Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
You are adding a lot of faith to the discussion, but pathetically, no facts.
The above is fact. Which you prove time and again.
Sad.
Here are two areas where you can start adding facts:
- Is 3:37 representative of Cheptegei's 1500m potential?
- Are drugs as revolutionary as you want to believe?
Armstronglivs wrote:
This is like a discussion with someone from the 19th century - who can't conceive of jet air craft before powered-flight.
Someone who can't beat 3.37 for the 1500 in over 5 years but can run 12.35 for the 5k is obviously doping when he runs the longer distance. There is nothing naturally plausible about a 3.37 athlete putting 3.44 together 3x consecutively.
What you also don't know about drugs is that they are not daily vitamin pills, they are part of a cycle where the athlete uses them as part of a programme to peak at targeted times. Hence, the athlete can show very wide disparities in performance, explained by the period that they cycle off the drugs.
Cheptegei would be struggling to get much faster over the 1500 - maybe like Ramzi he could drop from 3.37 to 3.30 by targeting the event through a doping programme (though Ramzi clearly had more speed than Cheptegei). But the 1500 isn't his preferred distance so he doesn't do that and his performances are slow.
If 12.35 was a clean record Cheptegei would need to be capable of around 3.28-30 clean. Even a margin of 15 or so secs from a notional best 1500 time to his 3.44 5k splits shows phenomenal endurance. He makes a mockery of that by halving that differential.
He isnt clean, his records aren't natural, and there probably hasn't been a clean record in running for over 30 years. But you wouldn't know that, with your 19th century understanding of doping. You won't be persuaded, because as we know you're not here for that but to present your staunchest defence against every suggestion a top athlete might be doping. They should pay you.
Ooh -- jet engines. Another failed analogy. That's a bad sign for you.
It's true he didn't beat 3:37 -- this has been addressed repeatedly -- but why would you say or believe that he can't? How can someone who thinks he is so informed repeatedly and unashamedly display such depth of ignorance about the sport of distance running? Why would you think he is not capable of at least matching Bekele and Geb's performance? I guess by implication, you argue now that Bekele and Geb are clean.
What I do know about drugs and performance in the modern era is how non-Africans have performed since the dawn of the African-era of distance running. Recorded history qualifies as "fact".
Help me update my understanding of doping and performance by providing any facts about PEDs and their role in creating the best performance of the best athletes, rather than repeating readings from the Gospel of Armstronglivs.
I find facts persuasive, but in very short supply.
rekrunner wrote:
How is it that the best non-African is Baumann, who was busted 2 years afterwards for steroids, who is nearly 20 seconds slower, in a race where he took 5th, losing by more than 12 seconds? Surely there were no shortages of 3:37 1500m non-African runners during the EPO-era, before EPO tests and before WADA. In light of all this power and prevalence, how is it that Solinsky (3:36 runner) is the first sub-27:00 10000m runner, and only Rupp (3:34 runner) could achieve the same milestone?
Interestingly, you keep circling back to banned drug cheat Baumann.
Doesn't it bother you that most of the very best non-Africans since the 90s were banned for doping (Baumann, Decker, Shobukhova), admitted to doping (Junxia), or were flagged as likely doping (Radcliffe, Jager, Rupp)?
As for "how is it" that more East Africans broke 27 minutes: overall more talent and more motivation, possibly more widespread doping.
Oh Please wrote:
Killeriott wrote:
Joshua ran a 12:35 5000m which meant he was running liken 3 and 1/3 1500m avg 3:46.6 and yet he cannot easily run faster than 3:37 for 1500m. He should be able to EASILY run 3:37. It makes me think he is taking PEDs.
You don't say? Sub 12:40 5000 is hard? The only other times it was done was during height of EPO?
and the height of the pandemic with virtually no out of comp testing
ukathleticscoach wrote:
and the height of the pandemic with virtually no out of comp testing
Yes. With super shoes and fewer doping controls and guiding lights, the pre-ABP track world records from two decades ago finally starting falling. 5000 down, 10000 down, 3000 and 1500 still to go.
casual obsever wrote:
Interestingly, you keep circling back to banned drug cheat Baumann.
