I'm looking at the Marathon wikipedia page, specifically the top 25 all time men. I had never heard of most of them so I googled some of their names. Seems like most of them pop a 2:04 in Dubai or Rotterdam and are never heard from again. Or they do run some majors but then only run like 2:09. What's up with this?
I think it goes something like this:
Step 1: Train really hard in the middle of nowhere in Ethiopia while taking a shitload of EPO
Step 2: Get $200,000 for winning Dubai
Step 3: Go back to Ethiopia and live like a king
works every time wrote:
I think it goes something like this:
Step 1: Train really hard in the middle of nowhere in Ethiopia while taking a shitload of EPO
Step 2: Get $200,000 for winning Dubai
Step 3: Go back to Ethiopia and live like a king
Yep. Just don't get greedy like Sumgong or Jeptoo. At least pay off the officials if you want to continue.
Most of us spend our time trolling letsrun.com.
In other ground-breaking news, scientists have determined that people don't get many PRs after they got their PR
Perhaps 2:04 is quite fast.
Too be fair, not much has been done by American's who ran 2:04 either
Abusive managers. They turn around 2:04 runners quickly to get them into as many WMM races as possible and if their times lag, they send them to second tier races until they no longer attract appearance fees. Getting to properly train for 2 big races a year is a luxury that only a few top E. Africans get. The rest will be raced into the ground.
Is this really surprising? 2:04 is a very good time, Dubai is a very fast course, and you only get so many chances in the marathon. What do you expect -- that they all later become 2:03 guys? You really can't get 'better' than 2:04.
Abusive managers may have something to do with it, but I think a more sensible explanation is: The athletes hit their peak at 2:04, run a few more marathons past that peak, and then, absent any event to 'move up' in distance to, they retire. That's no career to be ashamed of.
habs wrote:
Is this really surprising? 2:04 is a very good time, Dubai is a very fast course, and you only get so many chances in the marathon. What do you expect -- that they all later become 2:03 guys? You really can't get 'better' than 2:04.
Abusive managers may have something to do with it, but I think a more sensible explanation is: The athletes hit their peak at 2:04, run a few more marathons past that peak, and then, absent any event to 'move up' in distance to, they retire. That's no career to be ashamed of.
Well, we would expect to see at least a few sub 1:00hr half marathons, and some other marathons at 2:05, 2:06, maybe 2:07, but not to completely disappear or come back in two years and run a 2:10.
well if you ever gave a moment to listen to my theory, is dubai and rotterdam are "fast" courses like monaco is a "fast" track
not many people run sub 3:30 anywhere else but monaco
i personally think dubai and rotterdam are 2-3 min "fast" courses....whatever the reason that causes it to be fast i think causes calf and achillies injuries at dubai.
EPO gives you 3-4% increase in performance. so around 3-4 min or so in a marathon
a 2:04 dubai is really a 2:06 at say chicago, and off EPO is a 2:09-10 and well has anyone ever proven my theory wrong?
mindweak wrote:
well if you ever gave a moment to listen to my theory, is dubai and rotterdam are "fast" courses like monaco is a "fast" track
not many people run sub 3:30 anywhere else but monaco
i personally think dubai and rotterdam are 2-3 min "fast" courses....whatever the reason that causes it to be fast i think causes calf and achillies injuries at dubai.
EPO gives you 3-4% increase in performance. so around 3-4 min or so in a marathon
a 2:04 dubai is really a 2:06 at say chicago, and off EPO is a 2:09-10 and well has anyone ever proven my theory wrong?
I agree, except I would replace Chicago with something like London. Despite what people may know think because of its switch to a tatical marathon, Chicago was designed to be, and still is one of the worlds fastest marathon.
What are you guys talking about?
