Advertisement


    • coach deez nuts
      registered
      • If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 9:37AM
      • coach deez nuts
        registered
      • He has PRs of 1:45.14, 3:33.23, 7:40.78 and 13:16.53. Is it really such a stretch to think times like 1:41, 3:26, 7:20, 12:37 can't be achieved while clean? David Torrence is no once in a lifetime talent or incredibly gifted athlete, just a really hardworking guy who has talent for running.
    • coach deez nuts
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 9:40AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • coach deez nuts
        registered
      • I should preface this and say I do in fact believe David Torrence is 100% clean. Always have and the latest from this bust just reinforces it even more. I also think a lot of the top athletes are clean as well. I think it tends to be very obvious when someone is doping, maybe that's just me.
    • Farker
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 9:45AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • Farker
      • I think that's close to right. I'd also bet a lot of money that Nick Willis is 100% clean, and he's run a 3:29. I think most everyone thinks Manzano is clean, and he's run 3:30. There are some posters here who absolutely insist Bernard Lagat is and always has been clean, meaning that a 3:26 low is a legitimate non-doped time (although "Blast from the past" always comes on after with that article).

        If I had to guess, I'd say the clean world records are something around 1:40.91 (I may get burned, but I just can't imagine Rudisha doping, call me naive), 3:28 (with apologies to Lagat, who may well have been clean, but even if he were clean in that race in 2001, Guerrouj wasn't, so that negates his time, since he was dragged by a doper), 7:28, and 12:52.

        I think the subtext of many of Willis' tweets about doping is the message: if drugs didn't exist, yes, I would be the best in the world, and damn close to the world record. And he'd be right.
    • Oh you're clueless
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 9:54AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • Oh you're clueless
      • Look, Torrence seems like a good guy. I admit I don't know him. But yeah, letsrun hero, seems relatively fearless, fine. Professional Track and Field is worse than the WWE. At least then you know for sure it's a joke. The track and field fans really think what they're watching is legitimate. The records are probably just around 1:45, 3:35, and about 13:20. Don't be crazy.
    • Leopardly
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 10:00AM - in reply to Farker
      • Leopardly
      • Farker wrote:
        I think that's close to right. I'd also bet a lot of money that Nick Willis is 100% clean, and he's run a 3:29. I think most everyone thinks Manzano is clean, and he's run 3:30. There are some posters here who absolutely insist Bernard Lagat is and always has been clean, meaning that a 3:26 low is a legitimate non-doped time (although "Blast from the past" always comes on after with that article).

        If I had to guess, I'd say the clean world records are something around 1:40.91 (I may get burned, but I just can't imagine Rudisha doping, call me naive), 3:28 (with apologies to Lagat, who may well have been clean, but even if he were clean in that race in 2001, Guerrouj wasn't, so that negates his time, since he was dragged by a doper), 7:28, and 12:52.

        I think the subtext of many of Willis' tweets about doping is the message: if drugs didn't exist, yes, I would be the best in the world, and damn close to the world record. And he'd be right.
        Being paced by a doper makes your time nullified? Is that true?
    • Sabado Gigante
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 10:01AM - in reply to Oh you're clueless
      • Sabado Gigante
      • Oh you're clueless wrote:
        Look, Torrence seems like a good guy. I admit I don't know him. But yeah, letsrun hero, seems relatively fearless, fine. Professional Track and Field is worse than the WWE. At least then you know for sure it's a joke. The track and field fans really think what they're watching is legitimate. The records are probably just around 1:45, 3:35, and about 13:20. Don't be crazy.
        3:35? I ran that 15 years ago on beer and staying out late. I'm not even supremely talented. Someone with amazing genetics that dedicates their entire existence to running 3:30, would certainly make it possible without drugs.
    • nwpow
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 10:05AM - in reply to Oh you're clueless
      • nwpow
      • Oh you're clueless wrote: The records are probably just around 1:45, 3:35, and about 13:20. Don't be crazy.
        This is way too cynical. You must not have the mental fortitude to have ever gotten close to these times. Running and racing isn't just genetics or the ability to train hard and improve, it is mental and emotional strength that gets you through both of those. You really think everyone to have broken those times has doped? Ben True won't even take iron supplements and he's a 13:02 guy. Tim Broe doped? I really don't think Kennedy did - he won NCAAs as a frosh against unreal competition. Prefontaine ran 13:21 at 23-24 years old.

        A little slower than the times put up really are not that crazy - especially now when the NCAA system had like 50 guys break 4 this year. They're 18-23 year old guys, imagine how much the could improve clean if they all trained for the 5000 over the next 7-8 years. People devote their lives to this and that is why they're so good.
    • Star
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 10:11AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • Star
        registered
      • coach deez nuts wrote:
        I think it tends to be very obvious when someone is doping, maybe that's just me.
        It's obvious but you are arguing that Komen's 7:20 may be clean?

