Two More Kenyans Provisionally Suspended For Doping Violations

Chris Froome wrote:

How about we just ban countries where proven rampant doping exists, like Russia and Kenya?

+1

Don't forget England.

He asked me what I was really saying, focusing on the marathon -- it is appropriate to respond. I didn't criticize anyone for hypotheticals or theories, except to point out that they are hypotheses and theories, not carrying the weight of proven conclusions. It is not correct to say "proof", when the proof hinges on assuming what you claim you proved. My alternative and competing theories, based on the same set of facts, but with different assumptions, have the same weight and standing. The fast 5000m race in Brussels (and Paris 2012) was not setup as a time trial world record attempt, but was a fast paced, highly competitive race. If there were many attempts at organized time trial world record attempts, we would have seen many more faster times. Organizers did not make this happen in the 5000m or the 3000m (or the 10000m or the 1500m).

Subway Surfers wrote:

Two problems with this, but again you are writing hypothetically and making alternative theories. Yet you criticise everyone else for this. Last year's Brussels Diamond League 5,000m final was vastly superior conditions and pacing to the day Bekele set the 5,000m WR, heck Kejelcha did all the pacing and Berega did a slingshot off of him. Bekele had to run the last 2kms under 5 minutes.

Extremely fast runners like El Guerrouj, Ali Saïdi-Sief, Bekele, Morceli, Lahlafi, Mourhit and Kejelcha haven't come close to Komen's 7:20, because it is a super invincible WR. 7.5 laps @ 58.66 that is unreal.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Extremely fast runners like El Guerrouj, Ali Saïdi-Sief, Bekele, Morceli, Lahlafi, Mourhit and Kejelcha haven't come close to Komen's 7:20, because it is a super invincible WR. 7.5 laps @ 58.66 that is unreal.

58.66 a lap for 7.5 laps?!? That's mutant! ?

Coevett wrote:

You make some excellent observations Balco. I'd never considered that Kenyans were the biggest dopers in cycling too. Then again, Chris Froome is Kenyan, and probably the only Kenyan in cycling, so that's about a 100% doping rate right there. Probably even higher than the Kenyan doping rate in middle-distance. Well, at least equal.

Lol

rekrunner wrote:

I didn't criticize anyone for hypotheticals or theories, except to point out that they are hypotheses and theories, not carrying the weight of proven conclusions. It is not correct to say "proof", when the proof hinges on assuming what you claim you proved.

My alternative and competing theories, based on the same set of facts, but with different assumptions, have the same weight and standing.

So when a top athlete gets busted doping after many years, instead accepting the default logic that they have finally been caught, you create alternative explanations, "oh, they were on the decline and resorted to doping to get back to the top," when there is absolutely no evidence that this is indeed the case. You then made the case that some of the top marathoners could break the WR for 3k and 5k if they set their minds to it, yet the top marathoner is Kipchoge and he couldn't break them, this is an alternative theory. These world records are old, you need to look more closely at why.

The Wild 90s wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Extremely fast runners like El Guerrouj, Ali Saïdi-Sief, Bekele, Morceli, Lahlafi, Mourhit and Kejelcha haven't come close to Komen's 7:20, because it is a super invincible WR. 7.5 laps @ 58.66 that is unreal.

58.66 a lap for 7.5 laps?!? That's mutant! ?

At this point in my life I'd be delighted with being able to run one 58.66s lap or even two.

It's only the default logic when that was your prejudice beforehand. It is correct to say we do not know when athletes started doping if we do not know when they started doping. This includes any competing theories I offer based in part on what is known, and in part on what is not known. I do not know either when busted athletes started doping. I did not say "top marathoners". That came from Coevett, and I clarified by listing a bunch of 5000m runners.

Subway Surfers wrote:

So when a top athlete gets busted doping after many years, instead accepting the default logic that they have finally been caught, you create alternative explanations, "oh, they were on the decline and resorted to doping to get back to the top," when there is absolutely no evidence that this is indeed the case. You then made the case that some of the top marathoners could break the WR for 3k and 5k if they set their minds to it, yet the top marathoner is Kipchoge and he couldn't break them, this is an alternative theory. These world records are old, you need to look more closely at why.

You should not mention it. This pattern of up and down in parallel with the availability of peds and testing doesn't really exist. In cross country, Africans got faster in the 1980s and have remained fast. On the track, Africans got faster in the 1990s and have remained fast. In the marathon, they got fast in the mid-2000s and remained fast.

Coevett wrote:

Not to mention the evidence that African times went up and down in parallel with the availability of peds and testing standards, whereas the rest of the world (excluding dirty triangle countries such as Spain) largely didn't or even went the other way as the 'you have to dope to compete' situation caused a decline in participation in the West.

Even simpler is you will find clean and dirty runners everywhere: in Africa, out of Africa, good runners, and runners trying to be good. Even the most pessimistic prevalence estimates say there are more clean runners than dirty runners. Doping gives the promise to those who think they can be better, that doping will bring improved performances. Sometimes that promise is realized, sometimes it is partly realized, sometimes it is not realized, and sometimes it makes things worse.

