How are elites able to dope without being caught (not trolling)?

Simple answer: Dopers are always a step ahead of testers. The only way to get popped is to screw up.

Why do you think “most are doping”?

notworstyearever wrote:

Most are doping but only a small amount are busted.

Really? So you're an expert on the subject?

rekrunner wrote:

Why do you think “most are doping”?

People are running better times than busted dopers from the past. You mean to tell me they suddenly have all this natural clean talent to post better times than busted elites a decade earlier? Not a chance.

notworstyearever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Why do you think “most are doping”?

People are running better times than busted dopers from the past. You mean to tell me they suddenly have all this natural clean talent to post better times than busted elites a decade earlier? Not a chance.

So, you already know it all? Then why ask questions?

100% trolling aren't you?

why do you ask? wrote:

notworstyearever wrote:

People are running better times than busted dopers from the past. You mean to tell me they suddenly have all this natural clean talent to post better times than busted elites a decade earlier? Not a chance.

So, you already know it all? Then why ask questions?

100% trolling aren't you?

I don't know it all. I want to know how they are passing tests.

Of the top 10 100m times, 8 of them were busted for doping at some point

But yeah, the top guy was 100% clean.

notworstyearever wrote:

why do you ask? wrote:

So, you already know it all? Then why ask questions?

100% trolling aren't you?

I don't know it all. I want to know how they are passing tests.

Is Sydney McLaughlin doping?

notworstyearever wrote:

Of the top 10 100m times, 8 of them were busted for doping at some point

But yeah, the top guy was 100% clean.

You're obsessed with Bolt aren't you?

Of course the IAAF has done that in the past. See also the Jamaican clen scandal in Beijing. And most unfortunately, AIU has just restarted the silent provisional ban (point in case: burrito doper Houlihan).

Most likely - and there is still no test for blood doping. Yes there is the ABP, but you can safely use 200 if not 300 mL blood transfusions without getting flagged, thanks to the generous thresholds.

And if you do go over, you only get flagged and then target tested (points in case: see the short (!) list of likely dopers).

Of course - we continue to make new inventions literally every day.

I hope not everywhere. But yes for sure in certain countries.

Of course. This is well known. See for example Prof. Tucker openly discussing the Kiprop case.

Plus, many thresholds are well published. For example you may go up to 1.9 mg/L nandrolone.

Finally, microdosing with roids that are found in beef works quite safely in the US (points in case: Clayes, Wilson).

Most of the dopers work in conjunction with their governing bodies who are supposed to be testing them or facilitating the testing. Typical corruption in third world countries with payoffs and such. Decent money on the line for top stars. Kenya, Jamaica, Ethiopia, any country in North Africa or Middle East, etc.

American dopers (and prob most Euros) have to resort to more micrososing and staying a step of the testing science. Harder to do and less effective.

why do you ask? wrote:

notworstyearever wrote:

I don't know it all. I want to know how they are passing tests.

Is Sydney McLaughlin doping?

Womens wr

100m 100% doping

200m 100% doping

400m 100% doping

800m absolutely 100% doping

1500m likely doping

Sure the 400mh is clean, needs no speculation

why do you ask? wrote:

Is Sydney McLaughlin doping?

Is Femke Bol doping?

gh probably helps an enormous amount and is not easy to detect, I think.

They can prepare to miss tests and use short-term stuff.

I think tests do not look for exogenous test, so they could supplement right up to the limit.

I am still waiting for a Salazar Athlete to test positive.

We were told that would happen any day now ....and that was over a year ago.....

notworstyearever wrote:

Most are doping but only a small amount are busted. How come?

1. Is wada and the ioc covering up positive tests for image purposes (bolt testing positive for example)

2. Are their new drugs we don't know about that are untestable?

3. New masking agents wada doesn't know about?

4. Complete corruption? (Testing officials being paid off)

5. Short half lives for modern peds? (Only staying in system for a few days). If within half life window athlete has a whereabouts issue if a tester shows up. After two missed tests they slow down the doping regime?

Want 100% srs answers.

Yes, to all of the above. There also probably are 6th, 7th, 8th and more methods we're not even aware of yet, since the rule breakers always try to stay ahead of the rule enforcers. Since the rule breakers are usually better funded, they're successful more often than not.

notworstyearever wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Why do you think “most are doping”?

People are running better times than busted dopers from the past. You mean to tell me they suddenly have all this natural clean talent to post better times than busted elites a decade earlier? Not a chance.

I don’t mean to tell you anything.

You are the one trying to resolve a perceived contradiction with your assumptions.

It is true some people are running faster.

But “most elites” are not running faster than busted dopers from the past.

So again, why do you think “most are doping”?

Why do you think the reason for running faster is doping? What other explanations have you considered?

wazzu1452 wrote:

I am still waiting for a Salazar Athlete to test positive.

We were told that would happen any day now ....and that was over a year ago.....

well they are clean now, as you can see they are SLOWER than ever

centro is a max 3:34 guy now, rupp is a 28 flat 10k guy and 2:09 thon guy now....look at slow Mo now

Why do you respond to a question with three more questions?

Do you expect a response with nine more questions?