Well, how much does doping help? And, do you mean all out (protected by ADAK + AIU), or within the ABP limits (staying below the likely doping threshold)?
I'd say based on various published estimates: faster by 3 - 4% doping all out, 1.5 - 2% controlled doping.
His 2:01:09 was poorly paced, and could otherwise maybe have been a 2:00:40. 1% of that is 72.4 seconds.
If he is clean now, and goes all the way out with doping: 217 - 290 seconds faster.
If he is clean now, and starts microdosing: 109 - 145 seconds faster.
In conclusion: 1:55:50 - 1:58:51 (if properly paced and in the same shape etc)
I believe there was an early 90s study saying 1:57:58 was the limit of a marathon (assuming the person had best the VO2 max, LT, and economy ever possible for a human). Supershoes would probably bring it down to high 1:56. However, even Kipchoge isn't the best in human history at all 3.
Well, how much does doping help? And, do you mean all out (protected by ADAK + AIU), or within the ABP limits (staying below the likely doping threshold)?
I'd say based on various published estimates: faster by 3 - 4% doping all out, 1.5 - 2% controlled doping.
His 2:01:09 was poorly paced, and could otherwise maybe have been a 2:00:40. 1% of that is 72.4 seconds.
If he is clean now, and goes all the way out with doping: 217 - 290 seconds faster.
If he is clean now, and starts microdosing: 109 - 145 seconds faster.
In conclusion: 1:55:50 - 1:58:51 (if properly paced and in the same shape etc)
No, he wouldn’t. Your estimates are equivalent to sub-26 and 12:20. What published estimates are you referring to?
Well, how much does doping help? And, do you mean all out (protected by ADAK + AIU), or within the ABP limits (staying below the likely doping threshold)?
I'd say based on various published estimates: faster by 3 - 4% doping all out, 1.5 - 2% controlled doping.
His 2:01:09 was poorly paced, and could otherwise maybe have been a 2:00:40. 1% of that is 72.4 seconds.
If he is clean now, and goes all the way out with doping: 217 - 290 seconds faster.
If he is clean now, and starts microdosing: 109 - 145 seconds faster.
In conclusion: 1:55:50 - 1:58:51 (if properly paced and in the same shape etc)
1;55 if clean sounds fair. Bear in mind that no Kenyan had run 2:10 before EPO.
That's a 15.minute difference, which is a 12%. That's roughly the equivalent of no Kenyan ever running under 1:50 for the 800m until EPO and now a 'clean Kenyan running 1;40 clean and 1:35 if doped.
He's not clean and if you think he is you're naive and ignorant.
This thread is indirectly about the effects from doping and could be applied to any elite runner. How fast do you think Kipchoge could run if he wasn’t a cheater?
He's not clean and if you think he is you're naive and ignorant.
This thread is indirectly about the effects from doping and could be applied to any elite runner. How fast do you think Kipchoge could run if he wasn’t a cheater?
Probably 204-205 with the good shoes but it should be noted a key contributer via PEDs is recovery that enables more and better workouts/training to be obtained. So without the PEDs, the training performance of these doping athletes deteriorates as well.
No, he wouldn’t. Your estimates are equivalent to sub-26 and 12:20. What published estimates are you referring to?
Dr. Schumacher for example estimated 1 minute over 10K (c:a: 4%) in an offical CAS hearing. So IF there would be a clean 26:30 runner, he could run 25:30 if fully doped (3.8% faster).
The Sunday times cited experts in their big blood review from 2015 who estimated 30 seconds over 5000 m. That's also about 4%. I like the consistency. So yes, IF there would be any clean 12:50 runner, he could run 12:20 if fully doped (3.9% faster).
What are your arguments/estimates and sources? "No, he wouldn't" doesn't sound very convincing.
No, he wouldn’t. Your estimates are equivalent to sub-26 and 12:20. What published estimates are you referring to?
Dr. Schumacher for example estimated 1 minute over 10K (c:a: 4%) in an offical CAS hearing. So IF there would be a clean 26:30 runner, he could run 25:30 if fully doped (3.8% faster).
The Sunday times cited experts in their big blood review from 2015 who estimated 30 seconds over 5000 m. That's also about 4%. I like the consistency. So yes, IF there would be any clean 12:50 runner, he could run 12:20 if fully doped (3.9% faster).
What are your arguments/estimates and sources? "No, he wouldn't" doesn't sound very convincing.
10K at 4:06 pace? I don’t know if the human heart could withstand that kind of stress.
Well, how much does doping help? And, do you mean all out (protected by ADAK + AIU), or within the ABP limits (staying below the likely doping threshold)?
I'd say based on various published estimates: faster by 3 - 4% doping all out, 1.5 - 2% controlled doping.
His 2:01:09 was poorly paced, and could otherwise maybe have been a 2:00:40. 1% of that is 72.4 seconds.
If he is clean now, and goes all the way out with doping: 217 - 290 seconds faster.
If he is clean now, and starts microdosing: 109 - 145 seconds faster.
In conclusion: 1:55:50 - 1:58:51 (if properly paced and in the same shape etc)
1;55 if clean sounds fair. Bear in mind that no Kenyan had run 2:10 before EPO.
That's a 15.minute difference, which is a 12%. That's roughly the equivalent of no Kenyan ever running under 1:50 for the 800m until EPO and now a 'clean Kenyan running 1;40 clean and 1:35 if doped.
Maybe he runs slower, or fails to finish. Either the drugs burn sugar too fast, and he bonks, or his blood turns to sludge and oxygen cannot get to the muscles.