Reasons why Jakob Ingebrigtsen is drug-free

"One Kazakh, two Estonian and two Austrian athletes were detained."

The Kingdom of Norway doesn't extend quite that far.

Flyknit Racer upper is bit weird and midsole is very narrow, but I can manage that. In that area Flyknit Streak is better, but they carry more weight.

Sinister has same fit as track spike. Also midsole shape is copy of Dragonfly.

You are wrong when you say the confidential athlete surveys didn't show that up to 1 in 2 athletes admitted to doping. They were asked a very plain question, as whether they had taken any banned substances in the year before the championship competition they were entered for. It is unambiguous. The answer is simply yes or no. Expert analysis of the results indicated that doping prevalence ranged from at least 1 in 3 athletes to even higher than 1 in 2. The most telling conclusion was that actual doping far exceeds the numbers caught, as only 1% of tests return a positive. Hence, most dopers aren't being caught.

These are conclusions you are unwilling to except. Your wish to believe your heroes are clean shapes your views. The surveys - among another factors indicative of doping - suggest they won't be.

Doping could be rife but I don't care about cheating because I'm not getting cheated. My enjoyment of athletics comes down to wondering who is going to win. Jakob has lost 4 champ 1500m's in a row. He may be great, he may de doping, but he isn't winning.

I think they are deliberately avoiding testing some athletes who are marquee names and I'm glad if they are. I want to see the old records broken.

The world is filled with cheats and liars, many of them have started religions, been national leaders, run grand organizations. The founder of the Mormon Church was a con man, but people have been inspired to live good lives by it. If our benchmark for what we accept is whether people are liars or cheats then civilization itself is impossible.

I care not for moral correctness I care for greatness and glory. And given I can never have that at least I can enjoy it through watching other people achieve greatness, that in some way their greatness is partly mine for I am a fan.

I realized this recently that the reason normal people enjoy other people's success isn't because they selflessly respect it. It's because in some way they "share" in that glory. This I believe to be largely illusory but it is comforting and perhaps that is what matters.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I’m not saying the researchers behind the surveys are wrong. All I’m saying is that the researchers estimates are estimates, and that the situation isn’t that a certain percentage of athletes have admitted to doping. -The researchers have estimated this by a method they believe in (but that is quite easy to criticise).

What do I know? Doping prevalence can be even higher than these researchers’ estimates. -And logically we shouldn’t even base our judgment on f.x the Norwegians on high or low doping prevalence. They can dope despite low or high prevalence, as can everybody else…

I’m not unwilling to accept some conclusions, despite what you are claiming. -I agree that doping is a possible prevalent thing, and that more than the 1% caught dope. And I even mean that doping is such a severe problem that it’s about time testing and investigation are prioritised much more. And I agree with the leader of Anti-doping Norway that it’s alarming that police / custom officers don’t notice Wada when athletes are stopped carrying PEDS…

But knowing who dopes, as you seem to think you do, and knowing the current doping prevalence, when experts are saying everything from much higher than before to much lower, well -you are free to conclude with certainty, but I, I just don’t have a clue. -There’s fluffy indications in all directions; I have to see more than that before I conclude….

He usually wins all his 5'000 meter races. I'd really like to see him go all out in a 5'000 ,just to see how fast he can go.

A predictive text typo is side-splitting. Especially if you didn't understand any of the rest of the comment.

I agree that the question of prevalence is ultimately an estimate, because we can't know exactly how many are doping when so many who are doping aren't caught. The key point, I think, from the surveys is that they showed actual doping is far higher than the numbers caught, which means testing is of very limited effectiveness. The further inference from that is we cannot be sure if any top athlete is clean, because if they are doping the chances of their being caught are very slim.

That's not a typo. Go back to school.

Fair enough. But I think the reason I, who by the way is a very sceptical person, don’t spend much time on speculation about who is dirty and who could be clean, is that I’m very hung up about certainty in all my views. -I think I have a lot of firm believes, because when I’m a hundred percent sure on something I don’t let go easily. But when it comes to doping my believes aren’t that sure -10/20/30% believing in indications in one way or the other isn’t good enough for me. So I don’t conclude at all - just too difficult.

El Guerrouj, Gebrselassie, Komen, Bekele, Kipchoge, Lagat, Ngeny aren’t my heroes at all. -It wouldn’t make any difference for my interest in the sport if some old test material deemed them dirty. But of course sad for them. Or Coe/Cram/Ovett. But although I know that some made stellar result when EPO testing was spares, I don’t give the matter much thought -they could be clean (not all that unreasonably better than the clean Elliott) or dirty. How would I know -I’m not God; I don’t see through everything…

And when it comes to the Norwegians, that I root for -theoretically they might be dirty, but they might also very well be clean. So many years have gone -not likely there will be a case here. And if there was a bust -sad of course. But since I don’t fear this, why would I be sad in advance..? And if a Norwegian is dirty but under the radar -how would I know. So I just enjoy…. (And don’t even deny the possibility of frequent doping -what could I do other than supporting tests ++? Worrying? Judging a doping prevalence I don’t have sufficient information about at all?). So doping is somewhere in my backhead, but far far away from my daily concern…

You need to find an interest in life.

You have many, right?

When was your last meeting with all of your friends?

My resident stalker.

If i have to put my money on one T&F athlete, which is clean, it woud be Jakob.

I hope i get not disappointed at some time ...

You are not skeptical at all. You always look only one way - to minimize doping, both effect and prevalence. That peer-reviewed survey for example has a raw result of 44%, and when corrected for dopers not trusting the anonymity, over 60%. Of course you quickly discard both, and go with the low "at least 31%" although that is explicitly described as just one scenario explicitly only valid under two conservative assumptions, and the authors explicitly and correctly mention a couple of times that most scenarios discussed lead to higher numbers than the 44% - as you could quickly verify by browsing through the tables of the attachment where all those details are listed.

Naturally you love to ignore the "at least" and round 31% down to 30%. Your mission is quite obvious.

You crave the attention.

That's what stalkers always say.

You obviously know all about being one.