The naivety of this place never fails to surprise. Athletics is known as a worse doping offender than cycling, as shown by its doping violations. When you are watching top track and field athletes you are watching the equivalent of the TDF peloton, in which every rider was said to be doped (and this from riders). You can trust track to be clean as much as you can trust the TDF.
I think you have solid points but Khamis agreed with you so I got to downvote. You just have to be wrong if he thinks you are right.
LOL I think you are such a joker are you sir?????? Me, Armstrong and Coevett are of ONE ACCORD alright???? We trinity have an unspoken and unseeing invisible understanding between all 3 of us. It's like telepathy you feeling me sir????
If Armstrong and Coevett thinks an athlete or group of athletes are probably doping, I won't put up a resistance to that because I see what they see and understand what they understand and the same vice versa!!!!!!!
The only limitation though is that Armstrong and Coevett might not see my thoughts as I easily see theirs because honestly my thoughts are dominated by RF and they both have never encountered nor studied about that in their entire lives!!! It would a huge ask for them to upgrade their thoughts to the realm of RF but it would an easy ask for me to downgrade my thoughts to the realm of theirs!!!!
They are not humanoids but alien-human hybrids (in this case, most of them were 75% alien, 25% human).
Did anyone notice just how effortless it was for them? Classic sign of aliens. They are here to fulfill the alien agenda and no one will stop them, certainly not a couple of African countries
Correct sir!!!!! It was supposed to be East Africa sweeping all the medals and dominating the men's distance events especially in the 10k and Grant Fisher and the rest of the white men finishing in 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th or last place. In fact, the way Fisher ran clean at the 10k US trials before he took a plane back to Utah to dope or get dope and return back to Eugene where he shockingly electrified the 5000m finals all of a sudden out of turn with his 10k performance, if he ran cleanly at Paris Olympics 10k he should finish in LAST PLACE OR IN 28:00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Americans or even white men should never have been known for any distance supremacy at all in 2024 except Josh KERR and Jakob!!!!
He would well and truly be washed up, retired in Costa Rica and enjoying the Carribean summer breeze, period!!!!!!! Distance running will be a distant memory for him by then. But he pulled off unconvincingly and unpersuasively the mother of all shockers and medaled at both the 10k and 5k with finishing sprint kicks I had never seen of him at 18yrs old or 19, 20, 21!!!!!!!!!!!
Did you see how Fisher sprinted in the 5000m final in the last 300m??? His arms were SPREAD SO WIDE AS HEAVEN, SO UNGAINLY, SO LACKING IN BIOMECHANICAL SPRINT PROPRIETY AND ETHICS compared to Jakob Ingebrigtsen who hardly spread his arms as wide as Fisher in the final 100m and demonstrated so much more biomechanical grace, finesse and symmetrical beauty than the unsightly Fisher's!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Of course Josh KERR's was in turn much better than Jakob's!!!!
That is just another corroboration of evidence to my omnipotent RF sensing eyes that Fisher is dirty!!!!!
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
At Paris it was a thinner layer of mondo making the track harder, less durable and thus faster. But the huge difference was the athletes getting through to finals with substantially less cumulative fatigue in their legs because cushioned shoes/firm track is a far better long term equation (across 3 races in 4 days etc) than firm shoes/cushioned track.
Armstrong my man denies what you say. The sprint times didn't show that the track was all that fast but as I may remind Armstrong it could be due to heavy 5G and 4G+ mobile telephony irradiating the entire Stade De France from North, South, East and West positions of antenna locations so that spectators and fans can have seamless internet connection inside the stadium!!!! These same RF then slowed down both sprint and distance times as athletes' nerve sheaths get fried and cooked by these RF which then requires PEDs to off-balance to get back to par equilibrium, you feeling me sir???? Athletes are also fried and cooked inside all their hotel rooms, Olympic villages where WiFi and internet is VERY VERY high speed and accessible for all!!!!!
So in actual fact it's really hard to pinpoint just the track surfaces or shoes because you have something else having the opposite negative effect on sprint and distance performances and that is anthropogenic RFs!!!
This post was edited 54 seconds after it was posted.
It's not so much naivety as gullible zealotry wanting for evidence of the existence of powerful magical potions as if Asterix and Obelix are real.
They spend over a billion dollars a year in their "gullible zealotry". But you know they are merely succumbing to magical thinking while never having used peds or known anyone who has.
We were talking about "this place".
You perfectly demonstrate your "gullible zealotry wanting for evidence of the existence of powerful magical potions" with the statement "They spend over a billion dollars a year".
You keep referring to Al Jazeera, who provided no evidence (i.e. we are still wanting evidence), who did not define "they", and who did not describe what the money was spent on as limited to WADA banned substances. This thread is about Olympians who performed well, not about aging men taking Nugenix Total T (for the wife), or your local gym rats taking Muscle Boost 5000.
It is the broad ambiguity and lack of specificity that the gullible zealots find most persuasive, because they saw it on TV.
Gullible zealotry wanting for evidence -- case in point. The consequence of your misplaced trust is self-delusion.
