Abraham Kiptum WORLD RECORD 58:18 Half Marathon

rekrunner wrote:

To reach stronger conclusions, you have to stop adding unconfirmed hypothesis to unconfirmed hypothesis.

Stop looking for examples as proof, which you cannot distinguish between the general rule or single exceptions, and cannot draw correlations or show causation.

Start completing with real data, so that conclusions are not drawn from incomplete data combined with assumptions.

Start collecting enough data to draw strong correlations with minimum certainty.

If you are really good, isolate and measure the real mechanism hypothesized to improve performance for elites, to show causation.

rekrunner wrote:

Here is another seeming contradiction, based on complete historical data of all time bests, up until Jan. 2018:

If EPO, either alone, or in combination with other drugs, were to have a significant effect for elite runners in 1500m, you might predict a peak in the 1990s, when no test existed, a slowdown in the 2000s after a test was introduced, then further refined, and then again another slowdown in the 2010s, after the ABP was introduced. Here is what we can observe happened in the real world:

In two years, 1985, and 1986, 4 athletes from 3 countries ran 3:29.77 or faster

rekrunner wrote:

- In the next eight years, between 1987 and 1994, when EPO became available, and was slowly introduced into endurance sports, NO athlete ran faster than 3.29.77

rekrunner wrote:

- In the next five years, between 1995 and 1999, before the EPO test was developed, and when EPO was widely abused worldwide, 5 athletes from 5 countries, ran faster than 3:29.77

rekrunner wrote:

- In the next 10 years, between 2000 and 2009, when EPO tests were improving, before the ABP, 8 athletes from 4 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

rekrunner wrote:

- In the next 8 years, between 2000 and 2017, after the ABP was introduced, 13 athletes from 6 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

rekrunner wrote:

- After the ABP, which should have been a deterrent, the rate spiked to more than 1.5 athletes per year

rekrunner wrote:

To reach stronger conclusions, you have to stop adding unconfirmed hypothesis to unconfirmed hypothesis.

Stop looking for examples as proof, which you cannot distinguish between the general rule or single exceptions, and cannot draw correlations or show causation.

Start completing with real data, so that conclusions are not drawn from incomplete data combined with assumptions.

Start collecting enough data to draw strong correlations with minimum certainty.

If you are really good, isolate and measure the real mechanism hypothesized to improve performance for elites, to show causation.

I'm not going to repeat my performance thread, but will note that I observed the 1500m was by far the event which changed the least, both in terms of quality and quantity.

Here is another seeming contradiction, based on complete historical data of all time bests, up until Jan. 2018:

If EPO, either alone, or in combination with other drugs, were to have a significant effect for elite runners in 1500m, you might predict a peak in the 1990s, when no test existed, a slowdown in the 2000s after a test was introduced, then further refined, and then again another slowdown in the 2010s, after the ABP was introduced. Here is what we can observe happened in the real world:

- In two years, 1985, and 1986, 4 athletes from 3 countries ran 3:29.77 or faster

- In the next eight years, between 1987 and 1994, when EPO became available, and was slowly introduced into endurance sports, NO athlete ran faster than 3.29.77

- In the next five years, between 1995 and 1999, before the EPO test was developed, and when EPO was widely abused worldwide, 5 athletes from 5 countries, ran faster than 3:29.77

- In the next 10 years, between 2000 and 2009, when EPO tests were improving, before the ABP, 8 athletes from 4 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

- In the next 8 years, between 2000 and 2017, after the ABP was introduced, 13 athletes from 6 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

It's hard for me to see any connection between EPO and EPO testing milestones, and the number of higher quality performances. Looking at annual rates, the trend increases with time:

- Perhaps unfair, but in 1985-1986, the rate was 2 athletes per year. These were the only 4 performances for the whole 1980s.

- In the early years of EPO being introduced into endurance sports, the rate of fast performances dropped 0.

- In the mid-1990s to 2009, when EPO was undetectable, or easy to beat, the rate was approx. 1 athlete (slightly less) per year

- After the ABP, which should have been a deterrent, the rate spiked to more than 1.5 athletes per year

Let's Get To The Bottom Of This (once and for all) wrote:

I think rekrunner does? So, how do we reach some conclusions here?

