Holy Moly!! A legit 18 year old just ran 13:02!! J. Ingebrigtsen 53 last 400m.

Norway cross country skiers are known for their love of asthma medication haha.

Bjoergen

Sundby

Johaug was caught for steroid use

I definitely am. He's a huge talent and I think he'll get Mottram's records soon. Maybe even be the 1st Aussie to dip under 12:50?

Armstronglivs wrote:

That every achievement provokes passionate debate on these boards about whether it was genuine i.e. "clean", shows how hopelessly compromised the sport has become. There is little to be gained from defending it or its individual practitioners when it is just as likely as not that any given performance was doped. And we won't know which is true, either way. The battle for a sport that can be trusted has been lost.

That's due to the fact that in t&f youbcan blatantly dope in full view, doing ridiculous performances and get away with it.

Semiler wrote:

I think athletics is fairly clean now, and it is getting cleaner day by day.

Sarcasm?

casual obsever wrote:

Semiler wrote:

I think athletics is fairly clean now, and it is getting cleaner day by day.

Sarcasm?

It must be coming from the PR department of the IAAF. ?

Dear Hanssen, you seem like a rational guy. You are trying to make a logical line of arguments. And your conclution though is that it is hard for you to believe that the three Ingebrigtsen Brothers are clean, yes, it seems very fishy to you. Actually, you write that they are on PED; perhaps asthma medication or genetic therapy? At least you find it hard to believe that they are clean, and it seems "very fishy".

1. "A nation of five million". Correct.

2 "that doesnt take track very seriously". Not correct. Not at all.This year Karsten Warholm 47.12 400 m hurdles. In 2017 Sondre Nordstad Moen 2.05.48, the all time best for a runner of non african origin. Vebjorn Rodal, gold 800 m in Atlanta 1996. And may be you have heard about Grete Waitz and Ingrid Kristiansen?

3. And then the list. Just for comparation. The seven best all time 5000 m Norway+USA until 1975:

1. N Knut Kvalheim

2. USA

3. USA

4. USA

5. N

6. N the oldest of the Kvalheim Brothers, Arne

7. N

Logically, one can't draw any conclution at all form such lists, or maybe NCAA was bad at that time too, or that american long distance runners were lazy. But in a small nation, two brothers? Hard to believe? Fishy? Let's make a thought Experiment, there are only two of the brothers, no Henrik. Genetics is strange, so is epigenetics.

4. The training. Your presumption is that the training can't be better. Yes, not the training per se. The father has no background in atheletics whatsoever. He did'nt know anything about the Norwegian national sport, winter skiing.But when the family settled, a big and relatively poor familiy, in the town of Sandnes (it doe'nt snow in Sandnes) they started with cross country skiing. Henrik soon became Norwegian junior champion on 10 K. But it was too costly and too tough for them. No snow in the area, you know. They switched to running. You write "from a nonrunning country". There are amazingly many track and field clubs in such a small country. The Bislet Games, which has produced a lot of world records, may be compared to Prefontaine Classic, at least.

I, and it takes to elaborate, it, think that one could make a case for the how the traing is done and the consistency and the planning actually are better. Not the workouts, but when and how they are performed and what they learn about it. Logically, it is possible, right? If not we are down to basic genetics or as you indicates doping.

5. Families. We have had a lot of fathers in sports in Norway. But we also have a very good, extremely good organised sport. The establishment of The Olympic Top after it became clear that the Olympic Games in 1994 the Olympic Top was etstablised, a kind of "DDR-organisation" to get the results after the Winter Olymips in 1988, no gold, 3 silver, 2 bronze. In 1992 9-6-5, best nation, even though, before that we had not taken alpine skiing very seriously, not as seriously as track. 1994 10-11-5. It must be doping, right?

The Ingebrigtsen Family differs in many ways from the others. But, never mind. Norway is an open society. We know the families. In the Ingebrigtsen Family with spouses, babies, three more brothers and a sister, girlfriend, friends, still keeping the Secrets? If some of you on these threads had known a little bit about Norway, at least on the level of my rusty English, so.....

6. How, with the scarce resourses, could Gjert Ingebrigtsen make a doping program in Secret, especially in an environment like in Sandnes and Norway. It might be possible with one kid, but three? Year after year. All the doping equipment. In a country with few dopingcases and a very thight dopingcontrol. Much stricter than in USA.

7. Genetics. They are not very fast. But they have extremely high VO2max. Jakob has an advantage, like nearly no one else, he can run at submaximal speed for a very, very long time. He started to train within Gjerts programme when he was 12. Much earlier than the other Brothers. So let us see. This Autumn they are going to train in Africa, together with the Manangoi brothers and Cheruiyot, and they must bring all their dopingequipment so here is the chance for investigating journalists, what do you think? We have a lot of good investigating journalists in Norway. But facts,my friend, facts...sorry, this is too long now..

So they can't be doping? The longer the explanation the less credible.

Armstronglivs wrote:

So they can't be doping? The longer the explanation the less credible.

One of brothers may have been: Henrik appeared on the FB hacked WADA ABP database from 2016 as "passport suspicious/likely doping" flag:

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So they can't be doping? The longer the explanation the less credible.

One of brothers may have been: Henrik appeared on the FB hacked WADA ABP database from 2016

+1

And thanks to Ashenden and the Russians like Poistogova, it is public knowledge how much one has to dope to get flagged like this.

And, investigative journalists? Since when do they catch dopers?

You guys understand Fancy Bears was debunked, right?

