casual obsever wrote:
Coevett wrote:
If Lance Armstrong - who never failed a single test - could have all his titles taken away, why can't the same thing happen in athletics?
Because USADA considered it proven that he had doped during all his TdF wins.
More like, Lance admitted he doped in every Tour de France! Yet there are others who keep their wins. Bjarne Riis for instance. Ullrich also finally admitted he doped, but I don't recall if he admitted to doing it in '97... anyway ...
Regarding the interview, I agree with his views on Nike's influence, but not about most of the other stuff.
It is a WEAK argument to use the "better responder" to the shoes between person A and person B. Why? Because that is true for EVERYTHING an athlete does...it's just that most other things there is no way to quantify most things.
For instance, regarding training, we never actually KNOW whether someone has reached their potential. Maybe 20x400 works really well for A but not B, but how would you quantify that? Diet, supplements, sleep ... all of these things are not the same for all athletes, and if they were, it would be reasonable to expect that some would respond better than others, but we cannot prove it nor measure the effects.
Also, regarding the 4 guys surely not being better than Kamworor...while I would tend to agree, isn't it blindingly obvious that there is a logic gap here? Kam wasn't in that race, at the same time, in those same conditions. Whos to say he wouldn't have run 57:20, beating all those other guys?
Finally, I think Gladwell is the person that started the "in the year 2027..." about Colt Goucher!