even then he almost managed to buy the testers off with 'tea money'.
According to Rekrunner, a positive test says nothing about whether an athlete doped in the past, so it would be unfair to take away previous medals or even doubt their previous performances.
But by the same logic, a positive test equally says nothing about whether an athlete will dope in the future, so punishing him with a ban is equally unfair. Maybe just suspend him for the few hours or so that the EPO remains in the system?
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
