A new low for this website. Do many of these people actually run or are they merely trolls? Look up the current Kenya drug ban list and the AK banned list this year alone. What's the point of arguing?
I have never said what you are writing here, Dumby.
Anybody close to a current WR holder is a doper, that's what you have written, and that's what I have written several times now. But even 10 times would be not enough for you, you still would be misquote it completely.
If your statement would be true (it isn't, but just if) Coe would be a doper. But you are uncertain about this.
You are right here, it's a complete waist of time to try to discuss something with you. You can't understand the most simple points.
With rational posters on the level of a 10 years old such a point would be clarified in minutes. With you it's not clarified after weeks and dozens of posts.
If you are not sure that Coe is a doper, than your statement is false, an athlete can be close to a current WR without doping.
For sure your statement IS false.
You have got stuck on the only part of the argument you think you understand. You don't. You have just shown it - again - despite an attempt to correct your lack of comprehension. But you don't want to understand. You are obsessed with trying to prove I must be wrong. You fail, because you insist on telling me what I meant. I think I know that better than you. Actually, anything better than you.
There wasn't any argument from your side, just a stupid claim: anybody close to a current WR is a doper. And the totally nonsense that you don't say Coe was a doper.
You were wrong on this issue (as on so many others) - an extremely easy fact which you are too stupid to understand. You are not the letsrun dumber no. 1 for no reason.
You have got stuck on the only part of the argument you think you understand. You don't. You have just shown it - again - despite an attempt to correct your lack of comprehension. But you don't want to understand. You are obsessed with trying to prove I must be wrong. You fail, because you insist on telling me what I meant. I think I know that better than you. Actually, anything better than you.
There wasn't any argument from your side, just a stupid claim: anybody close to a current WR is a doper. And the totally nonsense that you don't say Coe was a doper.
You were wrong on this issue (as on so many others) - an extremely easy fact which you are too stupid to understand. You are not the letsrun dumber no. 1 for no reason.
Still stuck on what you haven't understood. You need to be on the threads about fake moon landings.
So if you haven't read any of my posts why are you so obsessed with what I say?
This is Dumbs level of thinking, exactly this! Not reading all of his googol of posts means not reading any one of them.
Since you respond to every one of them it is a given you read them. You must have posted your own 25000 by now. You are clearly my most ardent follower.
This is Dumbs level of thinking, exactly this! Not reading all of his googol of posts means not reading any one of them.
Since you respond to every one of them it is a given you read them. You must have posted your own 25000 by now. You are clearly my most ardent follower.
You have no ardent followers, you delluded narcissist. You just pollute thread after thread and nobody likes you.
A new low for this website. Do many of these people actually run or are they merely trolls? Look up the current Kenya drug ban list and the AK banned list this year alone. What's the point of arguing?
Here's a quick summary of the last 60,000 posts from 1200 threads:
rekrunner posts a billion times suggesting that doping doesn't work regardless of testing or busts. Armstonglivs, who understands the prevalence of doping, perhaps in my opinion spends a bit too much time responding to him. However, he's a grown man on the internet - I wouldn't presume to tell him how to spend his time.
Canova chimes in once in awhile getting deep in the weeds and the science, but typically suggests doping isn't a real problem and obfuscates the forest for the trees. Someone will then state that he's a great coach and knows way more than us. Of course he's a great coach and of course he knows more than us about training and science. None of this means that EPO doesn't work or that athletes at the highest levels of all "important" sport (and probably a lot of "unimportant" sport) don't dope.
Liar soorer and his other 324 sock puppets steamrolls most threads with, well I'm not even sure, but he makes rekrunner seem sane if they are indeed different people.
I occasionally waste my time pointing these things out and am largely ignored or asked for "sources" or something from rekrunner.
Essentially, the doping apologists try to make this into a very complicated and nuanced process ripe with potential mistakes. Sometimes people get off because their sample was handled improperly or some other loophole. Sometimes it's even possible that it WAS a false positive. Is it possible there's some corruption somewhere? Of course there is.
