letsdrum wrote:
For sure, those numbers could be interpreted very different to the wsy Coevett did.
The point just was that even with his childish interpretation he concludrd completely wrong numbers.
53 and 44 in his interpretation doesn't give you close to 20.
He unfortunately can't understand such things, despite his genious level IQ.
Yes sure. No disagreement here.
I don't want to pile on too much, as Coevett made those comments 2 years ago.
As a partial defense, he wasn't just counting the Arabs, but also including East Africans and Russians in the "dirty" pool.
Even then, I think your point stands -- this dirty pool of maybe 15-20% is not enough to bring the rest to "low 20% range".
A quick calculation shows that if 25% of the athletes are 53% doping, to arrive at 44% doping, the remaining 75% are 41% doping.
Or lets say 100% of Russians are doping and that is 10%, and the remaining Arabs and East Africans are 53% doping and they are 15%.
To arrive at 44%, the remaining 75% are still 35% doping, still quite far from "low 20% range".