Move over EPO, there's a new guy in town: H7379

casual obsever wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

Can't be bothered to waste my time in addressing each of those 'opinions' in turn, but Coe has never defended convicted cheaters.

Incorrect. See Salazar.

"can't be bothered", lol. Defending that cheat is what you are here for, isn't it?

Deanouk wrote:

Cheating on his wife is none of our business

Agreed - but thank you for agreeing that Coe is a cheater.

Deanouk wrote:

There is no evidence that Coe was aware of the bribery, cover up of Russia's behaviour or other corruption Diack was involved in, when he took over.

Also incorrect. See the various emails, texts and phone calls. Unless you believe that he didn't read them and misheard on the phone.

I still don't see anything in your long list that suggests that Coe actually doped, beyond some general statements that many people doped at that time, and generally testing was bad. Using this logic, we can argue everyone doped, and there is no reason to single out Coe.

In 2015, here is how Coe defended Salazar:

"It's for Alberto now to defend himself"

"I'm not supporting him. I'm just saying that I have no way of knowing the voracity (sic) of what's been said, but I do know Alberto and I'm sure he will mount a stout defence"

In 2019, here's how Coe stood by Salazar:

"IAAF President Coe says athletes must 'sever relationships' with banned Salazar"

"A banned coach has to sever relationships with those athletes,"

Regarding Diack, Coe eventually received information from David Bedford, and forwarded emails to the Ethics Commission's investigators. It's not clear even then, to what extent Coe was aware of any specific details such as Diack's direct involvement, the unofficial structure for Russian enforcement, and the bribery and extortion attempts. Like you said, we have to resort to believing he read the mails, rather than his duty of forwarding them to an on-going ethics investigation.

It was between 88 and 91 when EPO debuted in professional cycling

It's simply not possible that Aouita somehow had it in 83

Well...two out of those five are confirmed; Laâlou - a 2 time loser (EP0 & a masking agent), and of course, Ramzi, one of the biggest catches of all time with that IC CERA positive @ Beijing. Now when you look at Morocco's top 7 all-time fastest 1500 men, four(4) have been busted for doping! (3 EPOs & 1 ABP hematological anomalies case). That's huge and a reasonable thinking person would have to conclude that the other 3, including El G, would more than likely be doping (El G's training partner & pacer, was also busted for EPO. Lol).

Perhaps more reading on the culture of doping in Morocco might instill a more pragmatic understanding of how doping was an integral part of their athletics:

"Hall of Fame, Hall of Shame"

"Morocco is a country with a long running tradition that has produced great stars in the history of medium and long distance competitions. Said Aouita dominated the 1980s at all distances between 800 and 5000 meters. He is the only athlete to have won Olympic medals on both courses. Nawal El Moutawakel became Olympic champion over 400 hurdles in 1984 - as the first African and first Muslim woman to win gold at the Games and thus was even promoted later to become a member of the International Olympic Committee. And last but not least: Hicham El Guerrouj, whose world record in Rome in 1998 has lasted over 1500 metres until today. Even more striking, however, is the fact that the country in North Africa also looks back on a long era of convicted sports fraudsters - almost like Kenya or Russia."

"The Royal Moroccan Athletics Federation is based right next to the largest stadium in the capital, Rabat, where the Diamond League Meeting, currently the most important athletics event on the African continent, takes place every year. Right in the entrance area of the association's headquarters, champions are honoured, including those who have been blown out for fraud. One example: Amine Laalou - once one of the best in the world over the 800 and 1500 meters: now with multiple doping convictions. The man, who was banned from all sports activities for eight years, now works as a junior trainer, reports an informant. In an interview, Laalou confirms this, saying that this should not be made public because he would then lose his job."

"Frustration of the sports investigators"

The examination of the consequences brings amazing revelations to light: The doping dealer, whose home was once searched, doping substances seized, is to be still attained under the same telephone number and describes open-heartedly, problems with the police he got none. The pharmacy in the highlands around Ifrane, a popular training area for runners from many countries, sells the endurance doping drug EPO without a prescription on demand."

