they have thinner calved and hence lower torque is needed.
their genes give a better Gaussian distribution. For every
Rupp or Solinsky, there are 10 Mergas or Soihs.
they have thinner calved and hence lower torque is needed.
their genes give a better Gaussian distribution. For every
Rupp or Solinsky, there are 10 Mergas or Soihs.
QUOTE:
The amount of money available on the roads increased dramatically. There are many more marathons offering much more money than 15 years ago. If you're some Kenyan or Ethiopian hopefully, it's become a more likely avenue to earn money from road racing and the marathon specifically than as 5000m or 10000m runner.
UNQUOTE
THIS IS NOT TRUE!
I just about shat my pants when Khalid K ran 2:05:48 some years ago. He obliterated the record and no one was close to approaching his marks for some time.
These days he'd be getting 4th/5th place in most major marathons.
The "there's more money!" and "younger runners are competing!" statements are smokescreens very reminiscent of the "he's 6'5"!" and "he only takes 41 steps!" nonsense we hear regarding a certain doping Jamaican sprinter.
Bottom line - these Kenyan marathoners are doped to the gills. Italian coaches are stuffing these guys full of CERA, AICAR, and god knows what else.
The cleanest marathoner on the planet right now is probably someone who runs consistently in the 2:07-2:09 range.
I don't think you know what this word 'modern' means. You mean 'current'. And microdosing still works. The marathon majors only recently started more serious testing. The marathon times are clearly suspect. Only the greats all time at 10k could run close to 2:04 and now it's commonplace just a few years later??
2:03 non-doped athlete = bigfoot = mermaids = tooth fairy
the current crop of marathoners didn't ruin their legs by running track for a number of years before they hit the road.
Young talented runners with fresh legs run the marathon in their prime. These guys could probably go 26:30 on the track if they trained for it and so 2:03 is the least you should expect. Another decade with even better training I can imagine 2:01 being run routinely.
Emil C wrote:
...
The cleanest marathoner on the planet right now is probably someone who runs consistently in the 2:07-2:09 range.
Well, actually, my bet would be that the cleanest marathoner on the planet right now is probably someone who runs around 4:00 or so.
kenya is becoming just as bad as jamaica !!
with all similar excuses . look at rudisha , dirty as ,,
and similar important fact that not tested away from races
like certain carribean island.
thing not stating about epo is that more important
for training and the benefits of continuous high hct
for adaption to it and recovery .ask morrocans .
like previously came to europe with very high hct
now have to keep it under 50 .but still more advantageous
to high altitude athletes with naturally low hct .
could be just epo and real good courses/weather and pacing
but
Question ,if epo is the main ped in use why werent these
times ran before spring 2012 when biological passport
came in and crazy hct were not possible. guess they were and
guess that just in a perfect storm at moment
with afew marathons were all factors were perfect for fast times . but still not possible with out our good friend
epo
dont think aicar as around for awhile , gw50 cant use since
start 2013 ,could be seeing new endurance drug
or fact that nervous system enhancing effects of igf-1 lr3
that so good for sprinters ,has place in marathon also.
keep it up for whole race .god bless peptides ..
i know that the lightness lr3 is being used in kenya
senior rudisha and now kiprop.
that little extra speed of marathon runners tells
me could just be seeing the lightness lr3 in marathon
but still not possible without epo ,and aid to training.
lighntness lr3 not tested for .
and by way new test for micropdosing epo but not used yet
dangerdanger wrote:
2:03 non-doped athlete = bigfoot = mermaids = tooth fairy
The Tooth Fairy is probably real.
Well Actually wrote:
Well, actually, my bet would be that the cleanest marathoner on the planet right now is probably someone who runs around 4:00 or so.
I did 2:39 on little training, not much sleep and most likely with very moderate talent. It must be possible to get well inside 2:30 clean. How much under 2:30? Good question.
The truth is out there wrote:
Lance was never caught red handed during any of his tours, yet he was doping to the gills. It seemed to good to be true.
Then we hear about a no-name farmer who is running 2:03 in 2 years after 0 running.
It just seems too good to be true. It doesn't add up.
