Before the Barcelona Games in '92, Spain averaged 2-3 medals each Olympics. At Barcelona they hauled in over twenty medals. Spain has been acknowledged by its own political leaders to have a "doping problem", with violations in every kind of sport.
Russians have doped in a huge variety of sports - as with the old E Bloc. It has been reflected in their success in those sports. But they have also been up against other nations that also dope.
There are certain physiological features that are crucial to performance. If those features are enhanced by a given drug the experts say it has the "potential" to be performance-enhancing (but for ethical reasons they won't seek to prove it by actually doping athletes), and when athletes are using the drug you can guarantee it is performance enhancing.
However, by finding that a drug is potentially performance enhancing the drugs experts are not claiming to measure by how much it could enhance performance. That isn't their purpose. That will be measured by stopwatches - as you say - but none of the doping athletes and their coaches will be telling anyone how much they have gained. We have to guess. But at elite and professional level it is in plain sight - on the track and on the roads. The stopwatch (and the near miraculous absence of fatigue) is also telling us that.
You always muddy any discussion about performance in distance events with talk about a "doping problem", something that is never debated, and "every kind of sport". You are uncompelling because you cannot stay focused on the specific questions and doubts that are raised. What you always fail to establish, because you take it for granted as given for all athletes/dope/sports regardless, is the link, if any, to unnaturally fast distance running performances.
Spain's Olympic count in Barcelona put them roughly on par with the UK and France. The increase probably had to do more with the country's motivation to bid for the Olympics, and winning the bid, and a home court advantage, allowing them to perform at a level that was always possible before.
In Barcelona, Spain won 4 medals in athletics: 1500m (G) 20km walk (G), Decathlon (S), and pole vault (B).
In Russia, the men have done virtually nothing in distance running events on the track or the roads, since the 80's. Their women have fared slightly better, with a half-dozen or so taking medals in middle distance events, and one women in the marathon.
The stopwatch tells us next to nothing about doping for all of Spain since the 1990s, and all of Russia since the 1980s, with the exception of some of their women in the shorter distance events.
Whether doping brings athletes from 90% to 95%, while against the rules, is not all that significant from a performance perspective, if they are not making any impact on the international stage.
Sure some physiological features are important, and some doping can improve performance for some athletes to produce unnatural results. But you cannot just make the leap from "potential to be" to "guarantee it is", without providing some tangible substantial evidence or observations. Your "experts" don't even go that far.
I think you were referring there to Vladimir Kuts running 13:35 for the 5k in the late '50's. We see today Kenyan and Ethiopian women runners closing in on his record (Kuts first broke Zatopek's 5k record when he ran in the 13:50's), not to mention male marathon runners nearly running at the same speed for sections of the race. It is hard to see how training alone has enabled that kind of improvement.
The other notable point is that although you were invited by Russian sports administrators in 2015 to provide advice about how to improve performance without drugs Russia has since become the worst offender and the only country thus far to incur a national ban. They obviously felt drugs were more effective than just training.
What we didn't see, during decades of extreme doping, is Russian men running faster than Kuts.
You also seem to be mixing up the Russian doping timeline. It is well documented by both the IAAF's Ethics Commission and WADA's IC reports, that Russia started being put under extreme pressure around the 2012 London Summer Olympics, and the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics to comply with anti-doping rules including enforcement. One IAAF study looking at blood doping at both the 2011 and 2013 World Championships (unofficially) shows a massive drop in Russian doping.
2015 would make sense that Russia was interested in shifting its focus from improving performance with drugs to improving performance without.
I think you were referring there to Vladimir Kuts running 13:35 for the 5k in the late '50's. We see today Kenyan and Ethiopian women runners closing in on his record (Kuts first broke Zatopek's 5k record when he ran in the 13:50's), not to mention male marathon runners nearly running at the same speed for sections of the race. It is hard to see how training alone has enabled that kind of improvement.
The other notable point is that although you were invited by Russian sports administrators in 2015 to provide advice about how to improve performance without drugs Russia has since become the worst offender and the only country thus far to incur a national ban. They obviously felt drugs were more effective than just training.
What we didn't see, during decades of extreme doping, is Russian men running faster than Kuts.
You also seem to be mixing up the Russian doping timeline. It is well documented by both the IAAF's Ethics Commission and WADA's IC reports, that Russia started being put under extreme pressure around the 2012 London Summer Olympics, and the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics to comply with anti-doping rules including enforcement. One IAAF study looking at blood doping at both the 2011 and 2013 World Championships (unofficially) shows a massive drop in Russian doping.
