Care to refute it? The problem with such reasoning; this is not the point. You can't make such a broad comparation and then make an empirical statement. Yes, Katir had different background and so had Houlihan. This is just slander.
I really don’t think the reasoning is that broad. The original post puts together all the similarities between the two athletes. I didn’t make an empirical statement like Narve is 100% doping, but it doesn’t bode well if a very similar progression by an athlete in a very similar situation ended up in a positive doping case. Narve very well may not have that be his fate. I think we all hope that.
Yes, it was cherry picking. That is the way it all ads up for you.
1) "We can't reject the new event notion"? Yes, in a way we can, if you look closer . The point is that the "new event", though he was probably better at 1500, even though he ran two races in 2022, was not his event. He always let the guys in the front do the work, so his times more or less depended on that. In his 3:36.23-run May last year: Number two was Adrian Ben and three Coscoran 3:36.84. Andrian Ben a much faster runner by "nature. But even though. Coscoran has dropped 5 seconds this year to 3:30.42. Sure you can find similarties between him and S.H.
2) "There were no talk about anything radically different from one season to the other"? It depends on what you mean by radically? But some changes were made since Nordås got Gjerts full attention. The most radical, which is different from how he trained the brothers is much more speedwork before competitons. "If not" says Gjert" Narve tends to "die" ". And Narve says: "Gjert and I have found a gold mine in the training". And BTW more kilometers per week 195 K.
3) Katir "finally had support"? Yes, what about Narves support? He had to work a great deal, and had some minor economical support from a local bank and a student loan. He barely could make it. Do you when he actually got good sponsors? Actually under a year ago. Gjert did not pay much interest in that.
I could have gone on. Well, you are close to an empirical conclution. Just look at your whole enterprise here.
See the bottom of my post. I’m not accusing just noting their careers and breakout seasons are strikingly similar
With all respect, I think that’s kind of a cop out. You are effectively accusing him of doping, and that’s ok: posters are allowed to accuse tons of different athletes of doping on this site, and you lay out the reasons for your suspicion better than most. I think he and Jakob are probably doping.
When Shelby and Karissa Schweizer ran 14:23/14:26 in 2020, I thought it was an incredible coincidence that the two fastest non-African-born women at 5k apart from drug cheat Liliya Shobukhova (at the time) were both born in Iowa, a state of 3 million people. The Ingebrigtsens and Nordas are all from Sandnes, a town of about 80,000 (okay technically Nordas was born in Klepp, a small town about 7 miles from Sandnes). As soon as Gjert starts coaching Nordas he goes from someone we’d never heard of to one of the fastest non-Africans in history and the World Championships bronze medalist…it stinks!
Edit: also it’s spelled “eerie.”
You was suspicious about Shelby and Karissa but did you ever write about it?
Have you ever accused a countryman (male/ female) of doping or are you focusing on the guys "over there"?
Of course Nordas is doping. I would be shocked if anyone in that final was clean. Laros maybe?
But why is Nordaas the only one accused?
It could be for many reasons, so who knows? For some it might even be related to the fact Nordas runs in the new HOKA spikes that, unlike the dragon fly, actually possess a carbon fiber plate, and which he believes, are superior to the latter.
Some have invoked Mo Katir, but Shelby is the correct answer and the similarities are undeniable. Once you see it, you can not unsee it. To whit: Misplaced Early-Career Focus: Both started with an event far from their ultimate home. Shelby was an 800m runner, Narve was messing around with Half Marathons/10Ks early on.
Age: Shelby was age 25 in her breakthrough season, Narve is 24 but turning 25 in a month. These are late ages for such a breakthrough in the 1500.
Early Pro Career/Background: Both were mildly successful 5,000m runners at age 22-23 with a coach they'd had for years. Shelby ran ~15:00 in 2016 and 2017 and made two global finals but was not competitive in her races on the DL/World level. Narve ran 13:16, missing out on global finals, and was not competitive in his races on the DL/World level. They had improved to this level, but seemingly stagnated.
Coaches: Both Gjert and Jerry Schumacher are ferociously loyal to their system (my way or the highway), and believers in very high volume relative to their athlete's event. They're of course both Western coaches with a track record of success, and to the point of these breakthroughs not involved in any athlete ever busted. However, both had an athlete show up as "Likely Doping" in the Fancy Bears hack (Jager and Henrik).
"Found New Event in the 1500": Both broke through in the 1500 after semi-mediocrity in the 5000, flashing huge kicks that stood out vs. the competition while setting massive PBs. Narve 3:36 to 3:29 and a medal. Shelby 4:03 to 3:57 with a huge kick in multiple DLs. Both went from also-rans on the DL to contenders for the win.
