Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
Some people on this list need to lighten up. Some people are way too stuffy and proper. Even serious media outlets sometimes fail to provide anying new or interesting as they rehash old stories and ideas. Stop pretending the list is god. Alan _ Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your current Internet access and enjoy patented spam control and more. Get two months FREE! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa
Re: t-and-f: rutto
I bet you don't visit the Letsrun.com or Kemibe.com message boards much do ya? If you did you would see new meanings of the word libel and restricted speech going the way of the Dodo. Also, the correct adjective is indecorous not the non-word undecorous, but a less snooty way of saying the same thing would be tasteless. In fact this listserv has gone the way of the Dodo since I first signed on in 1996 when actual college runners *shock* frequented the list. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] And even so, a productive forum has civil discourse. Yes, you're protected to say all sorts of idiotic things, but expect to be slapped down in return, including being told your speech is undecorous. RMc _ Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account has exceeded its 2MB storage limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Re: t-and-f: rutto
but if the statement comes down to he ran fast, so he must be on drugs then these type of statements have two problems. First, they border on libel, which may expose the writer to legal actions. It doesn't boil down to he ran fast, so he must be on drugs. Do I have proof that he or anyone else is on anything? Nope. Who does? The only time we have concrete proof that anyone is on drugs is when the drug tests come back positive. That doesn't mean that the only ones on drugs are the ones getting caught. The ones who are getting caught are the stupid ones who made the mistakes to get caught. There are more elite athletes (In track, baseball, football, ect) on drugs than who are getting caught. If you think that our system of finding drugged up athletes is flawless then I'm sorry for you. My proof is in the context in which he ran so fast: His first marathon. Two weeks before it would have been only 12 seconds off the WR. It's not that he ran so fast. It's that he ran so fast so early. It would be different if he ran 2:05:50 a year or so down the road. Another thing...libel? Please buddy, get real. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Keith Whitman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: rutto Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:09:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc4-f33.hotmail.com ([65.54.237.168]) by mc4-s14.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:50:23 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc4-f33.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:47:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9FMEmJf004705for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9FMEmdE004688for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9FMEXJf002986for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:14:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9FMEVx03314;Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:14:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: x4V9WGjv0S/LcHeFkDEzQVwMDn7r1Oq+j7+VA9Gr7Ls= Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Oct 2003 22:47:55.0993 (UTC) FILETIME=[5FD42490:01C3936E] I don't think any of us have said just shut up, Alan. Rather, I think we've offered well-reasoned arguments, and have asked Alan for a substantive rationale that is logically and internally consistent. He can ask the question, and he can offer proof, but if the statement comes down to he ran fast, so he must be on drugs then these type of statements have two problems. First, they border on libel, which may expose the writer to legal actions. Second, it simply runs down the sport without basis. They become of a nature similar to the query when was the last time you beat your wife? I don't think such statements have any place in a public forum, which is what this list is. I don't know if this type of controversy rages among fans in other sports such as cycling or swimming, where doping issues continue to arise. But my sense of what drives the discussion on this list is a continuing attempt by Ben Johnson supporters to vindicate his actions in 1988. Maybe this occurs because so many people disliked Carl Lewis and can't stand the thought that he was the beneficiary of Johnson's foibles. Or maybe its Canadians thinking they had finally triumphed over their more dominant neighbors and then finding that it was taken away. Whatever the reason, the accusations made on this list have substantial emotional content that seems to go beyond simply making speculative statements. RMc At 07:46 PM 10/14/2003 -0700, t-and-f-digest wrote.. Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 21:55:17 -0400 From: Keith Whitman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: rutto Bob, I'm not stating an opinion about the athlete in question, but isn't a discussion list allowed to include the right to include an opinion? Alan simply said he was suspicious which is a fair statement given the state of our sport right now. We'd all love to live in that drug free athletic utopia in which people just gravitate to the event they are best at and put up astonishing marks. Until that day occurs then suspicion will be rampant. Some will have the stones to make comments to that affect and some won't. At least Alan isn't sticking his head in the sand...
RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
This is not 1954. HUGE difference in training between now and then. HUGE difference in tracks between now and then. HUGE difference between mindset between now and then. Alan From: vincent duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: vincent duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'John Molvar' [EMAIL PROTECTED],'Send t-and-f' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:03:00 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f20.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.27]) by mc11-s3.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:25:11 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:21:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9G33AJf027201for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9G33A80027190for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.70])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9G338Jf026967for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vincentmckzfad (ool-182e44a9.dyn.optonline.net [24.46.68.169]) by mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:03:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Info: x4V9WGjv0S/xICzPJbUig7zE7gJSP8O2kiFPYQiLZGk= In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2003 03:21:44.0238 (UTC) FILETIME=[9FD364E0:01C39394] I ask you kindly to look at the mile record after the first sub four by the good Doctor..was that drugs.or a new mind set. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Molvar Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:35 PM To: Send t-and-f Subject: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 Alan wrote: It's not just running near a WR that implies drug use. It's when numerous people run near a WR that bothers me. It's when a marathon VIRGIN runs near a WR that bothers me. If KK runs a WR it wouldn't strike me as mysterious at all. He's been in the game for a while. He didn't debut at 2:05. The problem I have is that 7 of the top 10 marathon times in HISTORY have been run in 2002 or 2003. From 1988 to 1998 no one went under Dinsamo's record. Since then there's been 25 performances by 21 runners under that record. You will not find such a statistic during any other past decade. When records (be it WR or debut WR which was just broken in Paris by Wilson Onsare before Rutto did his Chicago dance) are broken every year in the same event then I question every one of those results. The state of the sport leads to such uncredibility. Come on Alan, Didn't you hear what the man said? These guys have discovered hard training. That is why 7 of the 10 best times have been run in the 2 years. Marathoners before 2002 didn't know about hard training, basically they were all lazy, Krispy Kreme eating computer game players. The new wave Alan is to train hard and if you don't jump on the train hard bandwagon you are going to be left behind. I predict that more and more are going to discover this train hard and you are going to see even more record breaking times. Actually this train hard thing was secretly tried by chain smoking coach MA in the Mid 90s in China. That secret train hard formula combined with what Rich McCann would characterize as weak records in the women's distance events explains that record breaking surge. So you see Alan, you just don't get it, so stop trampling on our Yellow Brick Road. __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com _ Page a contactÂ’s mobile phone with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
Re: t-and-f: rutto