#1 - running, as a sport, has been around a long time. Why did it take this long to spot a talent like this? Kenyans (even ones that did only marathons) - were struggling to run 2:07s - then bam - 2:05, 2:04, 2:03.
#2 - How can 2:03 guys be THAT much more talented and work THAT much harder than a guy like Ritz, who also is no slouch with a 12:56 to his name and works very hard. I just find it hard to believe just because this guy's ancestors were Masai warriors he can run 2:03 just like that. Well - Ritz's ancestors were pillaging European barbarians, which also required stamina and plenty of strength!!!
#3 - Why is it 2:03-4 guys crumble so easily in championship races? None of the super stud 2:04 Ethios did well at the last championship marathon. Even Mutai, the super stud 2:03 marathoner, performed terrible
Bottom line - all of these guys have agents, huge profit motives, and suspicious times. And yet no one is questioning them, we just accept it as .. "yea, he's Kenyan."
There is a vast conspiracy being led by the agents. The runners themselves are naive and they are only seeing $$dollar$$ signs.
you are a moron
yyy wrote:
they have thinner calved and hence lower torque is needed.
their genes give a better Gaussian distribution. For every
Rupp or Solinsky, there are 10 Mergas or Soihs.
Lol that really makes sense to you? Volume has nothing to do with torque.
Jeff my friend,
good to see you.
Who are "we"?
Was this "belief" arrived at quickly?
Is no one questioning Kenyan performances? (Are you new to this site?)
But more generally, why do we believe what we believe? It's always some combination of none or more of facts, evidence, observations, and logic, and then faith to fill in the missing pieces.
Why do we believe that EPO can turn potential 2:06 runners into sub 2:04 runners? What fraction of this belief is based on facts, evidence, observations, or logic?
Why do we believe that 2:03 is not part of the natural progression of world records that similarly occurs in all sports?
Why do we believe that only Kenya and Ethiopia have figured out how to dope in distance events, for more than 20 years, while nations with more means struggle to match their own 30 year old performances?
Why do we believe that Lance's success in one grand tour, can be compared to the Kenyan dominance in the marathon?
Did he ever set any world records? Did he ever win two grand tours in one year (like Pantani and Contador, and six others on fifteen occasions)? Did he ever win two grand tours and a world championship in the same year (like Merckx and Roche)? Did he win a tour and a world championship in the same year (like Lemond in 1989)?
In cycling grand tours, what we believe is the best of all time depends on what we chose the contest to be.
We know Lance used his influence to build a network of support, including the cycling federation. After all, he was already a millionaire in 1993, after winning a "Thrift Drug" triple crown, so was certainly an athlete with potential for influence (not an undiscovered farmer from the midwest). Maybe he had less than $1 million, if allegations of bribing competitors to let him win are true.
Why do we believe such a similarly powerful network of support exists for Kenyans? It would even need to be more powerful, considering advances in doping control, and lessons learned from cycling.
Is Lance even the best American? His victories were always a "team effort", and a grand tour victory requires a lot of luck and credit outside of the riders control. No crashing or mechanical mishaps. Perhaps Lance was merely the best "captain" of his team.
In 1986, Lemond won despite his team's lack of commitment in a fiercely contested battle with teammate Bernard Hinault. None of Lance's victories were won against this kind of adversity.
If not for a shooting accident, and team orders in 1985, factors outside of Lemond's control, and unrelated to his talent, Lemond could have been the first with 6 consecutive wins.
Maybe the shooting also caused early retirement due to lead toxicity -- Lemond could have had more.
Maybe not, but the bigger point is that winning 7 tours in a row cannot be considered a personal victory, like running a single marathon.
The Lemond/Hinault cooperation is most comparable to Contador/Lance during his comeback, where Contador won, despite lack of support from the team.
But getting back to beliefs, in this case, of 2:03 Kenyans, we have to chose between two (at least) low probability events:
1) That 2:03's can be done clean
2) That ONLY Kenya and Ethiopia have figured out how to implement large scale doping, yet not get caught.
Lance was caught "red handed" in 1999, but let go.
He was suspicious in 2001, but let go.
