Two more Kenyans banned for doping violations

Armstronglivs wrote:

casual obsever wrote:

It's objectively false that 'the vast majority of top Kenyans are clean as a whistle', yes,

Actually I'd bett that the majority is dirty.

Reason 1: 44% or more top athletes dope worldwide.

Reason 2: the IAAF thinks that Kenya is among the worst offenders.

Reason 3: recent busts confirm that Kenya is among the worst offenders.

Add 1 + 2 + 3: ridiculous the think that the vast majority is clean.

You are entering a debate with the board's resident doping denier. It will be as useful as wading into a tar-pit.

No kidding and especially with his defense of the whereabouts failures/bans. He's so obtuse on that issue believing that it in no way, shape or form implies or suggests doping. Rekrunner will have to do some double-time as he is still active with the debate on the El G thread.

pupil3142 wrote:

this is soo far past being a joke, and clearly shows discrimination against russia.

countries that should be banned;

kenya,

ethioia

jamaica,

us

uk,

norway

spain,

and the great lord in charge of this debacle needs to be defrocked and a red hot poker inserted.

Didn't Russia have Systemic Doping essentially?

westsouthrunner wrote:

pupil3142 wrote:

this is soo far past being a joke, and clearly shows discrimination against russia.

countries that should be banned;

kenya,

ethioia

jamaica,

us

uk,

norway

spain,

and the great lord in charge of this debacle needs to be defrocked and a red hot poker inserted.

Didn't Russia have Systemic Doping essentially?

Yes, that is the point people tend to miss! Russia should not get NEAR and international competition and are getting off lightly. The US doesnt have state sponsored doping. I do wonder abit about Jamaica and east africa, but maybe its just systemic there and not necessarily state sponsored.

pupil3142 wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Do reasonable, sensible, and objective persons consider "whereabouts failures" as evidence of using "banned substances or methods" known to give an advantage?

WADA etc consider three whereabouts failures as sufficient circumstantial evidence of doping to make it an anti-doping rule offence and to award bans.

Clear enough?

WADA considers them separate offenses.

Since Coevett presumes to speak on their behalf, the question is if "reasonable, sensible, and objective persons" should also consider them separate offenses.

casual obsever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Is it objectively false?

It's objectively false that 'the vast majority of top Kenyans are clean as a whistle', yes,

Actually I'd bett that the majority is dirty.

Reason 1: 44% or more top athletes dope worldwide.

Reason 2: the IAAF thinks that Kenya is among the worst offenders.

Reason 3: recent busts confirm that Kenya is among the worst offenders.

Add 1 + 2 + 3: ridiculous the think that the vast majority is clean.

Objectively?

1) 44% is a subjective interpretation that assumes survey results are accurate measures of doping prevalence. Even the authors raised many questions regarding the accuracy. And it is not the figure for Kenya.

2) If you mean by virtue of being placed in Category A, this is not a measure of doping prevalence. It is an AIU Board committee decision that is a product of 1) "doping risk" and 2) "international success"; "doping risk" is a function of 1) "doping history", 2) "intelligence" and 3) National Federation compliance and 4) National Federation response (e.g. testing, education), and 5) any other (unspecified) criteria deemed relevant.

3) Maybe absolutely, but as a percentage? Kenya has a lot of athletes.

Add 1+2+3: Can you add terms with different units?

No comment or judgement on the violations but just some additional information:

Both of these are "old" violations.

1) James Kibet was provisionally suspended back in Dec. 2019. It was surely discussed at that time. I hope we are not treating this like it's a new offense. He is a 63:56/28:19/13:12 athlete.

2) Jacob Kendagor's offense dates back to Nov. 2018, but to be fair, I don't believe it was ever announced or discussed here. Like many cases -- this is another bizarre one. The first tribunal found him innocent -- after assigning and weighing the balance of the evidence, a likely case of mistaken identity as the IAAF did not meet its burden to show otherwise. The IAAF appealed, and the new CAS tribunal, (partly through some bad legal decisions of the athlete) decided to place more weight with the IAAF and less weight on Kendagor's witnesses, finding it wasn't mistaken identity, and therefore finding him guilty of refusing a test. He is a 2:07/60:32 athlete.

