Yes I know. I am not arguing with you, just adding some thoughts, as I find this case particularly interesting.
Yes I know. I am not arguing with you, just adding some thoughts, as I find this case particularly interesting.
rekrunner wrote:
I have already mentioned several times, that while I did use "top-5" averages, trying to use the same guideline with smaller populations risk including significantly slower times, due to a lack of depth of quality. I paid special attention to this, and specifically noted that for the women, in the longer distances, the lack of maturity in the times lead to lower references, and much larger "post-1990" figures versus the men.
I did not change the guidelines, but just noted that 2 times were 2:07:1x, and the remaining three must average 1:40 slower, at 2:08:50. As I already noted this several times, that this is what I feared would happen, I thought it appropriate to demonstrate that that is what happened because we shrank the samples to just European marathon performances.
Then, like I said it was fair, and you seem to have accepted, I compared the fastest Spaniard, Rey, to Pinto (POR) and Benoit (FRA).
My position is that Spain stands out when it comes to examples of doping busts, doping rings, etc., but does not particularly stand out, when comparing their times to non-Africans, and now just other Europeans. I didn't change the guidelines to fortify that position. Using my and your guidelines, 0.5% progress against this weaker European reference, for the marathon is rather small, for a doping nation, in an event which Subway thinks benefits the most from EPO. And Rey was still slower than a Portuguese and a Frenchman.
You're spinning...again. You said it was fair to compare the post-90s fastest Spanish times with the pre-90's fastest European times. These are the five fastest Europeans pre-90s:
1) Lopes (POR) 2:07:12
2) Jones (GBR) 2:07:13
3) Spedding (GBR) 2:08:33
4) Peter (GER) 2:08:47
5) Heillman (GER) 2:09:03
Lopes is a former WR holder & Olympic Champion, Jones' time is still the fastest for a Brit, Spedding is an Olympic Bronze medalist & London title holder and Peter held the German NR from 1985 thru 2015! There's no lack of depth here; Former WR holder, Olympic medalists, major title winners, National record holder for 30 yrs. These were the five most talented Europeans of their era who made some noise.
Rey (2:06:52) beat them all. The 2nd fastest Spanaird, Roncero (2:07:23), was just basically a few seconds off of Lopes & Jones, but ran faster than the other 3. With the five fastest Spanairds averaged out at 2:07:28 - they as a whole ran faster by about a minute over the best five Europeans pre-90s. And these are the Spanish, not the East Africans were sub-2:06 marathoners come a dime a dozen. ?
And 5 on 5...not 5 on 2...your protocol (it's not a weaker reference as you alluded to because there were plenty of European marathoners back in that era).
And yes, comparing Rey with post-90's Europeans, he's not as fast as Pinto, Zwierzchiewski or Moen, but you neglected to mention that he's faster than any other Europeans, all time, including some of the more faster dudes such as Italy's best (Baldini/2:07:22), Poland's best (Szost/2:07:39) & Germany's best (Gabius/2:08:33).
rekrunner wrote:
Unfortunate.
I was asked "when was the last time anti-doping flushed a time without an IC positive or ABP data to look at?" Anti-doping agencies can use any evidence in its possession. For example, in 2012 USADA used Eddy H. confessions, and other evidence, to overcome the 8-year statute of limitations, to invalidate results from Oct. 2001 to Jan. 2004.
It looks like in Poistogova's case, her interview with the WADA IC was incomplete, as was the ARD recordings, and whatever confessions she made probably lacked the sufficient detail, evidence, or corroboration, to annul her London 2012 performance. Furthermore, the IAAF is not responsible for the anti-doping for the Olympics, the IOC is. Nevertheless, the WADA IC recommended a lifetime ban for Poistogova.
Rather than losing credibility, the only way to maintain credibility is to act on a solid case. Annulling results without it will just result in appeals that overturn the decision. Rather than suggesting major corruption, it suggests an inability to make a case on secret recordings and half an interview.
Man...you sound like you're apologizing for a very egegrious decision by CAS - one that smells like corruption.