2015 would make sense that Russia was interested in shifting its focus from improving performance with drugs to improving performance without.
After a "massive drop in Russian doping" we saw a ban applied to Russian athletics. I guess there wasn't a massive drop after all.
After a "massive drop in Russian doping" we saw a ban applied to Russian athletics. I guess there wasn't a massive drop after all.
Once again, you only demonstrate how little you know about recent history in just this past decade, which is well documented in lengthy reports from the then IAAF Ethics Commission, and two WADA IC reports.
There is a false perception that the high number of doped athletes led to a blanket ban of all athletes, and that this would be a reason to ban all Kenyans. There is no rule that permits banning innocent athletes based on the doping of other athletes. Indeed, Russian athletes who were not caught were not suspended nor banned and were allowed to compete in neutral colors, if they could demonstrate being subjected to proper anti-doping controls.
It was the Russian Atheletics Federation ARAF which was declared non-compliant and banned, for failing to enforce sanctions for several athletes before the 2012 London Olympics, and extorting money from their athletes to bribe a handful of IAAF heads.
And it was the Russian anti-doping RUSADA which was declared non-compliant and banned for their breaches in anti-doping up until the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics (i.e. not "Athletics"), e.g. swapping urine samples with clean ones through a hole in the wall.
After a "massive drop in Russian doping" we saw a ban applied to Russian athletics. I guess there wasn't a massive drop after all.
Once again, you only demonstrate how little you know about recent history in just this past decade, which is well documented in lengthy reports from the then IAAF Ethics Commission, and two WADA IC reports.
There is a false perception that the high number of doped athletes led to a blanket ban of all athletes, and that this would be a reason to ban all Kenyans. There is no rule that permits banning innocent athletes based on the doping of other athletes. Indeed, Russian athletes who were not caught were not suspended nor banned and were allowed to compete in neutral colors, if they could demonstrate being subjected to proper anti-doping controls.
It was the Russian Atheletics Federation ARAF which was declared non-compliant and banned, for failing to enforce sanctions for several athletes before the 2012 London Olympics, and extorting money from their athletes to bribe a handful of IAAF heads.
And it was the Russian anti-doping RUSADA which was declared non-compliant and banned for their breaches in anti-doping up until the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics (i.e. not "Athletics"), e.g. swapping urine samples with clean ones through a hole in the wall.
What a load of pusillanimous garbage. I didn't say Russia was banned simply because of its incidence of doping. But Russia wasn't banned either because of a lack of compliance by its officials, but because their corruption went hand in hand with a sporting culture in which doping is rife - and has been so since the distant past of the Soviet era.
There isn't a post you make in this board which in some way doesn't intend to minimise doping, either by individual athletes caught doping or by countries or even entire sports. On this subject, you are little more than a religious nutjob, stuck in your fantasies of a mythical Garden of Eden.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
In the last four decades, the Russian men's 5000m record was improved by a whopping 0.04 seconds to 13:11.95, and the 10000m record by 2.05 seconds to 27:53.12. EPO works perfectly for them. At 10000m, the best Russians are on Bolotnikov-level currently.
What a load of pusillanimous garbage. I didn't say Russia was banned simply because of its incidence of doping. But Russia wasn't banned either because of a lack of compliance by its officials, but because their corruption went hand in hand with a sporting culture in which doping is rife - and has been so since the distant past of the Soviet era.
There isn't a post you make in this board which in some way doesn't intend to minimise doping, either by individual athletes caught doping or by countries or even entire sports. On this subject, you are little more than a religious nutjob, stuck in your fantasies of a mythical Garden of Eden.
Did someone buy a word of the day calendar?
The reasons for banning the Russian federation and anti-doping agency and Moscow lab are well documented by WADA the the IAAF. No need to rewrite history to suit your fantasy.
I only minimize that which is not supported by facts, evidence, or observation. That is my religion.
I don't doubt Russian doping was high for decades. Remind me again the notable Russian running performances in athletics measured by a stop-watch, since the Soviet-era.
What a load of pusillanimous garbage. I didn't say Russia was banned simply because of its incidence of doping. But Russia wasn't banned either because of a lack of compliance by its officials, but because their corruption went hand in hand with a sporting culture in which doping is rife - and has been so since the distant past of the Soviet era.
