MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:
Is he related to Phil Rirruto or he is the one who founded Roto Rutto?
How about Rizzo from Grease?
MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:
Is he related to Phil Rirruto or he is the one who founded Roto Rutto?
How about Rizzo from Grease?
cleans wrote:
My take:
Some Kenyans will dope with EPO because it can improve their performance (sorry Renato) and they could win some prize money (most of which Mr Rosa will take).
Brits won't get busted, as they have Loughborough Uni and UK Sport, providing and funding respectively largely undetectable doping analogues which will be used in lieu of 'traditional' PEDs such as EPO.
What is Loughborough and UK sport? What are undetectable doping analogues? (are you talking about ESAs or the sophisticated blood transfusions being carried out at the Erfurt doping ring?).
I bet there are a good number of amateur runners who dope.
I had a friend I ran with who used to take a testosterone booster before we would go run. He said it made him feel great. That's doping..., and he definitely was not a pro.
Mevadus wrote:
I bet there are a good number of amateur runners who dope.
I had a friend I ran with who used to take a testosterone booster before we would go run. He said it made him feel great. That's doping..., and he definitely was not a pro.
this is where the grey line is.
yams contain steroids, but not too anabolic
cholesterol converts to test.
vitamin d, raises test.
etc.etc.
what they ban, are things that work.
never mind if you are healthier,
then there are peptides.
then there are like 100000 substances that are in the hopper.
no, drug testing is a total quagmire.
people like coe, radcliffe, and everyone else were taking vitamins, herbs, concentrated organ extracts, altitude tents, aming acids you name it.
to do what?
keep em healthy, recover, recover from injury, and above all else, enhance performance.
the mantra is, if it works very well, ban it.
back in the day, people would take b vitamin injections,
somehow that was OK right across the board.
that's PEDs. 100 per cent.
but totally approved.
totally bogus.
longjack wrote:
no, drug testing is a total quagmire.
people like coe, radcliffe, and everyone else were taking vitamins, herbs, concentrated organ extracts, altitude tents, aming acids you name it.
to do what?
keep em healthy, recover, recover from injury, and above all else, enhance performance.
the mantra is, if it works very well, ban it.
Reading this post has been an epiphany for me. I've seen the light. Now I realize that the likes of Coe took vitamin D supplements and no doubt made sure to eat fish and broccoli and other healthy things. It's simply a joke we allow this sort of thing and yet we don't allow Kenyans to dope themselves silly with EPO, a synthetic drug that enables even elite Kenyans to run around 15 seconds faster per mile.
Apologies to anybody I've offended with my anti-doping posts in the past. I now believe all drugs should be legal and we should just let the East Africans get on with it, eh? Lets not be racist.
If we allow Evening Primrose Oil, we should allow EPO. If we allow tomatoes, we should allow testosterone injections.
Thanks Longjack.
#FreeRuto #FreeKiprop #FreeBett #FreeSumgong
https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001295637/study-shows-doping-helps-kenyans-run-fasterUK Sport financially underpin British medal-chasing sports like rowing, cycling, athletics. This year, UK Sport have requested 3 billion GBP to fund the latest tranche of promising or proven athletes.
Loughborough University is where many of the athletes are sent to for their preparation. An example is Adam Peaty: a skinny teenager in 2013, he was sent by his coach to nearby Loughborough Uni, who put him on their Olympic programme. Over a period of months, he transformed into perhaps the most dominant breast-stroke swimmer the world has ever seen. If we assume that no illegal drugs were involved in his rise, then either:
a) doping doesn't really help (otherwise other doped swimmers would get close to or beat Peaty)
or
b) the sports scientists at Loughborough have found legitimate analogues of banned PEDs.
Note that tens of millions of GBP have been invested in Loughborough Uni research precisely to find 'legitimate' ways of improving performance; and it would be naive to think that not one of the research programmes has delivered some positive outcome.
Note also that there is recorded evidence of British athletes being given thyroid medication, carnitine infusions, cortico-steroids, asthma drugs, etc. when these athletes have not medically needed it. Indeed, some have after the fact complained about being pressurised into accepting these treatments. Moreover, there are 'legal' drugs like synachten, actovegin and oxilofrine which are believed to be performance-enhancing and have a history of usage in boxing, cycling, and athletics.
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
^^
(Above is a reply to the request from the user 'Inquiring Minds Want To Know')
cleans wrote:
UK Sport financially underpin British medal-chasing sports like rowing, cycling, athletics. This year, UK Sport have requested 3 billion GBP to fund the latest tranche of promising or proven athletes.
Loughborough University is where many of the athletes are sent to for their preparation. An example is Adam Peaty: a skinny teenager in 2013, he was sent by his coach to nearby Loughborough Uni, who put him on their Olympic programme. Over a period of months, he transformed into perhaps the most dominant breast-stroke swimmer the world has ever seen. If we assume that no illegal drugs were involved in his rise, then either:
a) doping doesn't really help (otherwise other doped swimmers would get close to or beat Peaty)
or
b) the sports scientists at Loughborough have found legitimate analogues of banned PEDs.
