The Ingebrigtsen's prove that the East African 'natural born runner' superiority is a myth. Here's why.

Given the fact that testing only catches 1% of dopers and the ABP only moderates blood doping, not eradicating it. The fact that Mikhou and Bensghir were busted pretty much writes off the entire list ⤴doing similar times. One has to wonder if there was ever any real running talent in that country or just copious amounts of drugs?

Coevett wrote:

Yes I'm fully aware you've been trying to get me banned Observski.

Incorrect.

Coevett wrote:

You claim to be anti-doping in athletics, and appear to spend your time 24/7 on this board constantly shouting that everybody is doped to the gills and it's impossible to be elite without being so.

Three more lies.

Coevett wrote:

You're the only person who claims to be 'anti-doping' rather than a doping apologist who is calling for me to be banned.

Another lie.

This is pointless.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Given the fact that testing only catches 1% of dopers and the ABP only moderates blood doping, not eradicating it. The fact that Mikhou and Bensghir were busted pretty much writes off the entire list ⤴doing similar times. One has to wonder if there was ever any real running talent in that country or just copious amounts of drugs?

There were running talents with copious amounts of drugs, hence the world records for example. Without talent, no world record.

Subway Surfers wrote:

0000000lllllll wrote:

He is right. Coevett is a liar and proven racist. And you are either him or as much of a liar as he is.

You two keep harassing that guy for nothing.

And yes brojos, check my IP and no, I am not ex-runner.

I am someone who despises the cyber-bullying you two do on a daily basis.

Gosh you're immature ex runner.

You are calling everyone "ex runner", you are even too lazy to add the "-", you are addicted to Subway Surfers, and I am the one who is immature? OK then.

ex-runner never said he doped. This is your fabrication from the beginning.

I am not anyone's supporter here but you know, just like you I don't like threads getting rekrunnered, but I also don't like threads getting Coevetted. blah blah you don't agree with me you are a doping apologist, blah blah receding hairlines and HGH from childhood, blah blah you are Ex Runnnner, Ex-Runner, ex runnr, whatever wrong spelling you can muster. Always the same crap. It's like ventolin all over again.

We know your points. We can talk about your points, but just stop this idiotic thing of calling people Marxists, and doping apologists, and paid trolls, and lying about what people say.

I would like to have the good message boards of 15 years ago back.

Now you will call me a doping apologist, say hi Ex-Runner, or whatever... sigh

I Run sub 1:50 wrote:

Serious question for Ex-Runner - did you dope? Can you categorically say whether you did or did not? I don't know if I believe this guy accusing you of explicitly admitting to it, but I have read you a couple of times and it seems to me that it is fair to interpret your claims about doping to mean that you yourself doped as a UK middle-distance runner.

Do you have any real experience or knowledge that other guys in the UK were doping? If you believe others were doping but not you, why do you appear to have such a casual attitude towards doping in the sport?

An example above. Everybody knows it's you, Coevett. There you go with "Ex-Runner" again.

And you run 1:50 in the 500?

I was actually quite interested in your sub60 quest. That was something I would enjoy seeing you talk about.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Given the fact that testing only catches 1% of dopers and the ABP only moderates blood doping, not eradicating it. The fact that Mikhou and Bensghir were busted pretty much writes off the entire list ⤴doing similar times. One has to wonder if there was ever any real running talent in that country or just copious amounts of drugs?

Let's talk for a moment about your "given fact":

This "1%" comes from WADA reports where 1-2% of samples tested produce a positive result, across all WADA sports, both Olympic and Paralympic.

This is not the same as percentage of "dopers caught", in elite distance running.

We know the positive test rate is low, for many reasons, but one mitigation is to take more samples: when 1 single athlete may give dozens, or hundreds, of samples over his/her career, the chances of a serial doper getting caught increases. It's not perfect, but also not likely 1-2%.

From other techniques we have seen much higher estimates of doping prevalence. A 40% prevalence estimate would predict 2 out of 5 dopers.

