More Kenyan Doping

as an aside on the 'drop' of Kenyan dominance - I count 5 of 12 finalists in the london 1500 as kenyan:

Kiplagat

ozbilen (turkish export)

Ali (bahrain export)

Chepseba

Kiprop

That is still awesome performance from one country.

Renato.

I guess that you and all the post take the debate to ONE SINGLE AND WRONG direction. The highest percent of the doping among top runners is not to enhance the performance or WORLD RECORD OR INDIVIDUAL BEST PERFORMANCE. THE DRUG IS TAKE JUST TO GET THE BEST PLACE IN COMPETITION. Sometimes when the runner is still out of shape but got a compromise on an interesting competition.

Sorry, but this is your argument before or after 2001 is tricky. Your argument is this. If the world best were done AFTER 2001 you say that this proves that ther´s not drugs on that performances because the drug was in between 1990 and 2000. But when the world best performances are´t done AFTER 2001 you got the argument that the reason is that the training methodology for that event specialties doesn´t improve long ago.

One aspect is your individual option to not use drugs – ANY KIND, I respect and I trust on you, or who else I can trust ? I guess that if you don´t you shall fight those that suspect or false accusations over you.

Other different aspect is your continuous deny that DRUGS ENHANCE THE PERFORMANCE.

Look. As a start point I´m not focused on individual performance, or what particular kind of drug does or don´t. I´m not focus on EPO. Today is EPO, in the past was amphetamines and tomorrow will be something we really don´t know but some people are actual searching and working to create new drugs, you know that.

I guess that out of your genuine and sincere individual option to not use drugs, just by your scientific knowledge of our beloved sport you may assume that this sport is full of drug use and in the PAST TILL TODAY SOME PERFORMANCES AND SOME RESULTS WERE/ARE TOTALLY FALSE THE WAY AREN`T JUST THE CONSEQUENCE OF TALENT AND TRAINING ENHANCE. That wouldn´t not put you down, but would put you up. Honest people would think “we don´t know the extent of drugs in athletics in general and in middle to long distance in particular. But Renato primes for his genuinity and we got admiration because at the same time he denounces some drug scenarios, he doesn´t use it.

This debate was been simple focused about how to maximize the performance by the use of drugs, when IT´s a FACT THAT THE DRUF USE IS MAINLY TO WIN AND GET THE BEST IN COMPETITIONS WUITHOUT THE INTENTION TO BREAK THE WORD RECORD OR THE INDIVIDUAL PERSONAL BEST.

I show you the word best performances and I might start by the woman, and from the point we know that the DRUG USE IS NOT CONFESSED (it´s a fact) there it´s just necessary to got GOOD SENSE, nothing more than good sense and some knowledge of this sport to be aware that ALL OF THE WORLD RECORDS AND WORLD BEST WOMAN PERFORMANCES FROM 100m to the 3000m and some of the best 5000m, 10000m ALL WERE DONE WITH DRUG AID. It´s not enough for you claim your innocence, it´s necessary to judge that THIS OUR RUNNING SPORT IS FULL OF DRUG USE.

WR 100 Metres 10.49 0.0 Florence Griffith-Joyner 16/07/1988 – 24 years ago !

2 - 10.61 Lavardo Smith 10/06/2007 – the second world all time best 19 years later than FJ Griffith, still 0.12secs slower than JF.JGriffith

3 - 10.65 A 1.1 Marion Jones 12/09/1998 – the third world all time best is from Marion Jones that we know that was done with drugs !

WR 200 Metres 21.34 1.3 Florence Griffith-Joyner 29/09/1988 – almost 25 years ago !

2 - 21.62 A -0.6 Marion Jones 11/09/1998 – Once again the second world all time best that is still 0.28secs slower than Griffith, is who else but Marion Jones, that we now know that she did all that with drugs !

WR 400 Metres 47.60 Marita Koch 06/10/1985 – 27 years ago

2 - 47.99 Jarmila Kratochvílová 10/08/1983 – second best is older than the Kratochvílov world record. 29 years ago., done by the same runner that is the 800m WR recordist since 1983.

WR 800 Metres 1:53.28 Jarmila Kratochvílová 26/07/1983 – 29 years ago

2 - 1:53.43 Nadezhda Olizarenko 27/07/1980 – Second best done 32 years ago ! ! !

3 - 1:54.01 Pamela Jelimo 29/08/2008 – Pamela Jelimo is the third best , and we needed to wait 28 years ago for someone from modern training comes close to the 800m WR, but still 0.34 slower. During almost 30 years, hundreds of runners, like Maria Mutola and many others world top super female runners tried the WR but no one is still closer of the world record from 1983.

WR 1500 Metres 3:50.46 Yunxia Qu 11/09/1993 – done 19 years ago !