Doesn't it bother you that most of the very best non-Africans since the 90s were banned for doping (Baumann, Decker, Shobukhova), admitted to doping (Junxia), or were flagged as likely doping (Radcliffe, Jager, Rupp)?
As for "how is it" that more East Africans broke 27 minutes: overall more talent and more motivation, possibly more widespread doping.
Keep circling back? These must be very big circles. I just circled backed to Solinsky -- is that as interesting?
Baumann is interesting for many reasons: he is the fastest non-African; not a known blood doper, so can hardly be used as an example that "EPO works", missing that essential fact; no non-African EPO using 5000m specialist, from any country, for all time, could run faster, while a handful of potentially all clean athletes could come within a few seconds; and he is still 20 seconds slower than today's world records, while just 6 seconds faster than a 1982 David Moorcroft.
Do these points bother me? I hate to re-litigate any of these cases here, but:
- I would disagree with "most" in "most of the very best non-Africans since the 90s"
- I do feel "bothered" by the doping of the Russian, Chinese, and East German women
- I am also bothered by any intentional doping -- here it's the thought that counts
- I am not bothered at all by cases that were initially flagged, especially if automatically by software, and then dismissed during the well defined multi-stage process of expert review designed to filter out most false positives
- I am also bothered by cases that may be genuine false positives, as the result of faulty tests and procedures
Here is the World Athletics U20 Championships Records :
https://i.imgur.com/UCsbXyB.jpg
and
https://i.imgur.com/qWST7SC.jpg
Do African still use EPO on junior categories?
Killeriott wrote:
Rocket Mann wrote:
Maybe he's just in worse shape right now. He was probably peaking for his WR, while he's probably not trying to peak rn.
Just curious though, what should he be able to run?
Well you might be correct him being in worse shape now BUT in 12:35 shape he should be able to run 3:33 for sure, as he is running 3:46 x 3.333 with no rest.
In 12:35 shape he would be able to run 3:33.
rekrunner wrote:
Baumann is interesting for many reasons: he is the fastest non-African; not a known blood doper, so can hardly be used as an example that "EPO works", missing that essential fact; no non-African EPO using 5000m specialist, from any country, for all time, could run faster, while a handful of potentially all clean athletes could come within a few seconds; and he is still 20 seconds slower than today's world records, while just 6 seconds faster than a 1982 David Moorcroft.
"essential fact"? LOL - one of your classical distractions; this thread isn't about EPO.
Falling for your straw man:
a) You don't know whether Baumann used EPO and or blood doping.
b) You don't know whether your "potentially all clean athletes" used EPO and or blood doping and or steroids.
c) You don't know whether Moorcroft used (legal) blood transfusions and or steroids.
Conclusion: you can't conclude anything from these observations without invoking your faith. Thus I'd hardly call that "interesting".
Interesting facts are rather that the fastest non-African 5000 m male was a doper, the fastest non-African 5000 m female was a doper, the fastest non-African 10000 m male was a likely doper, and the fastest non-African 10000 m female was a doper. And all of that happened before the "super shoes" were invented.
To suspect that the overall fastest 5000/10000 m runner, quite substantially faster than the non-Africans, is a doper shows knowledge of history.
This was Cheptegei's first 1500 since 2018. Yet you have morons on here acting like 3:37 is some barrier he's chased like Bannister and the 4-minute mile. Really goes to show the depths of the idiocy you can find on the internet.
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
This was Cheptegei's first 1500 since 2018. Yet you have morons on here acting like 3:37 is some barrier he's chased like Bannister and the 4-minute mile. Really goes to show the depths of the idiocy you can find on the internet.
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
This
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
You were responding to me, but I actually agree with your statements, which is why I haven't commented on this pointless 1500.
yeah sorry i agree with you as well
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
This was Cheptegei's first 1500 since 2018. Yet you have morons on here acting like 3:37 is some barrier he's chased like Bannister and the 4-minute mile. Really goes to show the depths of the idiocy you can find on the internet.