Can't wait for Renato Canova to turn up and claim "institutional racism", "uneducated Westerners" and "why would Kenyans dope when they don't need to due to living at altitude and their basic lifestyles and disciplined mindsets"...

But it's only the average Kenyans you see - the bad ones cheat and the top ones don't - ^^, makes sense.

More likely is that top Kenyans make $$$ for agents which of course then attracts the "best" agents (like our friends Gianni and Federico) who of course know exactly who and how to get around things like pesky doping control officers, failed tests etc

I think that given the logic that sees Russia banned from the sport, that there is no way Kenya isn't surely in line for exactly the same treatment?

Yes. Objectively. 44% is not "a subjective interpretation" but the objective actual result that you don't appreciate.

"the authors raised many questions regarding the accuracy" is you putting your spin on the facts. In fact, the authors performed "Sensitivity analyses, assessing the robustness of these estimates under numerous hypothetical scenarios" and concluded thereafter that they "were unlikely to have overestimated the true prevalence of doping". Fact and fact, objectively, straight from the horses mouth.

"not the figure for Kenya"? As I said, worldwide, and Kenya is a lot worse than the average, see for example:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You are entering a debate with the board's resident doping denier. It will be as useful as wading into a tar-pit.

There is that. And as usual, he will have the last word.

Go for it rekrunner, keep this doping thread alive as long as possible!

Coevett wrote:

Yikes! wrote:

Dian Modahl is innocent, there were massive procedural issues with that which when replicated resulted in false positives.

It appears she was, However, a red flag for me would be that she shared the same manager (her husband) as Said Aouita.

Have you ever thought about using some good ol' vodoo on Aouita? You certainly hate him.

I would be interested to know from those who point out that Kenya may not be as bad as Russia or does not have state sponsored doping whether it still retains any credibility as a sporting nation in view of the constant stream of drug busts?

Ghost1 wrote:

What is curious about these doping incidents is that most of those Kenyans that are caught are not the best Kenyans and most of them are at the tail end of their careers (like the 36-year-old former third-placer in the Hamburg Marathon) or division 2 type Kenyans.

This means, that despite being tested, left right and center, the top athletes like Kamworor, Kandie and co. are clean as whistles one would think. This means that the vast majority of top Kenyans are in fact clean and can go to bed at night knowing that they have not cheated in any shape or form.

Just like the hysteria with regard to COVID-19, the hype surrounding the few cases of Kenyans who have been caught, is over the top and not deserved.

70 + in a few years is not a few.

They are getting caught at the end of their careers as there was no proper testing in their early competitive years. Testing is still a joke and probably catching 1/100

casual obsever wrote:

Yes. Objectively. 44% is not "a subjective interpretation" but the objective actual result that you don't appreciate.

"the authors raised many questions regarding the accuracy" is you putting your spin on the facts. In fact, the authors performed "Sensitivity analyses, assessing the robustness of these estimates under numerous hypothetical scenarios" and concluded thereafter that they "were unlikely to have overestimated the true prevalence of doping". Fact and fact, objectively, straight from the horses mouth.

"not the figure for Kenya"? As I said, worldwide, and Kenya is a lot worse than the average, see for example:

44% is the result -- the result of a survey, using a method that has not yet been shown to be accurate for sensitive questions like doping.

The suggestion that they "were unlikely to have overestimated the true prevalence" is subjective speculation on the part of the authors -- as they made no objective measures of any form of non-compliance that they identified.

As I already indicated, "most likely to dope" is not the real criteria for inclusion in Category A -- this is something you only find in newspapers, or website articles, dumbed down for their readers.

You can find the real criteria at the AIU website. It is a combination of doping history, international success, and testing (anti-doping) of the national federation (among other factors, including a joker: "any factor we deem to be relevant"). This could be objective, but the inclusion of a joker makes it not obviously objective.

