"I think the indoor mile record should fall. It's soft. It was set in 1997. In the context of times people are running now, it's a golden opportunity for the likes of Galen Rupp or someone else. I mean, El Guerrouj holds both the indoor and outdoor mile [3:43] records. If El G could do it ... of course, they're testing more now. You can read between the lines on that."
http://deadspin.com/how-i-brok...1525556046
Interesting.
-
-
- Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
Like they were testing when Coghlan set his WR...
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Bad Wigins
-
another great post from bad wigins
Bad Wigins wrote:
Like they were testing when Coghlan set his WR...
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
"Here's something you should know about tracks: The smaller the track, the slower the times, because turns slow a runner's pace. A 10-lap-to-a-mile track will cost an elite runner six or seven seconds over an eight-lap oval, the standard indoor size now."
At least one piece of BS in that article. There may be more.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to redux2
-
Not the first man to cast doubts about El G. At least he is getting it out there.
I have no doubt that that Coghlan was clean but I would love it if someone studied the videos of some of his records and measured the distance ran. The difference between his mile times indoor and out is ridiculous. His indoor times were run over tracks of varying size. It would not surprise me if some were short.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to P White
-
they're all doped. enough!!!
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to P White
-
He was really only healthy a couple of times outdoors after he got out of Villanova.
P White wrote:
I have no doubt that that Coghlan was clean but I would love it if someone studied the videos of some of his records and measured the distance ran. The difference between his mile times indoor and out is ridiculous. His indoor times were run over tracks of varying size. It would not surprise me if some were short.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Bad Wigins
-
There were much better drugs when El Guerrouj set his.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Like they were testing when Coghlan set his WR...
Circumstantial evidence, yes--but this is not about what would suffice in court.
Moreover, you can just look at cycling and the zero failed tests of Lance Armstrong to understand why 'better testing' doesn't mean what you would think it means, or hope it means.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
As time goes on, I actually think more and more that El G either was or could have run those times clean.
He was extremely light, went through a system where athletics was a lifestyle beyond what it is in the US and ultimately SOMEONE has to be the fastest. Being a North African, he comes from a land where inhabitants have the perfect genetic makeup for middle distance running.
Why couldn't the best grown man from North Africa, who is 15 pounds lighter at the same height, run 10 seconds faster than the best European-descent US HS runner ever did?
Whether El G was clean or not does not matter to me, that it's possible to do clean is what is important. I believe it's possible.
-
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to wqqqqqqqq
-
So 80's cheaters are less dirty because their dope wasn't as good?
wqqqqqqqq wrote:
There were much better drugs when El Guerrouj set his.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Bad Wigins
-
Doesn't matter. El G was still doped.
Bad Wigins wrote:
So 80's cheaters are less dirty because their dope wasn't as good?
You can tearfully cry "But what about this guy, what about that guy" as much as you want.
Still dirty.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
he ran a 3'44.9 in '97, worth 3'28-low
i figured he might go about 3'28-flat or perhaps just dip into the 3'27s in '98 & maybe plateau around that
to run 3'26-flat with a 53.2 finish was astonishing & i must admit that my immediate instinct was that he was doped
however, his longevity & still running 3'27 in '04 offers some evidence of innoncence
on balance though, that drop from 3'28-low to a 3'26 with poor pace to bell still tends to sway the argument more to doping than clean - i didn't see him as good enough to beat morceli's fantastic 3'27-low wr let alone absolutely destroy it !
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to ventolin^3
-
All that longevity implies is that El G was on a highly sophisticated Moroccan government-sanctioned doping regime. Which is what a lot of people think. In "The Perfect Distance", middle distance historian Pat Butcher suggests that El G did a lot of "odd" things.
We may never know the truth about El G, however.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Bad Wigins
-
All world records set in the 1980's had to have a drug test to be ratified.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Like they were testing when Coghlan set his WR...
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
Despite my belief that EL G was doped, this whole article should be taken with a shovel full of salt.
Once an Expert wrote:
"I think the indoor mile record should fall. It's soft. It was set in 1997. In the context of times people are running now, it's a golden opportunity for the likes of Galen Rupp or someone else. I mean, El Guerrouj holds both the indoor and outdoor mile [3:43] records. If El G could do it ... of course, they're testing more now. You can read between the lines on that."
http://deadspin.com/how-i-brok...1525556046
Interesting.
Coghlan implies that EL G's indoor record is weak, then stating that Rupp should be able to break it. I disagree on both counts, but heh ho.
But he then implies that if EL G could do it (on drugs) then Rupp should be able. So he thinks Rupp is clean and is a better athlete than a dirty EL G?
Clean or dirty, EL G is in a different stratosphere than Rupp when it comes to Mile running.
Another problem with this article is the lack of knowledge of the interviewer, who states that a Mile run on a 200m track would be 6 or seven seconds faster than the 10 or 11 laps to the Mile Coghlan set his record on. So she (I think the interviewer is a woman?) is basically saying that Coghlan's 3:49.78 would have been 3:42/3:43 on a 200 track and even faster outdoors! Utter nonsense.
Coghlan had enough spells of good running outdoors over a long career and never came close to matching his indoor Mile best, let lane 3:42. He always put great stock on the indoor scene and he excelled at it. He knew the likes of Ovett, Coe and most of the European elite either didn't run indoors at all or simply used it as a marker for how their winter training was going, thus he cultivated his indoor reputation and prowess. Coghlan realised that he wouldn't reach the dizzy heights outdoors and thus focused on indoors. He moved up to 5000m outdoors because he knew he wasn't the best miler outdoors when everyone was competing. There is no way a supposed 3:42 miler indoors could only muster 3:50 outdoors.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Once an Expert
-
I had lunch with Coghlan last year. He's a great guy, brilliantly hilarious and a wealth of stories and experience.
The only contradiction in his statement was that he would be afraid of doing a workout after a race in fear of breaking down, yet this is the guy that struggled with an Achilles injury most of his career - thus his mindset was warped on preservation.
Heck of an athlete. Tough as nails. Wicked kick. Gutsy winner.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to Deanouk
-
5000m was easy pickings then for coghlan in 83 and aouita after
Deanouk wrote:
He moved up to 5000m outdoors because he knew he wasn't the best miler outdoors when everyone was competing.
before the east africans moved in
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to just sayin
-
Coghlan also accuses Rupp of being doped.
I emailed Coghlan to see what his training was like prior to his record-setting mile in 1983, and whether it included a post-race workout a la Rupp. His email response was: "I'd never consider doing something stupid like 5 x mile, last one in 4:01, after a race unless I had some extra octane up my.... you know what!"
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to To the Limit
-
Drug tests for what? If Coghlan was tested it was 100 times more of a joke than today's. You have any idea what they tested for 30 years ago?
To the Limit wrote:Bad Wigins wrote:
All world records set in the 1980's had to have a drug test to be ratified.
Like they were testing when Coghlan set his WR...
It's always tough to believe your heroes cheated. But those without that bias would not think twice before doubting any/all of the late 70/80's milers.
-
-
-
- RE: Eamonn Coghlan implies that El G was dirty in interview - in reply to afafafa
-
OK but he walks it back later:
Jesus, I don't even know Galen Rupp—I'm removed from the inner sanctum of track now—but I don't think for one minute he's doing something illegal. But why in god's name would you do five times a mile after a race? How would anyone have the strength to do that? I just question the sanity of it.
-