There isn't a post you make in this board which in some way doesn't intend to minimise doping, either by individual athletes caught doping or by countries or even entire sports. On this subject, you are little more than a religious nutjob, stuck in your fantasies of a mythical Garden of Eden.
Did someone buy a word of the day calendar?
The reasons for banning the Russian federation and anti-doping agency and Moscow lab are well documented by WADA t Rdhe the IAAF. No need to rewrite history to suit your fantasy.
I only minimize that which is not supported by facts, evidence, or observation. That is my religion.
I don't doubt Russian doping was high for decades. Remind me again the notable Russian running performances in athletics measured by a stop-watch, since the Soviet-era.
And their relative lack of improvement, as you see it, must because doping doesn't enhance performance - your favourite position.
Your entire take on doping is based on the lack of definitive information about its extent and its effects. So what you can't see or measure doesn't exist for you. There is nothing beyond the tip of the iceberg. If there is, it is merely a fanciful distraction that athletes have fallen sway to - though they follow science, logic and reason for just about everything else - with no impact on elite sporting performance. But the nature of doping is that it will always be worse than what we see or can prove. It is always secret, concealed and denied. And yet it is everywhere - and especially on the podium.
The reasons for banning the Russian federation and anti-doping agency and Moscow lab are well documented by WADA t Rdhe the IAAF. No need to rewrite history to suit your fantasy.
I only minimize that which is not supported by facts, evidence, or observation. That is my religion.
I don't doubt Russian doping was high for decades. Remind me again the notable Russian running performances in athletics measured by a stop-watch, since the Soviet-era.
And their relative lack of improvement, as you see it, must because doping doesn't enhance performance - your favourite position.
Your entire take on doping is based on the lack of definitive information about its extent and its effects. So what you can't see or measure doesn't exist for you. There is nothing beyond the tip of the iceberg. If there is, it is merely a fanciful distraction that athletes have fallen sway to - though they follow science, logic and reason for just about everything else - with no impact on elite sporting performance. But the nature of doping is that it will always be worse than what we see or can prove. It is always secret, concealed and denied. And yet it is everywhere - and especially on the podium.
That is not my entire take, and that it not my sole basis. Mine is not a question of extent, but of evidence.
If an idea, even a popular one that is widely believed, has no substantial basis in facts, evidence, or observations, then I file it under mythology.
If someone makes claims, and as you suggest, it is based on science, logic, and reason, then there must be a basis for making that claim over other competing or opposite claims.
What no one sees or measures only exists philosophically, like the falling tree in the woods making a sound that no one hears.
And their relative lack of improvement, as you see it, must because doping doesn't enhance performance - your favourite position.
Your entire take on doping is based on the lack of definitive information about its extent and its effects. So what you can't see or measure doesn't exist for you. There is nothing beyond the tip of the iceberg. If there is, it is merely a fanciful distraction that athletes have fallen sway to - though they follow science, logic and reason for just about everything else - with no impact on elite sporting performance. But the nature of doping is that it will always be worse than what we see or can prove. It is always secret, concealed and denied. And yet it is everywhere - and especially on the podium.
That is not my entire take, and that it not my sole basis. Mine is not a question of extent, but of evidence.
If an idea, even a popular one that is widely believed, has no substantial basis in facts, evidence, or observations, then I file it under mythology.
If someone makes claims, and as you suggest, it is based on science, logic, and reason, then there must be a basis for making that claim over other competing or opposite claims.
What no one sees or measures only exists philosophically, like the falling tree in the woods making a sound that no one hears.
The evidence will not match your take because doping will always exceed the evidence. That is because it is clandestine and concealed. What will guarantee that it will be more than what can be observed or measured is that it has been pervasive in sport for decades and even fostered at a national level, it offers advantages beyond what talent and training alone can achieve, it is largely undetectable and there are innumerable ambitious athletes who are sufficiently motivated to take advantage of it. For many, their careers - their lives, as they see it - may depend on it. It is largely invisible yet it is everywhere - in all countries, in all sports, and even in schools and amongst seniors. We know this, while we are only able to identify or catch the few who slip up.
Why even bother arguing? Rekrunner is an obvious troll and Canova, being a European coach will always have a vested interest. Whatever the verbal shenanigans, Kenyans have been caught doping in far greater numbers than any other country's runners. Hundreds of them in fact. Upper level. Lower level - and lower level usually means National record standard in most places. Should the running community consider this a problem. Yes? Will anything be done about it? Probably not.