Ummm no, you are saying I misplaced my trust in my darling Armstrong and also Coevett really???? These 2 male men are very very well knowledgeable in the field of human psychology/psychiatry and behavior as applied to high performance sport in a variety of sports but mostly in distance running. Can't you FEEL them up and their authenticity dear rekrunner????????
Are your 'feelings' not functioning at all because if that's the case you need to SEEK HELP from a holistic health specialist who will lay you down in a Himalayan Salt bath half naked to detoxify and purge all the harmful poisons from your lymph nodes, you feeling me rekrunner??????
Get your lymph nodes straightened first please, and, connect your phone and laptop with an ethernet cable to free your mind from anthropogenic RF which then regains your 'feelings' for Armstrong and Coevett!!!
I know for a fact that Armstrong and Coevett are very sincere individuals who fights doping aggressively and voluntarily unlike you who seems to do the opposite instead!!!
I don't doubt their sincerity, just their statements. You should trust data, not people. You do yourself a disservice by trusting Armstronglivs and Coevett, and you do them a disservice by vouching for them. Armstronglivs can't support his Al Jazeera quote, and Coevett still can't even spell Wanyonyi.
I fight substituting faith and fallacy for facts. You can't fight doping by building fake scarecrows and setting them on fire.
A question more so for those who think that the performances over last week were clean, why are we seeing such a drastic improvement in performances and times?
I suppose I should first address the main question of the thread. What is different are the new superspikes and the new track. The new superspikes produced a bunch of improved performances already in 2021, and continued to do so in 2024. If you don't believe me, ask Sean Ingle about seismic shifts with epicenters around Nike and New Balance, and Nick Willis about what he newly believes in:
Look when you folks tell me 'you don't really know Hocker is dirty' do you know what's my riposte to them sir??????????????
Well I tell them 'you also don't really know Hocker is clean' LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's 50/50 but here's the thing I'm very good at 50/50 judgement you feeling me sir??????
Due to my avant-garde RF advancement, and if I apply enough mental concentration in any athlete and their space-time history, I would be able to overturn 50/50 and make it either 0/100 (definitely clean) or 100/0 (definitely dirty) you feeling me sir??????
This is called KNACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A knack is a skill, and an incredible knack is then an incredible skill!!!!!!!!!!!
You disaffirming this knack of mine doesn't make it truly disaffirmed or false btw!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you sir :)
RF Kings aren't known to have any special knowledge or insight into athletic performance, nor space-time. This point may be moot, as outside your own self-accreditation, you aren't particularly known as an RF King.
The naivety of this place never fails to surprise. Athletics is known as a worse doping offender than cycling, as shown by its doping violations. When you are watching top track and field athletes you are watching the equivalent of the TDF peloton, in which every rider was said to be doped (and this from riders). You can trust track to be clean as much as you can trust the TDF.
I think you have solid points but Khamis agreed with you so I got to downvote. You just have to be wrong if he thinks you are right.
The alternative is rekrunner. Are you happier with that?
They spend over a billion dollars a year in their "gullible zealotry". But you know they are merely succumbing to magical thinking while never having used peds or known anyone who has.
We were talking about "this place".
You perfectly demonstrate your "gullible zealotry wanting for evidence of the existence of powerful magical potions" with the statement "They spend over a billion dollars a year".
You keep referring to Al Jazeera, who provided no evidence (i.e. we are still wanting evidence), who did not define "they", and who did not describe what the money was spent on as limited to WADA banned substances. This thread is about Olympians who performed well, not about aging men taking Nugenix Total T (for the wife), or your local gym rats taking Muscle Boost 5000.
It is the broad ambiguity and lack of specificity that the gullible zealots find most persuasive, because they saw it on TV.
The Al Jazeera investigation referred to doping in elite sport, not the irrelevant alternatives you raise. Their estimate has not been refuted. If it was incorrect it would have been challenged - it wasn't - by those with expert knowledge of the sport. That, obviously, doesn't include you.
A question more so for those who think that the performances over last week were clean, why are we seeing such a drastic improvement in performances and times?
I suppose I should first address the main question of the thread. What is different are the new superspikes and the new track. The new superspikes produced a bunch of improved performances already in 2021, and continued to do so in 2024. If you don't believe me, ask Sean Ingle about seismic shifts with epicenters around Nike and New Balance, and Nick Willis about what he newly believes in:
Ummm no, you are saying I misplaced my trust in my darling Armstrong and also Coevett really???? These 2 male men are very very well knowledgeable in the field of human psychology/psychiatry and behavior as applied to high performance sport in a variety of sports but mostly in distance running. Can't you FEEL them up and their authenticity dear rekrunner????????
Are your 'feelings' not functioning at all because if that's the case you need to SEEK HELP from a holistic health specialist who will lay you down in a Himalayan Salt bath half naked to detoxify and purge all the harmful poisons from your lymph nodes, you feeling me rekrunner??????
Get your lymph nodes straightened first please, and, connect your phone and laptop with an ethernet cable to free your mind from anthropogenic RF which then regains your 'feelings' for Armstrong and Coevett!!!
