Does Renato Canova TRULY Believe What He Says About PEDs?

he probably dolls out drugs to all his athletes.i wouldnt be suprised.after all,if training at altitude was all it took to make an athlete great,thered be world class peruvians,nepalese,tibetans,bolivians,papuans and bhutanese.

jeff tallon wrote:

he probably dolls out drugs to all his athletes.i wouldnt be suprised.after all,if training at altitude was all it took to make an athlete great,thered be world class peruvians,nepalese,tibetans,bolivians,papuans and bhutanese.

To make it easy for simpletons like yourself to understand renato put together a list with the requirements to be the best in the world.

For fkkkkks sake, the whole point of his post was to explain that it isn't only this or that one thing it takes.

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?

preciously jaded wrote:

[quote]Renato Canova wrote:

Dear Weldon-ium, if I don't believe in the effects of meldonium (drug I don't know) is due to the fact that athletes of 30 different sports, requiring different attitudes and totally different physiological processes, used it.

This is the reason because I have some doubt, and my idea is the same of the Spanish scientist : taking meldonium is more as a "fashion" that as a real utility.

In all of the sports involved, increased endurance will be an advantage.

It is improbable that the athletes caught will have been taking ONLY meldonium. They will likely have been taking other PEDs as well. The "doping mentality" in doctors/coaches/athletes will have been the underlying factor in this.

It is very probable that many athletes were only taking meldonium, since it was legal until January 2016. Plus, if illegal enhancers were more effective, wouldn't they be taking those *instead*? The most logical explanation is athletes were taking only meldonium and through negligence or unlucky biochemistry, it was still in their systems in February 2016

Who takes some doping MUST be banned. Period.

But I'm curious to see if the same amount of athletes, of any level, should continue to take EPO, if the explanation was that doesn't work with the bests, or can give some small advantage only.

I'm for banning athletes taking EPO not because have some advantage in their performances, but because ARE STUPID going against the rules for something not working.

My position doesn't regard the fact they must or must not be banned : there is a rule, and for my "mental structure", apart the rule, I don't like and don't accept the fact athletes WANT to take something with the idea to enhance their performances.

It's not the problem of how much any pharmac works, and if is legal or not.

It's a problem of wrong, widespread mentality, very far from my mentality and my values.

The discussion here is not about the solution to ban or not athletes positive : THEY MUST BE BANNED.

The discussion is IF EPO can help performances for the well identified category of athletes born, living and training in altitude, using a continuous, advanced tuype of training (not only hard, but also smart) which includes a lot of components (something I don't think, opposite of what the most part of people supposes), or not.

I never suggested any doping, and I never wanted to cover anybody. Simply, I had evidence that it's possible to be at the top of the world with training only, and don't think these athletes could run faster if used some external aid (I repeat, legal or illegal, for me is the same).

I work for enhancing the self confidence of the athletes, connecting this with their training, step by step, with continuity and patience, because we need to work at the same time for changing physiological and psychological parameters, since a good athlete becomes a champion only when these two factors are able to grow together.

And, in this process, every aid from outside the interior sphere makes the athlete LESS confident in himself, and MORE confident in the received aid.

I don't want this. I want athletes very strong mentally, with the stimulus to see till where can arrive with their own strength.

And for reaching this type of goal, there is no room for the assumption of any pharmac, also legal.

Renato Canova wrote:

How many times I said that there are not researches involving the best athletes of the world, all born, living and training in altitude ?

And, believe me, there are a lot of physiological explanations about the reason that for people training so hard, and Always staying in altitude, EPO doesn't work.

This has been done to death several times before. Because the use of EPO is illegal in sports you cannot have a research study on the effects of EPO in elite athletes.

There are however some cases of Olympic athletes who have been caught which give some interesting information. You can look for example at this athlete of Kenyan origin who was born at altitude and who tested positive for EPO:

He made quite big improvements relatively late in his career and was selected for the 2012 Olympics in the marathon. At the Olympic training camp, French doctors saw that his blood values were not normal and monitored him to ensure that his Hb and HCt were within normal levels otherwise he was not going to be allowed to compete in London. During this time his training perfomance level dropped dramatically and he dropped out of the marathon. Then, no longer under medical sureveillance he improved again and ran 2h 08:33 mins to win the Daegu marathon. I know you will say that 2h 08 is not elite but it is 1.5% than your 2h06 min threshold for elite (and your threshold is actually 2.4 % slower than the world record) - but this means you are arguing that, due to a 1.5% difference, the athlete is completely different. A few months later he was tested positive for EPO and this was no surprise and it was made public that he was competing in the Daegu Marathon while not under medical sureveillance by the French federation.

