Half Marathon WR holder Abraham Kiptum busted by Bio Passport!!!!!!!!

GoldenMiles wrote:

And PS, I do probably have a personal bias against Russia, and tend to be pretty cynical about them as a country as a whole, and doping in particular, so I guess we all have our biases.

GoldenMiles wrote:

And PS, I do probably have a personal bias against Russia, and tend to be pretty cynical about them as a country as a whole, and doping in particular, so I guess we all have our biases.

Hey, but that's o.k, because Russians are white, so you can 'admit' to being as 'bad' as those who point out the doping problem in Kenya, while at the same time continuing to accuse us of being racist. BTW., seems like the IAAF shares your 'bias' against Russia too.

Each time there's a new Kenyan doping bust (and they'll get more and more frequent) I think to myself - well, there's no denying now, surely even the hardcore doping apologists on LetsRun will have at least enough shame to be silent. But no (with the exception it seems of El K on this occasion), it's always the same pattern of unregistered accounts clearly mostly the same person replying to himself, claiming that it's racist to suspect Kenyans in general, while at the same time suggesting that all Western athletes are doping too (with no evidence). Then Casual Observer starts agreeing and begins quoting stuff about how 44% of Africans admitted cheating which proves that everybody since Peter Snell has had peds seeping out of their eyeballs, and that peds improve peformance by at least 3% (which I agree) to which RekRunner comes in and starts an interminable psuedo-scientific statistical discussion with him on whether EPO works, that lasts 4 weeks until the next Kenyan star to get busted and the process starts again on a new thread.

My recommendation would be the Brojos only allow registered users to comment on important threads like this. Too many doping apologists and shills can turn these threads into a perversion of what both the athletics community and the general public thinks about these constant Kenyan doping busts. They should also consider banning Rekrunner.

KIPTUM BUSTED wrote:

https://twitter.com/ChrisChavez/status/1121826960877989888

Well this changes the race for second this weekend.

Tip of the iceberg and everyone knows it. There hasn't been a clean top 30 runner from E. Africa in three decades.

Weird theory, but then again the whole Mo show has been very strange over the past few days. The robbery thing, the treadmill dumbfuckery, the supreme confidence on display... Wouldn't be surprised is something's up.

Why is Tiger still with Nike and Lance isn't? Some of these guys are too big to fail. Kiptum apparently isn't.

Coevett wrote:

Then Casual Observer starts agreeing and begins quoting stuff about how 44% of Africans admitted cheating which proves that everybody since Peter Snell has had peds seeping out of their eyeballs, and that peds improve peformance by at least 3% (which I agree) to which RekRunner comes in and starts an interminable psuedo-scientific statistical discussion with him on whether EPO works, that lasts 4 weeks until the next Kenyan star to get busted and the process starts again on a new thread.

More lies from you, what a surprise.

a) I never agreed that "all Western athletes are doping".

b) It wasn't 44% of Africans, it was 44% overall at the IAAF World championship.

c) I never said that "everybody since Peter Snell has had peds seeping out of their eyeballs"

d) "peds improve peformance by at least 3%" - almost correct, wow!

e) Rekrunner comes in etc.: unfortunately that is correct, but he tries to defend that nonsense against several posters, not just me.

Serious question: do you think it's constructive for you to lie so much? Or are you just generating click-baits for the brojos?

Too juiced to lose wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Ha! Do you recall a thread that I was arguing with Renato last year and he came out of the blue with someone I had never heard of as proof that Kenyans doing "proper training" were just superior. He claimed that some guy who was Kwemoi's training bunny, a career 3:37 suddenly gets dropped in a 10k, barely breaking 28 minutes but six months later we're supposed to believe that he legitimately could then run 58 minutes. I Bett he is dodgy as well.

Talking about this cat?

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/kenya/eric-kiptanui-311759

That's the dude, good spotting 58:42 out of nowhere. A mind bending time.

+1

bureaucratic inertia wrote:

The new LRC article has all the info.

“He tell me, ‘I don’t understand exactly what is happened because I never do nothing wrong. I don’t know how my body [reacts] to the altitude or with my training or what I eat.'”

Kiptum was notified of irregularities in his ABP on March 27 by the AIU and asked to respond with an explanation. Kiptum emailed the AIU back on April 1, writing that he did not have an explanation as he claimed not to have doped.

Why did it take them 3-4 weeks to announce, from the time we emailed them back?