Who says I'm not suspicious of Radcliffe? I've said in the past that any current or former WR holder is suspicious in my mind. The only proof I need is the fact that these people hold world records. Is every WR holder drugged up? Probably not, but that doesn't mean one can't be suspicious. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: rutto Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:10:12 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc6-f9.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:14:53 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9GHEkx00506;Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:14:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jF2p+ghGKXNsoLnsp0NpHBY Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2003 17:14:54.0679 (UTC) FILETIME=[04735670:01C39409] At 04:37 PM 10/16/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: but if the statement comes down to he ran fast, so he must be on drugs then these type of statements have two problems. First, they border on libel, which may expose the writer to legal actions. It doesn't boil down to he ran fast, so he must be on drugs. Do I have proof that he or anyone else is on anything? Nope. Who does? The only time we have concrete proof that anyone is on drugs is when the drug tests come back positive. That doesn't mean that the only ones on drugs are the ones getting caught. The ones who are getting caught are the stupid ones who made the mistakes to get caught. There are more elite athletes (In track, baseball, football, ect) on drugs than who are getting caught. If you think that our system of finding drugged up athletes is flawless then I'm sorry for you. My proof is in the context in which he ran so fast: His first marathon. Two weeks before it would have been only 12 seconds off the WR. It's not that he ran so fast. It's that he ran so fast so early. It would be different if he ran 2:05:50 a year or so down the road. I'll accept circumstantial evidence--I have in the case of the Chinese women runners in 1993 (which also happened to coincide with a set of drug-related incidents among Chinese women in swimming.) To add to the Chinese evidence was the fact former East German coaches were then advising Chinese coaches. And we have smoking guns for the East Germans. What I don't see is the same level of circumstantial evidence in the case of Rutto. We've come up with many logical and empirical reasons to refute the basis of your claim. Even this last assertion of yours is blown away by KK's roughly equivalent debut (and then you respond by smearing him as well.) To add to that, Paula Radcliffe's 2:18:56 debut was similarly close to a WR which had been part of a two race sequence that lowered the previous record by almost 2 minutes! At least Rutto's was relative to a 4-year old mark which didn't improve a 9-year old mark very much. Why haven't you been on the list ranting about Radcliffe's performances being drug enhanced?! They're much more stunning than Rutto's, and even I show the women's marathon WR has being very strong relative to the other WRs (including even the Chinese marks). Your inconsistency is glaring. The fact is that once all of the basis for your claim are stripped away, as they have been irrefutably, you are left with the simple assertion he ran fast, so therefore he must be using drugs. You need to build a much more substantial case than what you've put forward. You need to look at all previous cases of high level debut performances. Another thing...libel? Please buddy, get real. Don't be so smug. Others who thought they were protected or too obscure have been sued. Just the legal expenses would be substantial. And even if libel is not proven in a court, these unsubstantiated claims border on libel. Not everything that we due in life must be regulated by a law. There's no law against being rude, but we all generally agree that it's not a tolerable behavior in a social setting. Many of us believe the same is true about libelous statements that may not pass the strict tests of the law. Richard McCann _ Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your current Internet access and enjoy patented spam control and more. Get two months FREE! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa
RE: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
Trumping the trump card... The record KK came within 20 seconds of wasn't 2 weeks old but 9 years old. It should also be known that KK isn't off my suspicion list either. I'm suspicious of any current or former WR holder or Olympic/World gold medalist. You can damn me for that opinion all you want but it is my opinion and it won't change until WADA, USADA or any other anti-doping agency does a better job which isn't likely to happen. I think we should adopt the cycling federations hematocrit test. If you're over 50 then you're out for health reasons Alan From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:57:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from exchange3.rodale.com ([206.245.129.44]) by mc9-f22.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 07:59:10 -0700 Received: by exchange3.rodale.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)id 46CBSSFG; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:57:38 -0400 X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGNXRvdeLQnY6cs8weDh8OP Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Oct 2003 14:59:11.0678 (UTC) FILETIME=[E46E3DE0:01C3932C] Rutto's debut of 2:05:50 was 55 seconds off the current world record. Khannouchi's debut of 2:07:10 - also a debut world record at the time -- was 20 seconds off the then world record. -Original Message- From: alan tobin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago running a near a WR in one event implies drug use. He's going to have to use a completely different basis for coming to that conclusion. It's not just running near a WR that implies drug use. It's when numerous people run near a WR that bothers me. It's when a marathon VIRGIN runs near a WR that bothers me. If KK runs a WR it wouldn't strike me as mysterious at all. He's been in the game for a while. He didn't debut at 2:05. The problem I have is that 7 of the top 10 marathon times in HISTORY have been run in 2002 or 2003. From 1988 to 1998 no one went under Dinsamo's record. Since then there's been 25 performances by 21 runners under that record. You will not find such a statistic during any other past decade. When records (be it WR or debut WR which was just broken in Paris by Wilson Onsare before Rutto did his Chicago dance) are broken every year in the same event then I question every one of those results. The state of the sport leads to such uncredibility. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:08:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc11-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:14:01 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9EJDqg05916;Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:13:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGQlXSka243lVN6IUY/pnVw Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .net Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2003 19:14:01.0947 (UTC) FILETIME=[53BA62B0:01C39287] I have problems with the statistical methods used to develop most of these tables. Even the comparison method I used, which is similar to Hoffman's is a bit too simplistic. However, the correct method is rather data intensive. I would want to use the top 100 marks over a series of years to estimate the underlying variance in performances. This would be the means of identifying which performances are the greatest outlier vs. other performances. The one underlying assumption is that the same proportion of the population competes in each event so that the probability distributions are comparable among events. If we're going to rely solely on subjective comparisons, then Tobin's evaluation is no more valid than mine and he has absolutely no basis for leaping to a conclusion that running a near a WR in one event implies drug use. He's going to have to use a completely different basis for coming to that conclusion. On the other hand, I'm not arguing that my comparison is subjective per se, but rather can be recreated by anyone else in a step by step fashion that is readily transparent. If they want to change the underlying assumptions, they are free to do so and to come to their own conclusions. Such transparency is the fundamental basis of objective comparisons
RE: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
H...apparently I've been trumped. I'll go back to my cave now. Alan From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:57:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from exchange3.rodale.com ([206.245.129.44]) by mc9-f22.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 07:59:10 -0700 Received: by exchange3.rodale.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)id 46CBSSFG; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:57:38 -0400 X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGNXRvdeLQnY6cs8weDh8OP Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Oct 2003 14:59:11.0678 (UTC) FILETIME=[E46E3DE0:01C3932C] Rutto's debut of 2:05:50 was 55 seconds off the current world record. Khannouchi's debut of 2:07:10 - also a debut world record at the time -- was 20 seconds off the then world record. -Original Message- From: alan tobin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 9:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago running a near a WR in one event implies drug use. He's going to have to use a completely different basis for coming to that conclusion. It's not just running near a WR that implies drug use. It's when numerous people run near a WR that bothers me. It's when a marathon VIRGIN runs near a WR that bothers me. If KK runs a WR it wouldn't strike me as mysterious at all. He's been in the game for a while. He didn't debut at 2:05. The problem I have is that 7 of the top 10 marathon times in HISTORY have been run in 2002 or 2003. From 1988 to 1998 no one went under Dinsamo's record. Since then there's been 25 performances by 21 runners under that record. You will not find such a statistic during any other past decade. When records (be it WR or debut WR which was just broken in Paris by Wilson Onsare before Rutto did his Chicago dance) are broken every year in the same event then I question every one of those results. The state of the sport leads to such uncredibility. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:08:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc11-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:14:01 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9EJDqg05916;Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:13:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGQlXSka243lVN6IUY/pnVw Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .net Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2003 19:14:01.0947 (UTC) FILETIME=[53BA62B0:01C39287] I have problems with the statistical methods used to develop most of these tables. Even the comparison method I used, which is similar to Hoffman's is a bit too simplistic. However, the correct method is rather data intensive. I would want to use the top 100 marks over a series of years to estimate the underlying variance in performances. This would be the means of identifying which performances are the greatest outlier vs. other performances. The one underlying assumption is that the same proportion of the population competes in each event so that the probability distributions are comparable among events. If we're going to rely solely on subjective comparisons, then Tobin's evaluation is no more valid than mine and he has absolutely no basis for leaping to a conclusion that running a near a WR in one event implies drug use. He's going to have to use a completely different basis for coming to that conclusion. On the other hand, I'm not arguing that my comparison is subjective per se, but rather can be recreated by anyone else in a step by step fashion that is readily transparent. If they want to change the underlying assumptions, they are free to do so and to come to their own conclusions. Such transparency is the fundamental basis of objective comparisons. Subjective comparisons are opaque and cannot be recreated. RMc At 01:23 PM 10/14/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ALL of these comparison tables are fundamentally flawed, as subjectivity is the common denominator. Don't believe me, just compare the projected equivalents from the various tables: Purdy, Coe and Martin, Portuguese, Mercier (I'm missing a few) _ See when your friends are online with MSN Messenger 6.0
Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
You need to realize that the current men's marathon WR is still quite weak, and should be well under 2:04 to be equivalent to the classic distances WRs. Even Tergat's half marathon record is better than his marathon. I friggin hate assumptions like that. Using that logic all of the women's WRs fail in comparison to the 400 mark. You can not compare a time at one distance to a time at another distance. It's just stupid. The marathon is an entirely different ball game than the 10k or even the half-marathon. You can however compare times at one distance across decades. It took 21 years to drop from 2:08:34 to 2:08:18. Even if you question the validity of the first time it still took 24 years to drop from 2:09:36 to 2:08:18. That's the largest gap between drops in the men's record. One would think that an event record would drop dramatically at first and then level off unless there are major training breakthroughs (late 60s) or very gifted individuals (Peters, Clayton, KK) who break the record multiple times. What I don't buy is the record being broken by a different person every year or every week. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:20:00 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc11-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:27:19 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9DJNTg17946;Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:23:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jE8Iw8MteVIzZe47pzeDXTH Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Oct 2003 19:27:20.0442 (UTC) FILETIME=[05414DA0:01C391C0] Actually, he's 55 seconds off the WR. By my calculation, his time equals about 26:55 for 10k. Given that few marathoners run equivalent 10k performances, I don't think he's too far out of line. You need to realize that the current men's marathon WR is still quite weak, and should be well under 2:04 to be equivalent to the classic distances WRs. Even Tergat's half marathon record is better than his marathon. RMc At 06:35 PM 10/13/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: When a runner I barely heard of runs his first ever marathon 8 seconds off a record that was just broke I start to wonder. 27:30 10k 2:05:50 marathon. Call me a pessimist if you want. Icing on the cake would be if he's a part of Dr. Rosa's camp. Anyone know? Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:16:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f33.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.40]) by mc11-s17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:59:16 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f33.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:58:24 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9CIMqE8021882for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9CIMqjY021881for t-and-f-outgoing; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9CIMoE8021862for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9CIEng22159;Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:14:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: yOfSAGsvVmXUyZvKoX7IYkust6GnxSMllxkgGYAi1YY= Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2003 18:58:24.0778 (UTC) FILETIME=[D04E3EA0:01C390F2] Sunday October 12, 06:50 PM Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/031012/323/eawyq.html Click to enlarge photo CHICAGO (AFP) - First-time marathoner Evans Rutto of Kenya and reigning Boston Marathon champion Svetlana Zakharova of Russia won titles at the Chicago Marathon. Rutto won in 2hr 05min 50sec, eight seconds off the race mark, American Khalid Khannouchi's old world best of 2:05:42 in 1999. Click to enlarge photo Kenya's Paul Tergat set the world marathon best of 2
Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
For example, how many 10k WR holders (Gebreselassie) or even 10k WC/Oly medalists (Tergat) have run the men's marathon at or near the peak of their career? Are you making the assumption that Geb and Tergat are at the peak of the their careers? I'd have to say that both were at their peak when they were setting 5k/10k WRs and winning Olympic golds/silvers (1995-2000). I think it's a pretty safe assumption that today there are more runners waiting until after their peak track 10k/5k fitness to run a marathon than 20-30 years ago. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:40:56 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc5-f28.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:42:57 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9EGgog19152;Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:42:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jF9Td9/1DyHr12VC9A5kd3c Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2003 16:42:58.0257 (UTC) FILETIME=[39590C10:01C39272] I believe that you CAN make comparisons across distances. What's interesting is that in the women's case, the marathon mark is now much STRONGER than the other marks. How do you explain that discrepancy? Over time, the longer distances have tended to get faster relative to the shorter distances as training volume increased and the number of top line athletes competing in the event has increased. For example, how many 10k WR holders (Gebreselassie) or even 10k WC/Oly medalists (Tergat) have run the men's marathon at or near the peak of their career? Salazar is the only one that I can think of. (Zatopek's triple doesn't count, but even that was a WR, showing how weak the mark was.) What's interesting about the women is that they've had many more top elites at shorter distances run the marathon, in part because the 5k and 10k were not Olympic distances until 1992. As for the drop in marathon from 2:08:34 to 2:08:18, remember that the 10k record only fell from 27:39 to 27:22 in the same period, yet the 10k record is now 26:22. The marathon record should be 2:04:06 if it is to improve an equivalent amount. That's in line with my previous assessment. Your assessment is purely subjective as to whether a 2:05:50 marathon should be considered on par with a 26:30 10k. You then leap to unfounded conclusions based on your purely subjective assessment. I offer a counter assessment which is backed by some quantitative analysis. I'm probably not on the mark, as most quantitative assessments of the real world require oversimplification. However, those types of analyses give a good indication of the general direction--much better than anecdotal subjective assessments. As for record bursts that have occurred, it's not always evident until after the fact as to why those bursts have occurred. If I was going to offer an explanation about the current burst it would be that African runners began to enter the distance running events in large droves in the 1980s. They ran along with the Europeans and Americans with their preexisting notions about running limits until the early 1990s. Then the Africans began to compete solely with each other and discovered that they could push beyond those limits, due in part because their own lifestyles are so harsh (much harder than even 19th century Europe and America), and in part because the added nutritional and technology benefits (not necessarily drugs given the leaps by young athletes who are too poor to buy drugs) that are becoming more available in East and North Africa. The 5k and 10k marks have stood since 1998. Now those top athletes are moving up to the marathon, and the performances in that event are beginning to improve similarly. The introduction of a new competitive population with the right predisposition may have been the reason for the Finnish-driven burst in the 1920s, and the Eastern European-driven burst in the 1950s (emerging from the WWII disaster). The 1940s and 1960s bursts were driven almost solely by new training techniques, although the emergence of Kip Keino had some effect on the latter (the only man who could run toe to toe with both Ryun and Clarke.) The late 70s burst was much more of mixed bag, with Rono on one hand, and Walker, Coe and Ovett on the other. RMc At 02:36 PM 10/14/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: You need to realize that the current men's marathon WR is still quite weak, and should be well under 2:04 to be equivalent to the classic distances WRs. Even
Re: t-and-f: rutto
Can you blame me for being suspicious? A negative split sub 2:06 in his DEBUT. I don't like the taste of that kool-aid. Alan From: peter watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: peter watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: rutto Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:48:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc7-f15.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.22]) by mc7-s16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:10:29 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc7-f15.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:03:12 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9DLmJE8005334for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9DLmJWm005333for t-and-f-outgoing; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web21109.mail.yahoo.com (web21109.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.227.111])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9DLmHE8005248for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:48:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [152.163.253.65] by web21109.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:48:17 PDT X-Message-Info: x4V9WGjv0S8YI9KZxuOo5DFefmGie1n+yUCCXapcubY= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Oct 2003 22:03:15.0777 (UTC) FILETIME=[CD782310:01C391D5] Alan- because you have not heard of him it is suspicious? I will tell you Evans is the real deal and 100% clean. I had the honor of being part of Dieters training group,running every day with the guys then hanging out drinking chai watching tv. unfortuantly I got injured and did not get to race. Running with the group (Paul, evans, Godfrey , tim cheriout and laban Kipkemboi) was an amazing experience. These guys are the most efficent runners I have ever seen and they work hard day in and day out. The training program is unbelivbly dificult and these guys made it through ready to race hard. Evans if you followed the running scene closly has also run 61 minutes for the 1/2. Paul and evans will only runner faster in the future. Usually i let these drug accusations go by without response but when they are directed at a friend of mine i cannot. pete watson __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com _ Surf and talk on the phone at the same time with broadband Internet access. Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). https://broadband.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
