OMG, I totally wish Paula Radcliffe gets caught/outted.

rekrunner wrote:

Q: Where is doping?

Follow the money. The 2012 pre-busted Lance was reportedly worth $125 million. What is Paula's net worth today?

Dunno, but she must have a bit because she's a self imposed tax exile (some would say tax cheat) living in Monaco.

J.R.

I'm afraid you fall into that category of anonymous forum poster.

It's january 17th 2013 the very latest up to date and Paula still has not announce her next race after vienna half marathon.

Nutella1 wrote:The Brojo pacing was in Chicago, not in London when she ran 2:15

it was the "just" kenyans race then

As for that performance, I highly encourage you to look up some clips. As in all other Marathons, Paula didn't draft at all here. She was running besides the pacers

drivel

she had pacers ifront/around her til near the finish, from my old notes, when they peeled off so she coud get the glory alone

she got plenty of drafting

And I don't know what you're smoking when you think 29:42 is a fit for 2:15. 29 FLAT is a fit for 2:15.

idiot

she ran 30'01 the same year as 2"17'18

her wr became 2"15'25 or 1'53 faster

just simple proportion indicates her 30'01 wouda been faster by only

~ 113 * ( 10/42.195 ) = 26s

->29'34

as a prelim figure to start with as her 10k potential

it's NOT anywhere close to 29-flat

Huh? What exactly is the subject?I listed a bunch of reasons why Lance and Paula are different. You didn't really address my subject.One of the reasons is the complete lack of anyone, outside of anonymous forum posters, ever accusing Paula of cheating. If you say she's dirty, it doesn't count. If I say she's clean (which I didn't), it doesn't count. Ingrid Kristenson thinks she's clean. Is there anyone of that caliber who thinks otherwise? I don't know. Do you?While I respect your right to an opinion, and I'm well aware of your proven track record for accuracy, you don't give me any facts, while I offered you many.I didn't claim Paula is clean or dirty. Just, given the complete lack of reasons, there is no reason to be suspicious. If you give me verifiable facts, then I would re-consider being suspicious.

rekrunner wrote:

J.R.

You did it first.

J.R. wrote:

So...

Nice try at changing the subject.

Props to Pros wrote:

Does rojo really think most pro athletes are clean? How can he think that world leaders are clean?

Who did Lance beat that was clean? Name one guy.

Cadel Evans.

Bet your House on that

Radcliffe is clean. She's probably had more physical therapy than any living creature. She is a wealthy women with access to more technology and science than anyone else in the sport but she does not take "drugs" and what she does is not illegal. If you want to change the rules and outlaw some other things, like altitude chambers, that's another matter.

rekrunner wrote:

However, the pre-1996 Lance struggled on multi-day tours. Lance was good on single day events, but not on grand tours, time-trials, nor in the mountains.

Even Lance's junior career is not without suspicion. As a junior he trained under Carmichael, someone accused of doping his kids without their knowledge.

Good post, but I don't agree with this. First young riders, and the TDF "young rider" classification is under 26, in general don't do well in grand tours because they're not yet fully developed for that sort of event and because they typically wouldn't be in the team leader role where they'd have a shot a good general classification placing. Second Lance had two wins and a second place finish in the Tour Dupont stage race. Obviously this isn't the same competitive level or duration of the grand tours but it was clear that he was something special well prior to 96. Never mind that Lance was a teenage triathlon prodigy.

At the age of only 21, Lance was the youngest ever rider to win the UCI world road-race championships, beating greats like Miguel Indurain. This demonstrated a hugely prodigious talent in the sport as the UCI world road-race championships is the deepest 1-day road race in the cycling calender.

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

For some reason when I try to post to the person I want to, I get some error message (?), so I am posting here:

Really Stubborn Person wrote:

"Paula didn't use an altitude tent. You keep repeating this myth, it's not true."

Give it up! Why are some people so stubbornly dumb? You have access to the world wide web, correct? You are posting here so you must (unless you phone in your responses to wejo and he types them in for you). So before so confidently calling someone else wrong, LOOK IT UP YOURSELF!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/07/sports/07iht-train_ed3_.html

So is Paula a liar? She said she uses them, defends their use, but really doesn't??? If you think she is that dishonest, then.....I wouldn't imagine you'd think she was a clean competitor.

Paula DID NOT USE an altitude tent. No matter how many times you dig that story up, it is not true.

ventolin^3 wrote:

drivel

she had pacers ifront/around her til near the finish, from my old notes, when they peeled off so she coud get the glory alone

she got plenty of drafting

That is not true. Out of 2 pacers who startet, only 1 was able to keep up with her pace and she ran alongside him. She didn't draft at any point.

If you want to see drafting look go any watch any of the Berlin marathons, either men or women. When Nguchi was paced to her only sub-2:20 time she was literally surrounded with men.

rekrunner wrote:

given the complete lack of reasons, there is no reason to be suspicious. If you give me verifiable facts, then I would re-consider being suspicious.

