One of the common methods to "prove" me wrong is to change the topic of conversation and use different goalposts. I call this a strawman. Good job. Build and burn that scarecrow.
While you think medal wins are important, and I agree they are, many other people think that the fast times from the likes of Geb, Bekele, Komen, and 450 other East African men and 45 North African men, and Paula Radcliffe, and the Dibabas, and Ayana, are only possible with EPO.
If the question is "what am I talking about" -- and it was -- I'm talking about best performances as measured by fast times.
But not you. It looks like you have conceded that EPO cannot really lead to fast times, like we saw in the '90's on the track, and like we've seen post-2000s in the marathon.
Lets Think This One Through wrote:
This is where you're wrong as best performances isn't all about raw time. Olympic & WC medals, especially of the gold variety, are equally as important as a PB time, otherwise what is the point in having Olympics & WC games? Do you think 20 yrs from now people are going care that Centro never ran anything faster than 3:30 in his career? (and didn't make pre-90s cut-off. Lol). No...they're going to remember him winning Olympic gold and defeating the likes of Makhloufi, Kiprop, Willis & Iguider on the biggest stage in the World. Another example is Seb Coe. Everyone I talk to never brings up his 3:29.77 PB - it's all about his 2 Olympic gold medals that they remember & talk about. And most of these athletes will tell you that the price of Olympic/WC gold outweighs any PB time.