        I don't think it is obvious when someone dopes.
        I think we see indicators but it's never obvious.

        And even more so, it's not obvious to say if someone is clean.

        There were pretty good arguments that Marion Jones was clean.
        She was talented from a young age. He progression seemed right after she quit basketball.
        She didn't break any world records.

        After someone is caught, it looks obvious.
    • Farker
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 10:39AM - in reply to Leopardly
      • Farker
      • Leopardly wrote:
        Farker wrote:
        I think that's close to right. I'd also bet a lot of money that Nick Willis is 100% clean, and he's run a 3:29. I think most everyone thinks Manzano is clean, and he's run 3:30. There are some posters here who absolutely insist Bernard Lagat is and always has been clean, meaning that a 3:26 low is a legitimate non-doped time (although "Blast from the past" always comes on after with that article).

        If I had to guess, I'd say the clean world records are something around 1:40.91 (I may get burned, but I just can't imagine Rudisha doping, call me naive), 3:28 (with apologies to Lagat, who may well have been clean, but even if he were clean in that race in 2001, Guerrouj wasn't, so that negates his time, since he was dragged by a doper), 7:28, and 12:52.

        I think the subtext of many of Willis' tweets about doping is the message: if drugs didn't exist, yes, I would be the best in the world, and damn close to the world record. And he'd be right.
        Being paced by a doper makes your time nullified? Is that true?
        It's not officially true. To be honest, I made it up on the spot. But it should make sense. Men aren't allowed to pace women to world records. Machines aren't allowed to pace men. It should follow that people who are unnaturally aided shouldn't be allowed to pace clean runners, and any record that results from being towed by a doper should be viewed as somewhat illegitimate. In today's athletic world, that's impossible to enforce and perhaps shouldn't be enforced, but go watch the 2001 Ivo Damme 1500. Do you really think Lagat would have run that fast were he not towed by El G?
    • No, you're clueless
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 12:35PM - in reply to Oh you're clueless
      • No, you're clueless
      • The records are probably just around 1:45, 3:35, and about 13:20. Don't be crazy.
        Henry Rono's 13:07 was clean. (Unless you consider drinking beer the night before to be doping!)
    • asfsdagds
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/21/2016 3:42PM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • asfsdagds
      • coach deez nuts wrote:
        He has PRs of 1:45.14, 3:33.23, 7:40.78 and 13:16.53. Is it really such a stretch to think times like 1:41, 3:26, 7:20, 12:37 can't be achieved while clean? David Torrence is no once in a lifetime talent or incredibly gifted athlete, just a really hardworking guy who has talent for running.
        Yes, I think it is a stretch. And I don't know how you can say that David Torrence is not a once in a lifetime talent, given that so many of today's top athletes are dopers.

        Torrence's type of talent is very rare. Even living in a world of dopers. According to http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_1500ok.htm, he's run one of the top 1000 1500m performances of all-time, which is incredible. More specifically, the list has multiple performances from a single person (El Guerrouj is the winner with 67 races faster than DT's PR!!), so I filtered those out and found that there are only 152 people who have run faster than DT. That's incredible. If I get rid of multiple performances, and then group the list by country, I have the following number of individuals from each country:

        KEN 54
        MAR 12
        USA 12
        ESP 11
        FRA 9
        GBR 8
        ALG 7
        ETH 6
        AUS 4
        BRN 3
        FRG 2
        NED 2
        NZL 2
        GER 2
        QAT 2
        SUD 1
        BDI 1
        UKR 1
        SUI 1
        TAN 1
        NOR 1
        CAN 1
        POR 1
        KSA 1
        RUS 1
        TUR 1
        SOM 1
        RSA 1
        ITA 1
        TUN 1
        DEN 1
        DJI 1

        Now how cynical do you want to be? If you cross off all of the Kenyan, Moroccan, Algerian, Ethiopian, Middle-Eastern, and Spanish (sorry but cycling gives you a bad name) athletes, you're left with only ~50 athletes who have ever run faster than DT, and half of those guys were probably doping too. For instance, considering American athletes (the number is performance ranking all-time):

        84 Sydney Maree
        139 Matthew Centrowitz
        153 Alan Webb
        206 Andrew Wheating
        221 Leonel Manzano
        229 Jim Spivey
        329 Steve Holman
        388 Steve Scott
        434 David Krummenacker
        548 Lopez Lomong
        848 Evan Jager
        905 Jim Ryun
        975 David Torrence

        It's easy for me to imagine that half of those names (in particular the more modern ones) doped in some way at some time.

        So it's possible in my mind that only a couple of dozen clean athletes have ever run faster than DT. I'm not saying "could", I'm saying "have" -- it's possible that some of the top guys could have run faster than him without doping but didn't.

