Dominguez detained in doping investigation

Mats,

Thanks for the response:

"The broader picture I have already pointed out: Sport is fun, but it is still only a game. Why are we so concerned about chasing people that cheat in games? Wouldn't the money be more well spent on other things?"

If we don't at least attempt to enforce the rules, we might as well not have the rules. I do think this would have quite negative consequences for the sport.

You mention that money should be spent on other things instead. I agree that money should be spent on those things, but that doesn't mean that any less money should be spent chasing people that cheat in games.

"Sports are not on a level playing field to begin with and anyone who claims this is delusional."

Agreed. But has anyone claimed they are a level playing field? Seeking to rid our sport of drugs isn't related to whether or not the sport is a level playing field. It's just trying to ensure people don't breach rules.

I see your point .

Mouhamed Mourith. 1:48.23/ 3:36.14/ 7:26.62/ 26:52.30/ and twice IAAF World Cross Country Championships but he is not top champion. Besides he was born and lives in altitude, he did win over top Kenyans and Ethiopians, but he from Kenya or Ethiopia, he is not one top champion.

Rashid Ramzi. 1:44.05/3:29.14/3:51.33 (mile), won 800 metres and 1500 m golds at the 2004 Asian Indoor Athletics Championships running against kenyans from Qatar, silver medal at the 2004 IAAF World Indoor Championships. In 2005 World Championships Ramzi became the first athlete in history to win gold medals in the 800 m and 1500 m in the same World Championship, and the first man to perform this feat in a global championship (World Championship or Olympic Games) since Peter Snell did so in 1964. He followed this with a bronze medal at the 2006 Asian Games and improved to the silver medal in the 1500 m at the 2007 World Championships. Ramzi won the gold at the 2008 Beijing Olympics the next year

But no. He isn´t a top champion, and it´s why drugs did work with him.

Henry Rono. 7:32.1/ 13:06.20/ 8:05.4 Steeple / 27:22.47 mostly done in a few weeks period but this one he is top champion.

Zolla Budd 3:59.96/ 8:28.83/ 14:48.07 she is top class.

However Marta Dominguez 4:06.08/ 8:28.8/ 14:48.33/ 9:07.32 Steeple/30:51.69

And with this achivement she isn´t world top class.

Year Competition Venue Position Event

1994 World Junior Championships Lisbon, Portugal 2nd 1500 m

1995 World Indoor Championships Barcelona, Spain 6th 3000 m

World Championships Gothenburg, Sweden 12th (semis) 1500 m

1996 European Indoor Championships Stockholm, Sweden 3rd 3000 m

Olympic Games Atlanta, Georgia, United States 26th (heats) 1500 m

1997 World Indoor Championships Paris, France 5th 3000 m

European U23 Championships Turku, Finland 3rd 5000 m

1998 European Indoor Championships Valencia, Spain 3rd 3000 m

European Championships Budapest, Hungary 3rd 5000 m

1999 World Championships Seville, Spain 9th 5000 m

2000 European Indoor Championships Ghent, Belgium 3rd 3000 m

Olympic Games Sydney, Australia 27th (heats) 5000 m

European Cross Country Championships Vilamoura, Portugal 14th Short race

2001 World Indoor Championships Lisbon, Portugal 4th 3000 m

World Championships Edmonton, Canada 2nd 5000 m

2002 European Indoor Championships Vienna, Austria 1st 3000 m

European Championships Munich, Germany 1st 5000 m

2003 World Indoor Championships Birmingham, England 2nd 3000 m

World Championships Paris, France 2nd 5000 m

2004 World Indoor Championships Budapest, Hungary 4th 3000 m

2005 World Championships Helsinki, Finland 14th 5000 m

2006 European Championships Gothenburg, Sweden 1st 5000 m

European Championships Gothenburg, Sweden 7th 10,000 m

2007 European Indoor Championships Birmingham, England 2nd 3000 m

European Cross Country Championships Toro, Spain 1st Senior race

2008 Olympic Games Beijing, China DNF 3000 m st.

2009 World Championships Berlin, Germany 1st 3000 m st.

2010 European Championships Barcelona, Spain 2nd 3000 m st.

However she is not top class mainly because she is just 80th in the all time 5000m.

