rekrunner wrote:
He said the doping claims have "no thought or substance". You didn't contradict him.
I disagree. Even if you rojo's thoughts didn't convince you, they would still be thoughts. Just like the evidence for certain dopers is still evidence, even if it didn't convince you.
Middle94 wrote:
I believe there are 20 times the number of clean athletes as ones that dope
20 : 1? Less than 5% dope? Where does that believe come from?
For other numbers, see here:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40279-014-0247-x"Data gathered in this way yield an estimation of 14–39 % of current adult elite athletes who intentionally used doping. "
Or here:
http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/33749208"A third of medals (146, including 55 golds) in endurance events at the Olympics and World Championships between 2001 and 2012 were won by athletes who have recorded suspicious tests. "
"Athletes are increasingly using blood transfusions and EPO micro-doses to boost the red cell count."
She is clean because she is white. Right, letsrun?
Middle94 wrote:
I believe there are 20 times the number of clean athletes as ones that dope so I don't agree that it's all we should be talking about.
We are going to have to agree to disagree here rojo. There is no reason why some of those people or Muir should be implicated whilst others aren't. Apart from them being good there is just no reason.
To the poster who mentioned Kiprops talent, El G was also an unbelievable talent. When 18 he ran in the world road relays and ran the 3rd 5000m leg in 13:43. At 19 he ran 3:33. This information doesn't disqualify him or Kiprop from being possibly doped. We just don't know.
I'm not sure Salazar is dirty coach either. I haven't been following this closely but from what I've seen, nothing has been brought against him it's just a lot of noise from the media.
So as I said I'll respectfully disagree and will simply enjoy the sport with Muir battling at the top. I hope she one day breaks the 1500m WR.
Kiprop ran 3:31 and won Olympic gold when he was 19. He's got a junior world cross title and a 1:43 low 800m. He's built like no one else in the game. He does appear, on all available evidence, to be the greatest middle distance talent we've had.
Of course El Guerrouj was very very talented, he's world record holder. But by all accounts he trained with superhuman intensity, far from prying eyes.
I'm not claiming this is proof of doping or absence of doping.
casual obsever wrote:
Middle94 wrote:I believe there are 20 times the number of clean athletes as ones that dope
20 : 1? Less than 5% dope? Where does that believe come from?
For other numbers, see here:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40279-014-0247-x"Data gathered in this way yield an estimation of 14–39 % of current adult elite athletes who intentionally used doping. "
Or here:
http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/33749208"A third of medals (146, including 55 golds) in endurance events at the Olympics and World Championships between 2001 and 2012 were won by athletes who have recorded suspicious tests. "
"Athletes are increasingly using blood transfusions and EPO micro-doses to boost the red cell count."
Going to be skewed by situations where whole teams - Russia - are doping.
Does TUE abuse count as doping? Yes. Yes it does.
Therefore all successful elite athletes are doing one way or another.
You can't win without it.
Laura Muir = doper, but that's elite sport for you. Nothing new here.
Sorry my racist, self-loathing snowflake. Other white women who are legit suspects: Radcliffe, Schippers and every single Russian, to name a few. Muir is not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion.
douchelin^3 wrote:
She is clean because she is white. Right, letsrun?
Here Comes Trouble wrote:
Sorry my racist, self-loathing snowflake. Other white women who are legit suspects: Radcliffe, Schippers and every single Russian, to name a few. Muir is not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion.
douchelin^3 wrote:She is clean because she is white. Right, letsrun?
I'm not sure what being called a snowflake even means and what that has to do with self-loathing, but why is she not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion exactly? I think she's just as suspicious as anyone else.
Letsrunners have called you a doper.
Robo. wrote:
No he is not, what single bit of evidence other than a good performance does he have for that. If you get a promotion at work is it ok to assume you are banging the CEO without any further evidence?
Yes he is justified even if you think he is being cynical. The system for testing has been proven to be ineffective and corrupt with cover ups and bribes all over the place in the IAAF. A little bit of probing by journalists has shown a lot of use of TUEs in British athletes in some cases for diseases that did not exist. You cannot blame the poster for that and in fact you are telling him to enjoy the racing and shut up. You have absolutely no right to do that. You may be even encouraging corruption by doing so.
The work place is different and often depends on the types of companies that you work in but if you have ever worked in the corporate world then you would be well aware that promotions are often not due to hard work or ability.
