I still haven't heard any really good reasons why any of Canova's athletes in particular are suspicious.
I will illustrate the kind of thing I'm looking for by comparing the current WR's in the 100m and the marathon.
The current 100m WR is held by Bolt, at 9.58 (2009)
Previously Powell had it in 2006 at 9.77, and in 2007 at 9.74
The current marathon WR is held by Makau at 2:03.38 (2011) Previously Geb had it in 2007 at 2:04.26, and in 2008 at 2:03.59
These records are comparable in that they are both recent, and both broke recently-set WR's, which were both lowered consecutively by a single athlete (Powell and Geb), in basically the same years.
The only difference is that Bolt's record appeared one year earlier than Makau's record.
So how do the two compare? As far as improving on the previous record, Bolt's represents a 1.6427% improvement, but Makau's represents only a .2823% improvement.
Bolt's record is MUCH more impressive, especially when you consider that it broke not only clean but ALL proven doped previous times and WR's, and that it was a strong record relative to the marathon record which, if Canova's logic that the best only started running marathons recently, hasn't seen the parade of excellence that the 100m has seen.
Now, imagine if somebody had run, in 2010, a marathon in the time of 2:01.57, instead of Makau going only 2:03.38 in 2011.
Show me something like that, or hopefully more egregious, given that the best are only now starting to do marathon in their prime. Yes, I know about the lack of testing in Kenya, and the generalized statements of a few athletes implicating many athletes--but those things are non-specific. They aren't useful for starting a case, only for supporting one that is made on more firm grounding.
And yes, I know that sprint PED's are different from distance PED's, although that is up for debate--or at the very least, maybe the potential benefit is greater in the sprints than it is in distance. Is that true? Is Makau's WR more egregious than Bolt's? Show me if it is.
And that's the tip of the iceberg. If you showed something like that, then you would have to move on to discussion of the individual athlete.
UNLESS, of course, you are of the belief that there has been doping in the marathon records for a long, long time, in which case I would like to hear you point out when it started, and make the case for why all the record-holders since then have been doped.
If you can't do that, lay off Canova until you can. Sure, a lot of what he says is irrational and nonsensical, but the point is that if you can't make a good case, then he shouldn't have to say anything at all, and anything he does say cannot be held against him.
Somebody make out at least somewhat of a case for one of his athletes doping, because if you don't, all of your protestations against Canova are meaningless.
Apologies, of course, if this has already been done elsewhere. I'm not a distance guy. Please link to it if it has already been done.