Al Bezabeh 3:39.85/ 7:45.98/ 12:57.25 he is not a top champion either. Look at his 5000m performances. Some 36seconds from his 12'57"25 5000m Pb and his 13'33"52, no cross country and road runs as best events.

Do you know in what conditions Bezabeh did the results you show us in your post? What training, what injuries, what motivation ?

12'57"25 (7) Oslo 4 Jun 2010

13'10"10 (1) Huelva 10 Jun 2009

13'18"74 (11) Roma 10 Jul 2009

13'18"95 (2) Aviles 17 Jul 2010

13'20"46 (9) Huelva 13 Jun 2008

13'29"57 (6) Barcelona 19 Jul 2008

13'29"95 (2) Barcelona 10 Jun 2006

13'30"48 (11) Beijing 23 Aug 2008

13'31"85 (2) Bilbao 1 Jul 2006

13'33"52 (10)h Berlin 20 Aug 2009

From 12:57:25 to 13:33 some 36 seconds.

But well, if we see about Shaheen he also goes from 12:48.81 to 13:29.83, soome 41 seconds distance.

2010 13:00.31 Oslo (Bislett) 04/06/2010

2009 13:22.70 Toronto (VC) 11/06/2009

2008 13:29.83 Beograd 29/05/2008

2006 12:51.98 Roma 14/07/2006

2004 13:14.65 Stockholm 27/07/2004

2003 12:48.81Ostrava 12/06/2003

2002 13:11.55 Melbourne 07/03/200

I know. I know that Shaheen isn’t a 5000m expert, he was been injured, but anyhow. I just want to prove that your tricky type of argumentation you get tricky conclusions.

Think about Lebid and what he did yesterday, one more European Cross Country win.

For the nineth time he did win the European Cross Champ.

But he is just a 13:10.78/28:09.71 runner on track as you might know because you coach him earlier.

Your classification about what’s a top runner based in results and in what runners the drug can enhance the performance makes me smile. It seems that every humans being is equal in the capacity and genetics to long distance performance. Europend are equal to kenyans, only the culture, the mentality is different. But in one thing they are different in the drug enhance effect. The Magreb is different from Kenya in that drug issue.

The results of one Ramzi, for instance, or every other, don´t support your theory.

Yes perhaps my post was depressing, but it is indeed truthful. At the time (mostly as a beginning athlete) I would have been upset if someone cheated as well. Later in my "career" and especially nowadays it would not have mattered that much. I am intrinsically motivated rather than extrinsically. As long as I know that I competed clean and he/she cheated then it does not matter. I am better than them. Period.

When it comes to the extrinsic awards I understand that it is an issue. I say make the sport amateur again. All of us should be working and providing more to society than our good looks on the track.

[My earlier earlier post was before I saw your other post to me.)

(1) If the money to combat famine could be found from other places, I don't understand why it should be taken from combatting dope in sport at all?

(2) I don't care if Joe Scmoe lives longer than me and works longer. Do you care about him? We're not competing against him. Who cares what he does?

(3) We only hold athletes to a higher standard because it is the standard that they have chosen to be held up to. By participating in e.g. Olympics they agree to abide by the rules.

(4) Valuing athletes doesn't stop me praising people who do something really good for society. It's not a zero-sum game.

*I would take Arron over myself also :-).

*Last time I checked "sprint geezer", throwers were quite a bit stronger and explosive than sprinters. But they (sprinters) did always shoot their mouths of really well.

Interesting and good post.

*I totally agree that the whole point is developing (wo)mankind without taking shortcuts that eventually could hurt us. Some day I think that there will be chemical aids that have no side-effects (or gene doping) and then this discussion will be really relevant. Nowadays most people point to the fact that steroid abuse leads to side effects, which it of course does. My argument was mostly about the money though.

*All I can say that we may be discouraging a few athletes but the money would be more well spent elsewhere (cost benefit).