How about KK? Sure he hasn't touched a track race in a long while, but I'm sure he could take down a few of his PRs if he chose to do so. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:47:45 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc7-f26.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:55:45 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9EHpsg24333;Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:51:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFSO02xCpCZ4xivGkU5FIDS Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2003 17:55:45.0760 (UTC) FILETIME=[64951E00:01C3927C] At 05:04 PM 10/14/2003 +, alan tobin wrote.. For example, how many 10k WR holders (Gebreselassie) or even 10k WC/Oly medalists (Tergat) have run the men's marathon at or near the peak of their career? Are you making the assumption that Geb and Tergat are at the peak of the their careers? I'd have to say that both were at their peak when they were setting 5k/10k WRs and winning Olympic golds/silvers (1995-2000). I think it's a pretty safe assumption that today there are more runners waiting until after their peak track 10k/5k fitness to run a marathon than 20-30 years ago. Gebreselassie won the 10k WC silver and ran 26:29, the fastest time in the world this year. He might be just slightly slower than before, but he seems to be pretty damn close to his peak. Tergat immediately jumped from an Oly silver to running marathons in 2:07. Top marathoners are younger, not older, than they were 20-30 years ago relative to their performance peaks. Think of how unusual Salazar was, yet many of the top Africans are about his age now. (BTW, Shorter was the other top 10k runner who also marathoned in the past at his peak.) RMc Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:40:56 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ([168.150.193.10]) by mc5-f28.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:42:57 -0700 Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9EGgog19152;Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:42:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jF9Td9/1DyHr12VC9A5kd3c Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2003 16:42:58.0257 (UTC) FILETIME=[39590C10:01C39272] I believe that you CAN make comparisons across distances. What's interesting is that in the women's case, the marathon mark is now much STRONGER than the other marks. How do you explain that discrepancy? Over time, the longer distances have tended to get faster relative to the shorter distances as training volume increased and the number of top line athletes competing in the event has increased. For example, how many 10k WR holders (Gebreselassie) or even 10k WC/Oly medalists (Tergat) have run the men's marathon at or near the peak of their career? Salazar is the only one that I can think of. (Zatopek's triple doesn't count, but even that was a WR, showing how weak the mark was.) What's interesting about the women is that they've had many more top elites at shorter distances run the marathon, in part because the 5k and 10k were not Olympic distances until 1992. As for the drop in marathon from 2:08:34 to 2:08:18, remember that the 10k record only fell from 27:39 to 27:22 in the same period, yet the 10k record is now 26:22. The marathon record should be 2:04:06 if it is to improve an equivalent amount. That's in line with my previous assessment. Your assessment is purely subjective as to whether a 2:05:50 marathon should be considered on par with a 26:30 10k. You then leap to unfounded conclusions based on your purely subjective assessment. I offer a counter assessment which is backed by some quantitative analysis. I'm probably not on the mark, as most quantitative assessments of the real world require oversimplification. However, those types of analyses give a good indication of the general direction--much better than anecdotal subjective assessments. As for record bursts that have occurred, it's not always evident until after the fact as to why those bursts have occurred. If I was going
Re: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago
When a runner I barely heard of runs his first ever marathon 8 seconds off a record that was just broke I start to wonder. 27:30 10k 2:05:50 marathon. Call me a pessimist if you want. Icing on the cake would be if he's a part of Dr. Rosa's camp. Anyone know? Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: fwd: Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:16:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f33.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.40]) by mc11-s17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:59:16 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f33.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:58:24 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9CIMqE8021882for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9CIMqjY021881for t-and-f-outgoing; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9CIMoE8021862for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h9CIEng22159;Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:14:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: yOfSAGsvVmXUyZvKoX7IYkust6GnxSMllxkgGYAi1YY= Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2003 18:58:24.0778 (UTC) FILETIME=[D04E3EA0:01C390F2] Sunday October 12, 06:50 PM Marathon debutant Rutto, Boston champ Zakharova win at Chicago http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/031012/323/eawyq.html Click to enlarge photo CHICAGO (AFP) - First-time marathoner Evans Rutto of Kenya and reigning Boston Marathon champion Svetlana Zakharova of Russia won titles at the Chicago Marathon. Rutto won in 2hr 05min 50sec, eight seconds off the race mark, American Khalid Khannouchi's old world best of 2:05:42 in 1999. Click to enlarge photo Kenya's Paul Tergat set the world marathon best of 2:04:55 at the Berlin Marathon on September 28. But Rutto's run does break the world mark for first-time marathon runners, which had been 2:06:47 by Wilson Onsari in Paris this year. I was very surprised by the time, Rutto said. I'm very happy. I felt good all the way, very strong. Zakharova won in 2:23:07 with runner-up Constantina Tomescu-Dita 28 seconds behind. It was hard to hold up at the end, Zakharova said. It was hot. I like it here very much and I'll be back next year. Rutto took home 225,000 dollars while Zakharova received 110,000 dollars. Each won 100,000 dollars for the victory but the Kenyan captured more in bonus prize money. A late-race surge brought victory for Zakharova, pulling away from her Romanian rival in the final mile for the triumph. I tried to hold on for the win, but it was not possible, Tomescu-Dita said. I had pain in my legs and my stomach. Latvian Jelena Prokopcuka was third, followed by Russia's Albina Ivanova and Poland's Grazyna Syrek. Kenyans swept the top five men's spots with Paul Koech second in an unofficial time of 2:07:07 and Daniel Njenga third in an unofficial 2:07:41 over the 26.2-mile course. Peter Chebet was fourth with Jimmy Muindi fifth. Moroccan Abdelkader El Mouaziz was sixth, followed by American Mebrahton Keflezhigi and South Africa's Hendrick Ramaala. Rutto, 25, ran the eighth-fastest 10,000m in the world in June of 2000, a personal best of 27:31:32. He seized command in the men's race, zipping through the 20th mile in 4:35 to pull away from a world-class field and handling the final 10km in 29:26. Zakharova, 33, was coming off a ninth-place showing at August's World Championships in Paris, where she ran 2:26:53. Zakharova won the Boston Marathon in April in 2:25:19 and ran her personal best here last year to place fourth in 2:21:31, a Russian national record. The 26th running of the Chicago race featured 40,000 entrants and a record 550,000-dollar purse. _ Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
Ah but the point was getting any money, much less $2500, for such a mediocre time. My PR isn't much faster but there are many runners out there who could run a 2:37 marathon nearly every week or at least twice a month. Actually now that I think about it...that is a great idea. If you make running a relatively mediocre time economically rewarding then that would motivate more runners to run faster. I know a lot of major marathons give bonuses for going under 2:12,:10, :08, etc but wouldn't it be great if they also rewarded the warriors in the up-and-coming 2nd tier. Say guys breaking 2;25, 2:22, 2:20... It doesn't have to be much money but it would be quite an incentive for the mid-pack guys. I would love to see more marathons do what Chicago is doing now. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:09:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f13.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.20]) by mc11-s8.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:29:25 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:26:32 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9A68PE8001598for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:08:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9A68PG2001596for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:08:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.198.35])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9A68OE8001577for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:08:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003101006081901300qoidbe (Authid: mikeprizy); Fri, 10 Oct 2003 06:08:19 + X-Message-Info: x4V9WGjv0S8YI9KZxuOo5MXfH/S8AVPuySmnACNeTP8= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2003 06:26:33.0444 (UTC) FILETIME=[73077240:01C38EF7] But, I guess that proves something. If a guy will give his left and right ones for $2500, surely he'll dope up for $60,000. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alan Tobin wrote: That is pretty freaked up Malmo. I would give my left and right nut to get $2500 for the male equivalent 2:37 marathon. Thanks for sharing, Alan. Phil _ Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