The Myth of the New Event Thesis: Sure both had newfound success at 1500 in their breakthrough year, but it wasn't merely finding their event. Nordas just advanced in the gauntlet 5,000 prelim on less than one day's rest as numerous fresher sub-13 runners got bounced. Shelby set an American record and ran 14:33 for the 5K in 2018. Both athletes made gigantic strides and would have been factors in their old event of the 5,000 had they stuck with it as primary event. We can reject the new event notion.
Explanations Behind Their Success: Both credited the accumulation of hard work most of all. Otherwise, they'd talk about marginal improvements in diet, more altitude, slightly more mileage and making their coach's system work better for themselves. Narve has talked about not feeling pressured to run with Jakob, more Gjert focus. There was no talk of anything radically different being done from one season to the next or overcoming major injuries etc. This is unlike a Mo Katir (younger, got a new coach, finally had support, affected by pandemic etc.) or Ciara Mageean (injuries, new coach etc.) for a couple of examples.
Conclusion: There is probably more I am missing, and I want to be clear I don't 100% know/think Nordas is doping or anything like that. But I think if you examine every aspect of it, there is no more comparable situation out there. Pretty much every aspect of their rise and breakthroughs is identical. I like Nordas' personality and would like to believe his breakthrough is 100% clean. I felt the same with Shelby, but was always dubious of it at the time.
So you're basically accusing Nordas of doping?
I think Gjert should take legal action against you.
You think that. But Gjert doesn't. He won't. No one sues on the basis of anything said here.
1. It is known the sport is full of doping, while most aren't caught.
2. We have yet another athlete making spectacular performance improvements mid career. They are the kind of improvements we generally only see in athletes believed to be doping or who were actually busted - like Houlihan.
,3. Training methods don't explain it because they are methods that have been around for decades that many other athletes use. It doesn't explain the exceptions.
4. When an athlete is clearly leapfrogging other doped athletes you can guarantee he is one of them.
You sound like John Kellogg. You are a rotten apple.
You don't make a single coherent point. But you still somehow think that in the 1500 the "clean" Norwegian runner should be able to finish faster than his doped competitors who also have greater speed. You haven't a clue.
You can't read neither understand. I was not writing about a "clean" Norwegian runner. I can't judge who is doped or not. Neither can you BTW. I was making theortical point. And you failed to answer. It is fruitless though to discuss with a guy who has decided that approx. 3:30 is the limit for nonedopers. And a guy that never was able to make reasonable arguments for that or can give evidence from sports science.
So if you have no idea whether Nordas is doped or not (or any other runner) what exactly do you have to contribute to a thread on a doping subject? Precisely, nothing. But I knew that already. You're a bag of wind.
Karissa Schweizer’s progression occurred in 2019-20. First 2 years on a pro team along with the advent of super spikes. She also ran her 5,000 PBs in the ‘19 Worlds semis and finals. Her next jump was in a glorified time trial in 2020. Most would not call that initial PB run her utter maximum. Her 4:06->4:00 1500 improvement was pre to post super spikes and her PB was from July 2018 after a collegiate season that included a 5K/10K double at Nationals. She’s definitely not above suspicion but her progression is far more explainable than Nordas’.
Mo Ahmed I don’t want to delve too deep into but you know the super spikes effect plus clearly 2019 was a breakthrough year for him even if he didn’t hit a super fast race until 2020. That being said he ran 13:01 in 2016 so we are talking about maybe 5-7 seconds improvement in a 5k not 11.
You also are acting like injuries/off years are impossibilities. Or that Nordas has made only a 10 second improvement in the 5,000 when we all reasonably expect him to be in 12:50-55 shape.
So you have all kind of explanation for your countrymen´s M/K achievements but you don´t believe changes in Nordaas training and other factors can explain Nordaas improvement.
I stresses again that I am neutral on Nordaas and as such I can see the following
1. Change in training, including focusing on a new distance and more focusfrom the trainer
2. 1500m times from 2022 probably not representative for his real potential. He won both races. One was a local run the other a low key international race. If he had joined a DL 1500m race last year he could possibly have run 2-3 seconds faster.
-----------
Why do you think Nordass is a 12:50 to 12:55 man. He ran a 5000m recently (after the 3:29 1500m) and improved with 10 seconds from last year in a race where the best ran 13:00. Why didn´t he win the race then? He was beaten by Kemboi, Fay, Hugo Hay and McGorty!
I have on other threads predicted that Nordaas only stand a chance in the final tonight if it is a slow race. And that due to his finishing ability.