*I partly agree with your sentiments especially when it comes to juvenile athletes. Then again, most of us were aware of the potential side effects and moral issues surrounding doping already at an early age (perhaps the drug education DID work?).

*Elite sports by themselves are risky. They are not healthy. American football players average lifespan is significantly lower than the average lifespan. Why would they care about the side-effects of steroids? Money and fame are all that matters to them (and to many involved in elite track and field).

*Rules or no rules, it is my opinion that most people would not cheat unless there are big money incentives, coercion, or threats involved.

I am sorry you did not like my post.

I am not entirely sure you understood my overall point, though: Stop spending millions of dollars on anti-doping and don't be so quick to judge. Global atrocities deserve more of our attention than steroid abusers in sports. Put things in a perspective. I never said that Spain was poorer than USA (I said I don't know what the GDP of Spain is). My opinion is that rich people, with a lot of opportunities, who decide to use PEDs are more morally inferior than poor people doing the same. The former have less of an incentive.

*Just because sports is and will never be on a level playing field does not mean that it cannot be enjoyed. It just has to be put in the right perspective. I (as you do) prefer sports clean and righteous, but it just isn't that airy-fairy when it comes down to it. It reflects society in general. Brits, Swedes, Americans will always have a leg up in sports compared to Nepalese people for the simple fact that they do not have the infra-structure. US college athletes (and their athletes in general) will always have better medicinal service/support than the equivalent-level Swedish athletes. Unfair, but a fact. Luckily, there will always be a Rocky Balboa underdog that can beat the odds. I savor those moments.

*The problem is that we equate Ben Johnson and Marion Jones to common criminals. They are not. They are still better than 90% of the population that are lying on their behinds in front of the TV and contribute no more than their genes to the human gene-pool. At least sportsmen and sportswomen are pushing their limits no matter if they are PED-users or not.

What career? :-). I am sure that one day I will amount to something. Thanks anyway! Whoever you are I hope you are happy and doing good.

*I cannot comment on the statement that Cesar used drugs during his tenure at UTEP. I just stated that I wasn't aware of it and that I liked that he was jovial and respectful to us other athletes.

*Does it make you a "monster" if you use PEDs? All I am saying is that we should not be so judgmental and put things into perspective. We are not doing the sport of track and field any favors by always highlighting the ones that don't follow the rules.

I was so incredibly judgmental when I was an athlete myself because I never did have anything good to say about people that took these shortcuts. I was partly wrong. This does not mean that I advocate the use of PEDs, though. The anti-doping money could be spent better that is all I am saying.

Mats, this is not 'Nam. This is track and field. There are rules.

*Agreed. We should not advocate people using drugs or cheating. They can still be apart of the rules. All I am saying is we should spend less time chasing cheaters and more time supporting/celebrating the positive things about the sport (or other causes such a eradicating famine).

Seriously, there are differences in genetics, opportunity, and experience between the athletes in any race, but to have any kind of meaningful competition you have to have rules. The rules set the factors that aren't variable (track length, equipment, etc.) so that you can have a competition in the factors that are variable (speed, endurance, tactical ability, etc.).

*Agreed.

Once you allow doping, you effectively require doping for anyone who wants to be competitive. Track and field has quite correctly decided that a competition between who can become the most doped-up freak is a competition not worth having. Bodybuilders may feel differently for their "sport," but I don't think most people in T&F and most fans of T&F share that view. I certainly don't.

*Not necessarily true. I believe that non-dopers can and will still beat dopers in the future. Perhaps it is time to make track and field an amateur sport again to reduce the incentive to cheat? As you know, SOME people will always find a short-cut especially when there is money and fame involved. Why not embrace the fact that there are SOME "rotten eggs" in all facets of life (although it is harsh/wrong comparing a PED-user to a common criminal), stop throwing money away on low cost-benefit interventions/procedures [bad rep for the sport in general; highlight the positive instead], and have faith that most competitors will be following the rules simply because it is the right thing to do.