(1500m ranking by event performance)

1 - 3:50.98 Bo Jiang CHN 13/03/1977 1 Shanghai 18/10/1997

2- 3:51.34 Yinglai Lang CHN 22/08/1979 2 Shanghai 18/10/1997

3 - 3:51.92 Junxia Wang CHN 09/01/1973 2 Beijing 11/09/1993

4 - 3:52.47 Tatyana Kazankina URS 17/12/1951 1 Zürich 13/08/1980

5 - 3:53.91 Lili Yin CHN 11/11/1979 3 Shanghai 18/10/1997

6 - 3:53.96 Paula Ivan ROU 20/07/1963 1 Seoul 01/10/1988

7 - 3:53.97 Lixin Lan CHN 14/02/1979 4 Shanghai 18/10/1997

8 - 3:54.23 Olga Dvirna URS 11/02/1953 1 Kyiv 27/07/1982

9 - 3:54.52 Ling Zhang CHN 13/04/1981 5 Shanghai 18/10/1997

10 - 3:55.0 Tatyana Kazankina 1 Moskva 06/07/1980

11 - 3:55.01 Lixin Lan 1h2 Shanghai 17/10/1997

12 - 3:55.07 Yanmei Dong CHN 16/02/1977 6 Shanghai 18/10/1997

13 - 3:55.30 Hassiba Boulmerka ALG 10/07/1968 1 Barcelona 08/08/1992

14 - 3:55.33 Süreyya Ayhan TUR 06/09/1978 1 Bruxelles 05/09/2003

15 - 3:55.38 Yunxia Qu 2h2 Shanghai 17/10/1997

16 - 3:55.47 Ling Zhang 3h2 Shanghai 17/10/1997

17 - 3:55.60 Süreyya Ayhan 1 Zürich 15/08/2003

1 8 - 3:55.68 Yuliya Fomenko Chizhenko RUS 30/08/1979 1 Paris Saint-Denis 08/07/2006

19 - 3:55.82 Yanmei Dong 4h2 Shanghai 17/10/1997

20 - 3:56.0 Tatyana Kazankina 1 Podolsk 28/06/1976

21 - 3:56.14 Zamira Zaitseva URS 16/02/1953 2 Kyiv 27/07/1982

22 - 3:56.18 Maryam Yusuf Jamal BRN 16/09/1984 1 Rieti 27/08/2006

23 - 3:56.22 Paula Ivan 1 Zürich 17/08/1988

24 - 3:56.31 Dong Liu CHN 24/12/1973 5h2 Shanghai 17/10/1997

25 - 3:56.43 Elena Soboleva RUS 03/08/1982 2 Paris Saint-Denis 08/07/2006

Amazing that in the 1500m, 25 all time world best in the ranking of event performances, 20 were done in the past century, and from those 21world´s best were done by Chinese, Ex-USSR and ex-east European countries.

3000 Metres 8:06.11 Junxia Wang 11/09/1993

8:06.11 Junxia Wang CHN 09/01/1973 1 Beijing 13/09/1993

8:12.18 Yunxia Qu CHN 25/12/1972 2 Beijing 13/09/1993

8:12.19 Junxia Wang 1h2 Beijing 12/09/1993

8:12.27 Yunxia Qu 2h2 Beijing 12/09/1993

8:16.50 Linli Zhang CHN 06/03/1973 3 Beijing 13/09/1993

8:19.78 Liyan Ma CHN 03/11/1968 3h2 Beijing 12/09/1993

8:21.26 Liyan Ma 4 Beijing 13/09/1993

8:21.42 Gabriela Szabo ROU 14/11/1975 1 Monaco 19/07/2002

8:21.64 Sonia O'Sullivan IRL 28/11/1969 1 London 15/07/1994

8:21.84 Lirong Zhang CHN 03/03/1973 5 Beijing 13/09/1993

8:22.06 Linli Zhang 1h1 Beijing 12/09/1993

8:22.20 Paula Radcliffe GBR 17/12/1973 2 Monaco 19/07/2002

8:22.44 Lirong Zhang 2h1 Beijing 12/09/1993

8:22.62 Tatyana Kazankina URS 17/12/1951 1 Leningrad 26/08/1984

8:23.23 Edith Masai KEN 04/04/1967 3 Monaco 19/07/2002

8:23.26 Olga Yegorova RUS 28/03/1972 1 Zürich 17/08/2001

8:23.75 Olga Yegorova 1 Paris Saint-Denis 06/07/2001

8:23.96 Olga Yegorova 1 Roma 29/06/2001

8:24.19 Gabriela Szabo 2 Zürich 17/08/2001

8:24.31 Gabriela Szabo 1 Paris 29/07/1998

8:24.51 Meseret Defar ETH 19/11/1983 1 + Bruxelles 14/09/2007

Maserat Defar is only the recent one to go to the world top ten. However to do trust that Tatyana Kazankina did just 0.42 slower than Paula Radcliff in the years of 84 ? ! ? ! almost 30 years ago ?

Mesarat Defar doesn´t uses a rich methodology, bestbetter methodology than Tatayana Kazankina ?

