I think one of the problems you have is your reputation for using your "90's cutoff times" as a measuring stick against some of these doping cases (both recent and past).
Case in point: I debated you quite some time ago on the prevalence & history of Spanish doping mentioning confirmed doper (EPO) Alberto García, a PB of 13:02.54 and European Champion (and a ~3% performance jump in his profile). All you did was harp on the fact that he didn't run faster than the "90's cutoff time." You've also stated from time to time that the Spanish "dope hard" but don't have the times to show it (something along those lines).
In the Rutto thread you seem to undermine Rutto's PB and also insinuating his placing at WC 5000 final it's not that great of a performance:
"Who said they look at the numbers, and numbers don't lie? Two numbers I saw:
In my look at performance, my 1990-cutoff definition of top-times was 13:02, a really fast time for 1990. This best Kenyan 2017 WC finalist placed 13th/14th in the 2017 WC final."
https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9334007&page=5If 13:02 is a really fast time for 1990, why do you consider 13:02.54 (García) & 13:03 (Rutto) slow times? (or do you?).
Now I know all about your position on 02-vector doping benefits being "over-estimated/stated." I believe you've mentioned .03 - 08% (?) that you determined from your EPO-performance analysis thread that used unreliable data from the pre-90's. As causal mentioned, some of the experts in the field are looking at "up to 3%."
The Schmaucher et al paper (Detection of EPO doping and blood doping: the haematological module of the AthleteBiological Passport) mentions even a higher than that:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22374784From the intro of the text:
"The capacity of the organism to transport oxygen to the workingmuscle is a key factor for endurance performance.[1] For many years, one of the prime targets of manipulating athletes was therefore to improve the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood as it offered gains in performance of 5–8%.[2] As early as 1970, athletes started to use the then legal transfusion of blood (blood doping) to enhance their endurance. This technique was banned in 1988 and is since a prohibited method listed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). The logistical requirements for blood manipulations were rather significant, which limited their use in the athletic population. With the commercial introduction of recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO) – the first erythro-poiesis stimulating agent (ESA) – the increase of red cell mass to boost performance became available to everyone and was soon widespread in most endurance sports. This paper reviewsthe development of the fight against ESA doping and blood doping and focuses on the most recent technique, the haemato-logical module of the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP)."
Also, here's a good read for you from Micheal Joyner. One the key issues here is though the ABP has stopped "industrial-size doping" it hasn't stopped microdosing at all which can still produce significant gains in performance and be a deciding factor in medals & placing at competitions.