...

Give it up wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

To reach stronger conclusions, you have to stop adding unconfirmed hypothesis to unconfirmed hypothesis.

Stop looking for examples as proof, which you cannot distinguish between the general rule or single exceptions, and cannot draw correlations or show causation.

Start completing with real data, so that conclusions are not drawn from incomplete data combined with assumptions.

Start collecting enough data to draw strong correlations with minimum certainty.

If you are really good, isolate and measure the real mechanism hypothesized to improve performance for elites, to show causation.

I'm not going to repeat my performance thread, but will note that I observed the 1500m was by far the event which changed the least, both in terms of quality and quantity.

Here is another seeming contradiction, based on complete historical data of all time bests, up until Jan. 2018:

If EPO, either alone, or in combination with other drugs, were to have a significant effect for elite runners in 1500m, you might predict a peak in the 1990s, when no test existed, a slowdown in the 2000s after a test was introduced, then further refined, and then again another slowdown in the 2010s, after the ABP was introduced. Here is what we can observe happened in the real world:

- In two years, 1985, and 1986, 4 athletes from 3 countries ran 3:29.77 or faster

- In the next eight years, between 1987 and 1994, when EPO became available, and was slowly introduced into endurance sports, NO athlete ran faster than 3.29.77

- In the next five years, between 1995 and 1999, before the EPO test was developed, and when EPO was widely abused worldwide, 5 athletes from 5 countries, ran faster than 3:29.77

- In the next 10 years, between 2000 and 2009, when EPO tests were improving, before the ABP, 8 athletes from 4 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

- In the next 8 years, between 2000 and 2017, after the ABP was introduced, 13 athletes from 6 countries ran faster than 3:29.77

It's hard for me to see any connection between EPO and EPO testing milestones, and the number of higher quality performances. Looking at annual rates, the trend increases with time:

- Perhaps unfair, but in 1985-1986, the rate was 2 athletes per year. These were the only 4 performances for the whole 1980s.

- In the early years of EPO being introduced into endurance sports, the rate of fast performances dropped 0.

- In the mid-1990s to 2009, when EPO was undetectable, or easy to beat, the rate was approx. 1 athlete (slightly less) per year

- After the ABP, which should have been a deterrent, the rate spiked to more than 1.5 athletes per year

Seriously? This is your analysis? You can't find any correlation between EPO & EPO testing milestones? I don't think that's going to tell you much. The problem is communication, which is rapid and total now. Communication & the passing on knowledge on how to beat the system. This is what is happening in much of the world, especially in East Africa, where doping abuse seems to be rampant. With properly communicated instructions it is not very difficult to dope with EPO and beat the system. You won't see any changes in trends in performance due to testing improvements because by the time they announce them, there has already been effective communication on how to beat the testing.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-32983932

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

I have no idea what you're talking about - is this some kind of sermon? ?

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

And one of those athletes is Aouita (3:29.71/1985), which is suspicious. ?

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

Not true; Moreceli ran faster on two occasions within that time period:

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

Yep...and the WR was set by El G in 99 at an incredible 3:26 flat - over 3 1/2 seconds faster than Cram's 3:29.67 just 14 yrs earlier! 3 1/2 seconds in the 15 - that's an enormous amount of time for that distance where improvements at that level are measured in tenths of seconds!

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

I think you mean 2009? And 11 athletes not 13 (Kiprop, Kiplagat, Cheruiyot, McDaddy, Iguider, Manangoi, Farah, Kwemoi, Ndiku, Souleiman, Willis). Out of that group, Kiprop & Amine Laâlou were popped for EPO.

Lets Tell It Like It Is wrote:

I don't think the ABP is much of a deterrent to Morroco as they have 12 ABP sanctions for hematological anomalies on their doping resume; 2nd only to Russia's world leading 35+. And I don't think Kenyan was part of the ABP until 2016 or so?

A few points about Monaco.

