What an amazing athlete!! SIfan Hassan 3:53.63 just 4 days after setting 10,000 WR!!!

Referring to this post above

TooMuchRange wrote:

I will also note that if an athlete like Hassan is clean, and cared at least a bit about the inevitable accusations, and wanted to put some effort into minimizing them, she COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season. Would it be too much of an imposition and capitulation to the suspicious if she, say, ran 3:48 THIS year, and 28:30 NEXT year ???

This is always the funniest. Like the people who thought Semenya was intentionally holding back on the 1:51 800 she could have run because of the optics of looking too good...

You know what Hassan is going to do? Run her best. Before 2019 that didn't even get her medals most of the time. If she's too good across too many distances for your brain to handle that's your problem not hers OK?

Iron Bars wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

I would agree, but I recall you saying you don't know anything about distance running.

You mistake me for someone else. Again, there is no way this is a clean performance.

You're right - on both counts. My apologies.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

TooMuchRange wrote:

In the modern era, we haven't seen any man do this sort of thing. That's a lot of data. Although, I'll admit that a counter-argument could be that the women aren't as deep.

That's kinda exactly it. Men and women are apples to oranges when it comes to this.

It's OK to be suspicious, but you and others don't know. Shelby Houlihan if healthy can probably run a wildly fast 10,000 in super-spikes and she ran 3:54.99/low 14:20s without them. Maybe she's just a slightly worse version of Hassan? Women's sports aren't as deep, so these sort of things are more possible.

I don't think that the difference in depth results in a fully apples-and-oranges situation. I'm not a statistician, but I think that the chances of getting a female Hassan would be marginally increased in proportion to the decrease in depth. And what's that? 10% less deep? 20% less deep? Such fractions wouldn't constitute apples and oranges. If one's never seen it with a man, one still wouldn't EXPECT to see it with a woman. Although yes, I presume that the odds would go up somewhat.

yahoo1991 wrote:

Lol is this a joke? so you are saying if she (or anyone like her) is clean, they should intentionally underperform their capabilities just to appease the suspicions of skeptics like you? Give me a break. For her and anyone else, I would sincerely hope they try to maximize their ability and accomplish great things on the tracks, including both fast times and incredible range. Btw, the range displayed this week is nothing new - she won the 1500 and 10k at the world championships, both were just as amazing performances.

An expected response. Reasonable, of course, but also unbalanced. Of course sometimes one adjusts to one's environment, even if it's not totally "fair." Make no mistake, the world has VERY GOOD reasons to be suspicious of superlative athletic performances. Cheating is huge and extremely well-documeted.

So, would focusing on the mile this year and the distances next year be fully "fair" to a clean Hassan? Of course not. But I can think of a LOT worse things for a great athlete than a concession to JUSTIFIED widespread skepticism that results in, say, a legendary mile season in 2021, and a legendary 5/10K season next year. Not a tragedy....by a long shot.

And ALSO fully understandable if a clean Hassan said, "Screw the skeptics, I'm doing both." But again, the skeptics aren't all hateful idiots. Many of them are fair people who have simply been reading the freakin' news for a short, or very long, time....

TooMuchRange wrote:

I will also note that if an athlete like Hassan is clean, and cared at least a bit about the inevitable accusations, and wanted to put some effort into minimizing them, she COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season. Would it be too much of an imposition and capitulation to the suspicious if she, say, ran 3:48 THIS year, and 28:30 NEXT year ???

She COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season, yes. But why SHOULD she do so? That her opponents don't get depressed?

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

getting bored wrote:

How about this. Can you provide the drug testing and dates for each and then we can draw better conclusions?

You're the same guy that promotes removing Russians from sport no matter that 99% have never tested positive. Why is that? Does benefit of doubt not apply to white people?

Russia had a literal state-supported doping regimen. This has been documented and exposed.

Unfortunately we do not have drug testing info on each athletes. That being said, Hassan clearly doesn't hide from the tests or biological passport (what brought down Russia btw). You can argue Dibaba, Makhloufi et al. do. Hassan who's lived in Portland, the Netherlands and now Park City, and did her altitude training in Saint Moritz, races regularly in major meets and as far as we know has never missed a test....not seeing it.