I found an interesting paper which reviews various techniques for estimating the size of the doping problem: 1) WADA test results, 2) IAAF biological approach, 3) Survey approach, 4) Doping from Performance, and 5) "Ego" documents (e.g. autobiographies)

I'll leave you with some quotes about the dangers of suspecting doping from performance.

"It is tempting to attribute outstanding performances to the alleged use of doping. The main problem with such a line of thinking is that the athlete will always lose in any such discussion: no matter how much he trains without the use of any prohibited substance, as soon as he excels he is, by default, a doping suspect. The essence of sport is to excel, and if excelling becomes synonymous with suspicions of cheating, each and every sport performance turns into an attack on the essence of sport itself. If such reasoning persists, this will seriously jeopardise the credibility of sport."

"It can be concluded that, on the basis of performances alone, an individual assessment on possible doping is simply not possible, and, in addition, any attempt to try to do this will violate the essence of sport. Linking extraordinary athletic performances to doping use is highly insulting to clean champions. Both scientifically and morally it is not recommended to try and link performance levels to doping use; at best performances can be used to identify general influences of anti-doping measures on the entire population of elite athletes."

Reference:

Prevalence of Doping Use in Elite Sports: A Review of Numbers and Methods

Olivier de Hon • Harm Kuipers • Maarten van Bottenburg

Sports Med (2015) 45:57–69 DOI 10.1007/s40279-014-0247-x

Downloadable PDF can be found here:

Firstly, you can't assume that increased testing of those whom you might consider "serial dopers" will yield more positives than the so far recorded 1-2%; Marion Jones and Lance Armstrong underwent hundreds of tests without testing positive. Then as now, testing lags behind doping. It is one of the reasons that estimates of actual doping are far higher than recorded positives.

The quoted extract is correct, when it says that accusations of doping for merely excelling discredits the sport as well as the individual athlete concerned. But it somewhat misses the point. The prevalence of doping is such that it renders all outstanding performance suspicious - regrettable as that may be. The reasons for that are 1. doping enhances performance (the extent of that is variable but as a general effect it is no longer questionable, in my view), 2. most doping remains undetectable still, 3. the estimated extent of it, as a billion dollar black market industry, and the observable history of its use, suggests it is likely being used by the very best athletes, with the further logic that elites of near equal ability will lose to their competitors if they don't avail themselves of the same advantage, which includes doping. Added to that is the reality, that to train and compete as hard as athletes are now required to do today - and to maintain their careers into their 30's and even 40's - makes doping a virtual necessity in modern professional sport. Thus it becomes impossible to distinguish the clean performance from the doped performance - particularly at the highest level.

But to acknowledge this openly damages the credibility of the sport amongst the wider public - as the writer observes (which is why sports governance bodies are so concerned to give the appearance that they are eradicating the practice. But it is window-dressing).

My own view is that the sporting world is increasingly divided into those such as professional athletes who regard doping as a necessity, and those - mainly fans - who want to maintain the idealistic and outdated fantasy that their sport and their heroes are clean.

No kidding the positive test rate is low - it's too easy to cheat! (haven't you been keeping up with the latest research in this area?). I think the prevalence is very high - these are professional athletes. They're paid to win - sponsors expect results. If they're not performing up to expectations the are many others waiting for their chance. It's a pressure cooker for professional runners to perform well - mediocre results aren't going to cut it when there are so many athletes wanting for a chance at the big stage. Where there's $$$ in sports there's cheating - always has been and always will be.

Remember this study where acute hyperhydration significantly reduces ABP OFF-hr and reduces ABP sensitivity:

I think the open thread is something not rational, and, for me, also a little stupid.

Starting from PARTICULARS (or exceptions) for demonstrating something GENERAL, is always a big mistake, and something without any base.

If some black African runs fast, this is a fact not connected with what European are able to do.

If some white European (or American) runs fast, this is a fact not connected with what Africans are able to do.

Talent is something PERSONAL and INDIVIDUAL. The history of athletics always showed that in any Country some talent can born, It's what happens LATER that can make the difference.

