Kenia should be blocked from athletics as they do obviously systematic doping. I have the feeling the athletic foundation gets paid by them to keep them 'alive'.
If state or a 'group' it does not matter, a systematic doping is a systematic doping whatever Coe says. Idiotic defence line from him. Very weak from him to keep that 'alive' and a belly kick for the running sport. Possible some serious money involved here, this is very obvious.
Maybe but no one has found Kenyan doping to be systematic. According to a 2017 WADA study, Kenyan doping is "unsophisticated, opportunistic, and uncoordinated."
This is just a semantics issue -"systematic" is been used to mean "widespread" in this case.
You are so totally full of sh*t. If a country had very few instances of doping it would not be banned. Russia was banned because its level of doping was near a 100%, which was the result of it being enabled by sports governance bodies. If Russia had had only a mere handful of cases it would not have been banned even if there had been attempted cover-ups.
Kenya has been on the verge of being banned because of the incidence of doping but has only avoided it through the efforts being made to catch the dopers, which Russia did not do.
Back to being an unpleasant foul mouthed poster …. yet again.
I await an other ban; hopefully for life this time.
You are so totally full of (it). If a country had very few instances of doping it would not be banned. Russia was banned because its level of doping was near a 100%, which was the result of it being enabled by sports governance bodies. If Russia had had only a mere handful of cases it would not have been banned even if there had been attempted cover-ups.
Kenya has been on the verge of being banned because of the incidence of doping but has only avoided it through the efforts being made to catch the dopers, which Russia did not do.
Of course you are wrong again, not fully understanding the history as it played out.
Doping positives, even a lot of them, alone only permits to ban the athletes that test positive. It is insufficient to ban a nation.
The Russian Federation (ARAF) was banned because they had too few instances of sanctions. The IAAF had identified several positives, and the ARAF was not prosecuting them in a timely way. Instead, they were extorting money from the athletes.
The Russian anti-doping (RUSADA) was banned because of their role in covering up positives and interfering with testing, e.g by swapping samples through a whole in the wall.
There is no rule for banning a nation. It is a political response. Kenya was expecting a ban at the end of last year and narrowly avoided it - but not on any pseudo-legalistic point as you try to argue.
If state or a 'group' it does not matter, a systematic doping is a systematic doping whatever Coe says. Idiotic defence line from him. Very weak from him to keep that 'alive' and a belly kick for the running sport. Possible some serious money involved here, this is very obvious.
Maybe but no one has found Kenyan doping to be systematic. According to a 2017 WADA study, Kenyan doping is "unsophisticated, opportunistic, and uncoordinated."
Whether Coe's response is weak or not, the situation in Kenya is different than Russia because the World Athletics/AIU are getting the co-operation of the Kenyan Athletics Federation, Kenyan Anti-doping, and the Kenyan government.
Indeed, ADAK is testing and catching athletes, AK is sanctioning athletes tested by the AIU, and the Kenyan government has just agreed to invest $5 million a year for the next 5 years into anti-doping.
It doesn't have to be systemic to be a commonplace - as it is in Kenya. So what if it isn't "systemic" but hordes of their athletes are doping - and they are?
Maybe but no one has found Kenyan doping to be systematic. According to a 2017 WADA study, Kenyan doping is "unsophisticated, opportunistic, and uncoordinated."
This is just a semantics issue -"systematic" is been used to mean "widespread" in this case.
It's also fake news. WADA was incapable of discovering the sophisticated dopers; thanks to a recent AIU report, we now know better: there is sophisticated and coordinated doping Kenya.
Maybe but no one has found Kenyan doping to be systematic. According to a 2017 WADA study, Kenyan doping is "unsophisticated, opportunistic, and uncoordinated."
Whether Coe's response is weak or not, the situation in Kenya is different than Russia because the World Athletics/AIU are getting the co-operation of the Kenyan Athletics Federation, Kenyan Anti-doping, and the Kenyan government.
Indeed, ADAK is testing and catching athletes, AK is sanctioning athletes tested by the AIU, and the Kenyan government has just agreed to invest $5 million a year for the next 5 years into anti-doping.
It doesn't have to be systemic to be a commonplace - as it is in Kenya. So what if it isn't "systemic" but hordes of their athletes are doping - and they are?
Who said "systemic"? "lexel" said "systematic".
Whatever you want to call it, the differences between Russia and Kenya are that Russia was banned because their system was doping the athletes, and not anti-doping the athletes, with the support of the Russian government, while the Kenyan system is not doping their athletes, and they are finding and sanctioning many doped athletes, with the support of the Kenyan government.
This is just a semantics issue -"systematic" is been used to mean "widespread" in this case.
It's also fake news. WADA was incapable of discovering the sophisticated dopers; thanks to a recent AIU report, we now know better: there is sophisticated and coordinated doping Kenya.
