You weren't getting younger in your 30's. You aren't an exception the biological process. We may age at different rates but we are all aging and it begins in the late twenties. Training can compensate for it but not reverse it.
He may be breaking rercords, but what in his history are you comparing to? He isn't ever going to break the 10km for example. So you do not know if he is physiologically getting better with age, because you do not have any phyiological data. Without that you are just speculating
He is (they are) probably just bringing the marahon more in line with the physiological limits compared to other distances, as it has been long speculated to be out of line. The things that are enabling that are ,
1) most importantly running economy, and if they were to give you data on VO2/kg/km (not VO2max) he could be closer to Tadesse like numbers now and he has almost a faultless style.
2) Add the shoes, which do not 'enhance' (i.e. no external energy), but lose less energy, then that economy is driven even further down. So both of these mean faster with the same (or even slightly declining) engine
3) Add proper pace judgement, pacers (as evidenced by Vienna where they rotated) then you limit the fade.
There's probably a few other things of lesser value, nutrition, monitoring of physiology, etc etc
Lastly, he is 'out there' available to be tested, they have his blood passport and have access to the O2 consumption.
Yes. On point 1) Taddesse's published economy number was obviously bogus. This should be common knowledge, instead the opposite has happened.
Kipchoge's tests were done under the supervision of Andy Jones, so they are worth somewhat more than the paper they are written on.
So just checking, but is everyone who is convinced he's dirty also convinced that Bekele is dirty?
I mean, he's also run 2:01 for a marathon. So I don't actually see Kipchoge as that much of an outlier in terms of time (in terms of consistency, sure...).
Are we also not taking into effect the fact that the new shoe technology let's you train faster without adding more wear and tear on your body? That's also a factor here.
HRE - sorry if I went too far being tongue-in-cheek. I’ve seen you here a lot of years and know that you are a decent guy. I was trying to be over the top to make a point, but I didn’t really mean to insult you.
I believe doping is destroying are sport and that current methods of detection are ineffective. Just think about it this way - if a clown like Victor Conte and an few unremarkable bio-/pharma chemists could upend sport, what do you think more committed actors could do? And they weren’t even close to detecting them.
1 - They must publish criteria for what constitutes an adverse analytical finding — advantage dopers.
2- What do you think happens on a highway if you tell people that you’re only going to check their speed in a few spots? Will they speed elsewhere? 100% says human nature dictates that they will. Only clowns who don’t know where the speed traps are will get caught.
3- My aversion to doping is less about finding the clean world record or some silly nonsense like that, but more to do with the fate of children and innocents in state-sponsored doping programs.
So just checking, but is everyone who is convinced he's dirty also convinced that Bekele is dirty?
I mean, he's also run 2:01 for a marathon. So I don't actually see Kipchoge as that much of an outlier in terms of time (in terms of consistency, sure...).
Are we also not taking into effect the fact that the new shoe technology let's you train faster without adding more wear and tear on your body? That's also a factor here.
every person who holds a WR is a cheater because they're beating people who are known cheats but still unable to obtain the WR
and also because this, it is likely that every WR holder would still hold the WR if cheats didn't exist because they would "proportionally" be slower alongside all the other cheats.
so yeah, cheat or not, guys like usain bolt, rudisha, hicham, or kipchoge would likely still dominate their events if PEDs didn't exist.
one thing to note though. lots of people talked about how kipchoge faked his age when he was a young guy but if this was true, then it would make him even more impressive as he would be well into his 40s now while breaking WRs in the marathon.
That's not how it works. Different bodies react to PEDs differently.
You should be questioning Tigist Assefa‘a performance considering she went from a 2:34 in March… Kipchoge is consistent. How tf does a 2:34 marathoner run a 19 min PR and the 3 fastest time in history in a mere 6 months….
She ran a 68:30 in 2019. That's sub 224. She was a much better runner than 2:34. She ran a mid 67 like 2 months after that marathon. That's 2:20ish shape. Probably justed needed one to be used to it.Of course it isn't like dropping 5mins off is something we see ever day.
It is easy to go drugs. But she just starts using them in like July? Seems odd...
Thank you, this is helpful context. I referenced her in my second comment on page 1. Never heard of her before last weekend. I think most people would agree her progression is suspicious.
So just checking, but is everyone who is convinced he's dirty also convinced that Bekele is dirty?
I mean, he's also run 2:01 for a marathon. So I don't actually see Kipchoge as that much of an outlier in terms of time (in terms of consistency, sure...).
Are we also not taking into effect the fact that the new shoe technology let's you train faster without adding more wear and tear on your body? That's also a factor here.
Ok, Bekele’s dirty, sure.
Bekele makes for an interesting contrast. His struggles with injury and consistency the past decade are what one would expect from an aging runner. He still popped a great one every now and then because he’s the best to ever do it. But overall he’s been on the expected decline. Kipchoge on the other hand continues to get better.
HRE - sorry if I went too far being tongue-in-cheek. I’ve seen you here a lot of years and know that you are a decent guy. I was trying to be over the top to make a point, but I didn’t really mean to insult you.
I believe doping is destroying are sport and that current methods of detection are ineffective. Just think about it this way - if a clown like Victor Conte and an few unremarkable bio-/pharma chemists could upend sport, what do you think more committed actors could do? And they weren’t even close to detecting them.
1 - They must publish criteria for what constitutes an adverse analytical finding — advantage dopers.
