Timothy Cheruiyot runs 3:29 FTW in Paris!!

rekrunner wrote:

Oooh, "that troll", "doping apologist" and "doping defender" of sure.

If I ever argued "EPO made her slower", this does not mean I think that makes it OK to take EPO.

But thanks for demonstrating a few more examples of arguments I never made -- it seems to be the only way some of you can find a way to disagree with me.

It's like I say "screw" and you hammers only hear "nail".

I'm sure I never said she ran Boston "clean", because I didn't know one way or the other, and said "we didn't know" about Boston.

There you could say I made a mistake.

I did say she ran slower in Chicago, two weeks after testing positive for EPO. This is really not even an argument, but historical fact.

I did say that the early fast pace of Boston, with 7 women together at 20 miles, helped lead to the fast times, with four women breaking the course record.

It's not like we have to pick only one cause. Fast pacing doesn't disprove any effect of EPO, but it should be considered when estimating effects.

rekrunner wrote:

Coevett,

I understand if you completely disagree with everything I write, but please stop putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

I never argued that "Russians didn't match East Africa at distance running".

I did not compare Russia with East Africa -- I compared them to a pre-1990 top-5 average. I compared them to Coe, Cram, and Moorcroft. and Steve Jones.

I never said pre-1990 Africa was a mess. In fact, I've said East Africa dominated in the 1980s. Kenya and Ethiopia dominated World Cross country in the 1980's.

I never said I live in Monaco. I've often said I do NOT live in Monaco.

I never try to prove EPO doesn't work, but argue that figures like 4% are too high for elites.

Sorry, "Guilt by association" is very much a logical fallacy.

I do not do it myself. I argued that many Russians dope, based on evidence of busts. They are at the top of every WADA and IAAF list.

I argue how they performed relative to 1990, based on historical evidence of all time best performances.

When I say "no one performs" this includes all clean runners, and all doped runners, without requiring making that determination. I assume a doping prevalence between 0% and 100%, inclusive.

Was Russia in the 2000s and 2010s also a mess? I looked at 28 years post-1990.

You can suspect what you want. You cannot conclude Aouita doped in the 1980s from statements 20 years later, unless the statement is "I doped in the 1980s".

I do this for free.

rekrunner wrote:

Coevett,

I understand if you completely disagree with everything I write, but please stop putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

I never argued that "Russians didn't match East Africa at distance running".

I did not compare Russia with East Africa -- I compared them to a pre-1990 top-5 average. I compared them to Coe, Cram, and Moorcroft. and Steve Jones.

I never said pre-1990 Africa was a mess. In fact, I've said East Africa dominated in the 1980s. Kenya and Ethiopia dominated World Cross country in the 1980's.

I never said I live in Monaco. I've often said I do NOT live in Monaco.

I never try to prove EPO doesn't work, but argue that figures like 4% are too high for elites.

Sorry, "Guilt by association" is very much a logical fallacy.

I do not do it myself. I argued that many Russians dope, based on evidence of busts. They are at the top of every WADA and IAAF list.

I argue how they performed relative to 1990, based on historical evidence of all time best performances.

When I say "no one performs" this includes all clean runners, and all doped runners, without requiring making that determination. I assume a doping prevalence between 0% and 100%, inclusive.

Was Russia in the 2000s and 2010s also a mess? I looked at 28 years post-1990.

You can suspect what you want. You cannot conclude Aouita doped in the 1980s from statements 20 years later, unless the statement is "I doped in the 1980s".

I do this for free.

Coevett wrote:

'Guilt by association' is not a logical fallacy. You yourself did it in the previous sentences - 'Russia, with arguably the strongest doping culture'. In fact one of your strongest 'arguments' is that Russians didn't match East Africa at distance running, with you assuming that they would be doping to the max with EPO, even though Russia was a complete and utter mess in the 90s (and again, one of your main arguments for the lack of African domination pre 1990 is 'Africa was a mess').

Can you explain that please? You're saying that we can't suspect Aouita of doping in the 1980s for telling athletes in the 2000s to take peds as the 'only way to win'? So what does that mean? Aouita felt everybody was cheating in the 2000s (EPO era) but not in his era? So that contradicts your whole argument.

You are a man of contradictions.

I would also like to know who is paying you. I find it hard to believe some random American hobby jogger living in Monaco (I think you said that here) could have the time or motivation to spend literally hours each day here defending Africans from doping accusations, as well as performing days worth of analysis of performances in order to try to 'prove' EPO doesn't work.

