casual obsever wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
To accommodate these few exceptions this can be updated for 2020:
"Despite a few exceptions, I still generally believe that top Ethiopians, and top Kenyans, and other top East Africans (Eritreans, Ugandans, etc.) are NOT using EPO."
It's not just "a few exceptions" - because as you know, the top Kenyans were average among the blood dopers in 2011 and 2013, and the top Ethiopians were even above average:
Country 2011 2013
Ukraine 89% 25% wow
Ethiopia 19% 30%
Kenya 19% 13%
USA 14% 17%
GB 4% 18%
Australia 0% 4% very nice
Japan 0% 0% awesome!
For context, average was 18% in 2011 and 15% in 2013.
13% - 30% can hardly be viewed as "a few exceptions".
Last but not least, doping in Kenya has increased a lot in recent years, according to Canova.
So let's update this without putting a spin to it:
13% - 30% of the top Ethiopians and top Kenyans were blood-doping in 2011 /2013, and according to Canova, that number is on the rise in Kenya.
Sigh.
After all these pages discussing what I mean by "top", are we now saying that athletes who simply meet A and B standards are considered "top"?
Not all World Championship participants win medals, and not all of them run "top" times.
So what does 19% and 13% mean? Given the number of Kenyan athletes sent, it is an estimated 8 athletes and 5.5 athletes, respectively. That represents men and women combined, and "top" and "not top" combined.
Now is when the fun begins. If we look for top athletes, how many would we find among the 13%-30% of estimated blood dopers, and how many would we find among the 70%-87% of estimated non-blood dopers.
The answer to that depends on what you believe causes the "top" runners to run "top" times.