10,000 Metres 29:31.78 Junxia Wang 13/09/1993

29:31.78 Junxia Wang CHN 09/01/1973 1 Beijing 08/09/1993

29:53.80 Meselech Melkamu ETH 27/04/1985 1 Utrecht 14/06/2009

Meselech Melkamu and all the best 10000m runners after 1993, 20 years past on, no one got talent and rich training methodology to be better than Wang Junxia ? I know that the 10000m track got less and less frequency. But anyhow 20 years after, no one still closer or beats Wang Junxia ? ? ?

I guess that out of your genuine and sincere individual option to not use drugs, just by your scientific knowledge of our beloved sport you may assume that this sport is full of drug use and in the PAST TILL TODAY SOME PERFORMANCES AND SOME RESULTS WERE/ARE FALSE THE WAY AREN`T JUST THE CONSEQUENCE OF TALENT AND TRAINING ENHANCE. That wouldn´t not put you down, but would put you up. Honest people would think “we don´t know the extent of drugs in athletics in general and in middle to long distance in particular. But Renato primes for his genuinity and we got admiration because at the same time he denounces some drug scenarios, he doesn´t use it.

Antonio, I don't understand what you want to show me.

I never said drugs don't help. In my different posts, for example, I well explained that, if there are not WR in throwing and in all the events for women where strength is the most important factor, after 1988, it's because it's not possible to reach the same level of muscle strength with training only, compared with the use of steroids.

And also, I never denied the fact EPO can help athletes in middle and long distances : many cases can show it.

I denied the idea that ALL THE BEST ARE DOPED, and all the bests of today are African, born, living and training in altitude. I denied the idea that EPO can help athletes so much as many thinks (for example, speaking of 10' of improvement in Nairobi marathon, clearly a demonstration they don't know anything about training, Africa and doping).

When I was in China, Chinese officials told me what we already know : the Chinese women in the period 1993-97 were all heavily doped (possible to compare that situation with the East Germany doping with sprinters, throwers and jumpers).

What I say, is that EPO doesn't work in the same amount for different athletes, and probably DOESN'T WORK WITH TOP TALENTED AFRICAN.

I explained some post ago, in scientific way, WHY I have this convinction : no prooves, buit prooves it's possible to win and to reach WR with clean athletes. So, if I'm sure about my best athletes (for example Shaheen), for which reason I have to doubt about incredible talents as Gebrselassie or Bekele ?

And of course nobody in good mental health can tell me possible to better their PB of 1 minute in 10000m or of 8" in steeple, as I read in some article.

The fact NEVER there were experiments about EPO assumption for top athletes in altitude opens the possibility to a wide range of interpretations. What I wanted to show are the contradictions there are between all the hypothesis.

For example, is it credible that all the performances went down during the same period that Kenyans had higher values? And, if this a fact, which kind of importance have we to give to high blood values, "probably mark of EPO assumption" ?

The only possibilities are : or they are not doped, and their high values depends on something else (how I tried to explain), or, if they are doped, their doping doesn't work.

I continue to think we speak too much of doping, and too little of training.

Also in the cases of athletes improving after taking EPO,

I think the real percentage of improvement due (directly) to EPO is very little. The fact is many athletes, mentally weak, and for that reason not accepting hard training "because we can't recover" or "because we are not able", start to have more volume and more intensity in training not because EPO, BUT BECAUSE, WITH EPO, FINALLY THEY ACCEPT THE IDEA TO INTENSIFY THEIR TRAINING.

If I run 1000m in 5' and I take EPO, probably I can run 4'40". But, of course, this can't be the case of top talented athletes, and the idea to transfer to the best talented athletes in the world, having the hardest training because they can have the greatest advantages under point of view of performances, victories and money, the same percentage of improvement in transporting Oxygen that is scientifically tested for patients needing dialysis, is so great stupidity that I can't suppose somebody can believe, if provided of brain.

Renato Canova wrote:

But I want to remember that NEVER there was some experiment regarding EPO in altitude, to athletes trained at high volume and high intensity regime.

So, ALL THE STUDIES ABOUT EPO IN ALTITUDE, FOR ATHLETES HAVING THE BEST TRAINING AND TOP TALENT, ARE ALL CONJECTURES.

So, if it's true I don't have any proof EPO doesn't work (but I have the proof it's possible to beat WR completely clean, because some athletes I coach did and I'm completely sure about themselves) with top athletes in those conditions, it's also true NOBODY HAS THE PROOF EPO CAN WORK, because all the physiological explanations I gave above are not fruit of hallucinations, but of years of experiences, and not only with Kenyans.

Everyone pay attention because RENATO IS RIGHTLY STATING HE HAS NO PROOF of his claim that EPO cannot work in top Kenyan athletes. I believe he has been saying this all along, although sometimes he writes with such authority that it comes off like a claim of fact. It is not fact, it is the untested "Canova Hypothesis".

As a scientist I am ok with that. It's an interesting and provocative hypothesis. Although if I were also a high profile coach I'm not sure I'd be putting it forward, because obviously there is the appearance of a conflict of interest... But hey, we have to respect Canova for being brave and putting his reputation on the line. If his hypothesis is wrong, it will only take one counterexample to prove it (e.g. a 2:04 guy who tests positive and then admits that he became faster when he started taking EPO). I'm sure Canova will say that this will never happen. Time will tell.