I know for a fact that Armstrong and Coevett are very sincere individuals who fights doping aggressively and voluntarily unlike you who seems to do the opposite instead!!!
I don't doubt their sincerity, just their statements. You should trust data, not people. You do yourself a disservice by trusting Armstronglivs and Coevett, and you do them a disservice by vouching for them. Armstronglivs can't support his Al Jazeera quote, and Coevett still can't even spell Wanyonyi.
I fight substituting faith and fallacy for facts. You can't fight doping by building fake scarecrows and setting them on fire.
You support nothing that you claim. You merely select "data" that will confirm your bias.
A question more so for those who think that the performances over last week were clean, why are we seeing such a drastic improvement in performances and times?
I suppose I should first address the main question of the thread. What is different are the new superspikes and the new track. The new superspikes produced a bunch of improved performances already in 2021, and continued to do so in 2024. If you don't believe me, ask Sean Ingle about seismic shifts with epicenters around Nike and New Balance, and Nick Willis about what he newly believes in:
I've often wondered if people that deny the super shoes' impact on our sport have ever raced in or trained in them. The impact of them on running economy, etc. has been studied and shows clear percentage point gains in single sessions, with some super responders mixed in there. What I don't believe is well know is the impact on training load. Anecdotally, when training in Alphaflys or Vaporflys, I'm noticeably less sore and able to recover quicker. My last marathon training block, it was undeniable that my long runs left me less beat up and able to train harder, in addition to getting work at faster speeds. This has been the experience of others I've trained with. At the elite level with sponsors, they can utilize these tools more often. Additional things like bicarb seem to also make a huge difference.
None of this is meant as a denial of any doping problem that may be there. But the training piece of the super shoes should not be overlooked.
This post was edited 24 seconds after it was posted.
By Aidan HansenAs athletes from around the world prepare for the 2024 Olympic games in Paris this summer, two College of Health Solutions professors recently shared research that could help those athletes, or anyone else taki...
I suppose I should first address the main question of the thread. What is different are the new superspikes and the new track. The new superspikes produced a bunch of improved performances already in 2021, and continued to do so in 2024. If you don't believe me, ask Sean Ingle about seismic shifts with epicenters around Nike and New Balance, and Nick Willis about what he newly believes in:
I've often wondered if people that deny the super shoes' impact on our sport have ever raced in or trained in them. The impact of them on running economy, etc. has been studied and shows clear percentage point gains in single sessions, with some super responders mixed in there. What I don't believe is well know is the impact on training load. Anecdotally, when training in Alphaflys or Vaporflys, I'm noticeably less sore and able to recover quicker. My last marathon training block, it was undeniable that my long runs left me less beat up and able to train harder, in addition to getting work at faster speeds. This has been the experience of others I've trained with. At the elite level with sponsors, they can utilize these tools more often. Additional things like bicarb seem to also make a huge difference.
None of this is meant as a denial of any doping problem that may be there. But the training piece of the super shoes should not be overlooked.
It seems like a reasonable explanation that super shoes/spikes and faster tracks have basically made up the difference with the more restricted doping that athletes can get away with now. It seems like the bio-passport system along with the AIU and now extremely sensitive tests have constrained what athletes can get away with in terms of chemical enhancement.
In my mind this is a fair tradeoff. Supershoes are basically available to everyone now, and compared to doping they are relatively cheap. To my knowledge wearing supershoes does not cause any long term health problems or break any laws. This seems like a big win for everyone involved.
I suppose I should first address the main question of the thread. What is different are the new superspikes and the new track. The new superspikes produced a bunch of improved performances already in 2021, and continued to do so in 2024. If you don't believe me, ask Sean Ingle about seismic shifts with epicenters around Nike and New Balance, and Nick Willis about what he newly believes in:
I've often wondered if people that deny the super shoes' impact on our sport have ever raced in or trained in them. The impact of them on running economy, etc. has been studied and shows clear percentage point gains in single sessions, with some super responders mixed in there. What I don't believe is well know is the impact on training load. Anecdotally, when training in Alphaflys or Vaporflys, I'm noticeably less sore and able to recover quicker. My last marathon training block, it was undeniable that my long runs left me less beat up and able to train harder, in addition to getting work at faster speeds. This has been the experience of others I've trained with. At the elite level with sponsors, they can utilize these tools more often. Additional things like bicarb seem to also make a huge difference.
None of this is meant as a denial of any doping problem that may be there. But the training piece of the super shoes should not be overlooked.
The company-funded study showing a 4% improvement was rigged to show that improvement and is about as scientifically sound as a poll of 100 meth addicts on the popularity of meth.
Like everyone else who bought them, your observed improvement was a confirmation bias fueled placebo effect. You wanted to believe the shoes would work. Your $300 investment couldn't in your mind be a failure. You ran better because your mind pushed you to do it when the shoes were on.
PEDs are 100% behind why elite runners wearing them run faster. All have been duped.
Cycling is the same way. There's something like Ketones or whatever, or combo with Maurten, or addition of something else borderline that's everywhere. We just don't know what it is.
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.