Do you have a link to this recent AIU report, or maybe some relevant quotes that say "sophisticated and coordinated doping Kenya?"
LOL. A classic rekrunner. That has come up here so many times, but you keep ignoring it. Read their 2022 FAQ about doping in Kenya, including their "sophisticated networks of conspirators".
WADA got fooled in 2017. Well, it is hard to uncover sophisticated doping, almost by definition.
LOL. A classic rekrunner. That has come up here so many times, but you keep ignoring it. Read their 2022 FAQ about doping in Kenya, including their "sophisticated networks of conspirators".
WADA got fooled in 2017. Well, it is hard to uncover sophisticated doping, almost by definition.
I keep ignoring it? That is news to me. Have I ever seen it before? I've seen it now and see no issue with it.
Some initial notes:
- It's reassuring that this 2022 AIU FAQ pretty much echos many things I've said here and elsewhere, that only seem to generate controversy and outrage when I say it -- that is classic rekrunner and classic letsrun!
- I recall that the AIU was also one of the authors of the 2017 WADA report on Kenyan Doping
- the 2022 FAQ describes an evolution of sophistication ("it is becoming increasingly more sophisticated"), and today that "range from the very basic supply of products to more sophisticated networks of conspirators", or, in other words, ranges from "unsophisticated and opportunistic" to "more sophisticated".
- The evolution of increasing sophistication suggests the problem is worse today, than say 2017, or 2012, or 2007, or 1990s, or 1960s.
- unlike non-African countries, "Kenya has an incredible depth of talented distance runners".
- "the top professional runners are controlled by the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), there are hundreds below this level who are currently not being tested sufficiently".
- "The crisis in Kenya is far different from what has occurred in Russia. In both 2015 and 2020, the Russian Athletics Federation (RAF) was found to be covering up anti-doping rule violations and collaborating in such practices at the highest levels of the sport. By contrast, the Kenyan authorities – its Government, Athletics Kenya (AK) and ADAK – are collaborating closely with the AIU to uncover doping."
Thanks for that update in an ever evolving and changing history.
Whatever you want to call it, the differences between Russia and Kenya are that Russia was banned because their system was doping the athletes, and not anti-doping the athletes, with the support of the Russian government, while the Kenyan system is not doping their athletes, and they are finding and sanctioning many doped athletes, with the support of the Kenyan government.
I mean systematic and not systemic, however 'systemic' is not totally off. I have the feeling the Kenyan goverment is not behind, so that would be different to Russia.
To do doping is a risk for any athlete. That risk has to be as small as possible.
So there is at least a doctor/pharmacist behind, who knows how much and when you should take that and that. Next to him is the manager. Next to him is the guy who gets/buys the EPO. Next to him is the insider who knows when they get tested. There is also the pharmacy behind. Etc. Etc. Mafia like structures.
Is that all so difficult to understand? Can't be that difficult.
It doesn't have to be systemic to be a commonplace - as it is in Kenya. So what if it isn't "systemic" but hordes of their athletes are doping - and they are?
Who said "systemic"? "lexel" said "systematic".
Whatever you want to call it, the differences between Russia and Kenya are that Russia was banned because their system was doping the athletes, and not anti-doping the athletes, with the support of the Russian government, while the Kenyan system is not doping their athletes, and they are finding and sanctioning many doped athletes, with the support of the Kenyan government.
You are truly an idiot. All doping that isn't accidental is "systematic". But "systemic" doping is highly organized. I can trust a bean-counter like you to not understand the distinction.
The main reason Kenya has not yet been banned is political: two banned countries would spell the end of the sport internationally. Kenya has also just slipped from the noose because efforts are being made to catch the dopers, which wasn't the case in Russia.
I mean systematic and not systemic, however 'systemic' is not totally off. I have the feeling the Kenyan goverment is not behind, so that would be different to Russia.
To do doping is a risk for any athlete. That risk has to be as small as possible.
So there is at least a doctor/pharmacist behind, who knows how much and when you should take that and that. Next to him is the manager. Next to him is the guy who gets/buys the EPO. Next to him is the insider who knows when they get tested. There is also the pharmacy behind. Etc. Etc. Mafia like structures.
Is that all so difficult to understand? Can't be that difficult.
Whatever you meant, "systematic" and "systemic" is both wrong, and both beside the point.
I can understand what you are saying is, as you put it, an expression of your "feelings", rather than any substantially accurate description of doping in Kenya.
Whatever you want to call it, the differences between Russia and Kenya are that Russia was banned because their system was doping the athletes, and not anti-doping the athletes, with the support of the Russian government, while the Kenyan system is not doping their athletes, and they are finding and sanctioning many doped athletes, with the support of the Kenyan government.
You are truly an idiot. All doping that isn't accidental is "systematic". But "systemic" doping is highly organized. I can trust a bean-counter like you to not understand the distinction.