EPO will help any race in which you are breathing in oxygen. More specifically, any race in which a significant amount of energy is being produced aerobically. Unless someone can run an 800m while holding his breath then your statement is false. Also, hGH and steroids both can aid distance runners in recovery without gaining muscle mass. Both aid in increased protein synthesis which will decrease recovery time. Unless you are taking large doses of hGH or steroids then you won't gain significant muscle mass. To reap the benefits of size bodybuilders and strength/power athletes would have to take in 100 times more steroids than would be beneficial for the distance runner. Some sort of designer steroid would be perfect for the 800m runner. The problem lies in the fact that you can go to jail for a long time for possessing steroids. You can't go to jail for possessing EPO. Alan From: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: \Athletics\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 12:06:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc10-f38.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.174]) by mc10-s11.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:24:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc10-f38.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:22:12 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h99I6lE8018939for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h99I6lkA018938for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adder.colorado.edu (adder.Colorado.EDU [128.138.146.12])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h99I6jE8018891for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tolstoy (gview146-173-dhcp.colorado.edu [128.138.146.173])by adder.colorado.edu (8.12.10/8.12.8/UnixOps+Hesiod) with SMTP id h99I6WLX02for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 12:06:42 -0600 (MDT) X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNM6p5iRjILwKX10ZMSL+jNnHRJhKmLv5s= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Oct 2003 18:22:14.0266 (UTC) FILETIME=[435725A0:01C38E92] The greatest benefits of steroids accrues to women in general, and strength-based events in particular. Those are the two categories that have stagnated since increased drug testing. Perhaps the causality is spurious, but I think we need a counter hypothesis that is testable to refute that point. I'm not sure I would actually make the argument, but another interpretation of the stagnation is that steroids allowed for the human limits in those events to be reached relatively quickly and no new generation of drugs has been able to top the old ones whereas a new generation of drugs that benefit distance and sprint performances emerged in the 1990's. The 800m is an interesting event also. Too short for EPO to help, too long for HGH, etc. to help by increasing muscle mass. The stagnation from Snell's 1:44.1 run on a 350 meter GRASS track to today's WR is astounding. 20 years ago it looked like 1:41 or 1:42 would be what it took to win major events in the future and a 1:40 was just around the corner. Instead, 1:44 can still win most events. Paul -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard McCann Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 10:41 AM To: alan tobin Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll The stagnation of men's throwing marks since the mid 1980s runs counter to that argument. That's why I included them in the discussion. The men's shot WR stands from 1990, and the last burst of records was in 1987, the HT WR is from 1986 and no top 10 since 1988, the DT from 1986 and before that in 1978, and other Keshmiri's doubtful 1992 performances, the only others in the top 10 since 1982 are 20 ft behind the WR. The greatest benefits of steroids accrues to women in general, and strength-based events in particular. Those are the two categories that have stagnated since increased drug testing. Perhaps the causality is spurious, but I think we need a counter hypothesis that is testable to refute that point. RMc At 04:15 PM 10/9/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: Could also be psychological differences between men and women. Men are more aggressive and therefore would be more inclined to cheat. Women tend to look internally instead of externally for success. When women cheat it's usueally because of an overbearing male
Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
The problem with steroids is that they carry a hefty federal penalty and that they have been the most tested for and analyzed drug of all time. If the testers have caught up to the users with any drug it would likely be steroids. It's still the most used drug in professional sports and only an idiot would get caught. The problem is that the penalty for being caught with steroids is more than just a 2 year ban as it is a federal offense. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 09:40:57 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f35.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.42]) by mc11-s6.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 10:03:30 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f35.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 10:00:17 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h99GheE8001585for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h99GheUP001583for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h99GhcE8001563for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:43:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h99GhOI27001;Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:43:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNXzjI4Nh76qmhfcrIt+K2lxjeWWyzjUa0= Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Oct 2003 17:00:23.0476 (UTC) FILETIME=[D4480F40:01C38E86] The stagnation of men's throwing marks since the mid 1980s runs counter to that argument. That's why I included them in the discussion. The men's shot WR stands from 1990, and the last burst of records was in 1987, the HT WR is from 1986 and no top 10 since 1988, the DT from 1986 and before that in 1978, and other Keshmiri's doubtful 1992 performances, the only others in the top 10 since 1982 are 20 ft behind the WR. The greatest benefits of steroids accrues to women in general, and strength-based events in particular. Those are the two categories that have stagnated since increased drug testing. Perhaps the causality is spurious, but I think we need a counter hypothesis that is testable to refute that point. RMc At 04:15 PM 10/9/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: Could also be psychological differences between men and women. Men are more aggressive and therefore would be more inclined to cheat. Women tend to look internally instead of externally for success. When women cheat it's usueally because of an overbearing male presence (Eastern Bloc government, Chinese coaches, etc). Something to chew on. The men's records have fallen insanely since the mid/early 90s. The number of men who have run sub 2:08 in the marathon is just insane. In fact the whole world of running in general from drug cheats to 6:00 charity marathoners to the transformation of Jeff Galloway is just quite insane. Maybe I should become a triathlete. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 13:45:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc12-f17.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.153]) by mc12-s9.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:56:03 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc12-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:52:14 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h98KiDE8017055for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h98KiDgs017051for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h98KiBE8016996for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h98Ki7I29823for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNVy/E1zBde3B8sVsFUErg21GhHrBhtNhY
Re: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
That is pretty freaked up Malmo. I would give my left and right nut to get $2500 for the male equivalent 2:37 marathon. Hell, I'd run a marathon every month. Isn't it kind of funny that all this money is being pumped into US distance running and especially the marathon with all those Running USA teams and more money to be won at races yet we still fail to succeed in the depth we did 20 years ago when Boston Billy was working 40 hours a week and running 2:09 Alan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:59:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from out008.verizon.net ([206.46.170.108]) by mc5-f2.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 10:03:36 -0700 Received: from outgoing.verizon.net ([192.168.1.5]) by out008.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:59:47 -0500 X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGaEAW5Pvt8A+WBCDE+orsK X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.10 (webedge20-101-190-20021211) X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out008.verizon.net from [192.168.1.5] at Thu, 9 Oct 2003 11:59:47 -0500 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Oct 2003 17:03:38.0639 (UTC) FILETIME=[489B91F0:01C38E87] Any woman who comes within 33 minutes of the world record gets a bonus check of $2500 at Chicago. Now that's insane! malmo From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2003/10/09 Thu AM 11:15:35 CDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Could also be psychological differences between men and women. Men are more aggressive and therefore would be more inclined to cheat. Women tend to look internally instead of externally for success. When women cheat it's usueally because of an overbearing male presence (Eastern Bloc government, Chinese coaches, etc). Something to chew on. The men's records have fallen insanely since the mid/early 90s. The number of men who have run sub 2:08 in the marathon is just insane. In fact the whole world of running in general from drug cheats to 6:00 charity marathoners to the transformation of Jeff Galloway is just quite insane. Maybe I should become a triathlete. Alan From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: (TFMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 13:45:31 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc12-f17.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.153]) by mc12-s9.