Joshua Cheptegei is SUSPICIOUS

effff wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

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.

Or a fundamentalist idiot, like yourself.

Another devoted fan. Of mine. Follows me from thread to thread.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

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.

The difference between a 400 and a 1500 is planets. A 1500 and a 5k on the other hand are in the same aerobic ballpark - as Jakob also shows (and El G before him). There isn't another world record holder over 5k who was as relatively slow over the 1500 as Cheptegei. I assume you have the basic intelligence required to perceive that anomaly.

sample size: 1

how did we get to 8 pages here?

John Macardle wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

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.

I have said that I believe a 12.35 runner should be capable of 3.28. Any slower then I am convinced they must be doping because the differential is too small to be natural. But that bar of doping suspicion is already low - I wouldn't give an ounce to credence that any top runner today isn't doped, and 3.28 is highly likely to be a doped performance for a 1500.

Armstronglivs wrote:

The difference between a 400 and a 1500 is planets. A 1500 and a 5k on the other hand are in the same aerobic ballpark - as Jakob also shows (and El G before him). There isn't another world record holder over 5k who was as relatively slow over the 1500 as Cheptegei. I assume you have the basic intelligence required to perceive that anomaly.

Here are some top 5k runners:

Paul Tergat PBs of 7:28 and 12:49 doesn't even have a 1500m PB.

Hagos Gebrhiwet of 7:30 and 12:45 doesn't even have a 1500m PB.

Sileshi Sihine of 7:29 and 12:47 doesn't even have a 1500m PB.

Dejen Gebremeskel of 12:46 and 26:51 doesn't even have a 1500m PB.

It's not about the nature of the event, it's of the necessity to race it. Guys who run the 5K-HM don't have to race it. That is why Cheptegei didn't race it in 2019-2020. There is nothing weird about this — Molly Huddle hasn't raced a 1500 since 2014 for a non-African example.

Armstronglivs, I really doubt you understand athletics, and what regards periodization and how to train a top athlete.

1) Cheptegei has already the limits for running in Tokyo. Being Ugandan, he doesn't need to qualify through Trials like Kenyans, This means that, after a year like 2020, with WR in 5000m and 10000m and the WHMCh without specific preparation, he took a more long than usual period of recovery.

2) The current shape of Cheptegei is very far from his best shape. Probably, if he runs at his top of the moment the distances where bettered WR, is not able to run under 13' and under 27', and this has a full logic if the peak must be after 3 and half months from now.

3) Cheptegei paced from the start all the race, and was attacked in the last 200m only. While Musigala is athlete able running 3'30", and the tall, new Kenyan talent is already able to run 3'34" (if I write is because I know his training...), Joshua at the moment is still in a totally aerobic phase, and there are not yet lactic workouts.

4) The difference, for athletes of longest distances, in a race of 1500m when are in top shape for their event, and when are in the Fundamental Period, can be also around 10", before starting the period more dedicated at specific speed. For example, Shaheen (whose PB was 3'33" at the end of 2006 in a race of preparation before the two victories in the World Cup in 5000m and Steeple) in April never was able to run under 3'40" and 7'34" at sea level (and 8'15" in steeple), coming from WCC Championships and a winter with the goal to increase his Aerobic Power. In 2005, when ran 3 times under 8' and won very easy WCh in August, after the cross season (4th in short and 8th in long run in two following days in WCh on 19-20 March), almost two months later (13th of May) run 2000 steeple in 5'14"53 only, something that in August could be the passage in a race of 3000 steeple.

The problem here is that almost all the posters don't have any idea about how to train for peaking in one season, maybe because the athletic seasons in High School or NCAA are very long and it's practically impossible to have a plan for being in top shape when athletes need, since is a must for them to compete in all the race requested by their University.

Another thing : while in US there is a very good knowledge about the level of talent for sprinters, throwers and jumpers, there is very little knowledge about the talent for long distances. This is exactly the opposite ogf the situation in Kenya : there, when a sprinter is able running in 10"50 in altitude (that means 10"70 at sea level), Kenyan coaches think to have in their hands a big talent.

At the end of the day, who is not able to recognize the talent, every time speaks for doping, without any proof and any evidence, apart his "belief" that some performances can't be achieved in clean way. Nothing scientific, nothing proved, only suppositions that for long time were the reason of bad performances in the Country, creating limits that, instead, were not so difficult to overtake, with adequate training and right mentality.

You are right -- this thread isn't about Baumann or EPO per se. I was responding directly to you.

Missing "essential facts" is not a distraction, but my main motivation in repeatedly asking for facts, specifically about the expected performance from any PEDs, if they exist.

Regarding a) b) c) -- yes, we miss essential facts. "Conclusion: we can't conclude anything". This is also my conclusion.

We remain in the realm of speculative hypotheses, and fallacies. We can be "suspicious" but there is little basis in fact for such suspicions.