However, it isn't this rampant flawed process that the apologists push here - if you test positive for EPO and the sample is handled properly and confirmed by the B sample, you did EPO and your entire career is called into question.
rekrunner and his ilk will then move the goal posts and tell you that the banned athlete probably only started doing the EPO that they have already stated doesn't work, only after they ran all their top times and were on the downturn of their career even though they were only 26.
Finally rekrunner will ask me for specifics on all the hypotheticals above - which of course I won't give him. When someone posts 50,000 times about how EPO and other banned substances don't work, far be it for me to try to change their mind.
A new low for this website. Do many of these people actually run or are they merely trolls? Look up the current Kenya drug ban list and the AK banned list this year alone. What's the point of arguing?
Here's a quick summary of the last 60,000 posts from 1200 threads:
rekrunner posts a billion times suggesting that doping doesn't work regardless of testing or busts. Armstonglivs, who understands the prevalence of doping, perhaps in my opinion spends a bit too much time responding to him. However, he's a grown man on the internet - I wouldn't presume to tell him how to spend his time.
Canova chimes in once in awhile getting deep in the weeds and the science, but typically suggests doping isn't a real problem and obfuscates the forest for the trees. Someone will then state that he's a great coach and knows way more than us. Of course he's a great coach and of course he knows more than us about training and science. None of this means that EPO doesn't work or that athletes at the highest levels of all "important" sport (and probably a lot of "unimportant" sport) don't dope.
Liar soorer and his other 324 sock puppets steamrolls most threads with, well I'm not even sure, but he makes rekrunner seem sane if they are indeed different people.
I occasionally waste my time pointing these things out and am largely ignored or asked for "sources" or something from rekrunner.
Essentially, the doping apologists try to make this into a very complicated and nuanced process ripe with potential mistakes. Sometimes people get off because their sample was handled improperly or some other loophole. Sometimes it's even possible that it WAS a false positive. Is it possible there's some corruption somewhere? Of course there is.
However, it isn't this rampant flawed process that the apologists push here - if you test positive for EPO and the sample is handled properly and confirmed by the B sample, you did EPO and your entire career is called into question.
rekrunner and his ilk will then move the goal posts and tell you that the banned athlete probably only started doing the EPO that they have already stated doesn't work, only after they ran all their top times and were on the downturn of their career even though they were only 26.
Finally rekrunner will ask me for specifics on all the hypotheticals above - which of course I won't give him. When someone posts 50,000 times about how EPO and other banned substances don't work, far be it for me to try to change their mind.
This summary is for everyone else.
That was entertaining. But rekrunner will have to respond, explaining at great length how you have misrepresented what he says. Someone will add, Canova is a great coach and therefore knows everything about doping - even though he has never coached or even apparently met a doped athlete. Then the sock puppets will chime in and for a brief moment we will gain the unlikely impression that rekrunner might be sane - as you say. Nah.
Since you respond to every one of them it is a given you read them. You must have posted your own 25000 by now. You are clearly my most ardent follower.
You have no ardent followers, you delluded narcissist. You just pollute thread after thread and nobody likes you.
There wasn't any argument from your side, just a stupid claim: anybody close to a current WR is a doper. And the totally nonsense that you don't say Coe was a doper.
You were wrong on this issue (as on so many others) - an extremely easy fact which you are too stupid to understand. You are not the letsrun dumber no. 1 for no reason.
Still stuck on what you haven't understood. You need to be on the threads about fake moon landings.
You never say a single word to the actual point, never.
I have exactly quoted what you have said. Several times now - but you don't even understand your own nonsense.
This is Dumbs level of thinking, exactly this! Not reading all of his googol of posts means not reading any one of them.
Since you respond to every one of them it is a given you read them. You must have posted your own 25000 by now. You are clearly my most ardent follower.
