Imagine the things you could have done in the literal years you have spent here repeating the same old 'arguments' that nobody except you can even make sense of, all to 'prove' that the natural limits for Kenyans are 3:35 and 2:10 and that any Kenyan since 1968 was doped to the max - a proposition that probably only you and a handful of people in the entire world take seriously?
Imagine the things you could have done in the literal years you have spent here repeating the same old 'arguments' that nobody except you can even make sense of, all to 'prove' that the natural limits for Kenyans are 3:35 and 2:10 and that any Kenyan since 1968 was doped to the max - a proposition that probably only you and a handful of people in the entire world take seriously?
Read and studied the entire Famous Five canon.
Learnt the small Multiplication table.
Become proficient in Rhythmic gymnastics
Grabbed money for yourself.
Gone on dates with some Kenyan males.
etc. etc.
Yes, 100 Kenyan busts later and I've been proven absolutely wrong about doping in Kenya, and Rekrunner was clearly right all along that there is no doping problem there. What a massive waste of time on my part, and what a valuable contribution he has been making all these years.
Yes, 100 Kenyan busts later and I've been proven absolutely wrong about doping in Kenya, and Rekrunner was clearly right all along that there is no doping problem there. What a massive waste of time on my part, and what a valuable contribution he has been making all these years.
Take your time.
Multiplication is hard enough. After this, it's a big jump to general logic. So, take your time.
Doping was known to be present in the '56 Olympics. So how do you know that drugs weren't available in the late '60s and '70's when Kenya entered running?
Again with the vague passive voice without specificity. What was known exactly? Where was it known to be present in the 1956 Olympics? Which country? Which Olympic sport? In athletics, 1956 track and road times are comparatively slow.
You never address the fundamental contradiction. The only way to conclude drugs work for Africans is to accept that they don't really work for non-Africans. For some magical reason Africans are high responders while non-Africans are non-responders.
What is known is that drugs were available worldwide, and known to be heavily used in Europe and Russia and China and America.
What I don't know is if Kenya or Ethiopia had the financial resources and the infrastructure (e.g. reliable electricity and refrigeration) to fund and support doping their athletes, on the scale necessary to significantly out-dope these richer countries, some with national support. Seems highly unlikely.
Your ignorance of the drugs used - amphetamines - in 1956 - is not an argument that drugs were not present. But that is always your argument - if you don't know about it it never happened.
Doping was known to be present in the '56 Olympics. So how do you know that drugs weren't available in the late '60s and '70's when Kenya entered running?
So drugs were available when New Zealand was winning gold medals. Interesting.
Drugs were available when your country was winning medals, too.
Yes, 100 Kenyan busts later and I've been proven absolutely wrong about doping in Kenya, and Rekrunner was clearly right all along that there is no doping problem there. What a massive waste of time on my part, and what a valuable contribution he has been making all these years.
I never doubted there is a doping problem in Kenya.
Imagine the things you could have done in the literal months you have spent here repeating the same old 'arguments' that nobody except you can even make sense of, all to 'prove' that EPO and doping in general doesn't work - a proposition that probably only you and a handful of people in the entire world take seriously?
Read and studied the entire Shakespeare canon.
Learnt Japanese.
Become proficient in a martial art.
Raised money for charity.
Gone on dates with beautiful women..
etc. etc.
I do imagine if some of the posters that engage with me were more honest and/or intelligent and/or informed, it would save me a lot of time pointing out basic factual errors and/or the lack of basic facts.
I can't control it if other people are unable to make sense of publicly available facts, so I don't worry too much about things out of my control.
My proposition includes doping working for women taking male hormones, but for men in distance events, it doesn't appear to have ever worked all that well for non-Africans in the last three decades. Again -- the performance data is publicly available.
Thanks for your concern, but I don't have too many regrets: I have learned French, and enough German to order beer and sausages and pizza. I was pretty proficient at running in younger years and now I go on dates with my wife and spend time with my children.