Lance was caught again in 2004, with results that showed doping during the 1999 Tour, but managed to lawyer his way out of it.
Lance was almost smothered by circumstantial evidence and suspicions.
#1)
2:07 was a good time in 1985. In 2003, the world record was sub-2:05. Running sub-2:04 now looks like a reasonable progression.
What can "bam - 2:05, 2:04, 2:03" mean when contrasted with reality of the progression of times?
Maybe a better question is why have non-Africans have stopped progressing.
#3)
The marathon is a tricky race.
Kenyan athletic federation is incompetent.
Why would I believe the 2:03's are clean?
- It's not clear EPO (or blood doping, or any other drugs) would even work for marathons. Marathons require energy management and promoting fat burning. Do drugs allow more glycogen storage or promote fat burning? Maybe they work, but the facts, evidence, observations, and logic are scarce.
- The alternative is less credible: how is it that Kenyans (mostly Kalenjins from the Nandis) and Ethiopians can dominate for decades, undetected, while nations with more resources cannot.
- Non-Africans have stopped progressing. It's not that Kenyans/Ethiopians are "bam" stepping forward, but more like other nations have stepped back.
- How can you ignore that the athletes winning all come from high altitude? Even Ryan Hall grew up and trained at Big Bear. Studies show "hi-lo" altitude training offers similar benefits that EPO offers.
I don't think everybody 'believes' that these performances are clean, several posters on this thread clearly don't.
We all have the right (and responsibility) to question performances, make speculations and believe whatever we want. But speculation and belief are not proof of doping. And it is accepted that someone is innocent until proven guilty.
You can't expect that people agree with you until something is proven (and even then they still might not).
grox wrote:
Well Actually wrote:Well, actually, my bet would be that the cleanest marathoner on the planet right now is probably someone who runs around 4:00 or so.
I did 2:39 on little training, not much sleep and most likely with very moderate talent. It must be possible to get well inside 2:30 clean. How much under 2:30? Good question.
Definitely possible to get under 2:30. My PB is 2:23 so I am guessing that is the absolute limit possible for non-cheaters.
However, note that the question posed was not who is fastest clean marathoner but rather who is the cleanest marathoner. My money is on someone who has never used PEDs, has not run a marathon in a long time, and is just stepping out of the shower even as we speak - probably a 4:00 guy/gal.
I =mr^2 for a point mass. less voluminous leg gives
less torque. clown.
Well, in a few years we shall all see what may come down the pipe whether or not the Kenyan marathoners are doping or not.
"Lance would have been caught under modern methods. And he had teammate after teammate implicate him. That hasn't been the case here."
Lance competed in 2009 and 2010 and placed THIRD in the TdF in 2009, overall.
His competition was this:
1 Alberto Contador (ESP) 85h 48' 35"
2 Andy Schleck (LUX) Team Saxo Bank +4' 11"
DSQ Lance Armstrong (USA) Astana +5' 24"
3 Bradley Wiggins (GBR) Garmin +6' 01"
4 Fränk Schleck (LUX) Team Saxo Bank +6' 04"
5 Andreas Klöden (GER) Astana +6' 42"
6 Vincenzo Nibali (ITA) Liquigas +7' 35"
7 Christian Vande Velde (USA) Garmin +12' 04"
8 Roman Kreuziger (CZE) Liquigas +14' 16"
9 Christophe Le Mével (FRA) Française des Jeux +14' 25"
10 Sandy Casar (FRA) Française des Jeux
Cycling had the Bio Passport and all the same testing in 2009 it has this year. Notice any other caught dopers on that list? Care to revise what you wrote or what you think?
joho wrote:
george oscar bluth wrote:It's called Train Hard Win Easy: The Kenyan Way, not "Running with the Kenyans".
Anyway, I've read it, and they don't train harder or smarter than the top level Americans. They're just, ON AVERAGE, more genetically predisposed to distance running, and as it is part of their culture they have their best athletes as distance runners instead of basketball players or football players.
Seeing as how Renato helps coach some American marathoners, I find that a little conflicting.
According to Renato, they do train smarter for the marathon than the Americans. I think he knows what he is talking about. There are few that I would trust more than him when it comes to marathon training.