You mean the "finishing ability" of a runner who himself says he has no "speed"? Doping has solved that problem.
You can't read neither understand. I was not writing about a "clean" Norwegian runner. I can't judge who is doped or not. Neither can you BTW. I was making theortical point. And you failed to answer. It is fruitless though to discuss with a guy who has decided that approx. 3:30 is the limit for nonedopers. And a guy that never was able to make reasonable arguments for that or can give evidence from sports science.
So if you have no idea whether Nordas is doped or not (or any other runner) what exactly do you have to contribute to a thread on a doping subject? Precisely, nothing. But I knew that already. You're a bag of wind.
On the flip side you have no idea who is doped or not, and if yes, what they are taking. You just exist to spew nonsense. If this guy is a bag of wind, you must be a bag of wind to contain the size of a tropical depression
,3. Training methods don't explain it because they are methods that have been around for decades that many other athletes use. It doesn't explain the exceptions.
What “exceptions”? You contend they are all doping, and so nothing between differences in training application is sufficient to explain differences in performance that are evidently not apparent to you in the first place; in which case, you might as well follow a roulette wheel game.
But the results of Snell and Coe demonstrate the radically different training philosophies that can approach the same apex of human performance at mid-distance, and Ryun, Scott, etc. are somewhere between those two extremes in what was is physiologically being accomplished to produce similar results.
So although various training methods have “been around for decades”, I don’t think until recently such attention has been paid to precisely controlling lactate production over voluminous training blocks, and understanding how that affects performance at the very fine apex of mid-distance performance.
I do think there is something more here that needs further exploration and physiological explanation, rather than it just being a careful ruse to cover up for a doping program.
1. I don't say all are doping but the best will be; it isn't possible for talented clean athletes to beat talented doped athletes today.
2. Since doping is prevalent in the sport and confidential athlete surveys put it as possibly high as 1 in 2 athletes at championship level it is beyond credibility that a clean athlete can make performance jumps that doped athletes aren't generally making.
3. Snell benefited from a revolution in training methods, which was focussing on an endurance base for md athletes; Coe later showed that a different approach could also produce spectacular results. But that supports my point, that first of all there is nothing new under the sun today in training methods, and, secondly, it isn't the training methods now that produce the athletes who are the exception. They are using methods that other athletes have long applied but without anything like the same results.
3. I understand your interest in the science of training but it isn't how it is applied by athletes coming from cultures where many of them have had very little formal education - and yet are absolutely dominant in the sport.
This post was edited 50 seconds after it was posted.
You apparently believe and repeat the sport is dirty and corrupt to the core, and drugs are the answer as to how one makes a worlds final. So what is it that separates those on the podium from the others in the race?
Not much. In any sense.
So why are you not stalking the 2 last world champions in the 1500m as you are stalking the current female world champion in the 1500m and the 5000m, Nordaas in this tread and Jakob in multiple treads (every time he has run a good race) ?
With all respect, I think that’s kind of a cop out. You are effectively accusing him of doping, and that’s ok: posters are allowed to accuse tons of different athletes of doping on this site, and you lay out the reasons for your suspicion better than most. I think he and Jakob are probably doping.
When Shelby and Karissa Schweizer ran 14:23/14:26 in 2020, I thought it was an incredible coincidence that the two fastest non-African-born women at 5k apart from drug cheat Liliya Shobukhova (at the time) were both born in Iowa, a state of 3 million people. The Ingebrigtsens and Nordas are all from Sandnes, a town of about 80,000 (okay technically Nordas was born in Klepp, a small town about 7 miles from Sandnes). As soon as Gjert starts coaching Nordas he goes from someone we’d never heard of to one of the fastest non-Africans in history and the World Championships bronze medalist…it stinks!
Edit: also it’s spelled “eerie.”
You was suspicious about Shelby and Karissa but did you ever write about it?
Have you ever accused a countryman (male/ female) of doping or are you focusing on the guys "over there"?
So if you have no idea whether Nordas is doped or not (or any other runner) what exactly do you have to contribute to a thread on a doping subject? Precisely, nothing. But I knew that already. You're a bag of wind.
On the flip side you have no idea who is doped or not, and if yes, what they are taking. You just exist to spew nonsense. If this guy is a bag of wind, you must be a bag of wind to contain the size of a tropical depression
I have presented arguments about doping here and on any thread in which the subject is raised. But it is all above your pay level.
So why are you not stalking the 2 last world champions in the 1500m as you are stalking the current female world champion in the 1500m and the 5000m, Nordaas in this tread and Jakob in multiple treads (every time he has run a good race) ?