Your ignorance of the drugs used - amphetamines - in 1956 - is not an argument that drugs were not present. But that is always your argument - if you don't know about it it never happened.
Sure some drugs were present somewhere. We can safely say that as far back as the 1904 Olympics, drugs were present. You always fail to tangibly connect "presence" with "elite performance". It's all vague statements like "drugs were present in sport" lacking any specifics.
I saw a report about West Germany, but nothing about Africa. In fact, I challenged you earlier -- is there any tangible evidence of significant African doping before 2012 -- given the Australian reporting of "below average" blood doping among Kenyans and Ethiopians up until that time?
What is the connection to amphetamines and elite sport performance? Are you suggesting for example that "Lydiard's Boys" success in the 1960s was fueled by amphetamines, because amphetamines were present in 1956?
Yes, 100 Kenyan busts later and I've been proven absolutely wrong about doping in Kenya, and Rekrunner was clearly right all along that there is no doping problem there. What a massive waste of time on my part, and what a valuable contribution he has been making all these years.
I never doubted there is a doping problem in Kenya.
You're a liar. To you doping is never a problem with Kenyans because they don't benefit from it and they are all accidental positives from eating contaminated pork - like Shelby.
Your ignorance of the drugs used - amphetamines - in 1956 - is not an argument that drugs were not present. But that is always your argument - if you don't know about it it never happened.
Sure some drugs were present somewhere. We can safely say that as far back as the 1904 Olympics, drugs were present. You always fail to tangibly connect "presence" with "elite performance". It's all vague statements like "drugs were present in sport" lacking any specifics.
I saw a report about West Germany, but nothing about Africa. In fact, I challenged you earlier -- is there any tangible evidence of significant African doping before 2012 -- given the Australian reporting of "below average" blood doping among Kenyans and Ethiopians up until that time?
What is the connection to amphetamines and elite sport performance? Are you suggesting for example that "Lydiard's Boys" success in the 1960s was fueled by amphetamines, because amphetamines were present in 1956?
The IOC developed a programme for drug testing in 1967, because of the increase in the use of performance enhancing drugs which had been occurring in the years before then. The chief difference in doping in the '50's and '60's compared to earlier decades was the development of synthetic drugs, such as anabolic steroids and testosterone. Blood doping had first been developed after WWII and was said to be present in elite sport in the late '60's. Since we know that doping had increased in that decade - resulting in the IOC programme - and yet there was no testing until the Mexico Olympics it follows that those who were doping were able to do so with virtual impunity. Indeed, blood doping remained legal till the early '80's. It is apparent that the freedom to dope has changed in more recent years for the Kenyan cheats, who are now many of them being caught. One thing we can be sure of - they weren't paragons of sporting virtue in those earlier decades who then suddenly lost their doping "virginity" in 2012 to now lead the world in doping violations.
I never doubted there is a doping problem in Kenya.
You're a liar. To you doping is never a problem with Kenyans because they don't benefit from it and they are all accidental positives from eating contaminated pork - like Shelby.
No lie. Of course it's a problem for the sport, and not just a problem confined to Kenya.
I heard the AIU found 60% of positive tests occurs outside of Kenya.
Can you tell me who performance benefitted from within that 60%? Not the Ethiopians or Ugandans, because they aren't testing positive. Jake and Jakob?
Potential for performance enhancement is just one of several concerns.
Sure some drugs were present somewhere. We can safely say that as far back as the 1904 Olympics, drugs were present. You always fail to tangibly connect "presence" with "elite performance". It's all vague statements like "drugs were present in sport" lacking any specifics.
I saw a report about West Germany, but nothing about Africa. In fact, I challenged you earlier -- is there any tangible evidence of significant African doping before 2012 -- given the Australian reporting of "below average" blood doping among Kenyans and Ethiopians up until that time?
What is the connection to amphetamines and elite sport performance? Are you suggesting for example that "Lydiard's Boys" success in the 1960s was fueled by amphetamines, because amphetamines were present in 1956?