No, Russian state-supported doping was not exposed and documented. Allegations were documented. Puzzles me as to how one can think modern Russia is communist USSR were everything was state controlled. Just boggles the mind how naive some people can be.

Russian athletes are in independent sports clubs. That's pretty evident and documented.

On the flip side, China is all state controlled. Not Russia.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

TooMuchRange wrote:

I will also note that if an athlete like Hassan is clean, and cared at least a bit about the inevitable accusations, and wanted to put some effort into minimizing them, she COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season. Would it be too much of an imposition and capitulation to the suspicious if she, say, ran 3:48 THIS year, and 28:30 NEXT year ???

This is always the funniest. Like the people who thought Semenya was intentionally holding back on the 1:51 800 she could have run because of the optics of looking too good...

You know what Hassan is going to do? Run her best. Before 2019 that didn't even get her medals most of the time. If she's too good across too many distances for your brain to handle that's your problem not hers OK?

Again, if folks like you want to tell yourself that YOU'RE the nice and fair ones, and EVERYONE else with justified suspicions are the BAD GUYS, great. You're awesome. But you're not living in the real world. And in a way, by apparently denying that cheating is always an unfortunate possibility (and not a terribly small one at the world level), you're insulting ALL of the clean folks who have suffered from cheaters all of these years. There ARE cheaters in sports. And you know what they love? For there to be nothing but folks like you who want to castigate the justifiably suspicious. Heard of a guy named Armstrong?

Fair and intelligent people try to be balanced. In this case, that doesn't JUST mean never being suspicious.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

You are still playing a sucker's game. What have you to say now that I have addressed your essential point?

And Hassan a perfect running machine? Have we been watching the same person? Are you kidding me? Bekele--he was a perfect running machine. Hassan isn't as biomechanically gifted as even I am.

I was talking about her frame. It looks pretty ideally suited to run distances and fast.

I think your essential point is you don't feel anything when someone runs faster/with more ease than you deem is possible. I'm not sure how to address that except to feel sorry for you. Maybe you are right and every game-changing athlete is doped. You're never going to know though anyway and will just be a jaded sprintgeezer as you say.

Her "frame"? If you mean what I think, then KK should be even faster, and Gidey slower.

And it's not really about what "I" deem possible, it is about what history deems possible. You are right, and I freely admit, that I don't have enough distance understanding to make a really informed decision--I just go on gut feeling. Believe it or not, I too have had great runs where I feel terrific at the end--my last half marathon, I felt like I could have kept going forever.

In the sprints, I know--but no, for distance, I do not. Maybe it is the repetitive, metronomic quality of distance that gives me a mechanistic feeling. Maybe it is the exaggerated thinness, the bulging eyes, the lips peeling back from the emaciated face, that causes me to think of a mechanism--but no, Makhloufi is different (although yes he is mid-d). You know, I used to feel for/with Hassan when she had more meat on her, some boobs, was more expressive, looked more like a person. Now she is just the distance essentials, stripped of the physical qualities that made her unique as an individual. This is why people, even distance runners, speak of "nameless, faceless Kenyans"--because they are all physically interchangeable, like a mechanical part made to a standard.

I keep hearing my wife's words resonating in my mind: "ripped psychotic". Maybe I just don't get it, because I am not of it--but that doesn't change the fact that I feel nothing from such performances. And you know what? Neither does the vast majority of people.

BTW I hear the same thing from distance runners about the sprints, and about throwers from both camps.

xzyztxyzt wrote:

TooMuchRange wrote:

I will also note that if an athlete like Hassan is clean, and cared at least a bit about the inevitable accusations, and wanted to put some effort into minimizing them, she COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season. Would it be too much of an imposition and capitulation to the suspicious if she, say, ran 3:48 THIS year, and 28:30 NEXT year ???

She COULD choose not to cover such range in the same season, yes. But why SHOULD she do so? That her opponents don't get depressed?

The answer to your question is clearly in what I wrote ("inevitable accusations"). And I said "could" instead of "should" for a reason. Of course it's her choice, and she's fully entitled to say, "Screw the skeptics." As long as you're ready for the ramifications.

And to save the reasonably intelligent folks on this thread some annoyance, if you're about to write that this situation is either black, or white, please stop.

Agreed.