"While I agree with most of your points, I have to say that Cesar Perez was definitely not regarded by everyone at UTEP as the hard working and nice guy you describe him as. No need to give details on here, but also no need to paint an overly pretty picture. I am sure that some that knew him are not shocked to see his name as one of those involved in this scandal".

*Of course I cannot speak for anyone else and I am not trying to paint a pretty picture. Perhaps you knew him better than I did? You mention that this incident is "a scandal". My argument is that words like that are best saved for major incidents....such as BP's oil well breaking in the Mexican Gulf...Wikileaks info regarding US "diplomacy"....the space shuttle blowing up at takeoff....etc.

"You are advocating or at least condoning athletes who use drugs"

*Absolutely not. I prefer clean sports, but the world just is not that black and white. My point is that you cannot view/treat drug-users in sports as low life criminals akin to Charlie Manson (just look at the Ben Johnson case) and that we should spend the anti-doping money elsewhere. I believe most people are honest and would not be able to live with themselves cheating. If we made the sport more amateur again perhaps it would be resolved by itself.

"No, the equivilant is stealing the exam paper beforehand".

*No way. With or without PEDs, you still have to perform. Some people have great medical backup, state-of-the-art equipment/facilities, nice hot weather to train while others do not. I would argue that this will have a more decisive impact on whether or not you qualify for the Olympic games compared to drug-use alone. Multiple regression would have been helpful to illustrate this point.

"I also noticed you like to brag about your running achievments and probably like to use the drug issue for a lack of further success"

*A) I was not a runner. B) I did not do drugs. C) Success is subjective. If I would have competed for Spain I would have made the Olympics in my event, but alas I am a Swede :-). My education was paid for. I met a lot of nice people. I got to travel. I am happy with my career and hope more youngsters get to do the same thing I did. I merely stated that I , as a former "elite athlete", would not have cared that much nowadays if I found out that my competitors were dopers. It is a maturity thing I guess. There are so much crap going on in society anyways so why would I waste my time being annoyed with someone cheating at a game/pass-time?

"Instead of trying to make up for the disadvantage of being born at altitude by moving and training at altitude (and 2 wks does not cut it) they try to cut the corner"

*....or how about sleeping/living in an altitude training tent? Is that considered cheating? Isn't that just as artificial as injecting your own blood?....what about removing a bone in your elbow to be able to lock out in the Olympic snatch? Is that cheating?....or how about drinking 10 cups of coffee before the javelin throw to become a tad more alert? Is that cheating?

"2 years is not a sufficient deterrent"

*In Sweden some rapists get less than 2 years in prison. A prison where they feed you well and you are allowed to exercise everyday. A doped up athlete does not always get prison (Marion Jones as the most notable exception), but you get your name smeared in the paper and your entire career is shot probably in all walks of life. Ludmila Enqvist even had to leave our country and basically had to beg for forgiveness to come back! We must learn to put things into an appropriate perspective.

"It may be a small matter to you but nobody has to watch the sport. If we stop watching there will be no money and a lot less reason to dope"

*Why do I have to stop watching the sport just because I have the insight to understand that it (sports in general) is a game and that cheating in a game is perhaps not the same thing as committing a crime/breaking the rules in other walks of life? It (cheating) should not be condoned of course, but the rabid treatment of PED users must stop and the anti-doping money could possibly be more well spent. I agree that money and fame are the main issues, though. Make the sport amateur.

My post was not meant to bad mouth USA, Sweden, or Spain in anyway. I love those countries and the prevalence of cheaters are probably the same when it comes down to it (although we Swedes would probably really hate to admit it).

That was my last rant on the topic. Good luck everybody!

Exactly, Mohammed Mourhit was not a top champion like specific talent, but a good runner only.

He ran in Maroc 14'08" when was 20, 13'29" (21), 13'47" (23), 13'46" (24). Then... he went to Belgium, and suddenly ran 13'05" and 27'17" when 27. He is exactly the kind of athlete that can have advantage using blood doping, but in this case athletes from Maghreb are very different from black Africans living in high altitude.