One thing that puzzles me is why Canova is so fiercely defending his hypothesis, when normally a scientist would just admit it needs to be tested. All this data on blood parameters in clean athletes does not amount to a test of the hypothesis, much less proof. My guess is that he would like to promote a "culture" which believes EPO cannot work in the very best, in the absence of 100% conclusive evidence one way or the other.

Nappy Roots wrote:

There will be some blind, devoted, and delusional followers of Canova until he is caught. We've seen this before, historically, and we will see it again when he falls. Just as Lance, Marion, Tim, and others have had God-like followers who are committed to believing in them and their word, Canova has the same.

You disgust me.

The great thing about this and other people who talk and think as you do is that it shows your own incredible ignorance of the situation.

I am not even talking about whether you are right or wrong in your opinion but on the fact that you opinion is based 100% on the fact that Renato posts on Letsrun.

He is your only link to the world of elite running in Kenya - therefore in your tiny mind he must be the one who is guilty and responsible for any ills which occur within that world.

If Renato did not post on Letsrun then firstly you would know very very little about him and secondly you would not think that he is the ring leader of the doping circle (if one exists?)

For example you do not accuse the other Italian coaches in Kenya - why not? Or the other non Kenyan non Italian coaches in Kenyan - why not?

The answer is because you do not know that they exist because they do not post on Letsrun.

lost in Boston wrote:

yyy wrote:

namely the flux of talent away from the track and to the roads. why? $$$$$

The best track runners do not go to the marathon for a good reason - and it is also money. If you are the best on the track you make a pile of money.

Do you think these 2.04 marathoners - most of whom do not win the major marathons - could win the 1500 or the 5000 or the 10,000? Of course not.

The fact is, the dopers are a bit more reticent than they were in the 90's and early to mid 2000s. Things are getting a little tighter. The Olympics showed that. (With the glaring exception of the US women sprinters. Puhleazze.)

Just curious to know what the drug testing requirements are in major marathons and HM? Have they become more stringent in recent years?

Could it be that many also turned to road racing since 2006 as there was less random or out of competition testing for these events rather than elite track athletes?

I'm asking as I genuinely don't know!

this is a very special moment:

meanwhile two famous coaches, mr. canova and mr. cabral, take part in this discussion.

it´s very difficult to talk about training if at the same time kenya is said to be a training mecca which is not famous for its control system as exigent.

in my point of view we have seen all possible kinds of training so far, all kinds of altitude training, all kinds of intensity and all kinds of volume.

Deanouk, about the "Major" there is an antidoping very much more tough than on track events. All the best are tested, also with blood, and normally WADA and IAAF antidoping agency go to test the top athletes also the day before the race. Sometimes this is done in not fair way, because athletes are not respected. For example, two years ago in London antidoping went to test the Swiss guy Viktor Roethlin after midnight, the night before the race, and this in my opinion is a lack of respect, because all the top athletes are in the same Hotel, nobody escapes and there is all the day available for testing everybody.

In a lot of occasions I found a big difference between the behavior of the doctors testing athletes AFTER the competition (normally friendly and trying to put the athletes, already tired, at their ease) and the behavior of doctors in the out of competition tests. In many cases they have a arrogant attitude, clearly thinking all the athletes are guilty of doping. I can't accept this behavior, meaning a lack of respect for human beings.

I don't agree the current behavior of great part of who fights doping, because NEVER I FIND SOME EDUCATIVE CONCEPT. I understand we need a deterrent against this spread evil, but I don't accept the only points antidoping rides are "risks for health" and "fright to be banned".

I don't teach somebody "don't go to plunder a bank, because outside you can find some policeman who can arrest you or can shoot killing you", but I try to teach him the respect for the properties of other people.

So, my opinion is clear : there are many types of doping, but this is one of the biggest business, connected with Big Pharma, and all the antidoping agencies, in order to increase their power (in the world of sport, money becomes less for every kind of activity, the only branch growing every years under economic point of view is antidoping), need to OVERRATED the effects of the most diffused substances, both on performances and of risk for health.

When we speak in medical or scientific way, about any type of medicine, one of the most important words is "DOSAGE". When we speak about doping, thgis word practically doesn't exist.

The reality is that, speaking continuously about the ADVANTAGES athlete can have with every type of doping, WE PUSH YOUNG PEOPLE AND AMATEURS, of normal level, to try to get something, also illegal, for enhancing their performances, knowing at their level there are no tests, because they are out of the small range of the bests.

Don't forget that, also if antidoping can work every year a little better for top athletes, in every sport, THE NUMBER OF ACTIVE PEOPLE USING SOME DOPING GROWS CONTINUOUSLY. In the amateurial world, in all the sport of endurance, there are a lot of cyclists, runners, skiers using EPO because they are sure to enhance their performances and not to be tested. In the gyms there are a lot of steroids, sometimes camouflaged inside aminoacids or supports for the normal life.