The main reason Kenya has not yet been banned is political: two banned countries would spell the end of the sport internationally. Kenya has also just slipped from the noose because efforts are being made to catch the dopers, which wasn't the case in Russia.
I'm well aware it is not very intelligent for me engage with true idiots for so long, especially those lacking self-awareness.
However you want to redefine these terms, no one was talking about "systemic" until you denied it. "lexel" didn't say "widespread", "commonplace", or "systemic", but "systematic". He just confirmed that he meant "systematic".
But here's a conundrum. If you knew they were "distinct", why would you bring "systemic" into a conversation about the distinct term "systematic"? This is yet another example of you not really understanding the conversation you want to participate in, getting basic things wrong, and then blaming me for pointing out your own idiocy, again.
The fundamental reason that Kenya is not banned because there is no reason for World Athletics to ban any organization who is meeting their obligations under WADA, and complying with World Athletics rules, both in will and in deed.
Linking it back to this thread -- and the two Kenyans banned for getting standard hosptial treatment -- the solution here is not to ban the whole country, but to educate the athletes, how to get their hospital care for illness and injury in a way that is compliant with their WADA obligations.
I mean systematic and not systemic, however 'systemic' is not totally off. I have the feeling the Kenyan goverment is not behind, so that would be different to Russia.
To do doping is a risk for any athlete. That risk has to be as small as possible.
So there is at least a doctor/pharmacist behind, who knows how much and when you should take that and that. Next to him is the manager. Next to him is the guy who gets/buys the EPO. Next to him is the insider who knows when they get tested. There is also the pharmacy behind. Etc. Etc. Mafia like structures.
Is that all so difficult to understand? Can't be that difficult.
Whatever you meant, "systematic" and "systemic" is both wrong, and both beside the point.
I can understand what you are saying is, as you put it, an expression of your "feelings", rather than any substantially accurate description of doping in Kenya.
You use semantics to avoid the fact that Kenya is currently leading the world for doping positives.
You are truly an idiot. All doping that isn't accidental is "systematic". But "systemic" doping is highly organized. I can trust a bean-counter like you to not understand the distinction.
The main reason Kenya has not yet been banned is political: two banned countries would spell the end of the sport internationally. Kenya has also just slipped from the noose because efforts are being made to catch the dopers, which wasn't the case in Russia.
I'm well aware it is not very intelligent for me engage with true idiots for so long, especially those lacking self-awareness.
However you want to redefine these terms, no one was talking about "systemic" until you denied it. "lexel" didn't say "widespread", "commonplace", or "systemic", but "systematic". He just confirmed that he meant "systematic".
But here's a conundrum. If you knew they were "distinct", why would you bring "systemic" into a conversation about the distinct term "systematic"? This is yet another example of you not really understanding the conversation you want to participate in, getting basic things wrong, and then blaming me for pointing out your own idiocy, again.
The fundamental reason that Kenya is not banned because there is no reason for World Athletics to ban any organization who is meeting their obligations under WADA, and complying with World Athletics rules, both in will and in deed.
Linking it back to this thread -- and the two Kenyans banned for getting standard hosptial treatment -- the solution here is not to ban the whole country, but to educate the athletes, how to get their hospital care for illness and injury in a way that is compliant with their WADA obligations.
I didn't use "systematic" as I wasn't the poster who did. I am not bound to use the term they did. I am not bound to use your terms either - God forbid. "Systemic" is the more relevant term in this discussion - which is why I used it.
But either term is meaningless to you, as doping doesn't really exist in Kenya - it is all the result of "disproportionate" testing, false positives and contamination through boar offal - your myriad excuses for the current world leaders in doping positives.
If you say there was "no reason to ban an organisation doing everything it could to comply with its WADA obligations" then why was a ban being considered and believed to be imminent? Maybe it had something to do with the sheer numbers of Kenyan athletes who have been caught doping - and continue to do so, as the weekly busts show. No one here lies to themselves as much as you do.
If you say there was "no reason to ban an organisation doing everything it could to comply with its WADA obligations" then why was a ban being considered and believed to be imminent? Maybe it had something to do with the sheer numbers of Kenyan athletes who have been caught doping - and continue to do so, as the weekly busts show. No one here lies to themselves as much as you do.
Agree.
Rekrunner is trying to fool other readers, but the reality is, in most cases, that doping does not happens accidentally, as you need people behind the athlete (a system behind), which i mentioned in my post #173. If there happens one mistake in this chain (system) a whole career can be over. There are more than enough examples outside for this.
You use semantics to avoid the fact that Kenya is currently leading the world for doping positives.
On the contrary, I accept and expect a higher number of positive tests from a country for which the AIU wrote: "has an incredible depth of talented distance runners" for a combination of reasons the AIU explains in their Rule 15.
But the topic was whether "Kenia (sic) should be blocked from athletics" alleging "they do obviously systematic doping."
It's not "semantics" to think that he meant what he said -- especially as he confirmed it.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.