Bannisterwasclean wrote:

The simplest conclusion is that most good runners, whatever the country, whatever the time period, are dirty.

There used to be a view that East Africans were clean and everyone else was dirty. That has proven to be wrong.

Some on these boards want to think that East Africans are dirty and everyone else is clean. Not sure why that would be true.

What makes sense is that everyone is dirty.

We all know this is true in cycling. No one seriously thinks that American cyclists are any more/less clean than English cyclists or Italian or Eritrean cyclists. Everyone (who wins) is dirty.

I have no confidence in any one any more.

rekrunner wrote:

You should not mention it. This pattern of up and down in parallel with the availability of peds and testing doesn't really exist.

In cross country, Africans got faster in the 1980s and have remained fast.

On the track, Africans got faster in the 1990s and have remained fast.

In the marathon, they got fast in the mid-2000s and remained fast.

Coevett wrote:

Not to mention the evidence that African times went up and down in parallel with the availability of peds and testing standards, whereas the rest of the world (excluding dirty triangle countries such as Spain) largely didn't or even went the other way as the 'you have to dope to compete' situation caused a decline in participation in the West.

Africans have slowed down on the track compared to 90's especially Kenyans. Ethiopia still has no virtually no testing out of competition.

Times have improved on marathon because out of competition struggles with marathon running as there are so many athletes who are not subject to out of competition testing. Only in last few years have top Kenyan marathon runners started getting busted.

The IAAF has just introduced improved dope testing for road runners

British/ American cycling doping involves the grey area of TUES asthma a abuse etc.

It should be banned but improvement is marginal and debatable & can't be compared to using EPO with impunity. They are only working in grey area because improved testing means they generally can't get away with EPO

Rosa moved from cycling to athletics in 1990 and has been implicated in doping since then. His first runner couldn't get close to top British runners then once Rosa appeared he wasworld champion within 2 year s

Kenyans without doping would still be at winning races.

However, Kiprops 3:26 their absolute supremacy was built on a lie. He's the fastest all time Kenyan and only his arrogance got him banned eventually.

Kipchoge is looked after by Nike who protected Armstrong.

Kenya's best pre EPO:

2 years later with Rosa he is world champion.

Rosa Jr looked after Kiprop.

https://youtu.be/VeHMDOUdnew

Does anyone still keep track of Rosa's caught drug cheats? Gotta be in the double digits now.

And he's still allowed to conduct business in Kenya?

rekrunner wrote:

Even the most pessimistic prevalence estimates say there are more clean runners than dirty runners.

With the exception of the 4 countries identified by the IAAF most at risk of doping; Ukraine, Belarus, Kenya & Ethiopia.

I wouldn't want to be on this list wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Even the most pessimistic prevalence estimates say there are more clean runners than dirty runners.

With the exception of the 4 countries identified by the IAAF most at risk of doping; Ukraine, Belarus, Kenya & Ethiopia.

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1068060/kenya-and-ethiopia-identified-as-among-countries-most-likely-to-dope-as-iaaf-introduce-new-regulations

It may also be wrong overall (emphasis on "may"): the only study to date that looked at all kinds of doping, not just one or two, resulted in likely more than 43.6%. That could mean anything from 43.8% to 50% to 60% etc....

Also that study only included doping within the last twelve months, so previously dirty now clean runners would be excluded in that count.

And finally, it averaged over track/road & field (with field being the significantly smaller half), and we don't really know which one is dirtier. Judging by the recent busts, track/road is a lot dirtier than field, which makes sense as there's more money involved, but it's not really proven.

So, it appears that indeed more than half of the elite runners are dirty, but yes, the evidence can be argued against.

Commenters here should realise it isn't possible to have meaningful discussion on the topic of doping with rekrunner, because the only information he will accept as valid is that which he has already accepted. You, none of you, have anything to offer him. In other words, you can only tell him what he already knows. If he doesn't know it, it doesn't exist - or it is wrong. Further, in anything that deals with doping, the only authority he accepts is of an academic study (that he approves of) confirming what is claimed - and if he doesn't like what it says he will produce another study that presents an alternative view. He will choose his own "facts", thank you very much.

But where he is fundamentally wrong is that he believes he has all the "facts" - or that some academic does - that will enable him to comprehensively map the dark side of the moon. Of course it is impossible, because doping is a practice enveloped in subterfuge, secrecy and concealment. It isn't a building that can be broken down and understood tile by tile or beam by beam. It is more - to borrow from Churchill - "a riddle wrapped within an enigma". There are no studies that can shine a light in dark places where no information is forthcoming; we rely on guesstimates, surmise, intuition and experience. All of which rekrunner rules out as invalid, because it does not suit the way he sees the world. Welcome to his private universe; you enter at your peril.

This is kind of funny, because the second paragraph is generally my line: You cannot say you "know" who doped with what, and when, when doping is mostly practiced in subterfuge, secrecy and concealment. As far as I am fundamentally wrong, I do not believe I have all the "facts" but I believe you do not.

Lagat was the fastest Kenyan all-time at 1500m, 3:26.3, not Kiprop (3:26.69).