Are we suspicious of Karissa Schweizer?

Io State wrote:

She was on a roll for a while there. Could do no wrong and sometimes beating her banned teammate and running very, very impressive times. Then she becomes beatable this Spring AFTER Shelby tests positive. I am seeing smoke. Did she get spooked and get off the juice?

If you are suspicious of Karissa what about that new runner that basically came out of nowhere to have the best national time? Norris. The large drop in times for the 5K and 1500 over the last few months sound ridiculously fishy. Takes years to drop times like that. I don't buy it. Juicing at it most obvious

Fisher got really fast too. I like him, would be sad. He has left Morgan McDonald in the dust and Morgan was faster just a year or so ago.

Was a slow time though i think

Schweizer is a sweetheart. She would never break a rule. She literally won't drive 56 in a 55 zone.

If we are going to be suspicious of Shelby for her jump to 14:23 then we also have to be suspicious of Schweizer (14:26), Norris (almost 40 sec improvement), Buchalski (25 sec improvement), Cranny, Purrier, and Fraser. All made big jumps in a short amount of time, but that alone can't be a reason they should be suspected of doping. If we're basing our judgement on fast times we could include Schneider and Osika, but they've been at this for a while. In the vast majority of cases I think it's safe to assume these improvements come from a combination of the lifestyle change of living as a professional athlete and not as a college student with many other competing demands/stressors, and by putting in uninterrupted stretches of consistent high-level training. Not to mention these athletes are collectively from 6 different training groups and I just really really want to assume the majority of training groups do NOT have a doping culture.

I tend to agree with this. A minor but interesting hiccup is Cranny, who ran 4:10 in High School (when that was only second to Mary Cain) but underperformed at Stanford and under Jerry has resurrected her obvious talent. Also seems much less cutthroat than Shelby/Centro/Shalane and their ilk. It would be a shame if she is clean yet her career takes a hit from all of this.

My rule of thumb is that every top professional runner is doping just as in cycling. Another is that runners without PEDs can run certain times, and that when you start seeing times such as 14:23 doping is going to be involved. I said so at the time. The thing is doping goes back a long time, such as blood doping which was legal until the mid 1980s but considered "unethical." I think the Ma's Army runners set a clear doping benchmark. If you are running comparable times you are doped to the gills.

astro wrote:

My rule of thumb is that every top professional runner is doping just as in cycling. Another is that runners without PEDs can run certain times, and that when you start seeing times such as 14:23 doping is going to be involved. I said so at the time. The thing is doping goes back a long time, such as blood doping which was legal until the mid 1980s but considered "unethical." I think the Ma's Army runners set a clear doping benchmark. If you are running comparable times you are doped to the gills.

Agree. I just don’t buy the whole - change of environment theory for dropping chunks of time from race to another and overnight have the best time in the nation when you weren’t even in the top 30 6 months before. All bs. Doped to the gills

zcxvzxcv wrote:

No, I'm not suspicious, as there have been no physical changes of the kind you expect from a distance runner using steroids. It's the training group. Talents training with great runners tons of volume can do this kind of thing, which is a big part of the explanation for Kenyan/Ethiopian distance success in great numbers. The problem is just the injury bug, which is why you have one great year and then some regression this spring.

I agree. You never know, but ks seems to have progressed evenly and doesn't look like shredded solid muscle. The Yoked factor is weak too.

She was already dominant in college. Her form looks night-and-day smoother from 2017 to 2020, she clearly fixed some muscle imbalances and/or got a bit leaner, as many people do when they go from college to pro. Her 14:27 is really good but there are women out there in sub-14 shape so we shouldn't be that surprised a 14:27 is possible clean.

Hardloper wrote:

She was already dominant in college. Her form looks night-and-day smoother from 2017 to 2020, she clearly fixed some muscle imbalances and/or got a bit leaner, as many people do when they go from college to pro. Her 14:27 is really good but there are women out there in sub-14 shape so we shouldn't be that surprised a 14:27 is possible clean.

The question is not whether someone else can run 14.27 clean but how much Schweizer has carved off her previous best times in a relatively short period.

Any woman running sub-14 is running as fast as Zatopek and Kuts. Juiced to the gills.

jocko johnson wrote:

Yes. Although she was one of the best ncaa runners in a long time so maybe there is hope that she is not. At least if you assume she wasn’t coping in college.

But yes, I am very suspicious. Also very suspicious of freirichs and definitely centro.

Does taking iron/blood infusions in the weeks leading up to NCAA XC nationals count as doping?

I'm suspicious of anyone who stands within 3 feet of Shelby. Like Covid, she's probably venting testosterone.

Blah blah blah. Everyone dopes. Blah blah.

big bopper wrote:

Blah blah blah. Everyone dopes. Blah blah.

Maybe not everyone. But quite a few here think Karissa does.

truthy wrote:

jocko johnson wrote:

Yes. Although she was one of the best ncaa runners in a long time so maybe there is hope that she is not. At least if you assume she wasn’t coping in college.

But yes, I am very suspicious. Also very suspicious of freirichs and definitely centro.

Does taking iron/blood infusions in the weeks leading up to NCAA XC nationals count as doping?

Hey-oh. Story time there truthy.

Hardloper wrote:

She was already dominant in college. Her form looks night-and-day smoother from 2017 to 2020, she clearly fixed some muscle imbalances and/or got a bit leaner, as many people do when they go from college to pro. Her 14:27 is really good but there are women out there in sub-14 shape so we shouldn't be that surprised a 14:27 is possible clean.

She has taken 126 seconds off her 5,000m time in five years.

For an already trained athlete that is remarkable, it’s 10.08 seconds faster per lap, for all 12.5 laps. Suspicious? Yeah.

Schweizer had already run very fast times in college. She holds the NCAA record for the 3,000 M, faster than Jenny Simpson. Add training on a professional level at altitude and her times as a pro are within reason. (Unless she was doping in College which is not within reason)

Former Flanagan fan wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

She was already dominant in college. Her form looks night-and-day smoother from 2017 to 2020, she clearly fixed some muscle imbalances and/or got a bit leaner, as many people do when they go from college to pro. Her 14:27 is really good but there are women out there in sub-14 shape so we shouldn't be that surprised a 14:27 is possible clean.

She has taken 126 seconds off her 5,000m time in five years.

For an already trained athlete that is remarkable, it’s 10.08 seconds faster per lap, for all 12.5 laps. Suspicious? Yeah.

As suspicious as J. Norris coming out of nowhere with mediocre times and no national level races, not even ranked, to #1 in the nation in a span of a couple of months dropping her time by 40 seconds from one race tot he next while all previous 5K a year back barely broke 16. Suspicious? Oh yeah.