So you have an Olympic athlete who was born at altitude, who trained at altitude, and whose performance level dropped when he was forced to get his blood parameters within "normal levels". When his blood parameters were not under surveillance his performace rose dramatically again but he was soon after tested positive for EPO. With this in mind you are saying "believe me there that there a lots of physiological expalnations that EPO does not work .etc ...".

Your example about Kiprotich actually PROVES what Canova is saying. Kiprotich had a time slower than the top 100 times in the marathon, so EPO helped him a lot more than it would any of those other athletes, and therefore he had more incentive to use it than any of those "best athletes of the world".

You are misrepresenting what he was saying... "So you have an Olympic athlete who was born at altitude, who trained at altitude..." is not what he said. He said the best athletes in the world, which Kiprotich was not, when he was not on drugs.

And to the earlier poster about using even with very minimal improvements, remember there is a downside to using (health, consequences of being caught), so at some point the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Basically (Canova is saying and I agree), there is an inverse relationship between the truly elite and actually using EPO etc. That's why the known distance dopers in the US like Christian Hesch or Mo Trafeh have been marginally elite figures.

pancaker wrote:

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?

You can't assume something we're actually trying to decide is true or not. Oh, never mind...

I can change the question for you : If PEDs works for elites, how come more than 100 Marathon runners were able to better the WR of HM and Marathon from the EPO era ?

Do you understand that the factors at the base of any performances are not only technical or connected with doping, but depend on a lot of circumstances ?

Do you understand that with Bekele or without Bekele, with or without El Guerrouj, with or without Shaheen, with or without Rudisha, the trend of competition is completely different ?

Do you understand that in 2005 organizers could use 20,000 USD for the pacers in a race when Kenenisa or Shaheen had to attack the WR, and now the winner of a DL has a prize of 10,000 USD only ?

Do you understand that, behind El Guerrouj, Bekele, Rudisha, all the other strong athletes could find the best conditions for running fast ?

Do you understand that in the first 10 performances all-time in 1500m, 6 are in the period 2013-2015 ?

Do you understand that at the end of 2000 (before the test for EPO) in HM only 3 athletes were able to run under 60 minutes, and now the athletes under 1 hour are 131 ?

If you don't know, or not understand all these points, why do you want to speak, instead to try to know what there is around international athletics, if you are really interested, before shooting bullshits ?

pancaker wrote:

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?

All of the Kenyan track distance records are at least 15 years old set between 1996-2001

1000m

1500m

2000m

3000m

2 miles

5000m

10000m

The golden age of track or the golden age of EPO?

sconehead wrote:

You are misrepresenting what he was saying... "So you have an Olympic athlete who was born at altitude, who trained at altitude..." is not what he said. He said the best athletes in the world, which Kiprotich was not, when he was not on drugs.

.

He was implying that there is no scientifc evidence that EPO and its influence on the Hb/Hct axis would work in elites from altitude but you cannot have a such a scientific study today to verify this in the first place. Therefore I only looked at the results of athletes with some blood data monitored as well as EPO test results because this is is the only relevant source of information to examine his assertion. I am not misrepresenting what was written especially as he said that EPO would not work in athletes born and raised and training at altitude and I gave an example of where EPO was working in such an athlete (in terms of running faster). There was then the debate about whether the athlete was truly elite by his standards. As this thread has gone on on, these standards now seem to be very much subjective and dependent on personal opinions about an individual athlete (eg Baldini= elite, Densanyo = not elite)..

If someone can become one of the best in the world through using EPO then how do you know how many of the world's best are using EPO? This issue is too complicated to make definite conclusions and this is why an absolute argument such as "EPO does not work in elite endurance athletes" will always be full of problems and posters such as myself or others will naturally point these out.

I do agree with him that thinking you need to use drugs to get your maximum performance level does harm the potential gains that an athlete can make from training naturally, and this is at all levels from amateurs to elite athletes. But with all the doping news reported in the press this thinking can be hard to suppress.

EPO blah blah blah.

Elite runners don't use more oxygen to race faster, they use less. They are more efficient runners. The have better OXYGEN ECONOMY.

Basic physiology anyone?

just sayin wrote:

pancaker wrote:

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?

All of the Kenyan track distance records are at least 15 years old set between 1996-2001

1000m

1500m

2000m

3000m

2 miles

5000m

10000m

The golden age of track or the golden age of EPO?