That's funny because her confessions from the ARD-recordings (admitted to using an EPO-roid stack during the summer prep for London, as well as explaining Russian anti-doping countermeasures) were good enough for CAS to rule that she committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to "Rule 32.2(b) of the IAAF Competition Rules." Her ban was backdated to August 2015, with her results from October 2014 nullified (which included her EC medal).
So, Semenya is elevated to gold (vacated by Savinova's ban & annulment), Doper Poistagova gets to exchange her bronze for silver, and Jelimo moves to bronze. And guess who gets the all-time screw job here?
Answer: Montaño....who finished fifth and should be getting bronze with both Russian dopers booted out.
And trying to rationalize one of the most ridiculous CAS decisions in the history of athletics? C'mon rekrunner...you can do better than that.
http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release_4480_4486_4487_4655.pdfrekrunner wrote:
But even then:
a) If the top-5 times were "clean", we learned that EPO was not an important factor for top times, in the EPO-era.
b) Learning EPO is better than blood transfusion (+ more steroids) is enough to curb some of the more exagerrated claims.
I don't think my numbers "prove" anything about EPO effect. Much of what I say relies on my expectation that these numbers would be much larger, for non-Africans too, since EPO was global, and not local, and for a decade, the lack of testing was also global, not local. Arguments about steroids and a decline of interest did not persuade me that at least 5 athletes, with sufficient talent, (or even just 1), from 5-continents, over nearly 3 decades, would not at least try to leverage the full power of EPO, with or without steroids.
Just curious: How many of the top-5 in each category do you actually suspect of doping or do you believe they're all clean? (excluding any confirmed dopers on the lists such as Kiprop, Boulami, etc.).
What spin? Here's what I originally said: "I think it is fair to compare Spain to Portugal, or the rest of Europe. And what we see is that Spain, quite famous for EPO abuse, EPO rings, EPO scandals, only brought the nation up to an ability comparable to what Europe achieved before the EPO-era." In the very same post -- the one to which you responded -- I ALSO said: "As I said before, the problem with choosing a pre-1990 reference with a small sample, like Spain, or Morocco, is the increased risk of lack of depth pre-1990." In other words, I thought using "my protocol" on smaller samples could be a problem, BEFORE you did your Spanish/European analysis. It should come as no surprise when I point out the very same risk was realized also for European marathon times pre-1990, and you observe the same in Europe post-1990. Since I simply said "compare", in the marathon, Europe achieved a 2:07:12 and a 2:07:13 -- so it is not wrong to say 2:06:52-2:07:28 is "an ability comparable to what Europe achieved before the EPO-era". I think by any measure 2:08:10 is weaker than 2:07:11. In all these doping threads, it doesn't take long for Spain to be mentioned, but their reputation for doping far exceeds their reputation for performing at the top.
Spanish Armada wrote:
You're spinning...again. You said it was fair to compare the post-90s fastest Spanish times with the pre-90's fastest European times. These are the five fastest Europeans pre-90s:
1) Lopes (POR) 2:07:12
2) Jones (GBR) 2:07:13
3) Spedding (GBR) 2:08:33
4) Peter (GER) 2:08:47
5) Heillman (GER) 2:09:03
Lopes is a former WR holder & Olympic Champion, Jones' time is still the fastest for a Brit, Spedding is an Olympic Bronze medalist & London title holder and Peter held the German NR from 1985 thru 2015! There's no lack of depth here; Former WR holder, Olympic medalists, major title winners, National record holder for 30 yrs. These were the five most talented Europeans of their era who made some noise.
Rey (2:06:52) beat them all. The 2nd fastest Spanaird, Roncero (2:07:23), was just basically a few seconds off of Lopes & Jones, but ran faster than the other 3. With the five fastest Spanairds averaged out at 2:07:28 - they as a whole ran faster by about a minute over the best five Europeans pre-90s. And these are the Spanish, not the East Africans were sub-2:06 marathoners come a dime a dozen. ?
And 5 on 5...not 5 on 2...your protocol (it's not a weaker reference as you alluded to because there were plenty of European marathoners back in that era).