Billy Fap wrote:
Mr. 69%
http://d4nuk0dd6nrma.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/riis.jpg
Hi Billy how is Flagstaff? That Riis certainly was a dirty filthy bast__d.
Huh?? wrote:
"Freedom of speech"= ability to make wild and baseless accusations of drug use?
The president of the United States makes wild and baseless accusations on Twitter every day!
Technically "I think she's doping" counts as a thought.But does it really take any thought to say:"If it seems too good to be true, it normally is." to support a non-substantial claim of doping?Seems like an intellectual cop-out. But let's disagree.
casual obsever wrote:
rekrunner wrote:He said the doping claims have "no thought or substance". You didn't contradict him.
I disagree. Even if you rojo's thoughts didn't convince you, they would still be thoughts. Just like the evidence for certain dopers is still evidence, even if it didn't convince you.
Blood dEPOr wrote:
Does TUE abuse count as doping? Yes. Yes it does.
Therefore all successful elite athletes are doing one way or another.
You can't win without it.
Laura Muir = doper, but that's elite sport for you. Nothing new here.
What TUEs does she have?
Let's make that ignorant racist self-loathing snowflake, since you are commenting without any effort to educate yourself about doping in this sport.
douchelin^3 wrote:
Here Comes Trouble wrote:Sorry my racist, self-loathing snowflake. Other white women who are legit suspects: Radcliffe, Schippers and every single Russian, to name a few. Muir is not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion.
I'm not sure what being called a snowflake even means and what that has to do with self-loathing, but why is she not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion exactly? I think she's just as suspicious as anyone else.
Here Comes Trouble wrote:
Let's make that ignorant racist self-loathing snowflake, since you are commenting without any effort to educate yourself about doping in this sport.
douchelin^3 wrote:I'm not sure what being called a snowflake even means and what that has to do with self-loathing, but why is she not on par with any of these in terms of suspicion exactly? I think she's just as suspicious as anyone else.
Again, not sure what being a snowflake even means, but it's clear that you had no intentions of having an actual conversation. Just searching for your thoughts I guess. Have a nice day.
It's simple. You're not a doper until you're caught. She hasn't been caught.
Middle94 wrote:
bmg wrote:At this point, I think it is a correct claim. Only Dibaba, Ma's army, and East Europeans in the 80s were faster than Muir:
http://www.alltime-athletics.com/w_1500ok.htmGranted, that may look different in 20 years.
I think at this point, currently in the sport, it's really difficult for a clean athlete to not accused of doping.
The sentiment on this website however is a bit more confusing.
I have seen that people seem to regard Kiprop as clean, but he is only 0.6s slower than El G who is definitely a doper according to this site. Makhloufi who is slower than Kiprop, is also a doper apparently.
Likewise Amos and Coe are called dopers, but Rudisha who ran 0.8s faster is not.
Haile is clean, Kipchoge is clean, and Farah who is much slower is not.
This is despite Kenya having a poor doping history, and Algeria or Britain having a less poor history in the middle distance events. None of the names I mentioned had anything serious found out about them.
So I don't think doping claims made by people on this website really have any thought behind them or substance. I've seen the thread about Rowbury where some people are saying she shouldn't be allowed to take Claritin or multivitamins.
For this reason I don't think anyone sane takes anything said on this site seriously, with regards to doping. It's a lively topic here but the quality is poor.
ALL the athletes you mention are likely dirty.
Sadly El G was during the EPO era, virtually all those around him have been busted. The 1500m/mile records declined by around 3.5s in 6-7 years from 1992 during this period. These records still stand and are slowly looking more and more like the women's sprint records.
casual obsever wrote:
Middle94 wrote:I believe there are 20 times the number of clean athletes as ones that dope
20 : 1? Less than 5% dope? Where does that believe come from?
For other numbers, see here:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40279-014-0247-x"Data gathered in this way yield an estimation of 14–39 % of current adult elite athletes who intentionally used doping. "
Or here:
http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/33749208"A third of medals (146, including 55 golds) in endurance events at the Olympics and World Championships between 2001 and 2012 were won by athletes who have recorded suspicious tests. "
"Athletes are increasingly using blood transfusions and EPO micro-doses to boost the red cell count."
Hey Casual, I saw that Frank Shorter tedX talk where he explained that they can catch the 'blood bags in the fridge' doping via micro plastic deterioration. So what's the story about person to person transfusions. One would have to scan for exogenous blood cells/DNA in the system, any of this testing currently going on?