They had to announce before London.

Else, when doped Kiptum gets 3rd place behind Kipchoge and Mo, what's the implication?

I appreciate the concern everyone has for me. While this post was growing overnight, I was sound asleep in my bed. Then Saturday morning, and had several errands to run with the kids. With each doping bust, it seems to only re-inforce what I always say -- the belief in doping is widespread, even apparently among 58 minute runners. If he truly doped against anti-doping rules, he should be found guilty and punished to the extent rules allow.

I got banned wrote:

Where is rek ... ?

You might never have said the literal words - "all Western athletes are doping" - but you've said similar or implied consistently over and over again, so it would concern somebody with an autistic and very literal mind to consider me a liar for that.

You've said over and over again that top athletes have to 'dope to cope', most recently in relation to Clemence Calvin, whose provisional doping suspension 'neither upset nor surprised you' (ie. any reasonable person would consider you to mean that to even break the French women's marathon record you would have to dope).

I wont answer any more of your questions until you start answering mine. I consistently give counter arguments to your positions (such as giving my reasons why I don't think Coe doped, or that sub 3:30 necessarily means doping) and you never reply.

casual obsever wrote:

Coevett wrote:

Then Casual Observer starts agreeing and begins quoting stuff about how 44% of Africans admitted cheating which proves that everybody since Peter Snell has had peds seeping out of their eyeballs, and that peds improve peformance by at least 3% (which I agree) to which RekRunner comes in and starts an interminable psuedo-scientific statistical discussion with him on whether EPO works, that lasts 4 weeks until the next Kenyan star to get busted and the process starts again on a new thread.

More lies from you, what a surprise.

b) It wasn't 44% of Africans, it was 44% overall at the IAAF World championship.

If you're going to quote a study ad nauseam to prove that everybody dopes..oh sorry, that 'you have to dope to cope', then at least understand it and get it right. The study looked at two championships, the worlds and the Pan African. The 44% figure comes from the latter, not the former, which was 'only' 29%. Given that a large number of Arab athletes were obviously at the World Championships, and the overall figure for the Worlds was a lot lower, that suggests the figure for non-arab athletes is lower still. If we assume quite reasonably that the figure for Africa as a whole is similar to that given by the Pan-Arab games, then we can conclude (if we understand basic mathematical reasoning) that the figure for non-African athletes is very much lower than 29%. And this is of course, fits in with what we are seeing and have seen as regards doping busts coming out of Africa (despite atrocious standards of testing there).

I've stated the above at least once here before, but evidently it fell on deaf ears, or maybe you don't want to hear.

I'm not going to be dragged into a time sink of constant arguments with you, I get no benefit from it, unlike you and unlike Rekrunner when he argues with you (likely both of you sharing a similar agenda). The truth is you're a liar, and more importantly, you're doing a disservice to the battle against doping in athletics. I stick to hard evidence (such as doping busts) and strong circumstantial evidence (such as Aouita's progression, or what we know about tea money testing in Kenya). I also give counterarguments against the idea that doping has always been endemic in Western countries. You don't seem to be able to set any standards when it comes to proof and weighing up evidence.

More lies, what a surprise.

Here, cited in full, is the complete Results part of the abstract (WCA: Word Championships in Athletics 2011; PAG: Pan-Arab Games 2011):

43.6% at the IAAF Word Championships, 57.1% at Pan-Arab Games, "unlikely to have overestimated".

dusty_xc wrote:

Brojos/Gualt, here's an article idea; with all these biological passport busts it would be good if you guys put together an in depth explanation of how the biological passport busts work. Do they just look for crazy increases in hemoglobin? How big a change in blood is considered enough for a provisional suspension? It would be interesting to look at what statistical analysis WADA is using to flag people, and ultimately hand out a suspension. Also, what happens if kiptum doesn't test positive for something? How long will he be suspended? Maybe an interesting article to write given how biological passport seems to be WADA's preferred method for catching cheats this year.

WADA doesn't need "crazy increases" in Hgb to suspect doping. It's based on Hgb levels & RET% which produces an OFF-score. An ABP profile is started based on an athlete's individual baseline blood values (Hgb & RET%) with upper & lower thresholds levels set specifically to the athlete's individual module. Athletes can have different baseline values (my baseline Hgb/Hct could be 15.0/45.0 while your's could be 14.0/42), so the upper & lower thresholds would be set differently in this example.