And yes, comparing Rey with post-90's Europeans, he's not as fast as Pinto, Zwierzchiewski or Moen, but you neglected to mention that he's faster than any other Europeans, all time, including some of the more faster dudes such as Italy's best (Baldini/2:07:22), Poland's best (Szost/2:07:39) & Germany's best (Gabius/2:08:33).
These are not my rationalizations but my conclusions from reading the WADA-IC report, and the subsequent lack of annulment of London 2012. Corruption in the WADA-IC and/or CAS is another possibility I had not considered. It was in the WADA-IC report that they started an interview with Poistogova, which was interrupted in the middle, by a doping control, and then she never came back to finish the interview. "The athlete interview of Ekatrina Poistogova was interrupted after the athlete spoke with her doctor (Igor Gubchenko)." The WADA-IC considered "Analysis of the ARD secret tape recording made on 21 October 2014", and the interrupted interview, and recommended a lifetime ban: "Ms. Poistogova is the subject of an IC sanction package that was submitted to WADA and has been submitted by WADA to the IAAF with a recommendation for a lifetime ban from sport." The CAS judgement date of 21 October 2014 is the same date that the WADA IC reported the "ARD secret tape recording made on 21 October 2014". This suggests to me that, even with the ARD secret recordings as evidence, they lacked sufficient evidence to annul London 2012. CAS is the final judge in these matters. When I say that anti-doping agencies need to build a solid case, it needs to survive any appeals heard before CAS.
Barrel of Laughs wrote:
Man...you sound like you're apologizing for a very egegrious decision by CAS - one that smells like corruption.
That's funny because her confessions from the ARD-recordings (admitted to using an EPO-roid stack during the summer prep for London, as well as explaining Russian anti-doping countermeasures) were good enough for CAS to rule that she committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to "Rule 32.2(b) of the IAAF Competition Rules." Her ban was backdated to August 2015, with her results from October 2014 nullified (which included her EC medal).
So, Semenya is elevated to gold (vacated by Savinova's ban & annulment), Doper Poistagova gets to exchange her bronze for silver, and Jelimo moves to bronze. And guess who gets the all-time screw job here?
Answer: Montaño....who finished fifth and should be getting bronze with both Russian dopers booted out.
And trying to rationalize one of the most ridiculous CAS decisions in the history of athletics? C'mon rekrunner...you can do better than that.
This is honestly a difficult question, because I link doping in distance events more to belief than top performance. First off, practically speaking, as I analyzed 6 male events and 5 female events, and for each event, there were 4 "top-5" averages (one pre-1990, and 3 post-1990), you are asking me to respond with 44 estimates. Sorry I'm not going to do that. But mainly, the question for me is: how many top-5 athletes believed they needed to dope WHEN they produced their top-5 performance? I suspect the Chinese women, and the Russian women doped, and no doubt convicted dopers like Boulami, where performances were annulled (which I found very few). You mention Kiprop, and similarly we've talked about Baumann. Convicted doper doesn't mean their best performance was dirty. Kiprop ran his best time in 2015, while the Fancy Bears leak was 2016, and the doping conviction was 2017 -- two years when he was running slower times. Baumann ran fast in 1997, but was convicted in 1999, when he was running slower times again. Generally, pick whatever doing prevalence you want: - The IAAF estimated about 14% based on abnormal blood values - Tuebingen survey, for all World Championship events, including field and sprint and walking, estimated more than 29% (with one major correction), or up to 44% or more based on raw survey results I'm inclined to believe, for distance events, for blood boosting doping, the IAAF prevalence is the most accurate, but also subject to adjustment from "false positives" and "false negatives". I suspect doping prevalence at the top is less than that estimate, as it is not the top-5 distance runners that believe they need to dope, but the ones who want to become top-5 who are more likely to dope, or the ones who were top-5, and want to stay top-5 for longer.
Inquiring minds want to know wrote:
Just curious: How many of the top-5 in each category do you actually suspect of doping or do you believe they're all clean? (excluding any confirmed dopers on the lists such as Kiprop, Boulami, etc.).
Hey congratulations for today, a big win and a new European record. You must be delighted with your new charge?