Now That's Telling It Like It Is wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

The use of Russian men is a terrible example. Prior to 1990, Abramov ran 13.11.99 in 1981 at a time we know Soviets were using transfusions & steroids, there were other good runners in the early 1980s. In 2000-2001, Shabunin ran 3:32/3:49. Then there is um, Borzakovskiy, 1:42!! Russia has terrible demographics, the state funding doping apparatus struggled in the 1991-2002 period because it was reliant upon funding from a bankrupt government. Vast amounts of Russian men are alcoholics. Russia has never been an ideal place for Distance Runners, it's under 3 feet of snow for half the year. Russians also prefer sports that pay better.

"we know too little from doping busts to characterize the impact of doping on the best performances." What? 20 years ago runners were doing 12:39 the best so far this year is 13:01. I wonder why? And this runner is barely tested.

'also that "guilt by association" (by nationality) is a logical fallacy.' Mate, Moroccans would sit around doping in Ifrane at night in the 1990s. They were like a TdF team.

El G was third in 1992, the two ahead of him were Geb and Kirui, two really excellent examples (Kirui is the brother of Richard Chelimo, a Rosa athlete who suddenly made miraculous gains). In 1993 Kirui won the WCs solo in 13:02 @ only "18."

+1

Good points on Russia - that'll finally put rekrunner (aka ex-runner?) in his place with his constant montra of "where were the all Russian men during the EPO-era." And rekrunner/ex-runner are naive if they believe there isn't a doping culture in Morroco were doping could be the normal preparation for a distance runner. I'm sure Ramzi, El G, Mourhit brothers, Koauch & the Boulami brothers all had nice fireside chats whlie training in the Atlas Mountains. ?

Coevett wrote:

Well I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I really have time to go back and double check your posts when the basis reasoning and assumptions of your arguments are clearly insane. I'm pretty sure you've pointed to the post Soviet performances, including the 90s, and compared them to the East African EPO mad times and concluded that this proves EPO doesn't work (because Russians, being dirty Russians, will always cheat, including EPO in the 90s).

Guilt by association is not in itself a logical fallacy. Perhaps you're confusing the legal fact that it's not admissable as evidence in a court of law? Guilt by association is a valid way of reasoning in the correct context. We have no way of proving that Aouita or others doped, short of him somehow failing retroactively a test from the 80s or publicly confessing (and many would say he did in Australia). We just have a collection of circumstantial evidence. Guilt by association is not valid taken in isolation, however it is a pointer of guilt when taken together with all the other sinister facts regarding Aouita, such as the Australian scandal, the dodgy progression, the many doctors and at least one of whom was busted for supplying peds.

rekrunner wrote:

You seem to be mixing up two things:

1) Is doping right or wrong?

2) What are the causes of best performances?

One is a moral question, and the other is a scientific/mathematical modelling question.

I never debate whether doping is right or wrong. In competition, it is always wrong, regardless of positive or negative or no impact on performance. If you call me a "doping apologist" this is not "maybe inappropriate", but it is ALWAYS wrong. It's a clear sign to me, that you've run out of merit for argument #2, or worse, you cannot tell the difference between #1 and #2.

If you say doping is wrong, I will never argue.

But if you say, for example, doping causes 4% improvement in elites, or the fastest performances can only be achieved by doping, this is not a moral question of right or wrong, but a scientific/mathematical question of cause and effect.

If you want to talk about performance, playing with numbers, it is necessary to consider all potentially significant factors, and doping is only one of many. It is not me the ostrich, ignoring doping, but many others, ignoring everything else.

I only have a "soft heart" for innocent victims of doping accusations.

Regarding Jeptoo in Boston, can you estimate for me how much EPO helped, from her clean baseline, and how much Shalane's aggressive pacing helped, given that 4 women in that race broke the course record, including New York based and US tested Deba?

Can you list for me the top 3 factors, that explain why Jeptoo was was 6 minutes slower in Chicago than Boston, given that EPO was common in both?

Regarding Kiprop, I do not have empathy. I do have a couple questions though about the bizarre circumstances.

Regarding Ramzi, are you suggesting that EPO was essentially the only factor? If not, what was the potential magnitude of other, not more than three, factors?

Can you put the "Kenyan doping problem" in perspective for me? If it is two athletes in the top-100 all time, what is the appropriate level of annoyance that I should express?

I don't deny Kenya has a doping problem, causing reputational damage.

I don't deny Kenya also has an anti-doping problem, causing reputational damage.

Now, if you want to connect these two factors to performance, you cannot ignore all other factors.

