I'm having a hard time convincing my coach, who is anti-doping but always states that we shouldn't distrust all great performances. He also says that usually people use doping who aren't at the very top, because they wanna get there or have financial issues.
For example he thinks that El G, Radcliffe, Bekele etc are all legit. Is there any way I can prove him wrong and change his opinion? Apart from very few performances like the Chinese 3k or the women 400/800 he thinks that unless someone is caught with proof we can't claim that doping was used which seems retarded, considering that most doping cases only got discovered by house raids and tests are rather useless.
Which world record is doped for sure?
Other Running Related Topic
Other
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
Women's 800
-
I'm an idiot who doesn't read before posting.
-
Men's 200m and 400m swimming.
-
A better thread would be which one is possibly clean?
-
Subway Surfers wrote:
A better thread would be which one is possibly clean?
Agreed, though I doubt that you can suggest one without laughing. -
can I suggest that you go to your local college ethics department and ask for a refresher on basic logic. then go to their history department and ask for a refresher on the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
1. your coach says that a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty, and you think this is, "retarded."
your right to be presumed innocent until you have been proven guilty is perhaps the most fundamental concept of a civilised society. without this, you can, quite literally, be sent to jail without even knowing what you have been accused of. you can be imprisoned without any opportunity to defend yourself. is this seriously the sort of country you want to live in?
2. you think that Hicham El Guerrouj, Paula Radcliffe, Kenenisa Bekele and a host of people you choose to lump under "etc" because you are too lazy to list them are guilty just because doping cases only got discovered by "house raids and tests are rather useless." so you have never read a newspaper, never heard of drugs cheat Ben Johnson, or the drugs cheat Marion Jones, or the cheating liar Maria Sharapova, or the drugs cheat Diego Maradona, or the drugs cheat Asbel Kiprop, you've never looked at the long list of athletes who got caught cheating by tests both in and out of competition and yet, despite your massive and deliberate ignorance on this topic you call your coach, "retarded" for upholding a sacred right that folk have quite literally died to protect.
you should be ashamed of yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_athletics -
cotton shirt wrote:
can I suggest that you go to your local college ethics department and ask for a refresher on basic logic. then go to their history department and ask for a refresher on the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
1. your coach says that a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty, and you think this is, "retarded."
your right to be presumed innocent until you have been proven guilty is perhaps the most fundamental concept of a civilised society. without this, you can, quite literally, be sent to jail without even knowing what you have been accused of. you can be imprisoned without any opportunity to defend yourself. is this seriously the sort of country you want to live in?
2. you think that Hicham El Guerrouj, Paula Radcliffe, Kenenisa Bekele and a host of people you choose to lump under "etc" because you are too lazy to list them are guilty just because doping cases only got discovered by "house raids and tests are rather useless." so you have never read a newspaper, never heard of drugs cheat Ben Johnson, or the drugs cheat Marion Jones, or the cheating liar Maria Sharapova, or the drugs cheat Diego Maradona, or the drugs cheat Asbel Kiprop, you've never looked at the long list of athletes who got caught cheating by tests both in and out of competition and yet, despite your massive and deliberate ignorance on this topic you call your coach, "retarded" for upholding a sacred right that folk have quite literally died to protect.
you should be ashamed of yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_athletics
Jesus guy, he's not trying people for crimes here. Nobody is going to jail as a result of this thread. So maybe dial down the self righteousness a tad. -
All world records are doped for sure. That is the only way to break a world record.
-
"Is there any way I can prove him wrong and change his opinion?"
Errrm... obviously not or those people would have been publicly shamed and stripped of their records. You can't PROVE anything here. I would suggest you point him at the Lance Armstrong saga. Cliche, I know - but he never tested positive. There are loads of books written by people close to him (I particularly like Tyler Hamilton's). Testing catches people who don't know how to dope properly. Armstrong was outed by continued pressure from those closer and closer to him that made him look so stupid that he moved to damage limitation and called Oprah.
This you mention will never test positive either because they don't dope, are experts at the managing the system, or are no longer competing and being tested. It would a huge expose from coaches, training partners etc to 'out' any of them and force a confession.
Lance dug his own long term grave by being a nob to all those he trampled on over the years - they finally joined forces and took him down. -
Harambe's ghost said: Jesus guy, he's not trying people for crimes here. Nobody is going to jail as a result of this thread. So maybe dial down the self righteousness a tad.
"Innocent until proven guilty" are not just pretty words we trot out when we go to court, they are a fundamental concept on which our notions of fairness and justice and civilisation are based. if you think this only applies when lives are at stake, or when jail is an option, then when you need to rely on it, it will not be there for you and you will not be protected by it. all it takes is for one person to accuse you of something, and that's it. you're guilty as accused.
we see this on a regular basis on so-called "social media," where a claim is made that some person did something and all notions of fairness and evidence and "two sides to a story" get thrown out the window and the guy loses his job and is hung out to dry with no opportunity to defend himself or correct the self-righteous indignation with which he was hung drawn and quartered in the first place.
if you think that opposing this despicable state of affairs makes me self righteous, then you are more deluded, dangerous and ignorant than the OP who could at least claim that he had forgotten, whereas you have deliberately decided that justice does not matter.
well I think justice and fairness and courtesy and consideration do matter. they always matter. not just when we go to court, not just when lives are at stake, not just when jail is an option, but always. that is what makes us civilised.
cheers. -
cotton shirt wrote:
Harambe's ghost said: Jesus guy, he's not trying people for crimes here. Nobody is going to jail as a result of this thread. So maybe dial down the self righteousness a tad.