Regarding what you find interesting for non-Africans, I agreed with you earlier regarding why so many more Africans are substantially faster, due to "overall more talent and more motivation, possibly more widespread doping". Doping is not ruled out, but not ruled in either. Less in doubt is the significance of physical and mental superiority.

Even then, we miss many essential facts:

- We don't know if known "busted for steroids" Baumann's only sub-13 performance was doped (but we do know several 13:++ performances were annulled due to doping).

- We do know any "likely doping" flag against Rupp did not pass through an expert review designed to filter out false positives, and that USADA looked under every stone for NOP dopers for some 6 years or so, using advanced investigative techniques in addition to standard WADA testing.

- Finally, despite the faith of some of the fastest non-Africans, and/or their coaches and national federations, we don't know how significant the effect, if any, of any and all PEDs would be, for these fastest 5000m and 10000m performances.

Armstronglivs wrote:

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.

You offer yet more personal opinion void of any facts about alleged affects of PEDs.

I could be convinced by the addition of more facts. This is why you are unconvincing.

How is that for succinct?

Well Renato you might want to check a calendar because the 10000m final is 3 months from Friday. You assert that Cheptegei is probably not able to break 27 or 13 now. This also makes the intelligent think he is doping. February 16 2020 he ran 12:51 on the road and then broke the 5 and 10 world records on the track in August and October, respectively. If Cheptegei cannot break 27 now then there can be little doubt he has either been injured or he is a doper or both. You seem to be conceding that he cannot come within about 50 seconds of his 10000 best now. You talk about periodization. You think some of us don’t grasp this concept. This sadly has become code for doping in many cases. Anyway thank you for your opinion.

You give examples of runners who dont run the 1500. Fair enough. But if they did, I would expect a performance that reflected their ability over the longer distance - and I would expect the world record holder over 5k would be a pretty respectable 1500 runner. Many double at those distances.

rekrunner wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

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.

You offer yet more personal opinion void of any facts about alleged affects of PEDs.

I could be convinced by the addition of more facts. This is why you are unconvincing.

How is that for succinct?

BS. You will never be convinced anyone dopes by the "addition of more facts". On the subject of doping, you never have and you never will. Nothing will convince you Cheptegei dopes. Your discursive posts say little more than that - although you pretend to have an open mind on the subject.

Periodisation is a poor explanation for why the world record holder over 5k apparently runs the 1500 on one leg. On the other hand, periodisation can also be another description for a doping cycle.

The absurdity of the argument that seeks to justify how slow Cheptegei is over the 1500 is demonstrated by referring back to the example of Halberg, the 1960 Olympic champion. Halberg was a 13.35 runner over 5k (a time he shared with the then world record holder, Vladimir Kuts). If Halberg ran the 1500 as Cheptegei does, his best time would be no better than 3.55. Yet he was a 3.38x runner. He also trained 100mpw with Lydiard as his coach. Like most top athletes today, Cheptegei dopes.

Killeriottt wrote:

Well Renato you might want to check a calendar because the 10000m final is 3 months from Friday. You assert that Cheptegei is probably not able to break 27 or 13 now. This also makes the intelligent think he is doping. February 16 2020 he ran 12:51 on the road and then broke the 5 and 10 world records on the track in August and October, respectively. If Cheptegei cannot break 27 now then there can be little doubt he has either been injured or he is a doper or both. You seem to be conceding that he cannot come within about 50 seconds of his 10000 best now. You talk about periodization. You think some of us don’t grasp this concept. This sadly has become code for doping in many cases. Anyway thank you for your opinion.

Three months to go from base shape to peak fitness, and improving 50 seconds, seems plausible without needing to resort to drugs for explaining the expected.

Six months between February to August is enough time for a complete periodized training cycle.

Extending your peak 2 months from August to October is also not unusual for the modern training of today's athletes.

Do you really know anything about training and performance and periodization? It's not coming across, and doesn't seem to be shaping your thoughts.

The intelligent form their thoughts logically around facts.

This question remains open and unaddressed.

What are the known established facts about the expected effects of PEDs for 27' runners?

Armstronglivs wrote:

BS. You will never be convinced anyone dopes by the "addition of more facts". On the subject of doping, you never have and you never will. Nothing will convince you Cheptegei dopes. Your discursive posts say little more than that - although you pretend to have an open mind on the subject.

It's a moot point when you have provided no facts.

It looks like you think your failure is my fault because I was never convinced by the production of no facts.

Go ahead -- call my bluff. If you finally provide facts, and I remain unconvinced, you win.

Just to be clear, I don't ask for facts about usage -- you keep coming around to usage, which is concerning, but far less interesting for me.

I am convinced that many athletes dope.

If a fact surfaced that showed that Cheptegei doped, that would not take long to convince me that he doped.