Some name ? For example, the heptathlete GHADA SHOUAA from Syria, number 8 all time with 6942 point ia a Country without any tradition and athletic culture, World Champion in 1995 and Olympic Champion in 1996 (she, of course, didn't train in Syria). Or, remaining in Kenya, Julius Yego, javelin world champion in 2015 and still number 5 all time with 92.72 in a Country without any tradition for throwers. Or, going to another sport, the current World and Olympic Champion of 100m freestyle for Women, the Afro-American Simone Manuel, able to win all the Championships from 2016, in spite of the common belief that black people never could become good swimmers for genetic and morphological reasons (the real reason is that in Africa there were not pools enough, and in US Black people were not admitted in the pools till few years ago...).

So, to say that the results of Ingebrigtsen show that the superiority of African runners is a myth is something not true, and totally useless. This can only prove that THE INGEBRIGTSEN can run at the same level of the best African runners.

But also to say that African runners are stronger than european or american runners for genetic reason is something not true. It's correct to say that African runners are "generally" stronger than white runners, because this is what the statistics can show, and numbers don't lie ; but the reason of this FACT is not genetic, but depends on other factors.

In Kenya and Ethiopia, ALL young people having some talent for running try to do this activity hoping to become professional and to change their lives. Practically no one, among the "fishes" having top talent, stay out of the net when fishermen go to recruit runners.

In Europe, America and Oceania, probably less than 1 talent every 1000 talents has interest in running, looking at other sports, or other activities.

You speak about doping : it exists, but to explain the current African superiority (as quantity at high level) with this is simply the explanation of people not knowing anything about the African activity, and obfuscated by the campaign that newspapers do, from many years, about African doping.

I repeat, this doping exists, but the most part of top athletes are clean. They are the first paying for the doping of athletes of second level, and pay even more when another top is caught (Jeptoo, Sumgong, Asbel Kiprop, Abraham Kiptum...).

The fact, acclarated, that these athletes used doping for their performances, doesn't mean that other athletes were not clean, and/or that the performances of doped athletes could not be the same if they had a different approach of their training and their mentality.

If you want to understand the real reasons of the superiority AS NUMBERS OF ELITE RUNNERS, you have to look at the competitions of cross Country in Kenya. For example, in the first seasonal cross (normally around half of October in Ndalat) there are MORE THAN 3000 RUNNERS, starting with a competition of 400m for children under 6 years of age,

This means that, in one Cross Country, in Kenya there are more runners that in all Europe, in all the season.

Not always the results are due to pure talent. Ambience, enviroment, mentality, tradition are at the base of the recruitment, and when there is some involution in these parameters (like currently in Italy, or in US from 1985 till 2005, or in UK in the era post Coe/Cram/Ovett, when there was the idea to reduce the volume till the ridiculous year 2003 when the best marathoner of UK was a woman...) the results can't be the same.

Now, US and UK live a new era of right mentality, and of course white runners can again produce top results.

Look at marathon : how many athletes in Europe were able to run under 2:10:00 ?

2005 : 14

2006 : 6

2007 : 4

2008 : 3

2009 : 2

2010 : 1

2011 : 5

2012 : 5

2013 : 4

2014 : 6

2015 : 3

2016 : 2

2017 : 4

2018 : 4

2019 : 13

This means that, in 2019, we are again at the same level of 2005, after years of WRONG MENTALITY that considered normal performances as something possible for African only.

The European Record of Sondre Moen in 2017 (2:05:48) from an athlete who always was in the medium international level, changed the minds of many Europeans, and this year we can see the fruits. Or do you think that now the European marathoners have found a better doping, when till 2018 they used water and bread ?

So, please, stop to think that the performances of somebody can reflect a GENERAL situation.

If you run fast, you are strong (European, American, African).

If you are not able, you are weak (European, American, African).

Start to look at the INDIVIDUALS, instead thinking to GENERALIZE facts that are strictly connected with the SPECIFIC situation.

