IAAF Set to Wipe all pre 2005 World Records from the Books

Bad idea. Marita Koch is clean.

Great marketing idea for track and field! Now there will be lots of new world records set - bringing attention to the sport! The public won't know, they don't remember any of it!

Concerned fan wrote:

YouYouYou wrote:

Fun fact to anger the slanderer morons: There are exactly ZERO marks in athletics from any suspended athlete that was doped that are superior to the standing world record in any event.

Brahim Boulami

Randy Barnes

Javier Sotomayor

Avocado's Number wrote:

Concerned fan wrote:

Brahim Boulami

Randy Barnes

Javier Sotomayor

Actually, Barnes and Sotomayour are athletes who were suspended or banned for doping, but who still have the standing world records. I'm not aware that they ever set marks that were superior to their world records, which seems to be what YouYouYou is talking about and Concerned fan responded to.

The funny thing is Paula prattling on about the unfairness of her losing a WR. She apparently hasn't accepted that Mary Keitany broker her WR. The only thing Paula has is a heavily asterisked "World Best" where she was surrounded by a pack men breaking the wind at a 2:15 pace. She knows those conditions won't be replicated and was hoping her "World Best" would stand for all time and she could pretend it was a WR.

Sorry Paula. Your lies and cheating and deception are no longer working.

Radcliffe is a hypocrite bitching about clean athletes 'like her' being punished in the attempt to remove cheaters, after she led the calls for every athlete in Russia to be banned.

As for her call for enhanced interrogation methods and 5 am dawn raids on athlete's homes she probably just wants to deter talented young athletes from even entering track and field, let alone doping, so that her record will still stand in 50 years time.

Since when are WADA findings valid in a court of law? WADA violates all the 'rules of evidence' set by US Police and Courts.

deanoisgod wrote:

Radcliffe is a hypocrite bitching about clean athletes 'like her' ...

Meaning clean athletes with a series of blood test results suggestive of blood doping and EPO use?

Radcliffe said: “I fully understand the desire and need to restore credibility to our sport but don’t feel that this achieves that. It is yet one more way that clean athletes are made to suffer for the actions of cheats.” On Twitter she wrote: “I am hurt and do feel this damages my reputation and dignity. It is a heavy-handed way to wipe out some really suspicious records in a cowardly way by simply sweeping all aside instead of having the guts to take the legal plunge and wipe any record that would be found in a court of law to have been illegally assisted. It is confusing to the public at a time when athletics is already struggling to market itself.”

She's right, you know. The IAAF didn't have the guts to take her on individually because she has the power and money to fight it in court and win libel and slander suits. So instead clean athletes' records are going to get wrongly taken down because of her bullying and cheating.

How about this: Paula can keep her 2:15 if she releases all of her blood values to a team of independent experts. If she really is clean, how could she refuse that?

doctorj wrote:

Now that's what I call re-writing history.

In any case it would be better to wipe out those records AFTER 2005 as "suspicious" due to the dramatic drop in times in long distance events.

IAAF, just leave the darn thing ALONE for the time being and just start to SERIOUSLY crack down on cheaters from here on. Both athletes and coaches involved.

Just saw Seppelt's documentary and I have had a complete reassessment of the situation. I now believe that they should scrap all WRs indefinitely. See how the sport goes, make it about racing and competing again. The sport needs a super test but this will require investment, maybe when they have a God-like super test they can reintroduce WRs but until then they may actually be half the problem. And gosh I'm beginning to sound like a nanny-state SJW, I'll be handing out participation medals soon.

In the womens 1500m we will be left with

Dibaba 3:50.1

Muir 3:55.2

Hassan 3:56.0

All the times run by other athletes between Dibaba and Muir were set by Russian in the 80's or Chinese in the 90's

This whole thing is stupid. Lots of runners from 2012 and 2016 Olympics have subsequently been caught doping and medals have changed. That means a whole lot more were doping and got away with it.

There is nothing special about 2005 that makes the subsequent records believable. Dopers are always ahead of the testers and still are. Only a small percentage get caught. As technology advances that will always be the case. Even if there is some breakthrough in years to come that shows all chemical substances ever consumed by an athlete, they would have moved onto gene editing etc by then.

There is no point at which the IAAF can say "all records are now 100% clean". It sure as hell isn't 2005 anyway.

Just leave things as they are, or don't keep records at all. This is a terrible idea.

Correct, but the point is we still have their blood, so one could hypothetically test all post-2005 records with nowadays method.

But... would the IAAF really want to test Bolt's old samples?

800ftw. wrote:

Dopers are always ahead of the testers and still are. Only a small percentage get caught.

These two statements contradict one another. They can't always be ahead of the testers if some get caught.

Based on your experience, what methods are being used to evade detection?

Heir to the throne wrote:

The funny thing is Paula prattling on about the unfairness of her losing a WR.

...

Sorry Paula. Your lies and cheating and deception are no longer working.

+1

But now with Paula finally out of the WR picture, Coe can get all tough and be in favor of erasing the dirty old records.

casual obsever wrote:

Heir to the throne wrote:

The funny thing is Paula prattling on about the unfairness of her losing a WR.

...

Sorry Paula. Your lies and cheating and deception are no longer working.

+1

But now with Paula finally out of the WR picture, Coe can get all tough and be in favor of erasing the dirty old records.

Her 2:17:42 would have stood anyway, since it was set in a women's only race in 2005. No one's worried about Paula, anyway.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

800ftw. wrote:

Dopers are always ahead of the testers and still are. Only a small percentage get caught.

These two statements contradict one another. They can't always be ahead of the testers if some get caught.

Based on your experience, what methods are being used to evade detection?

No Jeff, they don't contradict one another. On the whole, the dopers are ahead of the testers. Some get caught, often due to tip offs or being unlucky with their timing, or stupidity.

I don't have any experience with doping, but I can read what WADA themselves have said.

More than one in 10 athletes could be doping - Wada chief -

casual obsever wrote:

800ftw. wrote:

There is nothing special about 2005 that makes the subsequent records believable. Dopers are always ahead of the testers and still are. Only a small percentage get caught. As technology advances that will always be the case.

Correct, but the point is we still have their blood, so one could hypothetically test all post-2005 records with nowadays method.

If that is the case, then will the IAAF keep scrapping old records as time moved forwards and the old frozen samples degrade beyond use, are depleted through testing, or a time passes where it is no longer legal for them to keep old blood and urine samples of a person any longer?

So every 5 years some more records will be removed from the books? What a farce.