This means the system used for fighting doping doesn't work in a world that is "pharmacologic". In television we have a lot of spots pushing for using supports, also for people not doing any physical activity, and this type of messages go to mar a right mentality of young and normal people (see the mentality of the most part of posters of LR, for them doping is the normality for every sportsman).

If we explain that THE MOST PART OF DOPING doesn't have any effect for enhancing performances (and this is true in the most part of cases), and the only effect is to fill the pockets of cheaters doctors, may be we can obtain more results than threatening people, not interested in being threatened.

For all those reasons I fight against the culture of doping in my way, educating people to try their best with their only forces. For me, sport has still educative values that other human activities don't have.

Sorry if somebody can be disgusted for my behavior.

High Wire wrote:

Why hasn't the supposed money influx on the roads affected the Americans the same way? It certainly hasn't deterred Ritz from the 10000.

Americans have not had a realistic shot at winning the marathons that have the six figure prizes so in many cases it's more advantageous for them to stay at distances where they can race and be paid more frequently. And if I'm not mistaken, Ritz has run the marathon.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I couldn't quite follow all of your comments, but got the general idea.

The only way to fight against doping is with the truth and with penalties.

Pretending that doping doesn't work (which was what the medical community did in the fifties in the US) doesn't stop the proliferation of drugs because the druggies find out that the drugs do indeed work and they will be quite merrily cheat their way to the top - or at least closer to the top than they otherwise could.

Really, it makes no sense to claim that the drugs do not work. That path has been tried before and shown to result in a cavalier attitude towards druggies who can then hide themselves behind the big lie that drugs don't work.

People who believe in doping are stupid.

i can understand the argument of a double moral standard. from day to day normal people push themselves with pharma products while it´s expected that in athletics everybody should perform well and without any kind of artificial help.

but these are the rules to make results in athletics comparable.

remember the feelings of the world public, watching the chinese women in the 90´s perfoming long distance running in just another league? a country without satisfying doping control standards by all means, and then chinese officials published a movie to explain the miracle: turtles were headed and athletes drank the blood and someone explained, the blood of turtles plus hard training make it possible.

we can´t talk about world class training in kenya until a good working control system will be established there and athletes will be not asked to take part in a blood control test voluntarily (!).

just my opinion.

Renato I guess (and I hope) that you know that what I think of you is that i trust that you are a honest person on the drug issue and I guess that youe just don´t use drugs in their athletes. I guess that the rich results your runners they do, they are clean, and you– by your temper, by your sports ethic, you don´t use drugs. I respect your opinion and what you say. If you think (and you know) that is possible to do world´s best outstand performance with just rich training and without illegal substance use to performance boost I respect your opinion.

Therefore you Renato, at your individual behavior you are out of my suspicion on the drug matter, and while you don´t use drugs, you got the right to react, as you do often, to some silly posts that suggests that your runners are on drugs, what anyhow are false suspicious without factual support. Point.

My question is that despite you based on facts, that´s right, but since every fact got his own interpretation, sometimes your interpretation of one fact seems to me that you manipulate the fact with your own arguments to put the fact to your theory.

Let me write about some examples to what I want to say that migt answer to you misunderstand what´s my point.

Meanwhile I hope that I would not be misunderstand. I want to take the debate to a new level that is not just those silly recurrent comments that “Renato is on EPO”.

For example, you focus too much the drug issue on world top class runners or world records, when you should place the drug use (even on world top class runners) in COMPETITIONS and not world records or best performances. Also you use the argument that the enhance (or don´t) of world records and all time best performances. However when you are faced with all that past world records (facts again) i see you could deny that most if not all were done with any kind of drug help.

If drug offers any additional physiologic benefits at all in runners in general and world top class runners, everyone is just guessing because science got not a definitive answer. However we don´t need just to forget what science hasn´t yet proven.

Therefore or we do experimentation or “self-experimentation” (!) or we need to take CONCLUSIONS from FACTS that we already know.

For example, Your last post as in past posts you say it´s silly to think that a your runner with EPO may enhance 1min in 10k. I agree because I got good sense and some methodology knowledge (if you permit me). But somehow in the same post you say that it would be easy to run 2:01 in the marathon. So what ? Don´t you understand that one side you use factual, rationale, training skill and the other side you appeal to speculation ? Do you want that I quote and that I address the post where you say it ?

From facts… For example. You say that EPO doesn´t help because Kenyans do low hematocrit when they are in best shape and take rich performances. But I also know that By the way Antonio Pinto from Portugal when he did win the 2000 London marathon and he did get the marathon European record at that 2h06:36 time. But one week before the marathon he did a test and did 56% hematocrit. I can say something more because I know the tests. Every new occasion he goes to London marathon, the more high hematocrit and other high blood values he gets he does fast runs. Also we know that he disn´t altitude training. The first time hematocrit decreases – the last time he did compete there - he did a slower run.

So what ? In some case high hematrocrit might help, some other don´t, isn´t that true ?