In athletics, there are not young or old , white or black talents : there STRONG individuals, and WEAK individuals.

And, among the STRONG individuals, the professionalism about life and training makes the difference.

I Run sub 1:50 wrote:

Serious question for Ex-Runner - did you dope? Can you categorically say whether you did or did not? I don't know if I believe this guy accusing you of explicitly admitting to it, but I have read you a couple of times and it seems to me that it is fair to interpret your claims about doping to mean that you yourself doped as a UK middle-distance runner.

Do you have any real experience or knowledge that other guys in the UK were doping? If you believe others were doping but not you, why do you appear to have such a casual attitude towards doping in the sport?

You really should try to hide yourself little bit better, Coevette.

Which claims of Ex-runner lead to the conclusion that he is some ex-doper? I know you can't give a serious reply, but just a try!

My mistake Laâlou - you're right, he ran 3:29 post - ABP. He also ran his 800 PB and Moroccan NR (1:43.25) in 06. And Laâlou is a 2-time loser; testing positive for Furosemide at the London Olympics and an OOC positive for EPO in 2016. He's eligible to come back in 2024 and if he decides to compete, I wonder what the over/under would be for a 3rd doping violation? ?

I would disgaree with the Moroccan glory days ending with El G's retirement in 04. You forget Ramzi went crazy at the 05 WC winning double-gold clobbering world class fields in both events and his running his 800 PB (remember the IAAF report on his Off-scores of 157.8 & 148? Yikes!). In addition, his sidekick Adil Kaouch got the silver in the 1500 (and he later tested positive for EPO in 07. Lol).

Then at the 07 WC, Ramzi grabbed a silver in the 15 narrowly losing to Bernie. And of course, the Grand Daddy of them all: Ramzi's full-throttle CERA fueled Olympic gold medal performance at Beijing.

So, that's five Olympic/WC medals after El G's retirement accomplished in a short 3 yr period before the ABP (2005 -08), while Morocco has only been able to muster 2 Oly/WC medals post-ABP (Iguider: two bronze). I'd say things have gone south for Morocco post-ABP.

Not only can you, you should assume that subsequent tests would eventually catch more and more dopers. Exceptions like Lance Armstrong and Marion Jones would exist, but generally, many others would eventually get caught. In any case, both Armstrong and Jones tested positive. Not only does it not miss the point, that is exactly the point. While you find it regrettable and attempt to rationalize it, I find it all the things the authors said: unscientific, immoral, an attack on the essence of the sport, insulting to clean athletes, and jeopardizing the credibility of the sport. Undeniably, some athletes are doping and that is ruining the sport, but "fans" like you are making it worse, when you point the finger at distance runners, like Ingebrigtsen and East Africans, and say "because Armstrong, because Jones", or bring up "black market" figures which surely combine Olympic sports, non-Olympic sports, elites, pros, amateurs, non-athletes, etc. It is not interesting for the sport of distance running how many local gym-rats are pumping themselves up.

0000000lllllllI wrote:

ex-runner never said he doped. This is your fabrication from the beginning.

I am not anyone's supporter here but you know, just like you I don't like threads getting rekrunnered, but I also don't like threads getting Coevetted. blah blah you don't agree with me you are a doping apologist, blah blah receding hairlines and HGH from childhood, blah blah you are Ex Runnnner, Ex-Runner, ex runnr, whatever wrong spelling you can muster. Always the same crap. It's like ventolin all over again.

We know your points. We can talk about your points, but just stop this idiotic thing of calling people Marxists, and doping apologists, and paid trolls, and lying about what people say.

I would like to have the good message boards of 15 years ago back.