So for example a country with an average doping prevalence, (like we have seen for Kenya in both official and unofficial estimates), combined with the high international success rate, and the less than average testing, would be sufficient to put it in category A, while countries with higher doping rates, and lower international success, may end up in B or C.

These doping cases do not show that all or even the majority of Kenyans at the top cheat. This is something you people forget. There is no evidence that the likes of Kipchoge or Kamworor or any of the guys at the NN camp cheat. The question is, if Coe continues with his doping tests and guys like Kipchoge or Kamworor test negative throughout their career, will you still yell out at the top of your lungs that they must have been doping the whole time? If yes, then there is literally nothing these guys can do to prove their innocence to you.

pupil3142 wrote:

dwain chambers

linford christie

diane modahl

christine ohurogu

hmm, thats the best i can do (athletics). Might have to cross uk off the list. Im a little surprised. damn, the brits are clean, lol.

Or are they just good at doping/poor at busting their dopers?

Mo Farah

Paula Radcliffe

Kelly Holmes

Are all highly suspicious. So if I’m not mistaken, every British Olympic mid/long distance champ or world record holder in my lifetime has been highly suspicious.

pupil3142 wrote:

this is soo far past being a joke, and clearly shows discrimination against russia.

countries that should be banned;

kenya,

ethioia

jamaica,

us

uk,

norway

spain,

and the great lord in charge of this debacle needs to be defrocked and a red hot poker inserted.

Yeah like any of these countries have a government owned facility, where athletes show up to get their weekly PED's. Russia should be banned from all future olympics and WC because it is their government run sports program that is administering the PED's. and also note they fight any WADA testers any time they show up to test Russian athletes.

Yes, other countries have PED users but those countries are not providing the PED's to the athletes. Very different scenario, individuals vs government sponsored. So, no discrimination of Russia here. they deserve more punishment then they are getting.

c

Yikes! wrote:

Whistles are not that clean. Your mouth is actually one of the dirtiest parts of your body.

Most whistles carrying Covid and EPO particles.....Kenyans suck at all sports except distance running and that is all about them drug cheating.

the onlookers were able to see their own cars wrote:

pupil3142 wrote:

dwain chambers

linford christie

diane modahl

christine ohurogu

hmm, thats the best i can do (athletics). Might have to cross uk off the list. Im a little surprised. damn, the brits are clean, lol.

Or are they just good at doping/poor at busting their dopers?

Mo Farah

Paula Radcliffe

Kelly Holmes

Are all highly suspicious. So if I’m not mistaken, every British Olympic mid/long distance champ or world record holder in my lifetime has been highly suspicious.

That has a lot to do with them all competing in a doping infested era. So yes, the very fact they succeeded against so many dopers is suspicious. That doesn't negate the fact that they were outliers, and that the general standard of UK middle-distance declined in the EPO era, and has risen since better testing and a more even playing field- suggesting GB was one of the least doped countries.

Btw, Mo and Paula wouldn't even be highly suspicious if it wasn't for the anti-doping culture in the UK that led to the Panorama documentary exposing NOP etc. or the MP who used parliamentary privilege to name Paula as having suspicious blood readings in the House of Commons.

As to why Kelly Holmes is highly suspicious, I assume you mean because she suddenly was able to beat known dopers at the end of her career? I agree that's suspicious, but I don't think any of those three prove anything except that people like Anthony Whiteman would have been running sub 3:30 or that Laura Muir would be a multiple WR holder if doping like them.

I am afraid the US defiietly had state sponsored doping in the 70s and 80s else it wouldnt have been able to compete with eastern europe. drugs lists and drug identification were shaky, to say the least.

This led directly to the 90s and early 2000s about which less said the better

Whilst the US may not have state sponsored doping now, it certainly has systemic doping due to the cold war and EPO.

The ex Governer of Ca owes his entire fame and fortune to roided up excess ffs. he would have been taking all sorts of stuff under the benevolent eye of the Austrian army and now what does he do about it - systemic.