Again, not a single word to the point.
Not reading all of your many thousands of posts for you means not reading any of them.
That's the conclusion you did . A conclusion on a level you have shown so many times.
Destroying thread after thread - that's the only "impact" you have in this forum. Nothing of any benefit, just nothing. Anybody at the top dopes - Kenyans are at the top because they dope.
And, no, Dumbstrong, being close to a current WR doesn't necessarily mean the athlete is a doper. Even you have stated this.
Since you respond to every one of them it is a given you read them. You must have posted your own 25000 by now. You are clearly my most ardent follower.
Again, not a single word to the point.
Not reading all of your many thousands of posts for you means not reading any of them.
That's the conclusion you did . A conclusion on a level you have shown so many times.
Destroying thread after thread - that's the only "impact" you have in this forum. Nothing of any benefit, just nothing. Anybody at the top dopes - Kenyans are at the top because they dope.
And, no, Dumbstrong, being close to a current WR doesn't necessarily mean the athlete is a doper. Even you have stated this.
No, I haven't. But keep following me around. Does anything else interest you here?
Here's a quick summary of the last 60,000 posts from 1200 threads:
rekrunner posts a billion times suggesting that doping doesn't work regardless of testing or busts. Armstonglivs, who understands the prevalence of doping, perhaps in my opinion spends a bit too much time responding to him. However, he's a grown man on the internet - I wouldn't presume to tell him how to spend his time.
Canova chimes in once in awhile getting deep in the weeds and the science, but typically suggests doping isn't a real problem and obfuscates the forest for the trees. Someone will then state that he's a great coach and knows way more than us. Of course he's a great coach and of course he knows more than us about training and science. None of this means that EPO doesn't work or that athletes at the highest levels of all "important" sport (and probably a lot of "unimportant" sport) don't dope.
Liar soorer and his other 324 sock puppets steamrolls most threads with, well I'm not even sure, but he makes rekrunner seem sane if they are indeed different people.
I occasionally waste my time pointing these things out and am largely ignored or asked for "sources" or something from rekrunner.
Essentially, the doping apologists try to make this into a very complicated and nuanced process ripe with potential mistakes. Sometimes people get off because their sample was handled improperly or some other loophole. Sometimes it's even possible that it WAS a false positive. Is it possible there's some corruption somewhere? Of course there is.
However, it isn't this rampant flawed process that the apologists push here - if you test positive for EPO and the sample is handled properly and confirmed by the B sample, you did EPO and your entire career is called into question.
rekrunner and his ilk will then move the goal posts and tell you that the banned athlete probably only started doing the EPO that they have already stated doesn't work, only after they ran all their top times and were on the downturn of their career even though they were only 26.
Finally rekrunner will ask me for specifics on all the hypotheticals above - which of course I won't give him. When someone posts 50,000 times about how EPO and other banned substances don't work, far be it for me to try to change their mind.
This summary is for everyone else.
An amusing caraciture.
I simply point out the inconsistencies and contradictions and assumptions and fallacies.
Nowhere in there do I see any poster in these 60,000 posts and 1200 threads establishing any relation between doping and the fastest elite distance running performances.
Nor do I see any consensus towards a coherent explanation why EPO hasn't really "worked" as advertised for the fastest sea-level non-African distance runners (representing 85-90% of the world) for nearly four decades now.
That was entertaining. But rekrunner will have to respond, explaining at great length how you have misrepresented what he says. Someone will add, Canova is a great coach and therefore knows everything about doping - even though he has never coached or even apparently met a doped athlete. Then the sock puppets will chime in and for a brief moment we will gain the unlikely impression that rekrunner might be sane - as you say. Nah.
Oh I forgot those that have to create strawmen because they are unable to dispute or refute my points on the merits, and would be otherwise unable to respond.