Note that tens of millions of GBP have been invested in Loughborough Uni research precisely to find 'legitimate' ways of improving performance; and it would be naive to think that not one of the research programmes has delivered some positive outcome.
Note also that there is recorded evidence of British athletes being given thyroid medication, carnitine infusions, cortico-steroids, asthma drugs, etc. when these athletes have not medically needed it. Indeed, some have after the fact complained about being pressurised into accepting these treatments. Moreover, there are 'legal' drugs like synachten, actovegin and oxilofrine which are believed to be performance-enhancing and have a history of usage in boxing, cycling, and athletics.
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
What's Coevett's opinion? Does he agree with any of this? He supposedly is very well researched with British athletics - so let's see what he says.
Also, if this program is the magic formula for British athletics why isn't the Russians following suit? Their doping program, which I'm very familiar with, is pretty old-school: EPO, blood transfusions, oral turinbol, oxandrolone & T (they lead the world in ABP sanctions for hematological anomalies with about 60+ cases). I get it with the limited resources the Kenyans have but the Russians would have the infrastructure and plenty of $$$ to spend on a program like that (I'm sure this is something Putin would be very interested in).
cleans wrote:
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
The old argument that we should let those poor Kenyans dope themselves silly (and many of them dying suddenly in their youth) to 'level the playing field' (which results in domination by faceless East Africans with 200 twitter followers and the death of the sport).
But why stop there? Surely Europeans should be allowed to dope themselves too to 'level the playing field' in relation to those superior East African genes, or at least the benefits of living at altitude? Isn't it unfair that only 0.1% population of the world get the benefits of 'altitude doping'?
Kenyans also have the advantage of the top Italian coaches like Canova going there to train local talent. Maybe we should force top European coaches to only coach European talent etc.?
When was the last Samoan Olympic Marathon champion? Lets allow Samoans EPO to the max, start feeding little Samoan kids EPO from birth and get Canova to train them, while diverting 100 million from the UK lottery funds to the Samoan athletics association to produce Olympic talent? Let's level the playing field for Samoans.
Good question around Russia. I guess up until very recently it was far easier to buy off the +ves through Diack and his acolytes.
There might also be the fact that Russia is a far larger country. It's easy for UK athletes to get to Loughborough and continue to be based near their homes/coaches. Peaty, for instance, was brought up less than an hour from Loughborough.
My guess, though, is it's far easier to use 'traditional' doping and just buy off those who might reveal the truth - as seems to have been the case with Russia and the IAAF until maybe 4-5 years ago.
Coevett wrote:
cleans wrote:
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
The old argument that we should let those poor Kenyans dope themselves silly (and many of them dying suddenly in their youth) to 'level the playing field' (which results in domination by faceless East Africans with 200 twitter followers and the death of the sport).
But why stop there? Surely Europeans should be allowed to dope themselves too to 'level the playing field' in relation to those superior East African genes, or at least the benefits of living at altitude? Isn't it unfair that only 0.1% population of the world get the benefits of 'altitude doping'?
Kenyans also have the advantage of the top Italian coaches like Canova going there to train local talent. Maybe we should force top European coaches to only coach European talent etc.?
When was the last Samoan Olympic Marathon champion? Lets allow Samoans EPO to the max, start feeding little Samoan kids EPO from birth and get Canova to train them, while diverting 100 million from the UK lottery funds to the Samoan athletics association to produce Olympic talent? Let's level the playing field for Samoans.
If you think I am in favour of 'levelling the playing field' and pushing for that, then you have misunderstood what I have written. I certainly don't believe that. I'm just speculating on reasons why certain behaviours may occur. Ultimately, the vast majority of athletes and their management structures are striving to achieve success, and the money it brings, and they judge the risks associated to achieve their aim.
Not Buying It wrote:
Geo dood wrote:
PAUL CHELIMO
Paul Chelimo is a KENYAN TRANSPLANT!
This is interesting, of recent Chelimo has been not only the best American but the best indigenous Kenyan 5,000m runner. I will go out on a limb and say there is a chance he is clean. An Olympic silver medallist, WC bronze medallist and he got smashed by both Berega, Gebrhiwet and Kejelcha by like 100m. That is the difference between someone subject to mediocre testing in the US and the scandalously lousy Ethiopian testing.
Coevett wrote:
Apologies to anybody I've offended with my anti-doping posts in the past. I now believe all drugs should be legal and we should just let the East Africans get on with it, eh? Lets not be racist.
Noooooo! I want the old Coevett back.
Subway Surfers wrote:
Not Buying It wrote:
Paul Chelimo is a KENYAN TRANSPLANT!
This is interesting, of recent Chelimo has been not only the best American but the best indigenous Kenyan 5,000m runner. I will go out on a limb and say there is a chance he is clean. An Olympic silver medallist, WC bronze medallist and he got smashed by both Berega, Gebrhiwet and Kejelcha by like 100m. That is the difference between someone subject to mediocre testing in the US and the scandalously lousy Ethiopian testing.