59 times someone ran 2:04 or faster; lots of those runners are more than once in that list; of those who are not:
No. 2 (Moses) has also 2x a 2:05, and a 2:06, and a sub-27, and a 59:20, and had the 30 km world record; no. 13 (Guye) just ran his 2:03 in Berlin 2017; no. 20 (Tamirat) his 2:04 in Dubai 2017; no. 24 (Ayele) ran also 2x a 2:06; no. 31 (Dickson) ran also 2x a 2:05; no. 33 (Lemi) a 2:05; no. 34 (Tsegay) 3x a 2:05; no. 38 (Lelisa Desisa) a 2:05; no. 41 (Yemane) 4x a 2:06; no. 41 (Berhanu) is the only one of that list whose 2:04:48 from 2013 really stands out - next best is only a 2:09, and best half is only a 1:01:41. No. 44 (Tadesse) has 2x 2:05 and 3x 2:06, no. 45 (Dino) has a 59:41 half; no. 45 (Getu) has 2x a 2:05 and 1x a 2:06; no. 47 (Feyisa) has a 2:05 and 2x a 2:06; no. 47 (Endeshaw) also has a 2:06; no. 49 (Gebre) won New York City; no. 49 (Bernard) 2x a 2:06; no. 52 (Markos) a 2:05 and a 2:06; no. 53 (Paul Tergat)…; no. 56 (Sammy) 2x a 2:06; no. 56 (Jonathan) also a 2:06, and no. 59 is Ryan Hall - enough said.
There is really only one one-hit-wonder: Berhanu Shiferaw.
Do any of these guys get unannounced tests in the off season?
Unannounced wrote:
Do any of these guys get unannounced tests in the off season?
Yes.
A better question is: does testing matter? And then I'd say: yes, a bit, by somewhat limiting the drug amounts used, unless the IAAF and some NADOs are still corrupt.
We know for example:
- at minimum, 45% of the athletes cheat
- that percentage is higher among the better athletes
- 10 - 15% fall into the "likely doper" category
- 1 - 2% get banned
So I'd suggest to ban all "likely dopers", and to lower the ABP thresholds to start catching a significant amount of the cheats.
mindweak wrote:
i personally think dubai and rotterdam are 2-3 min "fast" courses....whatever the reason that causes it to be fast i think causes calf and achillies injuries at dubai.
EPO gives you 3-4% increase in performance. so around 3-4 min or so in a marathon
a 2:04 dubai is really a 2:06 at say chicago, and off EPO is a 2:09-10 and well has anyone ever proven my theory wrong?
You might be right with EPO, although I *think* the advantage is less than that.
I am quite sure that you are wrong with Dubai and Rotterdam being 2 - 3 minutes faster than the rest.
As for Dubai and Rotterdam, the course records are:
Berlin: 2:02:57
(Boston: 2:03:02)
London: 2:03:05
Frankfurt: 2:03:42
Chicago: 2:03:45
Tokyo: 2:03:58
Dubai: 2:04:11
Rotterdam: 2:04:27
As for the number of sub-2:05s:
Berlin: 16
Dubai: 15
London: 8
Chicago: 7
Rotterdam: 6
(Boston: 3)
Frankfurt: 2
Tokyo: 1
As for the studs, Haile and Bekele have tried but failed to run great in Dubai, and Mosop in Rotterdam.
why is that? wrote:
In other ground-breaking news, scientists have determined that people don't get many PRs after they got their PR
end thread
Kenyans FTW wrote:
Despite what people may know think because of its switch to a tatical marathon, Chicago was designed to be, and still is one of the worlds fastest marathon.
Wrong. People have known for many years that Chicago isn't all that fast. Maybe it is by the standards of American majors. But not compared to many in the rest of the world.
A few faster courses than Chicago, off the top of my head in alphabetical order:
Amsterdam
Berlin
Dubai
Eindhoven
Frankfurt
Rotterdam
Paris
These courses are truly flat. Chicago is not. Among the flat ones, Dubai goes to another level by having no sharp turns, basically just curves, which saves both energy and distance run.
Dubai's doping controls appear to consist of asking the Dutch and Italian agents if the athlete is clean.
nobody is sharing any FACTS!!!!
come on!