The IOC developed a programme for drug testing in 1967, because of the increase in the use of performance enhancing drugs which had been occurring in the years before then. The chief difference in doping in the '50's and '60's compared to earlier decades was the development of synthetic drugs, such as anabolic steroids and testosterone. Blood doping had first been developed after WWII and was said to be present in elite sport in the late '60's. Since we know that doping had increased in that decade - resulting in the IOC programme - and yet there was no testing until the Mexico Olympics it follows that those who were doping were able to do so with virtual impunity. Indeed, blood doping remained legal till the early '80's. It is apparent that the freedom to dope has changed in more recent years for the Kenyan cheats, who are now many of them being caught. One thing we can be sure of - they weren't paragons of sporting virtue in those earlier decades who then suddenly lost their doping "virginity" in 2012 to now lead the world in doping violations.
Boy, that puts the unprecedented, out of nowhere, flash in the pan 1960s success of Lydiard and Cerutty in a brand new light for me. Out of nowhere, they upset the world, and dominated for nearly a decade, in an era of no testing and increased doping with virtual impunity, and then scattered like cockroaches in the light of 1967 IOC doping controls.
"Champions are everywhere". Yeah, right. Wink, wink. I get the code now.
And in other words, what I hear you saying is that you really do not have any tangible evidence of any significant Kenyan doping before 2012, when Australian "scientists" found below average blood doping. All your notions and beliefs and fears about Kenyan doping between 1956 and 2012 have no real tangible evidential basis in fact or reality. Do you recall that in 2013, Turkey had 53 ADRVs, Russia had 40 ADRVs, India had 30 ADRVs, and Kenya only had 9? That's memorialized at the WADA website. Where were the Turkish and Russian and Indian performances? Where were the cries from fans to ban Turkey and India?
I think what happened is that foreign agents imported a foreign doping culture into Kenya, relatively recently, and then local chemists and doctors opportunistically joined in the exploitation of the largest proven pool of distance talent. After all, we don't need any evidence for personal pet conspiracy theories.
The IOC developed a programme for drug testing in 1967, because of the increase in the use of performance enhancing drugs which had been occurring in the years before then. The chief difference in doping in the '50's and '60's compared to earlier decades was the development of synthetic drugs, such as anabolic steroids and testosterone. Blood doping had first been developed after WWII and was said to be present in elite sport in the late '60's. Since we know that doping had increased in that decade - resulting in the IOC programme - and yet there was no testing until the Mexico Olympics it follows that those who were doping were able to do so with virtual impunity. Indeed, blood doping remained legal till the early '80's. It is apparent that the freedom to dope has changed in more recent years for the Kenyan cheats, who are now many of them being caught. One thing we can be sure of - they weren't paragons of sporting virtue in those earlier decades who then suddenly lost their doping "virginity" in 2012 to now lead the world in doping violations.
Boy, that puts the unprecedented, out of nowhere, flash in the pan 1960s success of Lydiard and Cerutty in a brand new light for me. Out of nowhere, they upset the world, and dominated for nearly a decade, in an era of no testing and increased doping with virtual impunity, and then scattered like cockroaches in the light of 1967 IOC doping controls.
"Champions are everywhere". Yeah, right. Wink, wink. I get the code now.
And in other words, what I hear you saying is that you really do not have any tangible evidence of any significant Kenyan doping before 2012, when Australian "scientists" found below average blood doping. All your notions and beliefs and fears about Kenyan doping between 1956 and 2012 have no real tangible evidential basis in fact or reality. Do you recall that in 2013, Turkey had 53 ADRVs, Russia had 40 ADRVs, India had 30 ADRVs, and Kenya only had 9? That's memorialized at the WADA website. Where were the Turkish and Russian and Indian performances? Where were the cries from fans to ban Turkey and India?
I think what happened is that foreign agents imported a foreign doping culture into Kenya, relatively recently, and then local chemists and doctors opportunistically joined in the exploitation of the largest proven pool of distance talent. After all, we don't need any evidence for personal pet conspiracy theories.