It's true that in Maroc a lot of people live in altitude (Atlas Mountain), but the most part of important athletes are born at sea level or about 500m of altitude, and only after becoming strong runners go to stay in Ifrane, that is a very nice small town at 1600m of altitude.

Which is your idea of top-talent ?

For example, an athlete running 3'33" can be considered a top talent, when the WR is 3'26" ? If all the athletes running in 3'33" MUST BE DOPED, and are top talents, WHICH TYPE OF DOPING has to use who runs in 3'26", and which type of talent has to have ?

If is a top talent Mouhrit, running 26'52" and 12'49" with doping, what about Gebre or Bekele ? Can you accept the idea that, in any case, some athlete can have more talent than somebody else, and that running 26'17" has little to do with running 26'52" (35" of difference) ?

This is the same situation of Marta Dominguez. She had a full career in 5000m, this was her main events till 2008, and at the end her best result was... 37" slower than WR. Do you think can be considered a TOP TALENT ?

Don't make confusion between MEDALS, depending on many factors (for example, how you are able to organise your life in order to have the best shape during the Championships, which type of assistance you can have from your Federation, the level of knowledge of your coach, the advantages you can have with a medal from your contract, etc...), where you don't show the level of your talent as runner, but of your ability in giving your best in that occasion, and BEST TECHNICAL PERFORMANCES, that can show your real POTENTIALITY as athlete.

When we speak about steeple, we had, for example, some athlete at the top of the World as specialist, but not among the bests as middle distance runner (for example, Grigory Taran WR in 1961 with 8'31"2, Jonko Kuha WR in 1968 with 8'24"2, Kerry O'Brien WR in 8'22" in 1970), and somebody else that can be considered a "full and complete runner", as Henry Rono (WR in 3000 / 5000 / 10000 and steeple), Moses Kiptanui (WR in 5000, too) and Saaeed Shaheen (12'48" in 5000 beating El Guerrouj). We cannot put all this athletes at the same level, when we speak about TALENT. Or, better, about SPECIFIC AEROBIC TALENT, because there were top specialists in steeple (like Malinowski or Baumgartl or Kariuki or Van Dijck) limiting for their technical ability the difference between running the distance with or without barriers. This fact has nothing to do with the AEROBIC TALENT. And, under this point of view, for women the situation is still worse.

When we speak about talent, can you compare the talent of Dibaba, Defar, Vivian Cheruiyot, Lineth Masai, Florence Kiplagat, Ejigu, Melkamu, with the talent of steeple runners ? Why in 5000m there is no space for not African runners, instead in steeple the best (forget this year, without important Championships) are from Europe ?

So, I fully confirm what I wrote before :

-Athletes with good but not exceptional talent can have advantage using PED (also if I'm sure this advantage is not great as many suppose). This expecially for typology of athletes with bigger mass, needing a higher consumption of Oxygen for the same performance of a more light runner

-Athletes with TOP TALENT (at the moment I see some of them in Kenya, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Uganda only) and different morphology cannot have any advantage.

And, because I never go to test what my athletes can do using EPO (the same for the athletes, for example, coached by Patrick Sang or Brother Colm), therefore I never can control, in "scientific way", if EPO can work with top athletes (that in any case are already among the best in the World), I continue to have my idea.

And, in any case, I know that, with top talented athletes and very good strategy, it's possible to better the most part of current WR using training only, being completely clean.

nonsense

he beat a still hungry tergat & forced the great man onto the roads

nonsense

progression means very little especially if you have no idea of how much time/dedication athlete spent on those clockings

flo-jo held a full time day-job until '88 & still ran 21.96 & wc silver in '87

she gave up her job for '88 & we saw fruits with 21.34

i see no problem in a natural 3'30-3'32 guy running 3'26 if they doped

you are an idiot if you think mourhit was "only" in 26'52 shape when he beat tergat

i doubt any guy who coud beat tergat over even longer than 10k, on the grass couda been at worst in maybe

26'40

& probably a lot quicker

his 12'49 is better number than 26'52 & his best performance was 12k on grass !