Here's a quick summary of the last 60,000 posts from 1200 threads:
rekrunner posts a billion times suggesting that doping doesn't work regardless of testing or busts. Armstonglivs, who understands the prevalence of doping, perhaps in my opinion spends a bit too much time responding to him. However, he's a grown man on the internet - I wouldn't presume to tell him how to spend his time.
Canova chimes in once in awhile getting deep in the weeds and the science, but typically suggests doping isn't a real problem and obfuscates the forest for the trees. Someone will then state that he's a great coach and knows way more than us. Of course he's a great coach and of course he knows more than us about training and science. None of this means that EPO doesn't work or that athletes at the highest levels of all "important" sport (and probably a lot of "unimportant" sport) don't dope.
Liar soorer and his other 324 sock puppets steamrolls most threads with, well I'm not even sure, but he makes rekrunner seem sane if they are indeed different people.
I occasionally waste my time pointing these things out and am largely ignored or asked for "sources" or something from rekrunner.
Essentially, the doping apologists try to make this into a very complicated and nuanced process ripe with potential mistakes. Sometimes people get off because their sample was handled improperly or some other loophole. Sometimes it's even possible that it WAS a false positive. Is it possible there's some corruption somewhere? Of course there is.
However, it isn't this rampant flawed process that the apologists push here - if you test positive for EPO and the sample is handled properly and confirmed by the B sample, you did EPO and your entire career is called into question.
rekrunner and his ilk will then move the goal posts and tell you that the banned athlete probably only started doing the EPO that they have already stated doesn't work, only after they ran all their top times and were on the downturn of their career even though they were only 26.
Finally rekrunner will ask me for specifics on all the hypotheticals above - which of course I won't give him. When someone posts 50,000 times about how EPO and other banned substances don't work, far be it for me to try to change their mind.
This summary is for everyone else.
An amusing caraciture.
I simply point out the inconsistencies and contradictions and assumptions and fallacies.
Nowhere in there do I see any poster in these 60,000 posts and 1200 threads establishing any relation between doping and the fastest elite distance running performances.
Nor do I see any consensus towards a coherent explanation why EPO hasn't really "worked" as advertised for the fastest sea-level non-African distance runners (representing 85-90% of the world) for nearly four decades now.
That was entertaining. But rekrunner will have to respond, explaining at great length how you have misrepresented what he says. Someone will add, Canova is a great coach and therefore knows everything about doping - even though he has never coached or even apparently met a doped athlete. Then the sock puppets will chime in and for a brief moment we will gain the unlikely impression that rekrunner might be sane - as you say. Nah.
Oh I forgot those that have to create strawmen because they are unable to dispute or refute my points on the merits, and would be otherwise unable to respond.
Your points don't have to be debated on their merits. They have none.
I simply point out the inconsistencies and contradictions and assumptions and fallacies.
Nowhere in there do I see any poster in these 60,000 posts and 1200 threads establishing any relation between doping and the fastest elite distance running performances.
Nor do I see any consensus towards a coherent explanation why EPO hasn't really "worked" as advertised for the fastest sea-level non-African distance runners (representing 85-90% of the world) for nearly four decades now.
This is why Sage says you are clueless.
Sage was unwise. He also failed to establish any relation between doping and the fastest elite distance running performances, or explain why EPO hasn't ever seemed to worked for his fellow compatriots on the international stage.
Oh I forgot those that have to create strawmen because they are unable to dispute or refute my points on the merits, and would be otherwise unable to respond.
Your points don't have to be debated on their merits. They have none.
So logically you build strawmen, only to knock them down?
Sage was unwise. He also failed to establish any relation between doping and the fastest elite distance running performances, or explain why EPO hasn't ever seemed to worked for his fellow compatriots on the international stage.
The relationship between doping and performance is that every kind of athlete uses drugs now, including elite distance runners. It is only if you see elite athletes as dumber than a bunch of rocks will they choose to risk their careers and reputations for something that gives them no advantage. But that's you.
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.