Regarding Viren and blood doping

old tymer wrote:

HRE wrote:

If Viren was going to dope or blood dope or do anything else that's nasty why would he only do it in Olympic years? Why have the down years when he could be on top all the time?

No matter how one slices and dices it, the Olympics were the biggest thing--by far--for athletes of the period. (Although we need to remember that there were other, very significant championship events, including the European and Commonwealth champs.)

I think the suspicions raised by Viren's performances in between Olympiads considering the information surrounding blood doping at the time are quite legitimate.

Viren was not eligible to compete in the Commonwealth Games so the only other major Championship he was able to compete in was the European Champs. Particularly at the time, the Olympics were so far above the more secondary championship competitions, that ensuring success at the OG would take far greater significance than it would even today.

It's all just opinion, but that "he must have done something illegal because he was nowhere near as good in non-Olympic years" stuff is totally unconvincing to me.

Given the number of Finns who've been caught doing something illegal, I'm fairly persuaded by the fatc that Viren never was.

HRE wrote:

It's all just opinion, but that "he must have done something illegal because he was nowhere near as good in non-Olympic years" stuff is totally unconvincing to me.

Given the number of Finns who've been caught doing something illegal, I'm fairly persuaded by the fatc that Viren never was.

While not offering an absolute about whether Viren blood doped or not I don't think the fact that he never admitted anything or was caught....wasn't the only one caught Vainio?....means all that much.

The practice was used by fellow Finns and he demonstrated performance which not only followed a similar pattern to the other Finns but what one would expect out of a distance runner who blood doped.

While this is not evidence that he did blood dope, I don't see how the conclusion can be drawn that he didn't.

Jouko Kuha admitted to blood doping in the late 60s and you had the Finnish cross country skiers caught doping a few years ago. But as you and I agree, there is no evidence that Viren did anything like that other than the fact that he's from the same country as others who doped are from. So following that logic we should suspect all female US distance runners because Slaney and Jacobs were dopers.

Debates like these are interesting for a while but ultimately are useless. We've all got our opinions and I doubt that any of us who's posted here has changed the opinion of anyone else, which is one reason why if I were Viren, I probably wouldn't bother making any comment about any of this.

HRE wrote:

Jouko Kuha admitted to blood doping in the late 60s and you had the Finnish cross country skiers caught doping a few years ago. But as you and I agree, there is no evidence that Viren did anything like that other than the fact that he's from the same country as others who doped are from. So following that logic we should suspect all female US distance runners because Slaney and Jacobs were dopers.

Debates like these are interesting for a while but ultimately are useless. We've all got our opinions and I doubt that any of us who's posted here has changed the opinion of anyone else, which is one reason why if I were Viren, I probably wouldn't bother making any comment about any of this.

Not to beat a dead horse here... You're completely right that "we all have our opinions" on the matter. I hadn't realized that Kuha had "admitted" to blood doping!! I've always suspected that his steeple WR in '68 might have been one of the very earliest instances of blood-doping. If what you say is true, it suggests that is, indeed, the case. Frankly, that does nothing to decrease the liklihood of other Finns doing the exact same thing in following years. Vaatainen, etc? In fact, a more relevant question is: why wouldn't they? Blood-doping improved performance, wasn't (yet) illegal, and couldn't be tested for. From the standpoint of 1971 or '72, etc., it sounds like a no-brainer to me.

To repeat, I've never accused Viren of "cheating." I have long suspected him of having had an "unfair" advantage (blood-doping) over most of his competition. That's it.

But, once again, you are entirely correct to say that our ramblings here prove nothing either way in this matter.

Everyone with any interest in the matter should do their own research--serious research--on the period and make up their own minds.

But it wasnt illegal so how could he be "caught" what do you expect to happen? The announcer at the stadium said that he was getting a blood transfusion before the race it is printed in papers that Viren blood doped his running collegues have admitted that they blood doped the only thing more that I can think of happening is that Viren admits it.

old tymer wrote:

a more relevant question is: why wouldn't they? Blood-doping improved performance

That has never been proven to be true and, in fact, has been proven to be false. I would not be surprised, and I expect, that blood doping would result in a decrease in performance.

Pharmaceutical advertising of course says that it is so they can gain high prices and profits from it's sale, but there is NOT evidence that blood doping OR epo results in any improvement in performance. Again, that they do not aid performance at all has been proven, but that they provide any benefit in a healthy and well trained competitive distance runner has not.

I am sure that drinking fresh vegetable juices every morning provides a much greater benefit than either blood doping or the epo pharmaceutical crap.

J.R. wrote:That has never been proven to be true and, in fact, has been proven to be false.

Hilarious.

Let's say that you have scientists developing a new technique and they demonstrate that it produces dramatic improvements in endurance, and only athletes from that country are given the new procedure. People in other countries know that you're using this technique but they don't get to see the research that shows the major advantages and this technique is quite novel. No one is likely to protest. But if they knew what the scientists knew, they would ban the technique.

The Finns, in this case, knew that this technique was giving them radical improvements over and above their training and their altitude work (which increases natural epo, and which is attainable for athletes of any country, although those born at altitude will always have an advantage). And when the rest of the world found what blood doping could do, they banned it. All proven dopers violate the Olympic fair play standard and should lose their medals. Shorter should get another gold in the 1976 marathon, and Pre a posthumous medal for 1972.

Plus, if you look at the 1972 Olympic 5000m final, Viren pushed Pre back at precisely the moment that Pre was moving up to challenge for the lead.

jonesy. wrote:

All proven dopers violate the Olympic fair play standard and should lose their medals. Shorter should get another gold in the 1976 marathon, and Pre a posthumous medal for 1972.

