In the end, probably clean is the best we can go with. With Evans I did not see the telltale signs of steroid use, which was the weapon of choice in swimming. As to anything else, blood doping went back at least until the 1970s and was for a long time not considered illegal. I guess you look for patterns, significant changes in form, things like that. I remember Michelle Smith in swimming all the sudden becoming a world beater.
So do you believe Lance Armstrong's power outputs were superhuman?
Do you actually know anything about cycling?
Do you know anything about oxygen uptake?
Do you know anything about training and coaching?
astro wrote:
I have a bridge to sell you.
Look boys and girls I was a huge Armstrong fan. Bought in completely. I get it. But we know it is cheating.
Dead on astro... Covid-19 has brought doping to a new level
Woah. We have now reached the "Lance Armstrong did nothing wrong" segment of the discussion. Fascinating.
astro wrote:
Woah. We have now reached the "Lance Armstrong did nothing wrong" segment of the discussion. Fascinating.
I forgave him before he even retired. Now answer the question? Do you believe his power outputs were superhuman?
Yes. He said he was often going 80 percent just to make it seem credible.
Now let me translate your thoughts for you. What you are trying to say without fully admitting it is that you believe that Cheptegei and Gidey are doping. You are not stupid. But in that case you need to leave something open for your hero worship. So you shift to claiming that doping is not that significant a factor, that it is 90 percent them, etc. "Yes they are doping, but they still deserve most of the credit." That sort of thing.
If it makes you feel any better. Personally I thought Armstrong was the best rider of the doping era. But at least I acknowledged the reality first.
remote wrote:
Very suspicious....
Far more believable than a 20 year old overweight Norwegian running sub 3:30 in the 1500.
subelite hobbyjogger wrote:
https://youtu.be/Pr0dWz_6oEIremote wrote:
Very suspicious....
Elliott looks pretty fresh after his WR in the 1960 Olympic 1500 final.
You've posted that video before to make the same argument. Are you blind? He looked like he could barely stand at the end and almost needed another athlete to stop him from falling over. Surely you can pick a different race from before 1989 that 'proves' that distance running was dirty all along prior to 100+ East African busts despite testing only reaching minimal standards a couple of years ago? How about posting Cram breaking the mile WR in 85 again? Remember (again) to post the one on YouTube that leaves out the post race interview which clearly shows Crammy still out of breath and exhausted ten minutes after the race.
astro wrote:
I could try gibberish, because that is the only response I have seen.
Look I get it. In cycling there was this almost touching phenomenon where fans of certain riders would be convinced that everyone was doping except their hero. Contador could have results annulled, get suspended, have positive test results, be on Armstrong's team, and yet magically he was "clean". Pantani had hematocrit levels that threatened to turn his blood into sludge, still has records that a generation of dopers could not beat, but he was "clean." Etc.
Sorry but your heroes are frauds.
I showed you a picture of Gidey, obviously, without a doubt, with a grimace, in pain, in an all-out effort. And yet you claim she wasn't even winded.
So you are a liar and you are a fraud.
But keep going. I love watching the Afrophobes like you having a meltdown.
astro wrote:
Yes. He said he was ofttalk oing 80 percent just to make it seem credible.
Now let me translate your thoughts for you. What you are trying to say without fully admitting it is that you believe that Cheptegei and Gidey are doping. You are not stupid. But in that case you need to leave something open for your hero worship. So you shift to claiming that doping is not that significant a factor, that it is 90 percent them, etc. "Yes they are doping, but they still deserve most of the credit." That sort of thing. I have been
If it makes you feel any better. Personally I thought Armstrong was the best rider of the doping era. But at least I acknowledged the reality first.
What the hell are you talking about? I have no suspicion about Cheptegei or Gidey at all.
Liar and fraud are quite the projection in this context. :)
Of course not. "Wink"
to dope or not to dope wrote:
Here's the thing, the times themselves, if run say 15 +years ago, definitely indicate doping.
HOWEVER, with the new pacing tech and possibly the spikes, perhaps the tech is the equalizer between a doped distance time in 04 and a clean distance time in 2020. This is not to say for certain Gidey and Joshua are clean or the Bekele and Dibaba were doped (although Tirunesh is definitely suspect based on the EPO hotel room incident) but is just a possible explanation.
One thing to note is that men have had pacers in distance racers go very long into the race many times. A male who can run half the distance at world record pace is reasonably common, and someone who is not that rich. But women rarely have a pacer go as far as Gidey got tonight. It is exceptionally expensive to hire a world record holder to pace someone. During a regular year, organizers could not pay the steeplechase record holder Beatrice Chepkoech to do this pacing. She paced Gidey through 3000 in, 8:31.85 the 74th fastest 3000 time ever. Yet nearly triple the number of men (219) have run faster than the 5km the men got paced through today. The men were paced by a cheap no-name athlete in comparison. Easy to find pacers on the men's side to pace world records. The wavelights will also help women more than men, because women have received pacing go much shorter distances than men in the past. We are going to watch many of the women records fall due to these wavelights. This 5km record will not last long.