I'd point out that there are Kenyan records for the 800m, 1000m, 1500m, Mile, 2000m, 3000m, 5000m, 10000m and 3000m steeplechase all set between 2008 and 2015.

Restricting the discussing to men, some records are hard to better. These are the years in which current United States records were set:

800m 1986

1000m 1974

2000m 1987

Does that suggest something nefarious about the men that set those records? I wouldn't immediately leap to that conclusion, even though out of competition testing wasn't established until 1989. I say this because someone like Duane Solomone ran within 0.22sec of the record in the London Olympic final, with another American close behind and because the 1000m and 2000m are such infrequently contested disciplines.

I would also add that in light of both recent record setters (Rudisha, the marathoners) and near record setters (Kiprop, Kipruto), it does not seem as if success in Kenya has at all been stifled.

sconehead wrote:

pancaker wrote:

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?

You can't assume something we're actually trying to decide is true or not. Oh, never mind...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

Does the same circular reasoning/logical fallacy apply to the so called 'PED' concept too?

Or am I not allowed to ask that question?

Or do I have to write extremely long posts to make me look more intelligent?

those times are elite,yes,and most likely drug fuelled,as human beings arent designed to run that fast.

Nutella1 wrote:

Renato Canova wrote:

I don't believe in the effects of meldonium (drug I don't know)

You don't know the drug but you have an opinion about it regardless?

Nutella

You could have chosen not to be a dick and copied his entire sentence instead of choosing the words to convey the message YOU wanted.

His exact sentence was:

"Dear Weldon-ium, if I don't believe in the effects of meldonium (drug I don't know) is due to the fact that athletes of 30 different sports, requiring different attitudes and totally different physiological processes, used it."

Not being a dick might be hard for you (no pun intended) but you should give it a try. That is how intelligent conversations are had.

Jon,One reason that Canova has credibility is that he has coached world class athletes with his ideas and has proven them. He also understands some real physiology. He uses the terminology of an educated man in this area. Heck, he has posted and explained blood data for some of his athletes on this message board. That sort of data and physiology seems to make you lash out at others with insults, then follow up with "you just don't get it". Canova can probably really explain some of the biomechanics that help and hinder a runner. He might even say that it can be done different ways to achieve the same result. He has stated that many factors are involved in performance. A concept with which you are unfamiliar. The big problem on this board with Canova is the hammering over and over of "EPO does not work on elite athletes". Very few people believe this so he gets attacked for that stance. I would like to know how he feels about other drugs. I would also like to know why he is taking blood data from athletes if there is no intention to modify blood chemistry.

Jon Orange wrote:

EPO blah blah blah.

Elite runners don't use more oxygen to race faster, they use less. They are more efficient runners. The have better OXYGEN ECONOMY.

Basic physiology anyone?

InCredibility wrote:

Canova I would also like to know why he is taking blood data from athletes if there is no intention to modify blood chemistry.

Canova:

"For athletes in top shape for 5000m (duration under 13') we can suppose an ability to stay about 9-10 mml for the central part of the race (for example, during second, third and fourth km), only moving from 8 to 10 mml, while the last km can launch their lactate till values of 14-16 mml.

If you take the lactate immediately after the test, you cant have a real value, because for the next minutes the concentration of lactate in the blood continues to grow, while the production of lactate inside the muscle fibres already is over.

Going to the marathon, the new type of athletes have a high ability in buffering. One of the reasons of this may be the improvement in the permeability of the membrane. One of the ways for defining "Endurance" is "the speed of removing lactate from muscle fibers or buffering".

So, if with marathon runners "old style" our goal was to reduce the production of lactate at the speed of the race, in order to teach to the muscle fibres to use as fuel, at the same speed, more fatty acid and less glycogen (and this fact could build the ability in lasting longer at the Marathon Pace), now we look for increasing the speed of buffering, allowing the athletes in using a part of the lactate they produce."

Thanks for the quote. Lactate testing is a partial answer. But lactate testing does not require a full blood screen, nor is it done before and after a block of training while at rest. It is done during or immediately following training. It is also an academic number with no direct relevance to the real goal - speed. If you can run 13:00 for a 5k does it matter if your LT is 8 or 14 mml at the end?Tell me more about "the new type of athletes have a high ability in buffering". Is this a new genetic anomaly that previously did not exist? Or is this enhanced by training or other external factor?

Where were non-africans during the EPO era, while the Africans were setting records, and their cycling colleagues were one bike length ahead of the testers?

pancaker wrote:

If PEDs does not work for the elites, how come no one has ever come remotely close to the WR of 3k/5k/10k from the EPO era?