"Innocent until proven guilty" are not just pretty words we trot out when we go to court, they are a fundamental concept on which our notions of fairness and justice and civilisation are based. if you think this only applies when lives are at stake, or when jail is an option, then when you need to rely on it, it will not be there for you and you will not be protected by it. all it takes is for one person to accuse you of something, and that's it. you're guilty as accused.
we see this on a regular basis on so-called "social media," where a claim is made that some person did something and all notions of fairness and evidence and "two sides to a story" get thrown out the window and the guy loses his job and is hung out to dry with no opportunity to defend himself or correct the self-righteous indignation with which he was hung drawn and quartered in the first place.
if you think that opposing this despicable state of affairs makes me self righteous, then you are more deluded, dangerous and ignorant than the OP who could at least claim that he had forgotten, whereas you have deliberately decided that justice does not matter.
well I think justice and fairness and courtesy and consideration do matter. they always matter. not just when we go to court, not just when lives are at stake, not just when jail is an option, but always. that is what makes us civilised.
cheers.
So, you're dialing the self righteousness UP a few notches then. I see.
What a sad pathetic person you are. -
Harambe's ghost wrote:
So, you're dialing the self righteousness UP a few notches then. I see.
What a sad pathetic person you are.
its interesting to me
the ghost of ee
our cotton shirted friend only capitalized the words op and innocent
in his vociferous defense
but did choose
to use
the period
to stop his thoughts which were myriad
a deliberate half rebellions penchant against the laws of grammar
or a nod to the belief the op doesnt deserve the slammer
the gentle irony of this use of the couplet
is the hope these few do half cottons ire rather than double it
[/satire font off] -
Xoman wrote:
I'm having a hard time convincing my coach, who is anti-doping but always states that we shouldn't distrust all great performances. He also says that usually people use doping who aren't at the very top, because they wanna get there or have financial issues.
For example he thinks that El G, Radcliffe, Bekele etc are all legit. Is there any way I can prove him wrong and change his opinion? Apart from very few performances like the Chinese 3k or the women 400/800 he thinks that unless someone is caught with proof we can't claim that doping was used which seems retarded, considering that most doping cases only got discovered by house raids and tests are rather useless.
All of them bud.
Doping comes in many forms, some of them to remain undetectable for years to come. Human enhancement is no secret to the sports world. However, the limits to "doping" are always changing, because something is now deemed "too helpful" to the athlete. -
Does your "coach" have the initials R.C.?
-
women's 100, 200, 400, 800. etc. All the throws.
Men's 800, 1500 etc -
I believe all Olympic track events have doped records. 100 through 10,000, and including the marathon, both men and women (I'll throw in the mile and 3000 as well).
Now I'm sure there are different levels of doping, and I do believe that is an important distinction. Just look at some of the women's sprint records and what those ladies looked like. Clearly not natural to the point of the body being almost deformed looking.
If I was told that there is for certain one clean record in the above list, then I think I'd go with Rudisha's 800. -
gingerneil wrote:
"Is there any way I can prove him wrong and change his opinion?"
Errrm... obviously not or those people would have been publicly shamed and stripped of their records. You can't PROVE anything here. I would suggest you point him at the Lance Armstrong saga. Cliche, I know - but he never tested positive. There are loads of books written by people close to him (I particularly like Tyler Hamilton's). Testing catches people who don't know how to dope properly. Armstrong was outed by continued pressure from those closer and closer to him that made him look so stupid that he moved to damage limitation and called Oprah.
This you mention will never test positive either because they don't dope, are experts at the managing the system, or are no longer competing and being tested. It would a huge expose from coaches, training partners etc to 'out' any of them and force a confession.
Lance dug his own long term grave by being a nob to all those he trampled on over the years - they finally joined forces and took him down.
This is a good post, but a far more relevant example is Marion Jones. Her case disproves the following:
1. Athletes at the top don't dope.
2. Athletes who dope fail drug tests. (she missed a test early on, and was cleared for EPO on a B sample)
Her case shows that your coach's premise is faulty.
At the same time, you're not going to be able to prove that somebody like El G doped. In his case, the circumstantial evidence is very suggestive (imo). -
cotton shirt wrote:
Harambe's ghost said: Jesus guy, he's not trying people for crimes here. Nobody is going to jail as a result of this thread. So maybe dial down the self righteousness a tad.
"Innocent until proven guilty" are not just pretty words we trot out when we go to court, they are a fundamental concept on which our notions of fairness and justice and civilisation are based. if you think this only applies when lives are at stake, or when jail is an option, then when you need to rely on it, it will not be there for you and you will not be protected by it. all it takes is for one person to accuse you of something, and that's it. you're guilty as accused.
we see this on a regular basis on so-called "social media," where a claim is made that some person did something and all notions of fairness and evidence and "two sides to a story" get thrown out the window and the guy loses his job and is hung out to dry with no opportunity to defend himself or correct the self-righteous indignation with which he was hung drawn and quartered in the first place.
if you think that opposing this despicable state of affairs makes me self righteous, then you are more deluded, dangerous and ignorant than the OP who could at least claim that he had forgotten, whereas you have deliberately decided that justice does not matter.
well I think justice and fairness and courtesy and consideration do matter. they always matter. not just when we go to court, not just when lives are at stake, not just when jail is an option, but always. that is what makes us civilised.
cheers.
So, to summarise, no record is doped. Because it isn't nice to suggest people do these things. In the meantime, I will jam my head back into the sand.