        Anyhow, back to the data. I don't know when doping really became a problem, but as of 1980 only four guys ever ran faster than DT's PR: Ryun, Jipcho, Bayi, Walker. Picking out some names from the sorted list, Noureddine Morceli, was the 29th guy to run faster than DT's PR, and a lot of people think there's a good chance he was doping. Said Aouita was the 11th, Seb Coe was the 13th person to run faster than DT's PR. If one or two of those guys (Morceli, Aouita, Coe) were doping, how many who came after them weren't?

        I think this does point to DT being a few-in-a-lifetime type of talent if he's clean. His PR might be even higher if he had had better funding and training opportunities without all the dopers around.

        Back to the original question, another point I want to make is that the differences between times at the top are very small. Adding doping in as a variable increases the spread of times at the top; the distribution is currently much broader than what it ought to be without doping. Different doping regiments and physiological responses to those regiments will vary from person to person. So we have no idea how much difference there really ought to be between the top athletes of the modern era. In other words, if you remove doping from the equation the top times will get slower, but I think they'll also get closer together. So 8 seconds per mile is even more than it seems based on modern performances.

        Can doping lead to an improvement of 8 seconds per mile? I don't know. Would Torrence break world records if he were on the same drugs as El G? But I also think that 8 seconds per mile is a HUGE amount at that level.

        If Torrence is in the top 99.999% of talent, now you're asking if the difference in time between 99.999% and 99.99999% is 8 seconds per mile. There's no way to know the answer to that question, but there's no reason why it would have to be so large.

        So yes, I think the difference between any of Torrence's PRs and any of the world records is very large.
    • Primo Numero Uno
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/22/2016 9:24AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • Primo Numero Uno
        registered
      • There is a huge difference between David's times and the WR's. 7 seconds may not sound like a lot but that a huge gap in a 1500. 3:26 is two or 3 levels above Torrance.
    • jeff tallon
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/22/2016 10:24AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • jeff tallon
        registered
      • david could well be a clean athlete,and his times are believable.the 1.41,3.26,and others,are not.
    • Rono Fan
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/22/2016 10:49AM - in reply to coach deez nuts
      • Rono Fan
      • Rono might have been the most talented distance runner ever. He ran 7:34, 13:06, and 27:22. We all know his off-track troubles and certainly he could have run faster, but 14 seconds faster for 3000, 30 seconds faster for 5000, and 60+ seconds faster for 10000? I don't believe any of those records.
    • random_name
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/23/2016 12:37AM - in reply to Farker
      • random_name
      • I'm on the fence about Willis. Running 3:29 at age 32 is highly suspect. He can't do weights according to his Instagram and is highly outspoken about doping. The loudest people aren't always the most honest. He also loves to stir up the pot online via Twitter like any bogan from Oceania.

        Plus, he's been known to present this facade of Mr. Clean and proclaim he never takes supplements. However, he's always popping SOS and other stuff.

        My guess is that he's very likely on the gas.
    • Bad Wigins
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/23/2016 2:18AM - in reply to random_name
      • Bad Wigins
        registered
      • Why do you all assume Torrence is clean? Maybe so when he was posting here, but things can change down the road.
    • krispy kremlin_._._
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/23/2016 2:21AM - in reply to Oh you're clueless
      • krispy kremlin_._._
      • Oh you're clueless wrote:
        Look, Torrence seems like a good guy. I admit I don't know him. But yeah, letsrun hero, seems relatively fearless, fine. Professional Track and Field is worse than the WWE. At least then you know for sure it's a joke. The track and field fans really think what they're watching is legitimate. The records are probably just around 1:45, 3:35, and about 13:20. Don't be crazy.
        I was conducting the exact same thought experiment last night and came to nearly the exact same 1500 and 5000m times.

        Also, if HEG was as "pinnacle-dopped" as people believe, other times from that unquestioned, unilateral Nike-era (Jordan, Atlanta 96, HEG/Geb, early-Armstrong), need to be considered suspect:

        1 3:26.00 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1 Roma 14.07.1998
        2 3:26.12 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1 Bruxelles 24.08.2001
        3 3:26.34 Bernard Lagat KEN 12.12.74 2 Bruxelles 24.08.2001
        4 3:26.45 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1rA Zürich 12.08.1998
        5 3:26.69 Asbel Kiprop KEN 30.06.89 1 Monaco 17.07.2015
        6 3:26.89 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1rA Zürich 16.08.2002
        7 3:26.96 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1 Rieti 08.09.2002
        8 3:27.21 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1rA Zürich 11.08.2000
        9 3:27.34 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14.09.74 1 Monaco 19.07.2002
    • runn
      registered
      • RE: If David Torrence is 100% clean... 6/23/2016 9:35AM - in reply to Farker
      • runn
        registered
      • with apologies to Lagat, who may well have been clean, but even if he were clean in that race in 2001, Guerrouj wasn't, so that negates his time, since he was dragged by a doper)

        Read more: https://www.letsrun.com/forum/f...z4CPhg7NcW

        Great point and interesting question!
        What if a pacemaker fails a drug test? Does that negate the record?