henry333 wrote:
Anyone who disputes the above data is either a moron or someone connected to the problem. I wouldn't was a second arguing with those people.
The only thing I will add is when the East Africans & Russians and Paula of course, realized there were way more fools with money in the marathon, the top runners moved from the track to the marathon or simply straight to the marathon after 2000 and of course all the marathon lists were re-written by EPO users. Again, if this isn't blatantly obvious, you are either a moron or you are connected to the sport and have a vested interest in keeping the status quo such as Canova.
I dispute it. And I'm one who has suffered financially from athletes doping. Not only that there were in fact two world bests at 2000m set in the 90s and not three, but that drugs were or are at the root of it all.
Some athletes who set records and win medals cheat. Some athletes who set records and win medals do not. Some of the surge in marathon performances can be credited to drugs, but certainly not all of it. There has been a massive shift in the availability of financial incentives from the track to the roads and the talent has followed. There are fewer fixtures on the summer circuit and those that remain lack the relative buying power those in the 90s had.
It seems that the premise here is that EPO fueled the surge in records until 2000, at which point EPO testing brought performances down. And yet you contend that it is in fact EPO that is the primary reason for the assault on the marathon records. But that doesn't make sense given your first point. If the testing is better, it's better for the marathon runners, as well.
I would also question the exclusion the 800m from discussion as well as limiting the metric to world records. None of the BALCO women were setting world records, but they were a filthy bunch. And then many excellent marks fall short of world records, but shouldn't be seen as insignificant because they come up just short.