They can be flagged for either a high OFF-score or high/low RET%, or both. It's up to the IAAF anti-doping experts to determine whether or not the anomalies were caused by physiological or pathological reasons, or blood manipulation. The ABP is also used for target testing. If an athlete's defense (altitude training, dehydration, illness, etc.) at the CAS hearing is rejected by the arbitrator and the anomalies are confirmed to have resulted from blood manipulation, it's usually a 4 year ban -- same as AAF doping positive.

Dr. Ross Tucker has a good basic overview of the ABP with examples that illustrates how it works:

In addtion, a steroid module was introduced to the ABP in 2014. So, an athlete charged post-2014 for an ABP violation could be the result of steroidal anomalies instead of hematological (we would have to review the CAS hearing to get the details).

Dr. Tucker's recent post on the Kenyan doping problem:

Coevett wrote:

I've stated the above at least once here before, but evidently it fell on deaf ears, or maybe you don't want to hear.

If you would calm down, and reflect on my actual statements for a moment, you could actually realize that we agree on these key points:

1) Kenyans dope significantly more than West Europeans.

2) All current running world records come from dopers.

We disagree on the extent of doping in Western Europe, and since when the world records have been dirty. Not sure why this bothers you so much that you have to consistently attack me with your lies, but sure, keep them coming, this is letsrun after all.

I'm not going to nitpick some of the details in this reply, but I just wanted to say I appreciate your attempt at "mathematical reasoning" to show that prevalence being higher than average in one place, means that it is lower than average elsewhere. I had a similar idea, but using Russians, because their prevalence is known to be the highest. For a more complete understanding, that you don't get from quoting the abstract:https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1007%2Fs40279-017-0765-4/MediaObjects/40279_2017_765_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

As yet another E African record-holder is pinged for a doping violation I can understand the excitement it generates on these boards. But as the discussion broadens to the subject of doping generally I cannot help but think we are merely trying to estimate the extent of the submerged part of the ice-berg. Whatever that may be, an iceberg is what it is. Enormous.

We are also probably realistically beyond arguing about the colour, as it were, of the iceberg. The long history of doping has shown that it is not a racial issue as such - even though some countries have appeared to dope more than others at certain times. It's a sporting, not a cultural issue, and in sport winning is often everything. That mindset can be found anywhere and at any level. Many competitors will dope - if they can get away with it.

For those who like to pretend to themselves that the sport is fine, how would you feel if the dopers were members of a political party or government who were busted for bribery or other such corruption offences? Would you trust in the integrity of such a party or government? Yet you continue to believe in the sport.

The issues are in no way confined to running. I have just been watching a top -level professional tennis match. More unbelievable tireless power. The boat for drug-free sport has long since sailed.

trollism wrote:

Think if he comes back Ethiopian he knows that he's just setting himself up for the same humiliation.

Surely one day they'll start testing Ethiopians.

We can only hope

Isn't it a bit odd that Kiptum is busted only hours before London? The guy has supposedly put in all his training and comes to London to race and now all this comes out? If this was a scandal in a political sense, I would be very suspicious of the timing of the bust. Was it done just now for the dramatic effect? It would've been even more dramatic if they would've dragged him off the start line.

Was it done right before London because someone was worried that Kiptum might've pulled off a historic win and then it would look worse when he was busted? That makes sense. More treacherous. could he be "as innocent as all the other contenders (guilty)" but was busted to favor another runner??

Intrigue.

GoldenMiles wrote:

I am curious: to those who believe that everyone dopes, why even bother watching the sport anymore? I get that these busts can cause cynicism and negativity to invade your worldview, but, like, why even watch and support the sport anymore if you seemingly hate it so much?

I don't watch any top level distance races anymore because of the doping issue as feel I would be somehow giving exposure and money (indirectly) to what is now just organized crime. However, I do follow the doping busts as there is nothing more entertaining than seeing a cheat get busted especially when they made a ton of money from their cheating. Watching Radcliffe spin some BS stories about faulty lab equipment, dehydration and antibiotics when she was technically busted was highly amusing especially when all the excuses were debunked on these boards and all the IAAF could produce was some sort whitewash report which paradoxically confirmed the corruption within the organization. Seeing Farah and Kipchoge get busted would be the most entertaining thing to see in distance running at this moment in time. It's shame they are not as articulate as Lance Armstrong as there would be the potential for some great TV Oprah-style interviews in the aftermath ...