"Without much digression, sports investigators complain that after passing on information to Morocco they never get any feedback as to whether the authorities in the monarchy are prosecuting the cases at all: It is as if everything disappears into a black hole."

Doped to the Max wrote:

Well...two out of those five are confirmed; Laâlou - a 2 time loser (EP0 & a masking agent), and of course, Ramzi, one of the biggest catches of all time with that IC CERA positive @ Beijing. Now when you look at Morocco's top 7 all-time fastest 1500 men, four(4) have been busted for doping! (3 EPOs & 1 ABP hematological anomalies case). That's huge and a reasonable thinking person would have to conclude that the other 3, including El G, would more than likely be doping (El G's training partner & pacer, was also busted for EPO. Lol).

Perhaps more reading on the culture of doping in Morocco might instill a more pragmatic understanding of how doping was an integral part of their athletics.

Reading on the culture of doping and how doping was an integral part of athletics would be like reading the bible. I already know the belief in doping is strong in Morocco.

But even assuming everything you said for the sake of argument, including assuming 7 for 7 Moroccans doped with the full stack, it would remain an unproven assumption that EPO has caused, or even can cause, these improvements at this level for the men in the 1500m.

7 out of the top 7 "examples" is not proof of effect, because it is not possible to construct a proof by example, even 7 examples. It is also not possible to prove effect, without estimating effect with controlled observations.

You seem completely incapable of realizing that your prolific use of emotional buzzwords and repetition of the same fallacies that fail every time are simply not enough to move beyond this unproven assumption.

Coevett wrote:

Just checking to see if I was banned.

Standards did rise in the mid to late eighties. Yo had guys like Gonzales and Abascal all making big jumps in their late 20's as well as the ability to suddenly perform equally well at 5000m.

Part of that was probably due to HGH becoming widely available in 83, which of course Aouita led the way in.

You have the history of EPO wrong. Cyclists and speed skaters were using it by 88. Aouita had a Belgian doctor named Georges Mouton who was later arrested for supplying EPO to dozens of cyclists and Moroccoan runners.

The history of EPO use in sport is very interesting but whenever I try to create a thread on it, the mods delete it.

I have always assumed that EPO use was first identified in cycling in the late 80’s, as you suggest. It have read in numerous articles that it didn’t appear in distance running until the early/mid 90’s. Of course, that’s not a fact, and maybe it was being used by a few athletes earlier. I just think that 83 is too early.

casual obsever wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

Can't be bothered to waste my time in addressing each of those 'opinions' in turn, but Coe has never defended convicted cheaters.

Incorrect. See Salazar.

"can't be bothered", lol. Defending that cheat is what you are here for, isn't it?

Deanouk wrote:

Cheating on his wife is none of our business

Agreed - but thank you for agreeing that Coe is a cheater.

Deanouk wrote:

There is no evidence that Coe was aware of the bribery, cover up of Russia's behaviour or other corruption Diack was involved in, when he took over.

Also incorrect. See the various emails, texts and phone calls. Unless you believe that he didn't read them and misheard on the phone.

No, he supported Salazar initially, basically taking the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ stance, which shouldn’t be an alien concept to you!? He took swift action to kick Salazar out of the World Champs when the inquiry found him guilty of various ‘grey’ areas.

It was early to mid 90s when the new super generation of African distance runners emerged

The suspicion is that EPO appeared in cycling first then track

just sayin wrote:

It was early to mid 90s when the new super generation of African distance runners emerged

The suspicion is that EPO appeared in cycling first then track

This^

Suddenly times and records were falling fast, and people were running the second half of the 10,000m as fast as the old WR for the 5000m. That's when I knew something was up.

'grey' areas? LOL - keep telling yourself that. He was convicted for three anti-doping rule violations, one with a minimum ban of two years, and two with a minimum ban of four years. Tampering, trafficking with testo, and administering a forbidden method isn't grey, it's outright black - which is exactly why he was banned. There is still hope that CAS sides a bit more with USADA who initially decided on a life-time ban than the American panel who gave out the shortest ban possible.