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:56:03 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc12-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:52:14 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h98KiDE8017055for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h98KiDgs017051for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.193.10])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h98KiBE8016996for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from user-dp1el8yc6y.cal.net (dcn235-28.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.235.28])by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (8.11.4/8.11.4/Omsoft) with ESMTP id h98Ki7I29823for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:44:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNVy/E1zBde3B8sVsFUErg21GhHrBhtNhY= Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Oct 2003 21:52:16.0405 (UTC) FILETIME=[70633450:01C38DE6] At 05:22 PM 10/7/2003 -0700, t-and-f-digest wrote: Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:02:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Starr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll From: http://www.bishops.ntc.nf.ca/TeenIssues/C.%20Little/PED.htm PED Use in Professional Sports I will point out a major, fundamental flaw in this type of study: Responses to hypothetical surveys differ significantly from actual real world behavior. This issue is a salient in the valuation of non-market resources (e.g., how much is a sunset worth, how much would one pay to preserve the spotted owl, etc.) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) comissioned a Blue Ribbon Panel to address this question in the early 1990s and concluded that contingent valuation surveys, where these type of hypothetical questions are asked, must
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT Also, it goes back to my original statement about the lack of top level US distance runners. In the world of sprinting and throwing the US has a good number of the very top level elite and the closer you are to the top level elite (world champions/record holders/race winners) the more you are exposed to the fact that doping is a near necessity. 20 years ago the US had a lot of top level elite distance runners and the rumors of drug use was there (Salazar, Slaney, etc). Now, you might not like my opinion or agree with my logic but it does explain the falling off of US distance running as a whole. Whereas US sprinting and throwing has always been at the top in distance running we had falling off (likely due to the less is more, faster not longer late 80s credo) that led to this naive view of the top level. With fewer runners in the very top level there are fewer people exposed to the reality of that top level. Cheaters have been winning medals and races for 100 years and there's no reason to think this has changed. Alan _ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service providers in your area). https://broadband.msn.com
RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
The original question was too inclusive. I said as a broad statement that in order to win a major championship you must be doped. That statement is likely wrong, but the general idea remains the same. I'm sure there are a couple athletes out there who are winning and not doped, but they are not the norm in my opinion. Yes, it is likely that many of those you listed either are currently or have doped. If you give me the names of the Olympic gold medalists and world record holders of the past 30 years I would say at least 80% of those were doped. Just one man's opinion. Alan From: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Randy Treadway' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc8-f20.hotmail.com ([65.54.253.156]) by mc8-s11.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:55:13 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc8-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:51:33 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h96JZje9008680for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h96JZj29008675for t-and-f-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h96JZhe9008381for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conway (c-24-127-179-221.we.client2.attbi.com[24.127.179.221]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100619353801100716sie; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 19:35:38 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFOB8xN+aFyHeF2uCobPEPOqiX3+GLMhigQ= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Oct 2003 19:51:35.0293 (UTC) FILETIME=[3F85B2D0:01C38C43] The original statement that lead to this thread was that the only way to win was to use drugs .. To wit I asked the question as to whether or not that then implied that all finalists at Worlds and Olympics are/were drug users .. And whether or not this then also meant that the likes of ElGuerrouj, Gebresselassie, MJ, Montgomery, Greene, Guevara, Jones, and others were then also implicated as drug users by default ... I've seen no discussion on this point .. Just the constant - most of the athletes are cheating .. If the implication is NOT that these and others are cheating ... Then who is ?? And why is the immediate assumption that if you are elite and producing outstanding marks then you must be a cheat .. Can't have your cake and eat it too ... That is saying that the majority of the world is cheating and that one must cheat in order to win, yet in the same breath assume that those at the top are NOT using drugs ... Or only select ones (those you don't like) .. So what is it ?? Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Treadway Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 10:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. Probably true in the United States. If American distance runners are doping, they ought to sue their pharmacist for malpractice. RT The original statement should probably be improved upon to say that: Sprinting and Throwing as sports are dirtier than distance running, at least in the United States. ...Not to imply, of course, that EVERY sprinter and thrower is doping, or that there are NO American distance runners using something like EPO or HGH. RT (dodging a 16 lb shot accidently dropped from an office building) _ Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
Re: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Sprinters and throwers are dirtier than distance runners. There are a lot more muscle building illegal drugs out there than endurance building illegal drugs. Your assumption is correct about that list but I wouldn't say ALL of them are dirty, just most. Can't hate a man for having an opinion. It just makes it easier to accept when the ax comes crashing down. Carl freakin Lewis was dirty for christs sakes. Isn't he the saint of US track and field? Alan From: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cheaters was Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc4-f37.hotmail.com ([65.54.237.172]) by mc4-s3.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:37:01 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc4-f37.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:35:33 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLme9008962for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h93HLl63008961for t-and-f-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h93HLke9008882for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:21:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Conway (c-24-127-179-221.we.client2.attbi.com[24.127.179.221]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id 2003100317214001200hvqlhe; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:21:41 + X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFPJfdfglUshtr/aOfzuKBht+/V7y0SBoUg= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2003 17:35:34.0788 (UTC) FILETIME=[C03E3440:01C389D4] OK .. Then does that mean that all finalists at the Olympics and Worlds are dirty - since they are the one's in a position to win ?? All of the finalists in the men's 100 this year, for example too turns beating each other all season long ... So the assumption then is that they are all dirty ?? That's part of my problem with the whole drug testing system and attitude ... The attitude is they are all dirty we just have to catch em ... And if they are really good they must be really dirty !! Here's a list of big time winners and medalists .. Is the assumption that they are all dirty ?? Hicham El Guerrouj Haile Gebrselassie Paul Tergat Wilson Kipketer Michael Johnson Frankie Fredericks Maurice Greene Tim Montgomery Marion Jones Cathy Freeman Allen Johnson Jonathon Edwards Are these and others assumed to be dirty since they are/were all top performers ?? I also find it interesting that the majority of those so vehemently against the cheaters are of the distance running ranks .. Not the sprinters and hurdlers, or the field event people ... But predominantly distances .. and even more so American distance ranks who are the only group (in the States) that are not internationally competitive ... Is that why the assumption is that anyone that is competitive must be cheating ??? - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 2:50 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan _ Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
No one is saying you have cheat to be good. You only have to cheat to win. Big difference. Alan From: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from frank2.mtsu.edu ([161.45.193.32]) by mc7-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 2 Oct 2003 11:27:22 -0700 Received: from frank2.mtsu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])by frank2.mtsu.edu (8.11.1 (Revision 1.5+JAGae91741) /8.9.3) with ESMTP id h92IPtM08035;Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from AndrewOwusu ([161.45.235.85])by frank2.mtsu.edu (8.11.1 (Revision 1.5+JAGae91741) /8.9.3) with ESMTP id h92IPqB07963;Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:25:53 -0500 (CDT) X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc46QR/ssR9vYDLTvQR5valP Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 18:27:24.0957 (UTC) FILETIME=[D3A294D0:01C38912] Yes, there are cheats in track and field like any other pro sports. However, it bothers me is that quite a number of people on this list seem to hold the view that you have to cheat in order to be good. Consequently statements such as when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked implies that almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Andrew Owusu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 02:38:56.0975 (UTC) FILETIME=[53D5A5F0:01C3888E] Conspiracy theories??? For a sport most could careless about??? Collaboration between some or all 200 federations who can't get along with each other??? And, on Page 2 of the supermarket tabloid ... the IAAF and USATF are actually ruled by Ollan Cassell at his double-secret headquarters at Area 51, near the hanger where the alien spaceship is housed, next to Elvis' office. alan tobin wrote: Why would we Mike? It's not like there is a lot of money at stake or that other sports are filled with cheats. In my world the sky is always clear and people help old ladies cross the street. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 12:59:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc9-f25.hotmail.com ([65.54.166.32]) by mc9-s13.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:13:06 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc9-f25.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:04:53 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h91HuiIK011974for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h91HuiUO011968for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received
