how does that work? wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
A UWAG is always good for a chuckle.
Ask Jack Daniels. He knows the truth. Are you saying you know more about Oxygen kinetics than JD?
No, I agree with him. His attention to correct gas exchange and breaths per minute analysis is a hallmark of his 50+ years at the top of his game.
Do you disagree?
He doesn't agree with you.
Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
how does that work? wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Yes, performance enhancing is pretty basic. Now why are you struggling to understand it?
It's the calorimetry thing, it doesn't stack up.
Maybe it's all in your head?
Prove it. With all the stuff in your head.
Tom Cochrane wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
No, I agree with him. His attention to correct gas exchange and breaths per minute analysis is a hallmark of his 50+ years at the top of his game.
Do you disagree?
He doesn't agree with you.
Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
Higher? Lower?
how does that work? wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
He doesn't agree with you.
Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
Higher? Lower?
Ask Jack. Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than JD?
Tom Cochrane wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
Higher? Lower?
Ask Jack. Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than JD?
What do you think he would say?
Higher?Lower?
how does that work? wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Ask Jack. Do you think you know more about Oxygen kinetics than JD?
What do you think he would say?
Higher?Lower?
So you think you know more about oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
Tom Cochrane wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
What do you think he would say?
Higher?Lower?
So you think you know more about oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
He wouldn't say that.
Would he?
how does that work? wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
So you think you know more about oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels?
He wouldn't say that.
Would he?
He wouldn't. But you did.
So you think you know more about oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels? Do you even understand the question?
$ 10 000 if you can prove you know more about Oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels.
Tom Cochrane wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
He wouldn't say that.
Would he?
He wouldn't. But you did.
So you think you know more about oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels? Do you even understand the question?
$ 10 000 if you can prove you know more about Oxygen kinetics than Jack Daniels.
Higher, higher.
Tom Cochrane wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Caffeine is performance enhancing, yet not banned by WADA.
Thyroid medication, considered by many to be performance enhancing, also by WADA and UKAD, repeatedly considered and not banned by WADA.
L-carnitine and Actovegin are other examples.
Protein powders, isotonic drinks, sugar, bananas, vitamin B-12, super-foods, ...
Citations?
Everything.
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Why would they have nothing to lose? They lose portions or all of their career and any sponsorships and earned prize money.
0% winners don't have these yet. They have nothing.
how does that work? wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Caffeine is performance enhancing...
Is it?
Which part of my performance will it enhance and how?
According to JD, it has a proven ergogenic effect.
rekrunner wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Citations?
Everything.
WADA loada stuff not to take because it will make you superhuman.
Everyone knows.
rekrunner wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
Is it?
Which part of my performance will it enhance and how?
According to JD, it has a proven ergogenic effect.
What is ergogenic effect?
rekrunner wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Citations?
Everything.
Just like EPO.
rekrunner wrote:
Tom Cochrane wrote:
Why would they have nothing to lose? They lose portions or all of their career and any sponsorships and earned prize money.
0% winners don't have these yet. They have nothing.
Most elite runners are 0% winners in the grand scheme of elite athletics. Yet they get money and sponsorship still.
Much like Tennis players who make millions as scrubs.
how does that work? wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
According to JD, it has a proven ergogenic effect.
What is ergogenic effect?
It's what didn't happen to you when you read a book.
how does that work? wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Everything.
WADA loada stuff not to take because it will make you superhuman.
Everyone knows.
Except Ramzi, Boulami, Kiptum and Sumgong. They knew what to take. The test was a bit of an obstacle though.
rekrunner wrote:
how does that work? wrote:
Is it?
Which part of my performance will it enhance and how?
According to JD, it has a proven ergogenic effect.
Are you saying JD knows more than Jon?
Armstronglivs wrote:
I guess it also hasn't really occurred to you that an objection to a drug being performance enhancing under the WADA code carries the implication that it is therefore also against the spirit of sport. Making connections not your thing?
The connection between method/drug X being "performance enhancing" and the automatic implication that "it is therefore also against the spirit of sport" didn't indeed occur to me during that discussion, because the X was residence at altitude, the habit that tens of millions of people do every day more or less voluntarily.
The discussion was indeed whether altitude training should be banned under the WADA code if it showed similar(ish) benefits as EPO did, and I pointed out explicitly that it didn't fit either one of the other two WADA criteria for a method/drug to be banned (against spirit of sport/being dangerous).
You explicitly maintained that only performance enhancing would've been enough rationale to get it banned.
For a man bragging explicitly about his "WADA contacts" and knowledge about the anti-doping literature, that shows implicitly a pathetic level of knowledge about the three criteria of WADA.