Other example. On the past, on several posts on this board you deny that the Chinese Wang Junxia what he did was done with drug help. One parenthesis. I know, as you know that what she did was done also by tremendous training stuff. Therefore you said that some years ago. Actually you said that what the Chinese did was done by drugs, and also the Chinese told you what you really knew.

Isn´t that manipulation from the facts ?

I need to say this right now. On this board, and in many other debates, most of people, if not all, you are running in circles on the drug issue, and the main problem of your misunderstand and the miss of sustained argumentation is that you are too much touched by Renato argument when he denies the interest of drugs relate to PERFORMANCE ENHANCE, be in agreement or disagreement with Renato. However Renato leads the comment on the drug issue, since most of you just try to argue based on Renato posts, related to Renato post contains.

In my opinion the focus on performance enhance confines the debate to HOW or IF THE DRUG WORKS TO THE PERFORMANCE ENHANCE. Renato Canova might be right when he says that drugs (EPO or blood transfusion by the way) doesn´t work at high-top level of performance enhance in distance running and anyhow, if works or doesn´t, is not very scientific proved or factual.

I guess that the amplitude of a rich drug debate might start by FACTS. WHERE AND WHEN the drug works and the runner takes benefit from drugs.

You are all leading to a mistake and misunderstand. IN DISTANCE EVENTS DRUG IS NOT USED TO ENHANCE PERFORMACE AT HIGHEST LEVEL, it´s not used to improve performance, it´s not used to exceed our talent and capacity where´s no kind of “world´s best training” can´t enhance the runner pb.

AT THE WORLD TOP CLASS DRUG IS USED TO WIN EVENTS, TO WIN COMPETITIONS MOSTLY not to break Pbs or to attempt break world records. To break world records is confined and reserved to such a minority of runners that got access to WRs or those that might be at the top ten every distance event that got not interest to take dugs to get that goals.

You see, I don´t remember one distance runner that is caught on drugs to take a world record. But we know Olympic winners that did that results with drug use, or just olympic medalists, world champs, or just world class road runs, world cross country winners, world class marathon winners or simply good results in one determined competition that did perform and wine over other runners adversaries and finally we know that they were on drugs.

That is what drug is for. To win distance events or best classification can be obtained. Drug is not spread to performance enhance mostly. This is the Renato and YOURS fallacy about the drug debate. The attempt to put the distance run debate about drugs, benefic, yes or no, done, yes or no, it shall start with the fact that the drug is our running sport is not take to performance enhance mostly, but to win competitions over the adversaries. That is here, in the competitions and not in the performance enhance that the drug debate might be focused.

See another manipulation. One 5:00min/kilo runner with EPO might improve for 4:40/kilo pace or faster a world top class of 27:00 in 10k can´t improve to 26:45 probably. Of course that what you say it´s true. But for example when Mohamed Mourith did win twice the world cross country and he took EPO, how do we know that it wasn´t the EPO that helped him to win that ones ? And are you sure that Rashid Ramzi would win the 1500m in the Olympics as well without EPO ?

When Renato focus the drug debate into his elitist world-class runner performer and world class performance you do the first step to unreal argumentation. Why it´s not real ? It´s not real because the real field of the distance run sport starts from local competitions to regional to national level, from junior to senior to master runners. Thousand, millions all over the world. To think that what really matters about the drug issue is the world top class runner is equivalent to think that the standard of world welfare is located in US or Germany in Europe when we got millions of African poor people living and also poor people in US or poor people in Europe. It´s kind of irrational. To think about the drug issue is not to see if the EPO or any other does enhance the performance of world top class runners. It´s also about Helder Hornelas that did pass on every drug test and did win the Milano marathon with 2:08 and finally after that the biologic passport is legal as test was caught. To think about EPO is to know about Fernando Silva that after several season serious attempts in 5000m track wasn´t able ever to do a sub 14:00 and at that during period he was second in the European Cross country only defeat by Mo Farah by a few seconds. After a while he was caught with EPO on a non-competition test and from that on after a 2 years ban he comes back and is the mediocre runner at international level that he was been before be on drug.

I will show you that I am right with facts. For example. One runner that wants to win the final 1500m in the WChamp and in the Olympics. He is one of the fast all time runners in 1500m with 3:26 pb. Why the heel this runner does take drugs ? To break the world record. No, he doesn´t. To be qualified from the heats, to the semi-final and be in the final and to be able to win the olympics ? Of course that this runner is Rashid Ramzi. Take a list from the all the middle to long distance runners were caught with drug and see if they did drug s to attempt performance enhance or if they did drugs with the main target to win or best classification in one/several events. Think about Mohamed Mourith for example. Winner of 2 world cross country champs. Does he took drugs on that champs to get a new pb in cross country ( ?) or to win events ???

Most sportsman took drugs to be at his best or near his best in on particular/special moments, on one special day, on that particular event, and to try to win over the rest, not that the main task is individual performance enhance. This is true also for the world´s best.

Your sincerely

António

Antonio and Renato--

I have stopped posting on this board, but I might have something to add to this discussion.

I cannot speak to EPO, but I can speak to steroids. I know they are different, but I think that parts of the steroid trajectory might be the same for the EPO trajectory.