Now you will call me a doping apologist, say hi Ex-Runner, or whatever... sigh

I've never said I'm a racist, in fact I've always categorically denied it. Apparently, some people allege I'm a racist on account of my statements here. Ex Doper has never said explicitly he's a doper, but he's still yet to categorically deny it. See how he wont reply to the request for clarification above. And any person of average intelligence and honesty would interpret his language as an admission of doping. He's stated several times his belief that virtually everybody dopes, including in the UK, or at least 'when they get the opportunity'. He's claimed that Anthony Whiteman is doping when he competes in the BMC meets as there is no testing. Yet he claims that he himself has been a UK sub-elite and presumably a regular at those BMC meets himself. Again, maybe you're an idiot or just being obstinate, but any fool can correctly see that ex-doper's statements here imply he himself he was indeed a doper. His general attitude to doping is not consistent with somebody who believes most of his rivals were doping, but he himself stayed clean.

The fact that you were a huge fan of athletics 15 years ago says it all.

I have no problem at all being hated by doping apologists such as yourself and ex-doper.

BTW, you claim to have been a member of this board since 2004, yet you're using an apparently newly registered account.

It's amazing that nearly all of ex-doper's supporters are either unregistered or newly registered and claiming to be old-timers. Oh, and Casual Observski. But then again he supports hardcore perverted psychopaths, so I'm not sure even ex-doper would want to be on his team.

So when you said 4 "EPO-era" to 1 "post ABP", it was really 1 "pre EPO-era", 2 "EPO era" and 2 "post ABP". I didn't forget Ramzi, but just don't consider him in the same class as other Moroccans before him, like Aouita and El Guerrouj, and more comparable to the post-ABP athletes like Laâlou and Iguider.

The magic has faded out wrote:

My mistake Laâlou - you're right, he ran 3:29 post - ABP. He also ran his 800 PB and Moroccan NR (1:43.25) in 06. And Laâlou is a 2-time loser; testing positive for Furosemide at the London Olympics and an OOC positive for EPO in 2016. He's eligible to come back in 2024 and if he decides to compete, I wonder what the over/under would be for a 3rd doping violation? ?

I would disgaree with the Moroccan glory days ending with El G's retirement in 04. You forget Ramzi went crazy at the 05 WC winning double-gold clobbering world class fields in both events and his running his 800 PB (remember the IAAF report on his Off-scores of 157.8 & 148? Yikes!). In addition, his sidekick Adil Kaouch got the silver in the 1500 (and he later tested positive for EPO in 07. Lol).

Then at the 07 WC, Ramzi grabbed a silver in the 15 narrowly losing to Bernie. And of course, the Grand Daddy of them all: Ramzi's full-throttle CERA fueled Olympic gold medal performance at Beijing.

So, that's five Olympic/WC medals after El G's retirement accomplished in a short 3 yr period before the ABP (2005 -08), while Morocco has only been able to muster 2 Oly/WC medals post-ABP (Iguider: two bronze). I'd say things have gone south for Morocco post-ABP.[/quote]

You are the only person saying ex-runner admitted he doped. Lots of people consider you a racist.

Any person of sub-par intelligence knows you (at least your LRC identity) are a racist.

Prove that he claimed AW is doping. You can't, right? Right.

Maybe I am an idiot. You for sure are one.

I was a huge fan of athletics 15 years ago as I was 40 years ago as I am now.

What does that matter to you?

Have you ever done anything for the good of athletics? And don't give me that BS again of bringing unique info to LRC. You use Google. Anyone can use it.

If I am a doping apologist then so are you, and you know why.

BTW, I have been a member of this board before 2004. No registered names were required then.

I registered this one. What's your problem with it?

I am as anonymous as you are.

It's amazing that you used to call people cowards for writing under different handles and yet you have written under at least three different ones on this thread.

Interesting if you could prove that casual obsever supports perverted psychopaths.

Stop coevetting threads! Even Renato says you're being stupid.

So right - 100% agreement.

rekrunner wrote:

So when you said 4 "EPO-era" to 1 "post ABP", it was really 1 "pre EPO-era", 2 "EPO era" and 2 "post ABP".

I didn't forget Ramzi, but just don't consider him in the same class as other Moroccans before him, like Aouita and El Guerrouj, and more comparable to the post-ABP athletes like Laâlou and Iguider.

You're clutching at straws there Rek, Ramzi beat El G in 2004.