"In the Fukuoka Marathon in Japan in December 1968, Burfoot ran a personal best time of 2:14:28, which was one second from the American marathon record at the time."
Well he is now a bitter old man who, like many here, is accusing someone with zero proof. And yes, saying he is suspicious is the same as accusing someone. It has the exact same intent.
Marathon is a massive outlier. Despite the fact that the men’s WR is already insanely fast.
But you forgot an important point - none of the distance records (800m and longer) above were run with a group of male pacers v.s its male counterparts. And certainly no pacer from start to finish which has no doubt contributed to their statistical differences.
That's why you can't just look at the stats. Statistical proof at best doesn't give the full picture and in worst case scenarios, over-reliance on it can lead to miscarriage of justice. (see Sally Clark and Lucia de Berk)
Just read his article. It's a hell of an article. It convinced me. Amby has been around for decades. He's earned the right to his opinion, and although I've heard some people joke that "opinions are like a--holes: everybody has one," not all opinions are equal. His opinion here carries the weight of his long experience as a runner and running journalist AND, not least, the weight of his decision to state his opinion openly, early in the post-race process, and with great force.
Impressive. We will remember that he wrote this piece.
Just read his article. It's a hell of an article. It convinced me. Amby has been around for decades. He's earned the right to his opinion, and although I've heard some people joke that "opinions are like a--holes: everybody has one," not all opinions are equal. His opinion here carries the weight of his long experience as a runner and running journalist AND, not least, the weight of his decision to state his opinion openly, early in the post-race process, and with great force.
Impressive. We will remember that he wrote this piece.
If anything, that made him worse. If his words carries weight, then he shouldn't share unfounded speculation as if he's an anonymous letsrunner like me. It's just witch-hunt. What's even worse is he's not even consistent with his stance and just picks on easy targets like Rojo, while turning a blind eye (or too craven to discuss)to Paula Radcliffe, Georgia Bell or Hull....etc, when they have equally suspicious progression and ground-breaking performances.
Just read his article. It's a hell of an article. It convinced me. Amby has been around for decades. He's earned the right to his opinion, and although I've heard some people joke that "opinions are like a--holes: everybody has one," not all opinions are equal. His opinion here carries the weight of his long experience as a runner and running journalist AND, not least, the weight of his decision to state his opinion openly, early in the post-race process, and with great force.
Impressive. We will remember that he wrote this piece.
If anything, that made him worse. If his words carries weight, then he shouldn't share unfounded speculation as if he's an anonymous letsrunner like me. It's just witch-hunt. What's even worse is he's not even consistent with his stance and just picks on easy targets like Rojo, while turning a blind eye (or too craven to call out)to Paula Radcliffe, Georgia Bell or Hull....etc, when they have equally suspicious progression and ground-breaking performances.
Burfoot could be right, but as he states, he has no evidence. I'm curious if the actual lawyers on the board know if she could sue him (and other media) for slander (or some other legal standard)? Is there an expectation of evidence to make such a claim if he causes her damage to her reputation? Which could harm her financially? He's not just asking the question, he's being pretty blunt about it.
This probably is a doped performance b/c the simplest conclusion is that running is like cycling and everyone dopes.
But a few things Burfoot should consider: (1) Shoes. All times are getting crazy better because of shoes. (2) Marathon courses/weather conditions/pacers. Marathon WRs are always weird because the slightest differences can make big differences over 26.2. This is not track where there is some level of uniformity. (3) Sometimes records get better fast. First sub 2:20 men's marathon was 1952. Then 2:15 on cobblestones in 1960. Then sub 2:10 in 1968.
So you have no respect for the understanding and knowledge that comes from years of experience. You will never see the doping that is right under your nose.
Read Amby's words and shut up. Your "years of experience" resulted in a moronic loudmouth. Be quiet for once.
A moronic loudmouth speaks. You've just proven my point.
If performances like these can't be questioned then none can. This coming, too, from a country with rampant doping in what has long been a dirty sport.