I think you are stretching the differences between cycling and running a bit. A major champs for Mo, Bekele, Rupp and others is actually a lot closer to a grand tour. The 10,000m on the first day, 1-2 days recovery the 5,000m heats, 1-2 days recovery the 5,000m final. (Years ago there were 10,000m heats.) A week later a Diamond League. Cycling tours often have lazy days with only a few days earmarked as "attack days." Often, like the US, there will be a national champs, where these athletes will do multiple events. Back in the old days athletes like Ovett, Rono, Walker, Boit and Dixon would race every few days, it was the Diamond League in recent years that has changed this for the worse.
Aragon wrote:
To summarize the only things I have claimed:
1) His 5000m PB time is only some 1 % better than his 3000m PB. If there is any claim made about the records, it is usually claimed that Komen's 3000m world record is "faster" than the 5000m record.
You're going to have to explain this claim:
3000 Metres 7:30.50 Monaco (MON) 08 AUG 1998
5000 Metres 12:54.70 Zürich (SUI) 13 AUG 1997
It is 1236 vs 1230 on the IAAF's points table.
Subway Surfers wrote:
Hey congratulations for today, a big win and a new European record. You must be delighted with your new charge?
+1
Well done, Gary!
Not this again. The authors clearly stated that it was likely more than 44% dopers in Daegu, not less. Of course you could disagree with them, but why do you keep mispresenting them?
Anyway, didn't you say you had a background in statistics? If 14% are likely dopers by a chance of, what, over 99.9%?, how many dopers you estimate are there?
rekrunner wrote:
In all these doping threads, it doesn't take long for Spain to be mentioned, but their reputation for doping far exceeds their reputation for performing at the top.
They won three straight WC Marathons in the EPO era you goddam moran!
The context was Baumann's performance improvement from 1991 to 1997, so the 3000m time (7:33.91) was his PB time before his alleged transformation, a reference ro my earlier post.
That IS the top JC on a B wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
In all these doping threads, it doesn't take long for Spain to be mentioned, but their reputation for doping far exceeds their reputation for performing at the top.
They won three straight WC Marathons in the EPO era you goddam moran!
WC 95, 97 & 99, WC Silver 97. ?
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/athletics-suspicion-clouds-spanish-victory-1118336.htmlThe Fast & Furious 90s wrote:
That IS the top JC on a B wrote:
They won three straight WC Marathons in the EPO era you goddam moran!
WC 95, 97 & 99, WC Silver 97. ?
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/athletics-suspicion-clouds-spanish-victory-1118336.html
Yes I don't know why Rek down plays Spain in the 1990s. They also had this guy
https://youtu.be/AiqPRpKVY5EAs you can see he was very (very) fast.
Aragon wrote:
The context was Baumann's performance improvement from 1991 to 1997, so the 3000m time (7:33.91) was his PB time before his alleged transformation, a reference ro my earlier post.
Gold medalist at Barcelona - knock off a Kenyan & Ethiopian:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1992_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_5000_metresIf that reference was an argument against my observation that Baumann had no super-miraculous transformation in the 1990's, I fail too see it, quite to the contrary.
In any case thanks for providing some extra material for my original allegation about his 1990's.
https://youtu.be/JD8g1t_zZZIWhat a performance! wrote:
Aragon wrote:
The context was Baumann's performance improvement from 1991 to 1997, so the 3000m time (7:33.91) was his PB time before his alleged transformation, a reference ro my earlier post.
Gold medalist at Barcelona - knock off a Kenyan & Ethiopian:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1992_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_5000_metres
Last 200m in 25.2sec wow!
Subway Surfers wrote:
I think you are stretching the differences between cycling and running a bit. A major champs for Mo, Bekele, Rupp and others is actually a lot closer to a grand tour. The 10,000m on the first day, 1-2 days recovery the 5,000m heats, 1-2 days...
That is red herring and beside the point that Canova made.
That is because the alleged similarity between major championships in athletics and cycling GTs has pretty much nothing to do with how rHuEPO benefits continuous efforts of different durations and absolutely nothing to do with the WR progression because in endurance events records are broken almost without an exception outside major competitions.