The racism is so blatant when it comes to distance runners. Ingrebrestein runs 3:56 at 16 he's wonderful..he's great but when an African does incredible things..they are doping..they are a older than what they say. If someone gets busted..talk about it then. All people talk about is Superspikes..doping smh. Appreciate the greatness!! Stop the slander

TooMuchRange wrote:

I don't think that the difference in depth results in a fully apples-and-oranges situation. I'm not a statistician, but I think that the chances of getting a female Hassan would be marginally increased in proportion to the decrease in depth. And what's that? 10% less deep? 20% less deep? Such fractions wouldn't constitute apples and oranges. If one's never seen it with a man, one still wouldn't EXPECT to see it with a woman. Although yes, I presume that the odds would go up somewhat.

Historically you are talking about way more than 10-20% less deep. You realize the cultural norms in Africa? How many great potential athletes didn't even think about running until not too long ago. Women have only been running above the 3K on the track since when?

It's just a wildly different calculus than men. How long ago was sub-15 a great time for women in the 5,000? Now there are a ton of American women who can do it. Is this due to doping or huge shifts in technology, participation and the like. The chances of a dominant 1500-10,000m runner really aren't that crazy. Right now there're men who are dominant 3K-HM runners (Chelimo). You had Farah who ran 3:28 and in a weak era might clock the fastest 1500 time and he was the best 10,000m runner in the world.

** Kiplimo, apologies (7:26 --> World HM title)

Please, I think every single elite international level runner and cyclist is doping. Just some athletes thumb their noises so blatantly at the sport that they catch more flak.

pardo wrote:

No, Russian state-supported doping was not exposed and documented. Allegations were documented. Puzzles me as to how one can think modern Russia is communist USSR were everything was state controlled. Just boggles the mind how naive some people can be.

Russian athletes are in independent sports clubs. That's pretty evident and documented.

On the flip side, China is all state controlled. Not Russia.

RUSADA and the state were carefully orchestrating widespread test evasion and doping. The top athletes were secured doping regimens and had their test results handled appropriately. This has all been documented. There were multiple whistleblowers who have appeared on Letsrun in the German documentary and so on. Seems like you are the ignorant one it was all over the boards and why Russia is not able to compete as a nation. Meanwhile they've done reports on Kenya and have concluded that there is not an organized system like in Russia. OK maybe it is not as organized as Soviet-era doping but the powers-that-be in close coordination with the State doped athletes and tried to ensure illegally that they would never fail tests.

Just because you look the same doesn't mean you have to be as fast. You would agree KK is a huge outlier from other German runners. I don't think you've refuted my point at all. She is special, and able to do things across 1500-10000 that few ever have. Gidey doesn't have to look the exact same either.

Again, you have a lot of feelings and instincts. That's OK for you. Calling Hassan another "nameless, faceless" Ethiopian would be insane because she is frankly a completely unique athlete. You found just KK who looks like her. You could maybe say Kejelcha as well if you want. I respect if you have these instincts and I'm happy they don't seem to be borne from racism. I more just feel bad for you because you're not going to get any resolution.

TooMuchRange wrote:

The answer to your question is clearly in what I wrote ("inevitable accusations"). And I said "could" instead of "should" for a reason. Of course it's her choice, and she's fully entitled to say, "Screw the skeptics." As long as you're ready for the ramifications.

And to save the reasonably intelligent folks on this thread some annoyance, if you're about to write that this situation is either black, or white, please stop.

Any African runner who sets records will get inevitable accusations. It'd be ridiculous to care about LRC keyboard warriors.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

It's just a wildly different calculus than men. How long ago was sub-15 a great time for women in the 5,000? Now there are a ton of American women who can do it. Is this due to doping or huge shifts in technology, participation and the like. The chances of a dominant 1500-10,000m runner really aren't that crazy. Right now there're men who are dominant 3K-HM runners (Chelimo). You had Farah who ran 3:28 and in a weak era might clock the fastest 1500 time and he was the best 10,000m runner in the world.

The really unique part is doing the events. Anyone doubt that a 328/1248 Jacob could run like a 2640 if he ran the race a half dozen times? Or that 143/329/1258/2726 aoutia could have ran faster if he ran the 10k more than once. Or that a guy like webb could have run a better 5k/10k if he races then more when in prime shape?