Wow!...both Canova and rekrunner will be thrilled to hear that! You're a changed man Subway. And if Chelimo is clean then many others at the top level will also be clean. Perhaps the tide is changing and anti-doping is finally winning the war?
Subway Surfers wrote:
This is interesting, of recent Chelimo has been not only the best American but the best indigenous Kenyan 5,000m runner. I will go out on a limb and say there is a chance he is clean.
A very tiny chance, imho.
Subway Surfers wrote:
An Olympic silver medallist, WC bronze medallist and he got smashed by both Berega, Gebrhiwet and Kejelcha by like 100m. That is the difference between someone subject to mediocre testing in the US and the scandalously lousy Ethiopian testing.
Well, USADA never caught Armstrong (before the feds hand-delivered witnesses) or Rupp, so "mediocre" may be a euphemism.
But yeah, that may be the difference between all-out ooc doping and slightly limited doping.
cleans wrote:
UK Sport financially underpin British medal-chasing sports like rowing, cycling, athletics. This year, UK Sport have requested 3 billion GBP to fund the latest tranche of promising or proven athletes.
Loughborough University is where many of the athletes are sent to for their preparation. An example is Adam Peaty: a skinny teenager in 2013, he was sent by his coach to nearby Loughborough Uni, who put him on their Olympic programme. Over a period of months, he transformed into perhaps the most dominant breast-stroke swimmer the world has ever seen. If we assume that no illegal drugs were involved in his rise, then either:
a) doping doesn't really help (otherwise other doped swimmers would get close to or beat Peaty)
or
b) the sports scientists at Loughborough have found legitimate analogues of banned PEDs.
Note that tens of millions of GBP have been invested in Loughborough Uni research precisely to find 'legitimate' ways of improving performance; and it would be naive to think that not one of the research programmes has delivered some positive outcome.
Note also that there is recorded evidence of British athletes being given thyroid medication, carnitine infusions, cortico-steroids, asthma drugs, etc. when these athletes have not medically needed it. Indeed, some have after the fact complained about being pressurised into accepting these treatments. Moreover, there are 'legal' drugs like synachten, actovegin and oxilofrine which are believed to be performance-enhancing and have a history of usage in boxing, cycling, and athletics.
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
STATE-SPONSORED DOPING! Team Sky was just the tip of the iceberg. Britain should be banned along with Russia when Coe gets kicked out of office next year. Seriously, Lamine Diack and Primo Nebiolo were Boy Scouts compared to these Brits.
El Keniano wrote:
cleans wrote:
UK Sport financially underpin British medal-chasing sports like rowing, cycling, athletics. This year, UK Sport have requested 3 billion GBP to fund the latest tranche of promising or proven athletes.
Loughborough University is where many of the athletes are sent to for their preparation. An example is Adam Peaty: a skinny teenager in 2013, he was sent by his coach to nearby Loughborough Uni, who put him on their Olympic programme. Over a period of months, he transformed into perhaps the most dominant breast-stroke swimmer the world has ever seen. If we assume that no illegal drugs were involved in his rise, then either:
a) doping doesn't really help (otherwise other doped swimmers would get close to or beat Peaty)
or
b) the sports scientists at Loughborough have found legitimate analogues of banned PEDs.
Note that tens of millions of GBP have been invested in Loughborough Uni research precisely to find 'legitimate' ways of improving performance; and it would be naive to think that not one of the research programmes has delivered some positive outcome.
Note also that there is recorded evidence of British athletes being given thyroid medication, carnitine infusions, cortico-steroids, asthma drugs, etc. when these athletes have not medically needed it. Indeed, some have after the fact complained about being pressurised into accepting these treatments. Moreover, there are 'legal' drugs like synachten, actovegin and oxilofrine which are believed to be performance-enhancing and have a history of usage in boxing, cycling, and athletics.
Kenyan athletes mostly don't have access to a powerful SOTA sports science and funding infrastructure like Loughborough/UK Sport, and so it is no surprise that some might be tempted to (or pressured to) use simpler more traditional doping products like EPO in order to even the playing field - assuming of course that one believes that 'financial doping' through UK Sport creates an uneven playing field. (Olympic medal progression for the UK from 1996-2016 would suggest that it does.)
STATE-SPONSORED DOPING! Team Sky was just the tip of the iceberg. Britain should be banned along with Russia when Coe gets kicked out of office next year. Seriously, Lamine Diack and Primo Nebiolo were Boy Scouts compared to these Brits.
That's what you got from that?
Have you got a learning disability?
Basically it says the UK has money so they can do it right, Kenya has none so they cheat without remorse.
Coevett wrote:
blah
Your silence on the French marathoner's thread is deafening.
But no, you are not racist nor anti-Kenya, you are fighting for doping-free track and field regardless of race or nationality!