Coevett wrote:
subelite hobbyjogger wrote:
https://youtu.be/Pr0dWz_6oEIElliott looks pretty fresh after his WR in the 1960 Olympic 1500 final.
You've posted that video before to make the same argument. Are you blind? He looked like he could barely stand at the end and almost needed another athlete to stop him from falling over. Surely you can pick a different race from before 1989 that 'proves' that distance running was dirty all along prior to 100+ East African busts despite testing only reaching minimal standards a couple of years ago? How about posting Cram breaking the mile WR in 85 again? Remember (again) to post the one on YouTube that leaves out the post race interview which clearly shows Crammy still out of breath and exhausted ten minutes after the race.
Using performance enhancers in running has been around a long time. Certainly before the 70s. The first anabolic steroid was developed in ‘58. How long before we’ll never know. Who and what they were using we’ll also never know. The athletes are ahead of the game and always will be unless significant changes are made.
For what it’s worth, I’ve been watching a bunch of 1500s and 8’s from the 80s. Haven’t watch many with Cram but there are several with Coe looking like he just got done with a brisk walk, sometimes even after finishing with 52.xx last 400m. Seconds after his ‘84 win he had enough energy to run over and Scan the crowd and then scowl and yell at the media. The guy had just run 3:32. with a 53 last lap and immediately goes over and starts yelling!? Cram did look spent in that race though.
For me, every one at the top is suspicious and certainly 26:11 would fit that criteria.
astro wrote:
Sorry but it is a fact that we are talking about records that were previously set and reset by multiple dopers. Being able to exceed dope assisted performances is compelling evidence. .
Coe was several seconds faster than all the doped up East Germans? So that's evidence he doped.
Differences in talent will still tell, esp in the pre-epo era. But once epo entered the picture that gap widened significantly. Before that that ped use tended to tell much more significantly on the women's side because steroids had a much bigger effect.
astro wrote:
Differences in talent will still tell, esp in the pre-epo era.
Uuuham ... beeing faster than some doper --> must be doped himself.
For sure this logic is not true anymore if your white and born on some small island ("difference in talent").
gfhbvj wrote:
Coevett wrote:
You've posted that video before to make the same argument. Are you blind? He looked like he could barely stand at the end and almost needed another athlete to stop him from falling over. Surely you can pick a different race from before 1989 that 'proves' that distance running was dirty all along prior to 100+ East African busts despite testing only reaching minimal standards a couple of years ago? How about posting Cram breaking the mile WR in 85 again? Remember (again) to post the one on YouTube that leaves out the post race interview which clearly shows Crammy still out of breath and exhausted ten minutes after the race.
Using performance enhancers in running has been around a long time. Certainly before the 70s. The first anabolic steroid was developed in ‘58. How long before we’ll never know. Who and what they were using we’ll also never know. The athletes are ahead of the game and always will be unless significant changes are made.
For what it’s worth, I’ve been watching a bunch of 1500s and 8’s from the 80s. Haven’t watch many with Cram but there are several with Coe looking like he just got done with a brisk walk, sometimes even after finishing with 52.xx last 400m. Seconds after his ‘84 win he had enough energy to run over and Scan the crowd and then scowl and yell at the media. The guy had just run 3:32. with a 53 last lap and immediately goes over and starts yelling!? Cram did look spent in that race though.
For me, every one at the top is suspicious and certainly 26:11 would fit that criteria.
I am NOT especially suspicious of Cram and Ovett, but after the 1983 Coca Cola Mile they both looked like they had not just run 3:52:56 for Cram and 3:52:xx for Ovett but were parting following afternoon tea.
St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote:
gfhbvj wrote:
Using performance enhancers in running has been around a long time. Certainly before the 70s. The first anabolic steroid was developed in ‘58. How long before we’ll never know. Who and what they were using we’ll also never know. The athletes are ahead of the game and always will be unless significant changes are made.
For what it’s worth, I’ve been watching a bunch of 1500s and 8’s from the 80s. Haven’t watch many with Cram but there are several with Coe looking like he just got done with a brisk walk, sometimes even after finishing with 52.xx last 400m. Seconds after his ‘84 win he had enough energy to run over and Scan the crowd and then scowl and yell at the media. The guy had just run 3:32. with a 53 last lap and immediately goes over and starts yelling!? Cram did look spent in that race though.
For me, every one at the top is suspicious and certainly 26:11 would fit that criteria.
I am NOT especially suspicious of Cram and Ovett, but after the 1983 Coca Cola Mile they both looked like they had not just run 3:52:56 for Cram and 3:52:xx for Ovett but were parting following afternoon tea.
You really have nothing do you. Keep going to same dried well.
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion