Wang Junxia - Was she on peds or was she on PEDs???

So a women's 1500m going out for the first 300m at 3:44 mile pace doesn't set off alarm bells in your head. RIGHT!

António Cabral wrote:

WR 100 Metres 10.49 0.0 Florence Griffith-Joyner 16/07/1988 – 25 years ago !

2 - 10.61 Lavardo Smith 10/06/2007 – the second world all time best 19 years later than FJ Griffith, still 0.12secs slower than JF.JGriffith

Hm, Usain Bolt has run 9,58. Is this meant as a joke?

António Cabral wrote:

WR 800 Metres 1:53.28 Jarmila Kratochvílová 26/07/1983 – 29 years ago

2 - 1:53.43 Nadezhda Olizarenko 27/07/1980 – Second best done 32 years ago ! ! !

3 - 1:54.01 Pamela Jelimo 29/08/2008 – Pamela Jelimo is the third best , and we needed to wait 28 years ago for someone from modern training comes close to the 800m WR, but still 0.34 slower.

Maybe you should look for a new calculator.

You are loosing a lot of credibility when writing such nonsense.

doesn't count if it's an imaginary ghost

I am letsrun wrote:

What is this fascination with crucifying the Chinese runners? You do know that everybody cheats, right? Is it the fact that they cheated to a higher degree? Does it make the runners that we admire yet probably also cheated look a little more legit?

The Chinese cheated, the Finns cheated,the Russians cheated, the Spanish cheated, the Italians cheated,the East Germans cheated, the Moroccans cheated, our sprinters cheated, Athletic West cheated, our NOP thyroid boys cheated. Even the East Africans cheated. What's the difference?

Perhaps it's like the poster describes above, when its tiny Chinese women cheating there way to the record books it really sticks in our craw. Cheating should be left to our fleet-footed Kenyans and NOPers.

For the people who know (or have a very strong suspicion) everyone dopes, it must be because they think, if athletes dope, at least, they must all have access to the same substances. When something like the Chinese women records of the 90s happen, we have to admit the drug playing field was not level. In summary: cheating like the others is about fine, cheating more is really cheating.

(And anyway, even if all the athletes used the same drugs, not all of them would respond as well. Still not the competition most of us want to see.)

said88 wrote:

You are loosing a lot of credibility when writing such nonsense.

Lol.

This has been discussed many times on this board. I think there are three facts that are not usually acknowledged:

1. Focusing on one specific performance (say, the 1500) misses the point that most of the athletes in question (not just Junxia) ran multiple events, some of which had qualifying heats, all at WR pace. Here's Junxia's six-day stretch:

September 8: 29:31, WR

September 11: 3:51.92, #2 all-time (now #4), betters old WR

September 12: 8:12, WR

September 13: 8:06, WR

I am assuming there were also prelims in the 1500.

2. The meet was restricted to Chinese athletes. It was not the Chinese national championships, though; those had already been held in May (where Junxia ran a much more reasonable 8:27). It took place in September, after the world championships. There is absolutely zero precedence for legitimate world records set in domestic meets late in the season. Junxia's season began in April, by the way, with a 2:24 marathon.

3. Contrary to what has been posted in this thread, several men's national records were also set at this meet: in the 100, the 400, the steeplechase, and the 400 hurdles. How often do we see legitimate national records set in domestic-only meets that take place in September?

If there were drugs that allowed women to run world record-caliber 3ks at the end of a 10k, and to produce at least four WR-caliber performances in 6 days, someone else would have discovered them too. The Chinese women were obviously doped, a lot, as were many other distance runners in the 90s. But there clearly must be more to this particular story.

This is the National Games. It's arguably more important than the Olympics in terms of sporting prestige in China.

That's not contrary to what's been written. There are zero standing men's national records from the 1993 National Games, while there are ten standing women's Chinese records (many of them world records). And many mediocre men's performances.

Again, this is the National Games. This is the premier sporting event in China.

It's not just drugs. This was a very unique combination that has never been used anywhere else. Who else has tried getting a large group of women, putting them on every form of chemical assistance available and having them run 40km hard every day?

bigup wrote:

So a women's 1500m going out for the first 300m at 3:44 mile pace doesn't set off alarm bells in your head. RIGHT!

Men have gone out at 3:30 pace before, so what? It's called opening fast.

Can you post a link to the men's results you're citing?

It seems likely to me that the track was something like 2% short, but it's hard to have a well-formed opinion without seeing men's results too.

They went through the first 300m at world record pace for 800m. That is the equivalent of men going out in 36 seconds for the first 300m. Then they still break the world record. Right!

Jeff Wigand wrote:

the women didn't run 41 anything for 300m. Qu hit 300m in 42.5 (56.7 pace) before hitting 400m in 57.2.

Thank you for adding some reality. Do you happen to have the rest of the splits, and where did you get them?

bigup wrote:

They went through the first 300m at world record pace for 800m. That is the equivalent of men going out in 36 seconds for the first 300m. Then they still break the world record. Right!

What if it was a weak world record? And why are you so concerned that the first lap was so fast? Their remaining laps were significantly slower. That balances it out. Again, sometimes people go out fast. Do you deny this?

No one runs a 3:50 1500 by going out in 42 for the first 300.

And the only way that it is possible is if that person was capable of running under 3:45.

This would be like El G going out in 37 en route to his 3:26.00.

You can't run that inefficiently and set a world record.

Pretty simple: Splits to all world records in distance events have been close to even.

This isn't even close to even.

And the 10,000 WR had a huge negative split.

Nothing made sense about any of these races except that the distance run must have been short.

Starting at the wrong line would be the way to do that on a legit track.

What were the winner's splits?

* wrote:

No one runs a 3:50 1500 by going out in 42 for the first 300.

And the only way that it is possible is if that person was capable of running under 3:45.

This would be like El G going out in 37 en route to his 3:26.00.

You can't run that inefficiently and set a world record.

Pretty simple: Splits to all world records in distance events have been close to even.

This isn't even close to even.

And the 10,000 WR had a huge negative split.

Nothing made sense about any of these races except that the distance run must have been short.

Starting at the wrong line would be the way to do that on a legit track.

Or that it was a weak record.

A record attempt doesn't have to be negative split. It can also be positive split. There is no difference in closing with a finishing kick or opening with a finishing kick instead. And plenty of world records have big negative splits - that's inefficiency according to you, but it happens. You're confusing setting a world record and running your absolute fastest time. One of those absolutely requires even splits, the other doesn't.

dkny64 wrote:

Can you post a link to the men's results you're citing?

It seems likely to me that the track was something like 2% short, but it's hard to have a well-formed opinion without seeing men's results too.

This website's coding won't let me post the link, for some reason. But if you google "7th chinese national games track," the wikipedia entry with medalists is the first result.

Here is a Chinese site, also with results for the top three finishers:

You gotta love this thinking that "it was a weak record." Yeah, a weak record that had been set 13 years earlier and has now stood for another 20 years.

grox wrote:

When something like the Chinese women records of the 90s happen, we have to admit the drug playing field was not level. In summary: cheating like the others is about fine, cheating more is really cheating.

(And anyway, even if all the athletes used the same drugs, not all of them would respond as well. Still not the competition most of us want to see.)

I agree, PED's will never level the playing field, in fact,it does the opposite. But wouldn't you agree that what NOP is doing right now is screwing up the integrity of the sport just like the Chinese did? Sure, they are not re-writing record books(even though Farah probably could), but they have finished 1,2,1,1,2,1,1,4 in the last three majors. I dought most east Africans are taking their thyroid and asthma meds, at least right now. And who knows what else legal PED NOP is using that they are choosing not to disclose after seeing the mini backlash they are getting for thyroid meds.

MA is no diferent than Salazar, they just found a way to get the edge and did it extremely effectively.

Maybe Wang started to do kettleball execises and started to do high-weight low-rep weight lifting? Or maybe they used under water treadmills.