I reposted the photo of her holding the accusatory epo sign, what more do you want.

That in and of itself affirms everything that I posted.

Besides that, you and most other serious runners should be well aware of her history.

here we go again wrote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/07/sports/07iht-train_ed3_.html

So is Paula a liar? She said she uses them, defends their use, but really doesn't??? If you think she is that dishonest, then.....I wouldn't imagine you'd think she was a clean competitor.

Paula DID NOT USE an altitude tent. No matter how many times you dig that story up, it is not true.[/quote]

Oh, I guess that settles it then.

Look, I use a lot of CAPS, but I do it to emphasize a word or point, not to PROVE/SUBSTANTIATE a point like you just tried to. See the difference???

You can't see how hilariously stupid you look trying to contradict me, after I cite a respected news source to back up my claim, by simply writing: 'No, YOU'RE WRONG,' without any other explanation or contrary source backing up your counter claim??

Wow. This is letsrun, but still, that's a new low in embarrassing debating skills.

One reason to be skeptic:

Paula Radcliffe set both the current marathon world record and the current road 10k record in 2003.

Tour de France top 10 from the same year:

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) *

2 Jan Ullrich (GER) *

3 Alexandre Vinokourov (KAZ) *

4 Tyler Hamilton (USA) *

5 Haimar Zubeldia (ESP)

6 Iban Mayo (ESP) *

7 Ivan Basso (ITA) *

8 Christophe Moreau (FRA) *

9 Carlos Sastre (ESP)

10 Francisco Mancebo (ESP) *

* convicted(!) for a doping offence

On the other hand, cycling performances have decreased in the last few years (which some attribute to the biological passport), while those in distance running (mens and womens combined) have not. Hence, either the passports don't work, aren't administered as effectively for runners as they are for cyclists, or runners really were cleaner than cyclists, even before the passports were introduced.

Since marathon running is not a team sport, unless old samples are retested and turn up positive (which I very much doubt), we will never know for sure. Even though she is still in the anti-doping programme, Paula Radcliffe would be more stupid to be doping today - but she clearly isn't stupid, and her recent performances don't suggest anything of the kind.

From a statistical point of view, I would think it very unlikely that a given world record in an endurance event is set by a clean athlete. But that level of evidence is not enough to convict an individual.

Querfeldein wrote:

Hence, either the passports don't work, aren't administered as effectively for runners as they are for cyclists, or runners really were cleaner than cyclists, even before the passports were introduced.

That's like expressing surprise that athletes were cleaner than WWF wrestlers.

here we go again wrote:

Paula DID NOT USE an altitude tent. No matter how many times you dig that story up, it is not true.

Plenty of references saying she did, Google: 'paula radcliffe altitude tent'.

From: The Journal of Philosophy,Science & Law (2b):

"Top athletes including women’s marathon world record holder Paula Radcliffe... have purchased their own altitude tents directly from Hypoxico and Colorado Altitude Training.

Reacting to the IOC investigation into banning hypoxic tents, Paula Radcliffe responded, “I don't really agree with the IOC investigation into it. All the altitude tent does is stimulates the body to cope with conditions that can be found naturally. If you say an altitude tent is unfair, you have to ban people living at altitude.”

From: Duke University School of Law (Page 5):

"..the case of marathon world record holder Paula Radcliffe, who is currently featured by WADA as an exemplar of “the spirit of sport,”presumably for her vocal, longstanding, and steadfast anti-doping stances. Paradoxically, she is also associated with the use of hypoxia, and identified as an illustration of the success of that training method. We suggest that this is not a mistake; nor is it the result of what the report calls the “considerable . . . confusion” about the status of this training method. Rather, it is because Radcliffe and other endurance athletes who use hypoxia as part of their training regimens..."

I'm not aware of any authorative links/sources saying she didn't use one, any chance of some from you?

Altitude tents were actually issued by UK Athletics to lots of endurance athletes, they were also issued with some tablets which were derived from pine bark which is supposed to have a similar effect to large quantities of beetroot but without the stomach problems.

Unfortunately for you, I know your history too. My experience is that anything you say seems to have a 50/50 chance of being accurate.But if you want to know what more I want, you can answer a few of the questions I asked previously. The photo only seems to confirm what I said, that she was a vocal anti-doping advocate. You gave some interesting alternative interpretations, but how about following that up with some names? Who was intimidated by Paula's sign? Who complained about Paula? What were the accusations? Were there former champions? Team staff? Teammates wives or husbands? Team doctors? Lawyers? Lance's story had all these elements. Does Paula's have any?

J.R. wrote:

I reposted the photo of her holding the accusatory epo sign, what more do you want.

That in and of itself affirms everything that I posted.

Besides that, you and most other serious runners should be well aware of her history.

rekrunner wrote:

My experience is that anything you say seems to have a 50/50 chance of being accurate.

If you understand 1/2 of what I have posted, than you're not as dumb as I thought.