Regarding "top runners"--every individual has his or her maximum possible performance. Perfectly trained, perfectly healthy, perfect conditions, perfect race, etc., sometimes which occurs during their career. When an athlete has a long career, we get an idea of what that maximum performance level was.

So take Ben vs Carl. Carl, throughout his long career, showed us his maximum performance in the 100m. He had excellent potential, was well-trained, was focused during competition, and had a winning attitude. He was the best he could be, and the best ANYBODY could ever be, or ever was, because he was a multiple world-record-holder in the 100m.

And yet he was absolutely crushed by Johnson, a sprinter with intrinsically much less sprinting capability than Lewis. How do I know? The same way you guys know certain things, I saw it all. Steroids made Johnson not only better than Johnson could have been without the drugs, they also made Johnson better than Lewis was at his maximum potential. In fact, nearly everybody in the 1988 race, except for Desai, was intrinsically faster than Johnson, including guys like Smith, who also had long careers and exhibited their maximum potential.

So when you say that, for instance, EPO only works on athletes who are not at the maximum of performance, how do you know where in fact that maximum performance is? What if that maximum potential is in fact at something like 2:06, and everybody faster is doped? From sprinting, we know that this is definitely a possibility, as the Ben/Carl situation has played itself out many times, with different names.

Why should it be that EPO can take an athlete only to the maximum physiologic ceiling, whereas steroids can raise that ceiling itself?

And why should it not be believed that endurance athletes are also on steroids or other testosterone analogs, since we know that power athletes have used EPO to good benefit?

One final point that has been missing from this discussion: the drug high.

Like one of you said, drugs can be hidden in supplements. Like I said before on this board, about 15 years ago I had a creatine supplement that I an absolutely certain was laced with steroids. After many, many years of high-level training, when I should have been past my prime, I had this unbelievable surge in strength, lean body mass, and attitude, in no time at all. It didn't take me long before I realized that something was strange, so I stopped taking--but the gains from that single, small bottle of "creatine monohydrate" made me feel totally invincible. I would go into the weight room and set a new record in bench, EVERY SINGLE TIME.

More to the point, I went into every workout KNOWING that I would set a new bench record. Given your experience with athletes, I know you understand how ridiculous that is--but it is also true. I attribute it to a drug high. I never verified that there were any steroids in that bottle of white powder, but I had never experienced that kind of high, either before or since. Total invincibility, total command of the situation.

When we talk about "physiologic limits", I believe that we are normally talking about points that if exceeded result in injury. But what if the injury after those points can be managed successfully, and minimized? Then the physiologic limit goes up, if only for a short time--enough to get in an injury-producing performance, after which you recover--quickly, if you are using the right PED.

In my opinion, is the drug high that permits an athlete to exceed that injury threshold, and to expand the absolute envelope. Some of this can be trained through excellent training and attitude, and a normal elite will exhibit some injury, even if only microscopic, after a huge effort--but I don't think that such ability comes even close to what the right drugs can do to your psychological state.

Again, I don't know if the steroid experience is in any way like the EPO experience regarding psychoactive effects, and I don't even know if I personally experienced anything attributable to steroids. What I DO know is what I have seen in the world of elite sprinting over many decades, which is that steroids and similar drugs increase the absolute maximum potential of drugged athletes well beyond the absolute maximum potential of any clean athlete, at any point in history.

Do you two have any thoughts about potential psychoactive effects of EPO, or of endurance athletes using also steroids or similar compounds?

'No, he doesn´t. To be qualified from the heats, to the semi-final and be in the final and to be able to win the olympics ? Of course that this runner is Rashid Ramzi. Take a list from the all the middle to long distance runners were caught with drug and see if they did drug s to attempt performance enhance or if they did drugs with the main target to win or best classification in one/several events. Think about Mohamed Mourith for example. Winner of 2 world cross country champs. Does he took drugs on that champs to get a new pb in cross country ( ?) or to win events ???'

The difference with the guys you mentioned is that they were not born at altitude

I think what Renato is alluding to is that for top athletes born at and training at altitude EPO is not going to help. Until recently this was born out by elite athletes failing dope tests. They tended not to be born at altitude

Recently there have been more East Africans failing tests than before but still nobody on the level of Ramzi winning championships

What will the tests coming out now reveal though?

...and one more thing. Even if EPO has little or no effect on elite altitude born athletes, do they think that? If they think it will make them faster they may still take it

Would also be interested to know what these top coaches think of El G who was not born at altitude?

I've come more and more to believe that what ukathletics coach believes is more of the heart of the matter. It may be that for athletes at the very top (and altitude born and trained, etc., really any caveats you want to put here) that EPO offers very diminishing returns. Maybe, but there is no way to prove that at present.

However, that doesn't mean the athletes believe that or that they are not doping. If they are doping then it is irrelevant if they are being helped or not.

p.s.--

I'm not talking about the kind of "invincibility" that Nick Willis was talking about on yesterday's homepage, the kind of invincibility we have all felt at some point because of good training and fitness--I'm talking about the kind of invincibility where you don't just feel great, but you have the physiology to back it up, and you KNOW that you will do something you have never done before.

