I think it's unlikely that Zatopek was clean, but also, I think everything was legal in the 1950's but not discussed publicly.
Synthetic testosterone was developed in the 1930's and led to a Nobel prize. It would have improved his recovery from grueling workouts.
Many soldiers in WWII used amphetamines, and Zatopek was a soldier.
There are papers in the mid to late 1940's describing blood transfusions for pilots, theoretically, but it's debated when that actually became feasible for athletes.
Apart from your speculation, where has it been reported - either in the era you're discussing or today by antidoping experts - that athletes like Zatopek were doping? If they were doping why were they no faster than schoolboys today or women?
I suspect you are too young to realise that the world has changed, that the past is a different country and what may be a commonplace today did not exist then or was only in its relative infancy.
So doping was around in Snell’s era. According to doctrine no one can achieve a world record or gold medal performance unless they are doping-no exceptions. So unfortunately we are forced to conclude that Snell was a doper.
Apart from your speculation, where has it been reported - either in the era you're discussing or today by antidoping experts - that athletes like Zatopek were doping? If they were doping why were they no faster than schoolboys today or women?
I suspect you are too young to realise that the world has changed, that the past is a different country and what may be a commonplace today did not exist then or was only in its relative infancy.
So doping was around in Snell’s era. According to doctrine no one can achieve a world record or gold medal performance unless they are doping-no exceptions. So unfortunately we are forced to conclude that Snell was a doper.
So nothing. You can't follow a simple point. Doping wasn't around in Snell's (or Zatopek's) era.
So doping was around in Snell’s era. According to doctrine no one can achieve a world record or gold medal performance unless they are doping-no exceptions. So unfortunately we are forced to conclude that Snell was a doper.
So nothing. You can't follow a simple point. Doping wasn't around in Snell's (or Zatopek's) era.
Doping doesn’t necessarily make someone not “nice”
Imo doping actually doesn’t make someone a bad person. It’s how someone turns their hobby and passion into a job. It’s a way of making money and there’s a lot of not so pure things very good people do, just to support their family and friends (and in this case help shuttle money to coaches and keep sponsors happy).
Give me a break. First of all, Athing Mu won the Olympics and World Championships BEFORE she started with Kersee. She hasn't won any major championships with Kersee.
Second, in the 1980's Bobby Kersee saw that the Eastern European countries were getting away with using steroids because there was no out of competition drug testing and so he jumped on that same band wagon. But out of competition drug testing started in 1989. That was 36 years ago. Kersee is not giving his current athletes drugs like he was back in 1988 and before.
This post made me chuckle. Kersee built his whole career & reputation as a coach by giving his athletes a tremendous amount of steroids & HGH (the latter something the East Europeans were not using). He was able to create the most intensive programmes only because his athletes could cope & recover due to doping. You think he suddenly gave that all up one day in 1989?
He continued to dope his athletes heavily way into the 90's. There was no sudden increase in OOC testing across the board it was extremely gradual. Although, ironically, not in Germany: in 1993 the number of dope tests conducted by Germany were more than all other nations combined. (Source: IAAF Stuttgart Annual ) No wonder German sprinting was decimated.
What is clear is Kersee has to do a different approach now to what he did back in the 1980s. That's a given. But it most definitely involves cheating, whether it be microdosing (most likely) or some new fangled substance (remember 'The Clear'?). And look at what happened when he took over McLaughlin's coaching: she didn't compete in Covid 2020 at all. And when she returned she ran 12.65 in the 100mh & went from 52.23 to 51.46 in the 400mh. To then run 50.37 two years later is taking the p*ss. That's no different to a 10.49, or a 47.60. It's a stupid time that only stupid people believe is clean.
Which brings me onto Jacious Sears. Why on earth would people think she is clean when he own coach was banned for doping in 2010 (use, possession & trafficking) and as recently as 2022 his own son - who he was coaching - was banned for tampering with the doping control process.
This was around twenty years ago, but a wealthy neighbor was aided in his age group Boston Marathon victory by an altitude tent. Something about that didn't, and still doesn't, feel right to me. Of course, Salazar would late help Galen Rupp secure an entire altitude house.
Sadly, like many on this board, I have become a slow and cynical old fart. I think pretty much all top-level competitors are involved in greyzone shenanigans, which I can't consider clean. I do think, however, that in countries that have robust anti-doping testing, that most athletes are cautious.
That being said, I think Abebe Bikila's barefoot 1960 Rome marathon win in 2:15 was the best clean performance of all time.
You don't know what you don't know. The only athletes I am convinced are clean are the ones I know well enough to have a solid judge of their character. I only personally know two of the people on your list and I'm pretty sure one of them is doping.
You are saying Cooper Teare is doping, aren't you? you said you know two of the people on the list personally. There are only two CT on that list. Cooper and Hocker both went to Oregon and were known to be friends. I'd guess you either went to school with them were on the team with them or were/are in the same circle of friends Eugene is a small town. And you just ruled out Chris Thompson.
You are saying Cooper Teare is doping, aren't you? you said you know two of the people on the list personally. There are only two CT on that list. Cooper and Hocker both went to Oregon and were known to be friends. I'd guess you either went to school with them were on the team with them or were/are in the same circle of friends Eugene is a small town. And you just ruled out Chris Thompson.
As I said in my initial post, I know him personally, but am not particularly close with him, and haven't interacted with him in a few years at this point. It is entirely a personal opinion based on my interactions with him and the opinions of my friends (some of whom know him a lot better than I). But yes, I do think he is doping. I think he has the right personality (highly competitive, a little carefree, a little arrogant), the right connections (Nike, Bowerman), and the right training setup (small highly elite and competitive group) for it.
I do not know Cole personally at all (he's not the second I know) and have no idea what he's like, but yes I suppose it could be implied that if Cooper is doping, so is Cole, because they are so close. Really can't comment on that.
" " I remember the days of "The most tested athlete in cycling" and "There is no way he'd dope, he survived cancer and would not chance affecting his body"
jfc you're posting anonymously on a message board. It's not difficult to just say the name, especially when there are two people in the list with the same initials
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.