2- What do you think happens on a highway if you tell people that you’re only going to check their speed in a few spots? Will they speed elsewhere? 100% says human nature dictates that they will. Only clowns who don’t know where the speed traps are will get caught.
3- My aversion to doping is less about finding the clean world record or some silly nonsense like that, but more to do with the fate of children and innocents in state-sponsored doping programs.
Good point. Regarding 2: what happens if people know that they won't get fined for going 75 if the speed limit is 70?
From my experience I'd say that very few will go above 80, most will be around 73 - 76, and some select few around 65 - 70.
This compares for example to the ABP that doesn't flag blood transfusions of 200 - 300 mL because of its generous thresholds. Or the nandro limits etc.
The doping era.means all.are under suspicion. Lack of logic in always pointing a finger at a winner but not the others. Can only be one winner but unlimited can dope. I actually think the gate was openedd wide when wada began allowing abnormal bio numbers up to a certain level. Basically green lighted micro doping....
Thank you. Maybe I wasn't clear. All I meant was that some people will respond to the idea that Kipchoge is too old to be setting PBs by citing examples of people his age and beyond to say he's not. Jon Orange actually does this earlier in the thread by saying he ran his fastest marathon at 40.
Personally, I spent twelve years of my life in the sport watching really good runners fail to get under Clayton's 2:08:33 which made me believe that his time must be pretty close to the limit of how fast someone can run for a marathon. Seeing an army of people running well under 2:05 brings up questions about legitimacy for me. I remind myself that the sport has changed since 1981 and that just because I find it hard to believe a time is possible without some PED help doesn't mean it is. At the same time though, I see no evidence that the people running the sport are really interested in cleaning it but rather need to look like they are.
HRE - sorry if I went too far being tongue-in-cheek. I’ve seen you here a lot of years and know that you are a decent guy. I was trying to be over the top to make a point, but I didn’t really mean to insult you.
I believe doping is destroying are sport and that current methods of detection are ineffective. Just think about it this way - if a clown like Victor Conte and an few unremarkable bio-/pharma chemists could upend sport, what do you think more committed actors could do? And they weren’t even close to detecting them.
1 - They must publish criteria for what constitutes an adverse analytical finding — advantage dopers.
2- What do you think happens on a highway if you tell people that you’re only going to check their speed in a few spots? Will they speed elsewhere? 100% says human nature dictates that they will. Only clowns who don’t know where the speed traps are will get caught.
3- My aversion to doping is less about finding the clean world record or some silly nonsense like that, but more to do with the fate of children and innocents in state-sponsored doping programs.
Good point. Regarding 2: what happens if people know that they won't get fined for going 75 if the speed limit is 70?
From my experience I'd say that very few will go above 80, most will be around 73 - 76, and some select few around 65 - 70.
This compares for example to the ABP that doesn't flag blood transfusions of 200 - 300 mL because of its generous thresholds. Or the nandro limits etc.
What makes you think you're an expert on the subject when you're still citing bogus information from Ross Tucker's website?
The last thing I’ll say for the people that don’t believe in running, the cynics and the sceptics, I’m sorry for you. I’m sorry you can’t dream big and I’m sorry you don’t believe in miracles.
HRE - sorry if I went too far being tongue-in-cheek. I’ve seen you here a lot of years and know that you are a decent guy. I was trying to be over the top to make a point, but I didn’t really mean to insult you.
I believe doping is destroying are sport and that current methods of detection are ineffective. Just think about it this way - if a clown like Victor Conte and an few unremarkable bio-/pharma chemists could upend sport, what do you think more committed actors could do? And they weren’t even close to detecting them.
1 - They must publish criteria for what constitutes an adverse analytical finding — advantage dopers.
2- What do you think happens on a highway if you tell people that you’re only going to check their speed in a few spots? Will they speed elsewhere? 100% says human nature dictates that they will. Only clowns who don’t know where the speed traps are will get caught.
3- My aversion to doping is less about finding the clean world record or some silly nonsense like that, but more to do with the fate of children and innocents in state-sponsored doping programs.
Good point. Regarding 2: what happens if people know that they won't get fined for going 75 if the speed limit is 70?
From my experience I'd say that very few will go above 80, most will be around 73 - 76, and some select few around 65 - 70.
This compares for example to the ABP that doesn't flag blood transfusions of 200 - 300 mL because of its generous thresholds. Or the nandro limits etc.
We also know that law enforcement practices can vary from city to city based on how much resources are dedicated to it and/or how much officers care about the law being broken. Where I live, highway traffic cops are both sparse and lenient. I can drive 10-15 mph over with little worry, and even at that speed there are people passing me.
She ran a 68:30 in 2019. That's sub 224. She was a much better runner than 2:34. She ran a mid 67 like 2 months after that marathon. That's 2:20ish shape. Probably justed needed one to be used to it.Of course it isn't like dropping 5mins off is something we see ever day.
It is easy to go drugs. But she just starts using them in like July? Seems odd...
Thank you, this is helpful context. I referenced her in my second comment on page 1. Never heard of her before last weekend. I think most people would agree her progression is suspicious.
Thank you, this is helpful context. I referenced her in my second comment on page 1. Never heard of her before last weekend. I think most people would agree her progression is suspicious.
When you look at sporting achievements over the last decades, it seems like humans have gotten faster, better and stronger in nearly every way. Yet as David ...