Thank you Paula!

Paula didn't cheat.

Try to keep up wrote:

Paula didn't cheat.

So she didn't cheat? She is like 3 minutes faster than the next fastest runner (who likely cheated as well) BUT Paula didn't cheat? How can someone be so much faster than everyone else (and many of those are cheaters) yet she is the one not cheating?

Because she's FASTER.

No reason to think she cheated, nor many others.If there were many other cheaters, then surely cheating isn't that effective, if they can't produce times within 3 minutes of Paula's record.I guess the main reason, like we saw in London today, many women could run faster, if they tried, but they don't try.

Common Sensesical wrote:

Try to keep up wrote:

Paula didn't cheat.

So she didn't cheat? She is like 3 minutes faster than the next fastest runner (who likely cheated as well) BUT Paula didn't cheat? How can someone be so much faster than everyone else (and many of those are cheaters) yet she is the one not cheating?

rekrunner wrote:

No reason to think she cheated, nor many others.

If there were many other cheaters, then surely cheating isn't that effective, if they can't produce times within 3 minutes of Paula's record.

I guess the main reason, like we saw in London today, many women could run faster, if they tried, but they don't try.

So she didn't cheat? She is like 3 minutes faster than the next fastest runner (who likely cheated as well) BUT Paula didn't cheat? How can someone be so much faster than everyone else (and many of those are cheaters) yet she is the one not cheating?

[/quote]

We assume many marathoners (and track athletes) are using some kind of performance-enhancing drug. When Lance Armstrong won 7 Tours de France but almost everyone else in the sport was using drugs, was it reasonable to conclude that Lance was clean? The one of the very few clean riders who was dominating the sport, a sport so infested with dirty riders? Is that logical?

If a male runner were to run a 1:59:55 would you likely assume that he is cheating? Or he is so exceptional that clean he can beat by 3 minutes all of the others, many of whom are cheating? That just does not pass the smell test just as Lance's 7 titles didn't either.

It may smell funny, but there's no proof it's rotten. So eat up.

She is the Lance Armstrong of Marathoning. The truth will come to light one day. Thank you for such great deceit, Paula.

wtfanny wrote:

It may smell funny, but there's no proof it's rotten. So eat up.

I wouldn't suggest doing that with dairy products.

wtfanny wrote:

It may smell funny, but there's no proof it's rotten. So eat up.

Think about it this way: If Paula was clean how fast could she have run using PEDs? 2:11? 2:10? Faster?

Cheaters never win wrote:

Why thank her? Are you thanking Justin Gatlin too? Canadican Ben too? Are you congragulating other cheats?

That you imply she cheated says more about you than the facts.

Did Bob Beamon cheat?

Sure! Why not?

Booster wrote:

Cheaters never win wrote:

Why thank her? Are you thanking Justin Gatlin too? Canadican Ben too? Are you congragulating other cheats?

That you imply she cheated says more about you than the facts.

Did Bob Beamon cheat?

Bob Beamon had only jumped 27'4" prior to his historic leap AT ALTITUDE.

Where in track and field do we find world records vastly superior to the runners-up? With the Chinese women runners and with old Communist 400-, 800- and 1500-meter record holders. Everyone here assumes the Chinese were doping just as they do with Koch and that other lady.

Sally V wrote:

Booster wrote:

That you imply she cheated says more about you than the facts.

Did Bob Beamon cheat?

Bob Beamon had only jumped 27'4" prior to his historic leap AT ALTITUDE.

Where in track and field do we find world records vastly superior to the runners-up? With the Chinese women runners and with old Communist 400-, 800- and 1500-meter record holders. Everyone here assumes the Chinese were doping just as they do with Koch and that other lady.

And don't forget FloJO. Funny how the outliers in track and field / running are all assumed to be cheats EXCEPT for Paula.

There are very valid reasons FloJo was assumed to be a cheater. She used to be a soprano, for one thing.

Why would you assume that? Does a performance enhancing drug even exist that can produce a 2:15? Any supporting anecdotes, besides Paula? Others have been busted, but evidently the banned substances did not provide enough significant performance enhancement.One difference with Lance (and there are many more differences than similarities) is that many "in the sport" expressed doubt that his comeback was unnatural, as early as 1999, before his first Tour victory. In Paula's case, the suspicion remains within the circle of armchair experts.I don't consider Lance the best of all time -- not even the best American.I'll answer your hypothetical 1:59:55 when it happens. My guess is that other women could match Paula's time, but they don't make world record attempts.

Sally V wrote:

We assume many marathoners (and track athletes) are using some kind of performance-enhancing drug. When Lance Armstrong won 7 Tours de France but almost everyone else in the sport was using drugs, was it reasonable to conclude that Lance was clean? The one of the very few clean riders who was dominating the sport, a sport so infested with dirty riders? Is that logical?

If a male runner were to run a 1:59:55 would you likely assume that he is cheating? Or he is so exceptional that clean he can beat by 3 minutes all of the others, many of whom are cheating? That just does not pass the smell test just as Lance's 7 titles didn't either.

Rekrunner,

Do you think junxia wang doped? How about flojo?

The proof is in the pudding, so eat your meat.

Let's look at it this way. Paula's marathon record converts (using McMillan race predictor) to a 1:47:8 800 meters. The oldest track record is a 1:53.28 set more than 30 years ago by a runner who looks muscular even for a man. The record is rarely approached even today. But a clean Paula ran the equivalent of a 1:47.8 800 meters - that is more than 5 seconds faster than a dirty runner who was supremely doped up. Does that seem reasonable?

Wang Junxia's 29:31 10K record is not even recognized by Track and Field but even that would trail Clean Paula's 28:52-equivalent by 40 seconds.