anyone who thinks 26'17 kennster wouda runaway from mourhit on grass is a fool

it'd be a desperate hard sprint in the stretch

drivel

you are a moron if you think she was "only" in 14'48 shape when she charged like a runaway rhino to gold in 9'07

there is no way she was't in at least 14'30 shape that day

for a coach, you are clueless about what an awesome performance represents - drugged or not

drivel

runners come in all shapes/sizes

look at ryun/rudisha/cram/snell

drivel

russia virtually produces 1'54'-1'55 or 3'55-3'56 or <14'30 runners every year

enough population & dedication will get you very close

unfortunately

you are a moron if you hold onto that belief

the supposition epo won't help these guys is imbecilic

learn some haematology moron

men can have haemotocrits upto the 70s before they are are likely to die from thrombo-embolic phenomena - go read up rubra vera ( you aren't even a bloody physioloigist let alone MD )

yes

finally a sensible comment

boy I hope Agosto isn't exposed - she is actually good looking and fast. But european women all seem guilty now.

Mats, I will respond later when I have the time. Thanks for following-up on your original post.

Mats:

1) I am totally in favor of completely amateur athletics. It will never happen, as it would require such regulation of the market as to effectively wipe the market out, which is an unlawful outcome in many jurisdictions, and which is against free market policy in many as well. But I am in complete favor of it.

2) The world, and foreign aid, is not a zero-sum game. There is room for BOTH funded athletics, and international aid. Sociologically, sport has ALWAYS been important, in any culture, at any time you care to identify. Culturally speaking, it is non-trivial, and athletics, along with combat, forms the terrestrial core of sport. Like it or not, sport has historically been at least as important, culturally, as foreign aid. Activities that lift the spirit are worthwhile, no matter what the context. Even those in abject poverty play games and adorn themselves, unless their cognition is impaired, or unless they are very young children. If you think we should aspire to a future that differs from the past in that athletics should be considered less important, fine--but I don't. I understand why sport has been, and continues to be, at least as important as any other human endeavor, and I appreciate the weight given to it by history.

3) You entirely missed the point I made, that avoiding individual sanction was only one part of an anti-doping attitude, not the "biggest part".

4) If it helps, consider sport a metaphor for other social activities, and you will understand why societies are concerned about doping.

5) I personally never claimed that sports was a level playing field, and I can't remember any other letsrun poster ever having made that claim either.

6) In congratulating yourself as "humane", I presume that your object was to consider the welfare of the doper as paramount. Ridiculous, they have not at all earned that position of distinction; in fact, they have earned a position of ignominy and distrust instead. There are better ways to express your "humanity", like considering the effect on the morally superior non-dopers who were adversely affected by the actions of the doper. Humanity can also be expressed in the sanctions taken against the doper, but the doper must be revealed as such and be subject to some form of sanction.

7) Contrary to your assumption, Ben Johnson was, and still is, treated as a national hero in Canada by the everyman; not only that, but he is seen as a sort of folk hero in MANY parts of the world outside the USA. And your mention of Marion Jones' incarceration without regard for the underlying offense is a non-sequitur.

8) I totally understand your "internal" motivation to run--I have that same motivation, to do my individual best. But competition is not JUST about competing against yourself, as there are always other athletes in the same competition; if there are not, then you aren't fully competing, you're just working out, or training. If you're not interested in competing against them, why show up? For distance verified to the decimeter, or for timing verified to the hundredth of a second? Why would you care? You could always measure your own performance on a known course, or on a known machine, to a degree sufficiently accurate to allow one of your performances to be measured against another. Camaraderie? Group runs. Atmosphere? Reliant on multiple competitors. Granted, running a meet can involve a sense of belonging, which is important--but then why time at all? Again, why not just a group training run?

9) Finally, if you really don't find athletics a sufficiently worthy endeavor that it should be allotted social resources, why do you even participate in this forum?

I am in total disagreement with your attitude regarding dopers, but I still think Ben Johnson was great.

I can live with the cognitive dissonance--at least I'm aware of mine.