Coevett wrote:

So what are you saying in this post Rekrunner? You're comparing Russian Post-Soviet performances unfavourably with East African EPO era performances, as well as assuming guilty by association in the worst possible way - post Soviet Russian runners had a doping culture, even though Soviet doping was not a 'culture' but a state sponsored doping regime in which the athletes probably had little choice in. Similarly, the alleged recent Russian doping was/is supposedly State sponsored.

And to answer your argument (which you have been making for the last year at least and as recently as yesterday but today you're denying making) that Putin era Russian performances in distance running are no match for East Africans. You have to ask what would be the motivation of Russian state sponsored doping. Why would they even bother with distance running when they are competing with multitudes of East Africans able to EPO up almost at full throttle and with other huge advantages (such as climate and the ability to train at altitude? Why risk pumping female 10,000m runners with EPO when the odds of a medal are pretty slim? I guess the Russian state would be rational enough to have a risk/reward analysis on which sports/events to dope in. In fact, you'd expect a corrupt haphazard real DOPING CULTURE like Kenya to produce far bigger improvements and in depth too, than a state sponsored regime that is organizing the doping.

rekrunner wrote:

What I'm saying is regarding the correlation between "doping busts" and the "quantity of quality performances" relative to 1990.

Russia, Morocco, and East African have three very different patterns, making the correlation unobvious.

What I'm saying about Russia is not an example of "guilty by association" -- the physical evidence of a high number of doping busts is enough to say that Russia has a high number of people doping. I'm not applying that general conclusion onto specific Russian runners with an unknown doping status, for example, like you are doing with El G and Aouita.

While you can conclude Russia did not compete well against East Africans, both in terms of quality and quantity, thanks to my comparisons of performance relative to 1990, this is not my argument and I don't require an answer.

Coevett wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

What I'm saying is regarding the correlation between "doping busts" and the "quantity of quality performances" relative to 1990.

Russia, Morocco, and East African have three very different patterns, making the correlation unobvious.

What I'm saying about Russia is not an example of "guilty by association" -- the physical evidence of a high number of doping busts is enough to say that Russia has a high number of people doping. I'm not applying that general conclusion onto specific Russian runners with an unknown doping status, for example, like you are doing with El G and Aouita.

Well I don't see the meaning of your 'top 5 average performances' analysis otherwise. Surely you're assuming that the top 5 are using EPO?

And are you referring to busts in the 90's when you make the judgement of 'doping culture'? Because Russia in the 90s had a very different culture than under Putin or under the Soviets.

While you can conclude Russia did not compete well against East Africans, both in terms of quality and quantity, thanks to my comparisons of performance relative to 1990, this is not my argument and I don't require an answer.

Well I honestly don't know what the hell your argument is then. And that might actually be sign that you're wasting a lot of time here, rather than that you're smart or presenting a watertight case. I think there's about 3 people on this forum who even have a clue what you're saying. However, I'm a pretty intelligent guy who would like to know what effect EPO has on performance. You may want to consider you have a communication problem as to presenting your argument/analysis if after all the posts I've read from you here on the subject in the last year, I still haven't got a clue what you're actually saying.

rekrunner wrote:

I think it's a problem of what you see.

I think you are right that you honestly don't know what my argument is.

My communication problem is that I repeatedly say clear things like "I made no assumption of doping when choosing the best performances" and "I have no way of knowing which top times are clean" and you keep saying "Surely you're assuming that the top-5 are using EPO", and I always reply "No, you misunderstand. I made no such assumption." and "You need to interpret the top-5 without making any clean or doping assumption." then we repeat the exercise again later as if you just don't read my responses, and you don't make an effort to understand that the top-5 performances means just the top-5 performances, without full knowledge if they are clean or dirty.

It's not a presentation problem but a problem of interpretation.

Everytime you restate my arguments, in your own words, reflecting what you understood, I do not recognize my arguments as retold by you.

Why is it you completely understand the word "doping culture" when it is used against the Africans, but slice and dice it now with the Russians. I'm referring to the number of doping busts no matter which period, no matter which government.

Coevett wrote:

Well I don't see the meaning of your 'top 5 average performances' analysis otherwise. Surely you're assuming that the top 5 are using EPO?

And are you referring to busts in the 90's when you make the judgement of 'doping culture'? Because Russia in the 90s had a very different culture than under Putin or under the Soviets.

Well I honestly don't know what the hell your argument is then. And that might actually be sign that you're wasting a lot of time here, rather than that you're smart or presenting a watertight case. I think there's about 3 people on this forum who even have a clue what you're saying. However, I'm a pretty intelligent guy who would like to know what effect EPO has on performance. You may want to consider you have a communication problem as to presenting your argument/analysis if after all the posts I've read from you here on the subject in the last year, I still haven't got a clue what you're actually saying.