There are many facts showing that a significant minority of athletes at world class level dope.

Some get faster. Some get slower. Just like clean athletes.

Demonstrating usage is uninteresting to me, because athletes are not like me, waiting for definitive proof of expected effect directly attributable to doping.

They emotionally succumb to rumors with limited, inconclusive, information, out of desperation or greed, hoping for a better outcome, "because Lance".

Here, we are talking about patterns of performance that are allegedly cause for suspicion because they are unnatural, attaching unusual significance to a slow 1500m, an off-event, during base phase, in a no-name meet.

Facts about the relation to PEDs and peak performance are in scarce supply.

You say you want proof? You must be so naive. First of all Seb Coe is going to make sure the circus goes on and he will certainly protect dopers if they are stars. What else can he offer as an appeal to the fans? Seb himself was probably a doper. He has sympathy for dopers. That is likely why he got the job. The sport is dying and it occasionally gets a CPR treatment for temporary revival when a doping Cheptegei breaks world records. Proof? It must be nice to be so naive. Ignorance is bliss for you presumably. Cheptegei’s pedestrian 1500m simply gave further proof but ONLY to the intelligent.

It seems there are several factors that changed in the last ca. 30 years that can both make runners much better over the relatively longer distances than it used to be the case:

- EPO and other substances that did not exist (or were not used as much) in the 70s/80s

- more sophisticated training methods

- more money and competition in the longer road distances

- tracks?

and very recently

- supershoes

- pacing lights (Cheptegei's 5000m WR was probably the most evenly run ever)

I don't think that without inside information we can tell which factors are at work in a specific case. When the road records didn't last for more than a year and no-names suddenly ran tremendous times on the road, I thought it was mainly the shoes (and the money in road races). When admittedly world class athletes rather easily beat several track records last year that had been unassailable for more than a decade (+ Tsegay indoors) I get more wary.

7:28.70 Monaco (MON) 10 AUG 1996 Paul Tergat.

Going by this time, he ran this 3000 m at 3:44 pace (4:02 mile pace!) per 1500 m. Going by an approximate 10 second differential for the best 1500 m time he (Tergat) would’ve been capable of around 334/1500 when he ran that fantastic 3000 m.

Does professor Canova agree?

I seem to remember the Tergat once ran 1500 m in 3:36 but I cannot find the source or the link?

On the world athletics website, there is indeed no mention of his best 1500 m time.

If a guy like Bob Tahri (French Steeple guy) ran 1500 m in 332 at the end of his career with much less talent than Tergat, one can imagine that Tergat would’ve been close to that time.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Periodisation is a poor explanation for why the world record holder over 5k apparently runs the 1500 on one leg. On the other hand, periodisation can also be another description for a doping cycle.

...

The absurdity of the argument that seeks to justify how slow Cheptegei is over the 1500 is demonstrated by referring back to the example of Halberg, the 1960 Olympic champion. Halberg was a 13.35 runner over 5k (a time he shared with the then world record holder, Vladimir Kuts). If Halberg ran the 1500 as Cheptegei does, his best time would be no better than 3.55. Yet he was a 3.38x runner. He also trained 100mpw with Lydiard as his coach. Like most top athletes today, Cheptegei dopes.

What kind of new nonsense is "periodization can also be another description for a doping cycle"?

Everyone who periodizes is a doper? How convenient for those who can produce no facts.

Next will be that everyone who doesn't periodize is also a doper.

Halberg trained under Lydiard, who periodized.

You seem to be oblivious to the fact that training has evolved and specialized in the last 60 years, since the days of Halberg and Lydiard. If Halberg trained full time using modern methods today, with new shoes, and new tracks, he could probably get both 1500m and 5000m times down significantly. Then, by your same metric, the "Halberg of today", would like like a doper compared to the Halberg of 1960.

If we just fast forward to the 1980s, we can find the example of Mamede, who ran 3:38 and 13:08. Which 3:38 1500m runner is more representative then? Halberg who ran 13:35 in the '60s, or Mamede who ran 13:08 in the '80s?

I think the absurdity comes from comparing an East African specialist today, using an event not specialized, to Murray Halberg of the 1960s.

The fact is, as many have painstakingly pointed out, Cheptegei ran a 3:37 at 1200m altitude, in April, 3 months before the Olympics, in base phase, in an event he didn't train for and doesn't specialize or compete in.

We know from a century of training evolution, that with a dedicated SPECIAL and SPECIFIC phase, his 1500m time will surely improve at least by a few seconds, and then would be the same as Kipchoge (3:33), or Bekele (3:32), or Geb (3:31). How much depends on whether he is a SPEED type runner, who could specialize in 1500m/5000m, or an ENDURANCE type runner, who could specialize in 5000m/10000m/half-marathon/cross-country/roads.

I think the fog of dope has clouded your judgement for more than 40 years.