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
Your own argument proves your claim above. No one is saying that the 1500 should be his most focused event. But that in his career he has been utterly pedestrian over the distance cannot be reconciled with his performances over the longer distances, which are off the planet. A red flag of doping waves over his record performances but there is nothing so blind as a devoted fan.
casual obsever wrote:
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
You were responding to me, but I actually agree with your statements, which is why I haven't commented on this pointless 1500.
He will only blow it out of the water if he dopes like he does for his targeted races.
John Macardle wrote:
Killeriott wrote:
Well you might be correct him being in worse shape now BUT in 12:35 shape he should be able to run 3:33 for sure, as he is running 3:46 x 3.333 with no rest.
In 12:35 shape he would be able to run 3:33.
Rubbish. That makes a differential of only 11 or so seconds between his best 1500 time and his pace for each 1500 in his record 5k. You guys have come to believe anything now is normal.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
This was Cheptegei's first 1500 since 2018. Yet you have morons on here acting like 3:37 is some barrier he's chased like Bannister and the 4-minute mile. Really goes to show the depths of the idiocy you can find on the internet.
It's very simple: If Cheptegei runs a 1500 in the middle of the season in a fast race with competent pacemakers, he will blow 3:37 out of the water. If he runs it only in rust-busters at altitude leading the race himself, we're not going to get close to a representative PB out of him.
You are of course right, as most with a modicum of analytical thinking realize, but unfortunately that doesn’t apply to all on this thread.
rekrunner wrote:
casual obsever wrote:
Interestingly, you keep circling back to banned drug cheat Baumann.
Doesn't it bother you that most of the very best non-Africans since the 90s were banned for doping (Baumann, Decker, Shobukhova), admitted to doping (Junxia), or were flagged as likely doping (Radcliffe, Jager, Rupp)?
As for "how is it" that more East Africans broke 27 minutes: overall more talent and more motivation, possibly more widespread doping.
Keep circling back? These must be very big circles. I just circled backed to Solinsky -- is that as interesting?
Baumann is interesting for many reasons: he is the fastest non-African; not a known blood doper, so can hardly be used as an example that "EPO works", missing that essential fact; no non-African EPO using 5000m specialist, from any country, for all time, could run faster, while a handful of potentially all clean athletes could come within a few seconds; and he is still 20 seconds slower than today's world records, while just 6 seconds faster than a 1982 David Moorcroft.
Do these points bother me? I hate to re-litigate any of these cases here, but:
- I would disagree with "most" in "most of the very best non-Africans since the 90s"
- I do feel "bothered" by the doping of the Russian, Chinese, and East German women
- I am also bothered by any intentional doping -- here it's the thought that counts
- I am not bothered at all by cases that were initially flagged, especially if automatically by software, and then dismissed during the well defined multi-stage process of expert review designed to filter out most false positives
- I am also bothered by cases that may be genuine false positives, as the result of faulty tests and procedures
If you were capable of being succinct, all you would need to say is that nothing will ever convince you that Cheptegei dopes or even that top African athletes benefit from their doping. Your position hasn't changed amidst all the threads where you have come to defend runners against doping accusations. What is particularly amusing is your pretence to being open to "persuasion". A chastity belt is more open to persuasion than you are.
Armstronglivs wrote:
John Macardle wrote:
In 12:35 shape he would be able to run 3:33.
Rubbish. That makes a differential of only 11 or so seconds between his best 1500 time and his pace for each 1500 in his record 5k. You guys have come to believe anything now is normal.
It is not rubbish that he would be able to run 3:33 in the fitness/setup that he had for his 12:35. It is, in fact, common sense.
You seem to be saying that he should run much faster, but I did not claim that he would “only” run 3:33, just that he would clearly be capable of it in a Monaco TT.
Armstronglivs wrote:
But that in his career he has been utterly pedestrian over the distance cannot be reconciled with his performances over the longer distances, which are off the planet.
This is the first time he's raced it while in his prime. The absolute first time. I don't see how this is hard to understand. I assume you must be a troll because nobody could be so dense.
One is not utterly pedestrian over the distance if they don't even compete in it. It's like saying Jakob Ingrebridsten is utterly pedestrian at the 400 with his 51 PB. He doesn't compete at it, there's a difference.