Prove it then

HRE wrote:

Jouko Kuha admitted to blood doping in the late 60s and you had the Finnish cross country skiers caught doping a few years ago. But as you and I agree, there is no evidence that Viren did anything like that other than the fact that he\'s from the same country as others who doped are from. So following that logic we should suspect all female US distance runners because Slaney and Jacobs were dopers.

Debates like these are interesting for a while but ultimately are useless. We\'ve all got our opinions and I doubt that any of us who\'s posted here has changed the opinion of anyone else, which is one reason why if I were Viren, I probably wouldn\'t bother making any comment about any of this.

I don\'t think Kuha admitted anything. He was suspected.

As I\'ve stated my thoughts on Viren go beyond what you\'ve written and if you\'re going to ignore that then there\'s no point in debating something that isn\'t that big of a deal to me. I find it interesting but don\'t consider it cheating or that Viren was an evildoer or a big meanie or any other negative term one can think of.

Don\'t know whether this has been posted

jonesy, don´t write BS. This is pure BS:

"if you look at the 1972 Olympic 5000m final, Viren pushed Pre back at precisely the moment that Pre was moving up to challenge for the lead."

Viren didn´t push anyone, Pre was coming behind Viren when Lasse accelerated and passed the leading runner Gammoudi. Pre was so tired that ended being 4th.

About Vaatainen, he was "dirty" in my opinion but not Viren.

And I haven´t heard that Jouko Kuha has used blood doping.

J.R. wrote:

old tymer wrote:

a more relevant question is: why wouldn't they? Blood-doping improved performance

That has never been proven to be true and, in fact, has been proven to be false. I would not be surprised, and I expect, that blood doping would result in a decrease in performance.

Pharmaceutical advertising of course says that it is so they can gain high prices and profits from it's sale, but there is NOT evidence that blood doping OR epo results in any improvement in performance. Again, that they do not aid performance at all has been proven, but that they provide any benefit in a healthy and well trained competitive distance runner has not.

I am sure that drinking fresh vegetable juices every morning provides a much greater benefit than either blood doping or the epo pharmaceutical crap.

Sorry J.R but I've seen proper "double blind" studies showing dramatic improvement with blood doping in well trained distance runners -typically between 5-8 secs per km on 32-34min 10k runners.

Would you get the same improvement with 27-28min runners? I suspect not, although anecdotal reports suggest elite runners can improve 30 or more seconds over 10k with the procedure.

There have been "tests" done on near elite runners with EPO but it is very hard to get proper accounts of the results. From what cyclists and xc skiiers suggest you'd expect improvements in the same sort of range.

My vegie/berry smoothies don't seem to be giving me the same lift. Still I don't get the headaches and stomach cramps that the drug regimes can give you.

Any innovative advantage could be seen as "unfair" if knowledge of how to obtain that advantage is not generally available. When Ron Hill learned that cyclists in Sweden were using the high protein/high carbo depletion diet he adopted it and was very secretive about it. He admitted that he used a special diet but when asked about the specifics would only say, "It involves high protein."

If Viren had stumbled onto a legal technique that improved his performance I see no problem if he used it. Knowledge of blood doping existed prior to Munich and the discussions about Viren perhaps using the technique started immediately afterward so by 1976 there was plenty of opportunity for others to obtain Viren's "advantage" if in fact he had such a thing.

If people who think he blood doped feel like it diminishes their respect for him that's their business. What bothers me about threads like this are some of the underlying assumptions, specifically and mostly the assumption that because other Finns doped or blood doped it proves that Viren did, that people's inability to find a quote from Viren which answers their doubts (and wouldn't believe anyway even if he issued one) is further proof that he blood doped, and that only the Finns could have used this technique.

I realize I am coming in late here on this but from what I understand of the process it needs to be well regulated and carefully administered which would lead to the "team away trip" sort of process that has been mentioned. I thought that Viren did much of not all of his training away from the team and led a fairly solitary existance in terms of his running. And that his training sojourns were fairly remote and away from the proper mediacl facilities to carry this out...

HRE wrote:

specifically and mostly the assumption that because other Finns doped or blood doped it proves that Viren did, that people's inability to find a quote from Viren which answers their doubts (and wouldn't believe anyway even if he issued one) is further proof that he blood doped

Dont you think that makes it more likely that he doped? I mean if all his team mates were clean and he always directly denied it wouldnt that make you more sure that he was clean?

I don't. "All" of Viren's teammtes in this case would have been Maaninka who was on the Finnish team in 1980. Vaatanien, Vassala, Paavarinta, his teammates in Munich have not been shown to have done anything illegal. Kuha was pretty much done by Munich. I don't think he was even there. Vanio was caught in 1984. So the argument really comes down to "Maanainka did so Viren must have." Just doesn't do it for me.

HRE wrote:

I don't. "All" of Viren's teammtes in this case would have been Maaninka who was on the Finnish team in 1980. Vaatanien, Vassala, Paavarinta, his teammates in Munich have not been shown to have done anything illegal. Kuha was pretty much done by Munich. I don't think he was even there. Vanio was caught in 1984. So the argument really comes down to "Maanainka did so Viren must have." Just doesn't do it for me.

If there is a string of dirty athletes coming out of Finland doesnt that make it more likely that there is a culture of blood doping in Finland. I mean if there are dirty Finnish runners before and during and after Viren doesnt that make it more likely that he was doing the same thing.

I was around then and marvelled at Viren. The circumstantial evidence was far to great for me to believe they weren't doping. From Vaatainen to Vasala for the Finns to simply burst on the scene then disappear the was classic doping pattern (see also East Germans, for an individual example see Olaf Beyer).

In spite of this, Virens performance in Montreal was the best I've seen before or since. Doped or not.