1) It might be the fastest track in the world, but I doubt it has anything to do with the surface, but maybe to do with the base. The track is built on the 3rd floor of the facility. There is a swimming pool underneath it. To get to the track level, you have to walk up three flights of stairs to get to it (Feels very weird. You expect to come out above the track, not on it). This has always been like that though, so I don't give credit to a post 2010 conspiracy. Some say the Dempsy facility gives an extra spring because it is on docks?

2) Ever since Michael Stember got his Olympic qualifier there in 2000, the track has been joked about being downhill.

3) Since the start of the Diamond League era, and the end of the Golden League/Super Grand Prix era (2009?) the 1500m races have been largely a farce. By that I mean meet directors have allowed ridiculous field sizes (18-21 guys) because there are only half the number of quality 1500m races on the calendar now. In the past, there was a 1500m at EVERY major meet, so all the top20 guys could pick and choose their races to get their qualifying times in. Monaco has been an exception to this, and has kept field sizes very exclusive. how does this help? It means you can run your own race off the start line, and not have to fight with 20 others for positioning in the first 200m. This allows for more even pacemaking, and much better times on the 2nd and 3rd laps (key to a good 1500m time).

4) Most major meets have 30-45 minute call rooms time (the world and Olympics are 50-55minutes). This makes getting your warmup timed right very challenging. Monaco only is 10-15minutes at most, and the call room is close to the start line, so you are able to get your warm-up routine timed perfectly. This along with perfect temperatures, allows you to be at your ideal preparation right before the gun goes off. It really can be a challenge when you warm up, only to have to sit on chairs for 30minutes in tight quarters and only a 30m area to do some high knees!

5) Since 2009, there has been someone willing to put their neck on the line and go with he requested pace. El G used to do this every race, but these days, few are willing to put a target on their back (I'm the worst culprit of this). Choge did it, then Chepseba, and now Kiprop the last three years. I sign up for this race, because I know it's going to be fast, and so I put all my eggs into this basket for hopes for a PR. Stanford distance races have the same effect as this.

6). When you do strides on the track the day before, it doesn't feel fast, and always feels like a head wind which ever straight you use. None of us hit impressive times for our strides, so take that as you will, but I would venture to say the surface is nothing special like Rieti or the old Georgia Tech track.

I would include Rieti, Rome, Athens and Zagreb as just as fast tracks. Perhaps Oxy also (but for different reasons - wide bends)

m!ndweak wrote:

dont forget that willis PR comes from the doped track that is monaco

hes next best? pretty sure its 3:32...willis is not the clean WR holder

no explanation wrote:

I can never buy any theory of inherent east African attributes that predispose them to untouchable performances. First, there's too much anecdotal evidence of doping, and 2nd there's been a large enough amount of busts that had Kenya been Russia, it would have been banned.

Also, if you look at it, even with extremely low interest in running in much of the world, and it being hugely popular in east Africa, they still can't produce more runners in the top 50 in the most important of distances - the 1500/mile than non-east Africans. If they were so incredibly predisposed to such astounding natural performances, they would easily have the top 50 out 50, but no, they have maybe 17-18. The reality is that there is nothing inherently helpful genetically that they have other than that they are tiny, averaging 120 pounds for males.

https://www.iaaf.org/records/toplists/middlelong/1500-metres/outdoor/men/senior/2018?regionType=world&page=1&bestResultsOnly=true

ukathleticscoach wrote:

NativeSon wrote:

............and then the usual naysayers will come here and crucify them all wondering where they were at the age of 24 (five years prior to whatever great races they win).

They will accuse them starting with the usual suspects on this site.

People haven't seen anythign yet from Ethiopia and Kenya. Young runners have taken on road racing with all seriousness.

Negative people will always be here with us throwing all manner of accusations but that won't deter us.

The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.

The accusations follow numerous doping cases among Kenyan abs Ethiopian runners.

10 years ago I believed East African rubbed to be clean. Your opinion is merely a biased view flying in the face of the facts of numerous doping cases.

Who is the coach / agent of this athlete?

Where are his results from 4-5 years ago?

His many times has he been blood tested out of competition.

..and one more thing your use of a ridiculous saying (dogs and caravan?) having nothing to do with the discussion shows you are a native of America not Kenya.

Here is one for you when it comes to doping and Kenya - the cat is out of the bag.