Re: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative
Is Malmo the only one on here who is speaking with a clear head? Malmo has been there and done that in the world of elite track and field so he has an insight that 90% of this board does not. In fact I would even wager that he has an insight into the dirty world of track and field and road racing that even most of today's US elite do not have. That's simply because in his day his times were competitive on an international scale and more US runners in general competed on an international scale. Today there are fewer US runners who truely are world elite and thus there are fewer US runners with the right insight into top level dealings. I'm not trying to kiss your ass Malmo, just trying to make a point to the board. Many of the top US runners from 20-30 years ago would share ther same insight that is lacking in today's US runners. You can't see the man behind the curtain if you still at the front door. Alan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED],'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from out009.verizon.net ([206.46.170.131]) by mc12-f17.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 2 Oct 2003 13:27:50 -0700 Received: from out009 ([192.168.129.59]) by out009.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc6QAZB0A2DqAGffxIghXBL0 X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.10 (webedge20-101-190-20021211) X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out009.verizon.net from [192.168.129.59] at Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:23:58 -0500 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003 20:27:52.0069 (UTC) FILETIME=[A7545B50:01C38923] You've INFERRED that I'm not shocked... is the linguistic equivalent to almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Wrongly. I think that those who have uttered the phrase I'm not shocked... on this forum would let me speak for them when I say, I'm not shocked... IMPLIES that many (more than you want to believe) top runners...are dirty Am I correct shocked track fans? malmo Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds? Louis (Police Inspector): I'm shocked - shocked - to find gambling is going on in here! Croupier: Your winnings, sir. Louis (Police Inspector): Oh, thank you very much. From: Andrew Owusu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2003/10/02 Thu PM 01:25:52 CDT To: 'alan tobin' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Yes, there are cheats in track and field like any other pro sports. However, it bothers me is that quite a number of people on this list seem to hold the view that you have to cheat in order to be good. Consequently statements such as when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked implies that almost all top runners, jumpers, and throwers are dirty. Andrew Owusu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative It doesn't matter if no one cares about it as long as there is a lot of money involved then there will be cheaters in the sport. Players cheat in baseball and other sports. Why not track and field? Is this sport and the Kenyan culture so angelic that it's beyond belief? Go to Nairobi and tell me that Kenyans are so angelic they wouldn't even take an asprin much less use EPO *Shock* *Awe*. I simply believe most of the top athletes in the world are using something. That's my opinion. This way when a top athlete is busted I'm not shocked. Even a B rate sport like track and field and road racing has enough money in it that many people will cheat to win that money. Alan From: Mike Prizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lgat's B Sample Negative Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 15:20:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.198.35]) by mc12-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 19:38:56 -0700 Received: from comcast.net (12-248-211-198.client.attbi.com[12.248.211.198]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id 2003100120173901300cnmmme (Authid: mikeprizy); Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:17:40 + X-Message-Info: yilqo4+6kc5ElR6/ZLG8HLbynwyqYHhZ Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2003
Re: t-and-f: Kenyan drug scandal
was primarily a 5000 runner; the 26:58 was only his second track 10,000. But that certainly doesn't mean he had done nothing to indicate etc. At the time of the record, he was the reigning World Champion at 5000, and four years earlier he'd been the first man to beat Said Aouita at the distance in 10 years. He had three of the top nine times on the all-time list (13:01.82, 13:03..58 and 13:04.24) and had run the year's top mark in 1989 and 1991, and #2 in 1992. He didn't generally run the 10,000 because he didn't like it, and with 3:34.36 (1990) 1500 speed, he figured he was better suited to the 5000 -- but he clearly had no trouble adapting!. He had been at the top (i.e. top 10 of the world list) for five years when he set the record and continued to run on the circuit for two more years before retiring at the age of 34 after 16 years of competitive running. What the hell were long time fans stunned about? One more point and I'll stop. Here's John Molvar again on August 19: EPO did not become widespread in cycling until about 1990. Shortly thereafter I believe it invaded our sport via an agent for the Kenyans who was a former cycling agent who got banned from that sport for drugs. And later in the same post, . . . the biggest Kenyan agent was banned from pro cycling for providing drugs to athletes. I believe John is talking about Dr. Gabriele Rosa, an Italian sports medicine specialist who coaches a large number of athletes, mainly Kenyans, under the sponsorship of Fila. I've defended Rosa against doping accusations a couple of times in the past on this list (October 24, 1997 and August 28, 1998), so I'll try to keep this short. He's not an agent; he's a coach. He left cycling in 1985 on his own initiative because doping had become so endemic. He's never been named in any of Italy's repeated doping exposes and has never been banned from anything. (Perhaps Rosa is being conflated with Prof. Francesco Conconi, who was at the center of the big doping court case in 2000, but Conconi has never had anything to do with Kenyans.) On what secret evidence John has come to believe that [EPO] invaded our sport through Rosa and his Kenyans I have no idea. Interestingly, a persuasive defense of Rosa and his operation is inadvertently offered by Alan Tobin (August 28), who compares the doctor's success with the Kenyans and the Americans he has coached and concludes, The fact that the US program was plagued with injuries and the Rosa Kenyan program has done well gives even more light to the rumor that Rosa is a druglord. In a second post, he elaborates: So FILA/Rosa start up a US program using the above [weeks of high intensity, high mileage training of the sort he uses in Kenya] and the athletes procede to get injured or slide down the slippery slope of chronic fatigue. So, the question is asked 'Why?'. My answer is hGH or a synthetic steroid, something that enhances protein synthesis so recovery is quickened so that Rosa's Kenyan athletes can handle such intense workloads week after week after week. Whoa! Rosa dopes his Kenyans, but gives nary a drop to the Americans? Let's think about this. Rosa and Fila began their US program because, successful as their Kenyans were, they weren't doing much to boost Fila's bottom line. What was needed was runners with whom prosperous Western consumers could more readily identify. The US has a huge talent base and scores of millions of well-to-do runners -- the ideal place to develop a couple of new superstars. So, with a per capita investment orders of magnitude larger than what they spend in Kenya, Fila and Rosa set up camp three years ago for about a dozen promising young distance runners at 6000 feet in Mount Laguna, CA. In addition to the anticipated commercial benefits for Fila, the program gave Rosa a chance to further establish his brilliance as a coach. If only one or two world-class marathoners emerged in California, he would have proved that it was his methods, not just natural talent, that had produced his success in Kenya. Now, with so much riding on the US program and Rosa knowing the only way his Kenyans survive his full-throttle training is through the use of hGH or a synthetic steroid, are we to believe that he would withhold these vital elixirs from his US athletes? Come on. So what does explain the fact that the Kenyans don't seem to suffer the injuries or chronic fatigue that has afflicted the Americans? First, some of Rosa's Kenyans do get hurt or worn out, and they simply wash out of the program. But there are so many who are so good that losing a few doesn't matter. And the survivors tend to be tough. Remember, they grow up, for the most part, without cars, without public transportation, without bicycles, without shoes. A tired cliché, I know, but all those barefoot miles over all those years must have some effect, and I suggest one is to condition kids to the rigors of the training they'll do later. There may be innate