In any case, here's a different description of Coe's attitude in that context:

rekrunner wrote:

You seem completely incapable of realizing that your prolific use of emotional buzzwords and repetition of the same fallacies that fail every time are simply not enough to move beyond this unproven assumption.

You should look at yourself every morning in the mirror and repeat this three times.

just sayin wrote:

It was between 88 and 91 when EPO debuted in professional cycling

It's simply not possible that Aouita somehow had it in 83

Of course not. It was autologous transfusions.

Dope Hardstrong wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

You seem completely incapable of realizing that your prolific use of emotional buzzwords and repetition of the same fallacies that fail every time are simply not enough to move beyond this unproven assumption.

You should look at yourself every morning in the mirror and repeat this three times.

I could, but this will not turn the assumptions and fallacies of others into proofs.

Initially you said "his defending of other cheaters" and giving Salazar as an example.

Did you have something else in mind? Because in this opinion piece, Coe did not defend Salazar, but the athletes who won medals under Salazar.

Salazar's prosecutor, Tygart, similarly defended NOP athletes.

rekrunner wrote:

Initially you said "his defending of other cheaters" and giving Salazar as an example.

Did you have something else in mind? Because in this opinion piece, Coe did not defend Salazar, but the athletes who won medals under Salazar.

Context! Deanouk had already - quite correctly, I might add - admitted to Coe defending Drug Cheat Salazar*, so I moved on instead of needlessly proving my point.

*He thinks it was fine because then Salazar wasn't convicted yet, while the evidence was known. A bit like for example defending Kiprop after his positive test but before his conviction, for example. I would never defend such people, but Deanouk and you see that differently, I know.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Initially you said "his defending of other cheaters" and giving Salazar as an example.

Did you have something else in mind? Because in this opinion piece, Coe did not defend Salazar, but the athletes who won medals under Salazar.

Context! Deanouk had already - quite correctly, I might add - admitted to Coe defending Drug Cheat Salazar*, so I moved on instead of needlessly proving my point.

*He thinks it was fine because then Salazar wasn't convicted yet, while the evidence was known. A bit like for example defending Kiprop after his positive test but before his conviction, for example. I would never defend such people, but Deanouk and you see that differently, I know.

The way you use the words "cheat" and "defense" somehow make them lose their meaning.

I guess what is confusing me is that the timeline is all screwed up. I guess you mean he cheated in 1991, or maybe cheated on his wife, and in 2019, he was convicted, not of these previous instances of cheating, but of other violations -- are you also calling these violations "cheating"?

DeanoUK said "innocent until proven guilty", which isn't really a defense, but more like a legal principle.

You said it was "quite correct", but I'm not so sure Coe even went that far with Salazar. Did Coe defend Salazar? Do you have an example? I couldn't find any evidence of any defense.

In 2015, after the BBC/Panorama accusations, Coe said:

"It's for Alberto now to defend himself"

"I'm not supporting him."

In 2019, after the verdict:

"IAAF President Coe says athletes must 'sever relationships' with banned Salazar"

"A banned coach has to sever relationships with those athletes,"

Classic LRC thread that gets completely derailed into irrelevant name-calling and debate about (a) trampoline effect of now widely available shoes (b) the cleanliness of athletes racing 40 years ago and (c) Jama Aden.

I think it's interesting to consider that there have been no real advancements in doping since like 1990 -- it's all been edging around the testing with less benefit than in the past. This supposed advance sounds no better than the OG blood doping, if I'm reading it correctly, and they still have to microdose.

Rather than focusing on new chemicals, we need to realize that most superathletes are just benefiting from corruption in the testing apparatus/state involvement at this point. If the new drugs are worse than the old drugs, than athletes who can dope with the old drugs have an advantage.

Dont blame newfangled chemicals and doping schemes for what can be perfectly explained by old fashioned graft and corruption.