It was an intern that was making guesses, no real science, just guesses based on nothing.

And as we heard on Joe Rogan's podcast with a world leading scientist, the Biological Passport is a joke. No science behind it and pure theory. The only solution is to allow 80% doping to level all playing fields. Let everyone play at 50 hematocrit and then the men will separate from the boys, much like when Lance was dominating a level playing field.

For someone who purports to tell it like it is, here are some points of correction: - It was not WADA, but the IAAF. - It was not an ABP database but internal documents.

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

One of brothers may have been: Henrik appeared on the FB hacked WADA (sic) ABP database (sic) from 2016 as "passport suspicious/likely doping" flag:

+2 1) Thanks to pioneering ABP scientists like Ashenden, it is public knowledge that even clean athletes may be flagged like this due to the indirect nature of the ABP, and several known non-doping factors -- hence the need for expert evaluations (something largely lacking in public forums like this). 2) And investigative journalists? Has there been one as good as David Walsh since?

casual obsever wrote:

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

One of brothers may have been: Henrik appeared on the FB hacked WADA ABP database from 2016

+1

And thanks to Ashenden and the Russians like Poistogova, it is public knowledge how much one has to dope to get flagged like this.

And, investigative journalists? Since when do they catch dopers?

Is "the longer the explatation the less credible",a scientific argument? It is interesting to see this. Strange to be on these threads. Crediblity lies in the arguments, if mine are not good enough, argue and point to them. My answer is:You never know, you know. That is more or less a universal answer. But these classic american conspiracy theories, not based on facts, are not much worth. If one accuses persons of wrongdoing, and that is not nice, back it up with facts, not speculations and bad "probablity hypothesis".

mooonshot wrote:

You guys understand Fancy Bears was debunked, right?

It was an intern that was making guesses, no real science, just guesses based on nothing.

And as we heard on Joe Rogan's podcast with a world leading scientist, the Biological Passport is a joke. No science behind it and pure theory. The only solution is to allow 80% doping to level all playing fields. Let everyone play at 50 hematocrit and then the men will separate from the boys, much like when Lance was dominating a level playing field.

Correct...and the longer one refers to Fancy Bears the more idiotic the appear..

Investigating journalists made a fanastic job this year. Two austrian croos countryskiiers were caught in flagranti. Henriks blood passport, or biological Passport showed varainations in bloodvalues. It was investigated, but since you write about it, you sure have the knowledge about the process? Or not?

rekrunner wrote:

For someone who purports to tell it like it is, here are some points of correction:

- It was not WADA, but the IAAF.

- It was not an ABP database but internal documents.

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

One of brothers may have been: Henrik appeared on the FB hacked WADA (sic) ABP database (sic) from 2016 as "passport suspicious/likely doping" flag:

Quit trolling rekrunner....why so pedantic? Where the hell do you think the data comes from? It comes from the athlete's ABP - how else would they become aware of elavated Hgb and other anomalies that show characteristics of "likely doping." The notes suggest suspicions of ESA use with the increased target testing. And doesn't WADA oversee the ABP and not the IAAF?

Question: Are you disturbed by the fact that a "Ingebrigtsen" appears on this list as "passport suspicious/likely doping." Because you get so contemptuous with some of us posting doping related information, and I wouldn't doubt you wish LRC would delete that link.

Daehlie wrote:

Norway cross country skiers are known for their love of asthma medication haha.

Bjoergen

Sundby

Johaug was caught for steroid use

Use of asthma medication is legal for people with asthma, like Bjørgen, and used by all nations in the world. Winter athletes tend to get more asthma because of the cold.

The story about the number of asthma medicatations sent from Norway to the olympics in Korea was based on a misunderstanding, and other nations did in fact send more per athlete. I will not attack these nations though.

Sundby took his dose of asthmamedication at once instead of distributing it over the day, and got rightly punished.

Johaug bought lipbalm at an Italian pharmacy and got rightly punished for being unable to read.

Norway is by far the best sporting nation in the world, and those two incidences is what you have got?

I'm not aware of the role of investigative journalists in two Austrian cross-country skiers this year. The ABP process is well documented at both the IAAF and WADA's website. It does involve multiple stages of review, and the names that appeared in this list were all at various stages of the review process.

KaareV wrote:

Investigating journalists made a fanastic job this year. Two austrian croos countryskiiers were caught in flagranti. Henriks blood passport, or biological Passport showed varainations in bloodvalues. It was investigated, but since you write about it, you sure have the knowledge about the process? Or not?

Trolling? Pedantic? Disturbed? Contemptuous? If your goal is to post doping related information, isn't it better to post the right information? I am not disturbed by any of the names on the list, or the list itself, but I am interested in an accurate record. That's why I posted two corrections, without judgement or comment.

Let's Tell It Like It Is wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

For someone who purports to tell it like it is, here are some points of correction:

- It was not WADA, but the IAAF.

- It was not an ABP database but internal documents.

Quit trolling rekrunner....why so pedantic? Where the hell do you think the data comes from? It comes from the athlete's ABP - how else would they become aware of elavated Hgb and other anomalies that show characteristics of "likely doping." The notes suggest suspicions of ESA use with the increased target testing. And doesn't WADA oversee the ABP and not the IAAF?

Question: Are you disturbed by the fact that a "Ingebrigtsen" appears on this list as "passport suspicious/likely doping." Because you get so contemptuous with some of us posting doping related information, and I wouldn't doubt you wish LRC would delete that link.