here's why wrote:
one word..
morocco
^^^^^Assuming your title is true, this is the main answer.
Seyta wrote:
The judgment criteria for doping based on "consistency of performance" really doesn't make all that much sense when you put together all the opinions on this board.
- A large number of people argue that being extremely consistent at a high level indicates doping. Exhibit A: El Guerrouj. Exhibit B: Gebrselassie. Exhibit C: Bekele.
- However, a significant proportion of the board also routinely accuses very inconsistent runners of doping for their wild fluctuations in performance. The runners accused include Centro (performing abnormally well during Championship races), Makhloufi (performing abnormally well during ONE Championship race), and a number of others.
As for consistency, I'd say you make a good point. I personally think long seasons full of incredible results is a sign of doping.
I also think sudden huge improvements are a sign of doping.
They aren't mutually exclusive. Why?
Well comparing El G to Kiprop is like comparing apples to oranges as they compete in totally different eras. Testers now are actively trying to catch people. There is an EPO test. None of that was really true when El G competed.
I've never ever heard anyone with a brain say Centro's clutch World performances were a sign of doping. The guy was great at tactics in college and won a WC medal while at Oregon. The recent talk surrounding him is the result of two things 1) he's in Alberto's group and 2) he didn't race indoors.
One more thing about Kiprop. He just looks different. The guy was a teen phenom and like Bolt just looks like a different specimen than everyone else in the race. Plus he seems human. Has bad races, gets hurt, etc.