There is a sense of certainty, a sort of out-of-body experience, a sense of total command, not only of yourself, but of the very situation you are in, of everything around you.

Imagine anybody who, after they have been training a long time, go out and set a new 1500m PR every single time they do it in a workout, every third day, and who KNOW that they will set it, every single time, for a month.

Alptekin has apparently tested positive for EPO, and Bulut is now under suspicion. Another poster posted how rapid their rise in ability was, also how rapid Makhloufi's was--this is EXACTLY the kind of phenomenon I'm talking about. Total command, not only of yourself, but of the entire situation. After a month or so of continuous and inexplicable gains, knowing when the chips are down that you will be able to do what it takes to either set a new PR, or to beat whatever competition is at hand.

Both Makhloufi and Alptekin set 1500m PR's in 2012, and both won Olympic 1500m gold. As you know, the 1500m is often a tactical race, with athletes only doing as much as they need to to win.

That is the sense of command I'm talking about, and for Alptekin at least, it seems that it came from EPO, unless she was on hormones as well.

Sprintgeezer, there is a fundamental dfifference between steroids and EPO. The difference is that without EPO a well trained top athlete can increase of 25% his total blood volume, with EPO this is not possible because the increase of viscosity.

Instead, when we speak about steroids, there are not "controindications" in the normal physiological activity, so their assumption provokes a summation of effects.

I never said EPO doesn't help athletes. I'm sure Mourhit, Boulami, Ramzi, Selsouli, Turkish 1500 runners, many Russian specialist, could have advantages taking EPO.

What I say (and I think I was clear in what my thought is) is that DOESN'T HELP A PARTICULAR TYPE OF ATHLETES, HAVING THE FOLLOWING REQUISITES :

a) born, living and training in altitude

b) top aerobic and biomechanical qualities

c) great tissular elasticity

d) hard and correct training

And, Antonio, about Mouhrit,for example, he won twice WCCCh, but also bettered the European Record of 3000, 5000 and 10000m, so was able to use during two years, all around, the benefit of doping ; and Boulami took EPO in order to beat in Zurich the WR of steeple.

About Boulami, I have an anecdote.

2002, in Tunis, we are there for the African Championships, and I'm with Stephen Cherono (not yet Shaheen) and Wilson Boit Kipketer, my athletes at that time. They went for warm-up, after some minute came to me saying "There is something strange with Boulami. We found one syringe in the dressing room, and he was joined by a doctor from Belgium. The guy is taking something not legal".

Boulami won African Championships, but of course his doping was not for that competition. About 10 days later, he destroyed the WR of steeple in Zurich, running alone the second half. What was strange is that the day BEFORE Zurich there was a test taking also blood, while the official doping control AFTER the record was with urines only. This fact provokes polemics from Boulami group, since they wanted the record valid, according to the specific control, following the rules at that time.

Only after that affair, IAAF decided to have a full test with blood and urine in case of all the WR in endurance (from 800 till Marathon).

About the Chinese records in 1993, you have reason. I thought the records could be clean, for a very simple reason : I had an athlete as Maura Viceconte, running 10000m in 31'05" in 2000 after her Italian Record in Marathon (2:23:47), with a basic speed of 4'26" in 1500m.

During the famous National Games 1993, when every day there was some WR, looking at 10000m, the 3rd athlete in the race ran slower than Maura. For me, the possibility of selecting the best runners in a Country of 1 and half BILLION people, putting all together for a period of 6 years, was enough for justifying a CLEAN record of that level. If a Country as Norway, where it was not possible because there were only 2 athletes (Ingrid Kristiansen and Grete Waitz) and the 3rd ran 35', was able to produce the to organise competitions for women only in long distances, number one in 10000m and the number one in Marathon, I couldn't be surprised if China could produce a lot of WR having a so wide base.

But last December I was in China making a course for Asian coaches, and when I asked why Chinese athletes at the moment run so slowly, some national coach answered "In 1993 they were all doped", so I needed to accept the reality. However, how much can be the improvement in case of doping ? So, how much 8'06" in 3000m can change without doping ? 8'15", 8'20" ? But now their best athletes run 9'15" !

What happened in China, during the last years, is :

1. All coaches involved in Doping were fired, but they were the only coaches having some methodological knowledge, doping apart

2. After this, the current coaching level is very low

3. Chineses are completely clean (and the results show this very well...), also because in China now there is a penal law very tough in case of dopers (coaches, doctors, officials).

At the end of every discussion, don't think I believe doping don't work, and a lot of times I already explained it. The fact I continue to say I think EPO doesn't work with particular selected people, is because this people belongs to two Countries only (Kenya and Ethiopia), that are continuously attacked without any real evidence, and the doping of few people NOT STRONG becomes, for many, THE RULE FOR EVERY TOP ATHLETE IN THE WORLD.

I'll continue to refuse this unfair position, not supported by ANY SCIENTIFIC PROOF.