They are nowhere near as glaringly obvious, if they are doping. I don't think 3:29 of itself confirms doping but I have already said that if they were significantly faster than that - maybe 3:28 and certainly 3:27 that would raise red flags for me.
Kipyegon and Hassan I simply regard as ridiculous, their doping is so obvious.
If Nordas is doping, it is plausible to think that the NAU team is doping, along with Mike Smith's pro group. By no means am I accusing them of doping, but: If Nordas and Jakob are doping (and I do think that the two are), then it means they are using double threshold as an excuse. Gjert did not invent double threshold, but Jakab is by far the biggest name to use the training plan, and he is certainly one of the earliest top pro adopters. But, it is possible (highly likely) that Gjert knows a doctor who, simply put, has the best proprietary sauce on the market. because there is relatively little data on double threshold and the results it brings, it would not be apparent right now that jakob and nordas are outliers among double threshold users (which would essentially mean they are dopers). Mike Smith was the earliest collegiate adopter of double threshold, so he could be using the same strategy of doping and blaming good results on double threshold. I really hope that Smith's athletes are clean (Luis is my favorite 5k guy and pick for bronze in the Paris 5k), but if Gjert is running a doping ring (and he is), then NAU has to be questioned. I don't know of other pro or college groups using double threshold, but if they are, they warrant more suspicion. And again, it might turn out that double threshold really is the holy grail of training. but we can't rule out the sauce
What a bunch of biased rubbish:
You want accuse Mike Smith´s group of doping but you have no problems with accusing Jakob and Nordaas of doping even though it - according to you - must mean it is plausible that the American group also dopes.
Then you by free phantasy suppose Gjert knows a "good" doctor but in the same time hopes that the double treshold regimen is the explanation for you beloved American training groups good results.
Hopes for for the Americans, but no hope for the guys "over there"!
If Nordas is doping, it is plausible to think that the NAU team is doping, along with Mike Smith's pro group. By no means am I accusing them of doping, but: If Nordas and Jakob are doping (and I do think that the two are), then it means they are using double threshold as an excuse. Gjert did not invent double threshold, but Jakab is by far the biggest name to use the training plan, and he is certainly one of the earliest top pro adopters. But, it is possible (highly likely) that Gjert knows a doctor who, simply put, has the best proprietary sauce on the market. because there is relatively little data on double threshold and the results it brings, it would not be apparent right now that jakob and nordas are outliers among double threshold users (which would essentially mean they are dopers). Mike Smith was the earliest collegiate adopter of double threshold, so he could be using the same strategy of doping and blaming good results on double threshold. I really hope that Smith's athletes are clean (Luis is my favorite 5k guy and pick for bronze in the Paris 5k), but if Gjert is running a doping ring (and he is), then NAU has to be questioned. I don't know of other pro or college groups using double threshold, but if they are, they warrant more suspicion. And again, it might turn out that double threshold really is the holy grail of training. but we can't rule out the sauce
What a bunch of biased rubbish:
You want accuse Mike Smith´s group of doping but you have no problems with accusing Jakob and Nordaas of doping even though it - according to you - must mean it is plausible that the American group also dopes.
Then you by free phantasy suppose Gjert knows a "good" doctor but in the same time hopes that the double treshold regimen is the explanation for you beloved American training groups good results.
Hopes for for the Americans, but no hope for the guys "over there"!
On the flip side you have no idea who is doped or not, and if yes, what they are taking. You just exist to spew nonsense. If this guy is a bag of wind, you must be a bag of wind to contain the size of a tropical depression
I have presented arguments about doping here and on any thread in which the subject is raised. But it is all above your pay level.
Baseless short bus arguments are not legitimate arguments. It's wind bag material
So why are you not stalking the 2 last world champions in the 1500m as you are stalking the current female world champion in the 1500m and the 5000m, Nordaas in this tread and Jakob in multiple treads (every time he has run a good race) ?
They are nowhere near as glaringly obvious, if they are doping. I don't think 3:29 of itself confirms doping but I have already said that if they were significantly faster than that - maybe 3:28 and certainly 3:27 that would raise red flags for me.
Kipyegon and Hassan I simply regard as ridiculous, their doping is so obvious.
Don´t you think you should take a nap now your biased oldie?
Just above you stated the following :
" I don't say all are doping but the best will be; it isn't possible for talented clean athletes to beat talented doped athletes today. "
If Jakob, as one of your favorites dopers are beaten, by your beloved Anglo Saxon friends shouldn´t they be doping? Or perhaps you don´t think Jakob is a TALENTED doper?