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of sprint work he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and sprint work. If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery enhancement (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of running on Sunday and 2 easy days then I will agree. You haven't shown me that yet. I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was just a wimp. M From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either threshold or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.137]) by mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3xHD003414for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7RH3x2l003413for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (law12-f24.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.24])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3uHD003339for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I think we are missing what I'm saying: Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. As I said above: 10x200 with 200 recovery is not a hard workout. It's not supposed to be. If you are doing sprint work correctly you shouldn't be dead for days on end because you are giving yourself enough rest between efforts so that you are able to give a near all-out effort each time. It's basically strides and I'd call strides at the end of a run sprint work. I've done 20x200 with 200 recovery and 20x200 with 100 recovery. The latter is worlds ahead much harder than the former because of recovery. I would call the first workout a sprint workout and the second workout a lactate tolerance workout. In the first workout you are able to go near full speed on each 200 because you have two times as much recovery time. In the second you can't go near full speed because the recovery is short. Because the recovery is short you build up a high level of blood lactate so through most of the workout (especially the second half) you are running with a high level of blood lactate, thus it improves your ability to run hard under a high level of blood lactate. We have no specifics on Geb's sprint work. It could very well be nothing more than organized strides and plyometrics. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:40:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:40:27 GMT The easiest workouts I have ever done have been longer intervals (most of the time those are done near LT) The hardest workouts I have ever done are hill repeats and sprint workouts (150s, 200s, 300s). The latter leave me sore, with an oxygen debt headache, and wiped out for 2 days. If you can do 10x200 every day, you're not doing 10x200 correctly. I'll never forget the 12x200 in 25 I did on the indoor track at Columbia. Damn thing nearly killed me. M From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:31:37 + Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of sprint work he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and sprint work. If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery enhancement (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of running on Sunday and 2 easy days then I will agree. You haven't shown me that yet. I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike. I've done both. Less recovery is MUCH harder. You might run it like a fartlek, but the way I ran it was 200 meters in around :32 100 meters slow slow jog. The workout with 200 meter recover was 200 meters in about :28-30 with 200 meters slow slow jog. My best 200 is a flying start high :26.x and :27.x standing start. The one with less recovery was MUCH harder. The faster 200s were hard simply because of the number of them. 10x200 with 200 recovery is my usual sprint/form/stride/acceleration work and isn't hard at all. I don't want to hear about well, :25 is much much harder, you're just too slow to appreciate how hard, blah blah blah, everything is relative. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:58:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:58:12 GMT Alan, I can't disagree with you're sentiments on sprint work more. 200 meter strides are meant to work on your form. That is not sprint work. The one with 100 meter recovery is harder? Are you kidding me? The one with 100 meter recovery is basically a fartlek (I run my recovery jogs relatively quickly). The one with 200 recovery will kick anyone's ass 100x moreso. Off to France. Enjoy the weekend everyone. Michael _ MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either threshold or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Contopoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.137]) by mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3xHD003414for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7RH3x2l003413for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (law12-f24.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.24])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3uHD003339for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:51 -0700 Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:03:50 GMT X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMHuWZVPb0dcXowdMfwAnNuh9L5WiG3lYE= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2003 17:03:51.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[30730950:01C36CBD] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find it interesting that when all of you post you throw names out like Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY'S AMERICANS. Listen, being 25 and having run at least at one time with guys in pretty much every distance final at USATF's at one point or another... and because discussing training brings great joy to my life, I can tell you that TODAY'S AMERICANS do NOT train as much quality as I would imagine it would take to run as fast as the E. Africans. In the US we have two mode's of thinking... easy mileage or lots of shorter faster runs. People don't undertstand... you need to be doing mileage, fast and often, with workouts 3-5 times a week where you focus on ALL aspects of running including sprinting! Its not one or the other. Its not 150 miles easy or 80 miles hard. Its 150 miles hard with workouts. M From: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: P.F.Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: \Athletics\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:39:12 -0600 On hard training. People seem to forget that Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's runners would run 100+ mile weeks of intervals. People trained harder in that era than in any other. Obviously it didn't produce sub 27:00 10k's. I seriously doubt that it's a matter of western runners not training hard enough. If there is a mental block my guess it would be more on the lines of, they're on drugs so we can't beat them. To which I say, go do drugs, but that's another matter entirely. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of edndana Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:22 PM To: Athletics Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Joe - Well. ..you and I are arguing over semantics, and I don't think our argument has anything to do with whatever problem there is. Five years ago, I sensed more of the excuse mentality from American runners - I don't so much any more. Maybe they aren't training hard enough - I really am not sure - but I don't think we have the same mentality problem we used to have. As for Geb's hard days in a row, Bruce Lehane's subsequent post would seem to contradict it. But the world's best marathoners (including Americans) have been doing a variation on that for at least 30 years. Derek Clayon may have been the first to really push that particular envelope, although I can't help wondering if Lydiard also did during his experimentation in the 1950's and din't have the same success. I
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Can I join the betting pool? When someone closes in :25 or 12:57 it has little to do with pure speed. It's all about slowing down the least. Let's say a normal elite runner can run a 10k race going through the 5k mark 5% slower than his/her all out 5k. How would you train in order to drop that % to say 3%? What if your all out best 200 is in the :24-:25 range? How would you train in order to drop a :25 second last 200 at the end of a 10k? Lots of fast hardcore speedwork? Or, would you improve your endurance by running a lot of hard miles? If you improve your endurance you'll slow down less as you go up in distance. These guys went through the 5k about a minute off their best 5k times. Relatively speaking, they were jogging the first 5k Alan From: malmo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: malmo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'edndana' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:10:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc5-f38.law1.hotmail.com ([65.54.252.45]) by mc5-s9.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:02:07 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc5-f38.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:01:56 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PJ9nLR019866for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7PJ9naH019865for t-and-f-outgoing; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PJ9lLR019801for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from george ([68.161.207.30]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:09:42 -0500 X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNDyediwFombNRNnTDhbG88537d1YJa0Tw= Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at pop018.verizon.net from [68.161.207.30] at Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:09:33 -0500 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2003 20:01:56.0464 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC6B5F00:01C36B43] I'd be a big seller on that claim. malmoo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb constantly talks about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat out let alone at the end of a 10k? Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet nearly all of them could. - Ed Parrot _ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
Re: t-and-f: Kenyan Drug Scandel
Drugs and our sport: If drug scandal's have taken fans away from this sport it is because we let them. Pro baseball, football, etc don't have drug scandals (aside from the recreational use of cocaine) because the governing bodies simply don't care what their athletes are on as long as money keeps pouring in and the average fan won't care unless people tell them to care. I think in the end for track and field/road racing to be a popular sport there must be US athletes winning races. For that to happen there either needs to be a proven way to get rid of drugs in the sport or more US athletes will have to give up their moral compass or be duped the way many naive foreigners have been. Alan Tis only a vitamin pill, I promise... _ bHelp protect your PC:/b Get a free online virus scan at McAfee.com. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
