Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
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 be constructed in rigorous specific ways so that respondents believe that the consequences of their choices will actually occur, or they will not respond truthfully or accurately vis a vis their actual choices under real world conditions. http://www.darp.noaa.gov/pdf/cvblue.pdf It's pretty obvious that the survey on potential elite athlete drug did not meet these criteria. Given that problem, it's very difficult to draw any useful conclusions. On another point, I'll reiterate a point I made earlier about performance trends: I think most of us, even myself, would agree that performance drug usage was rampant in the late 1970s and early 1980s among Eastern Europeans, particularly women who benefited most, and could have been widespread among male throwers. Since the institution of drug testing, women's performances in the "classic" events, even up to 3000m, have largely stagnated, while men's performances in comparable events have continued to improve, except in the shot, disc, and hammer (the jav has changed), where performances from the that earlier period would still be highly competitive. The stagnation in women's marks is particularly striking given that the competitive opportunities for women have only recently approached levels similar to men, so one would expect more rapid improvement in the women's marks. What's equally striking is that the men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, women are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone else has an adequate explanation, I can only attribute this to the deterrent value of testing. Baseball may see a similar outcome. Richard McCann
RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
Actually, it wasn't until the 1990s that the men's distance marks made the dramatic gap. 1500 1991 3000sc 1992 5000 1995 1 1993 Marathon 1998 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard McCann Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:46 PM To: T&FMail List Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll What's equally striking is that the men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, women are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone else has an adequate explanation, I can only attribute this to the deterrent value of testing. Baseball may see a similar outcome. Richard McCann
RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
My point is that since 1985, the men's records have continued to fall at a relatively steady rate (I just got done reading the men's portion of Quercetani's distance running history. While Rono's steeple record stood for an extraordinarily long time, the records in the other events were broken regularly through the 80s and early 90s. The 1500 was under 3:30 by 1985, the 3k under 7:30 in 1989, the 5k under 13 in 1987, and the 10k under 27 in 1991. I'm not sure which marks Malmo is pointing to on his list. Certainly Gebreselassie drove down the 5k and 10k records in 1995 to 1998, but those sort of individual-driven bursts are far from unusual. And usually, the records are being broken by other individuals at the same time. That was true for Nurmi (the other Finns), Zatopek (didn't hold 5k record until the end of his career), Kuts (Pirie, Chataway, and Iharos), and Clarke (Keino). RMc At 08:29 PM 10/8/2003 -0400, malmo wrote: Actually, it wasn't until the 1990s that the men's distance marks made the dramatic gap. 1500 1991 3000sc 1992 5000 1995 1 1993 Marathon 1998 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard McCann Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:46 PM To: T&FMail List Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll What's equally striking is that the men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, women are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone else has an adequate explanation, I can only attribute this to the deterrent value of testing. Baseball may see a similar outcome. Richard McCann
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: (T&FMail 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 be constructed in rigorous specific ways so that respondents believe that the consequences of their choices will actually occur, or they will not respond truthfully or accurately vis a vis their actual choices under real world conditions. http://www.darp.noaa.gov/pdf/cvblue.pdf It's pretty obvious that the survey on potential elite athlete drug did not meet these criteria. Given that problem, it's very difficult to draw any useful conclusions. On another point, I'll reiterate a point I made earlier about performance trends: I think most of us, even myself, would agree that performance drug usage was rampant in the late 1970s and early 1980s among Eastern Europeans, particularly women who benefited most, and could have been widespread among male throwers. Since the institution of drug testing, women's performances in the "classic" events, even up to 3000m, have largely stagnated, while men's performances in comparable events have continued to improve, except in the shot, disc, and hammer (the jav has changed), where performances from the that earlier period would still be highly competitive. The stagnation in women's marks is particularly striking given that the competitive opportunities for women have only recently approached levels similar to men, so one would expect more rapid improvement in the women's marks. What's equally striking is that the men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, women are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone else has an adequate explanatio
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 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: (T&FMail 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 be constructed in rigorous specific ways so that respondents believe that the consequences of their choices will actually occur, or they will not respond truthfully or accurately vis a vis their actual choices under real world conditions. http://www.darp.noaa.gov/pdf/cvblue.pdf It's pretty obvious that the survey on potential elite athlete drug did not meet these criteria. Given that problem, it's very difficult to draw any useful conclusions. On another point, I'll reiterate a point I made earlier about performance trends: I think most of us, even myself, would agree that performance drug usage was rampant in the late 1970s and early 1980s among Eastern Europeans, particularly women who benefited most, and could have been widespread among male throwers. Since the institution of drug testing, women's performances in the "classic" events, even up to
RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
"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 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: (T&FMail 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 -07
Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
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
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 a
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: (T&FMail 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) wit
RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
This may be true, but potential jail time is certainly not a deterrent. There are MILLIONS of Americans using steroids illegally. Go read a bodybuilding board some time or just look at the statistics on high school use. And though possession may be punishable by jail time, I've never heard of anyone getting jail time for simple possession. Dealing, yes, possession no. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of alan tobin Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 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: (T&FMail 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 >>
Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
That's true for US athletes, but this is a worldwide phenomenon. I don't know the worldwide situation, but certainly enforcement issues vary widely. Also, use of other drugs, e.g. EPO, for non therapeutic purposes also are illegal. Buck, our resident pharmacist, what's your expert opinion on this matter RMc At 04:34 PM 10/10/2003 +, alan tobin wrote: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 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
Re: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
I disagree. The trend analysis shown below refutes your point. We see steady record breaking through the 1980s, and more interestingly, the top 10 marks compressed around the records, showing broader improvement, which lead to the 1995 burst. For example, a 13:15 5K was an excellent mark in 1980. By 1990 it might not make the top 10. The same cannot be said about women's marks. The trend analysis reinforces a point I made earlier--the record burst in the 1960s lead by Ron Clarke and Jim Ryun shows a greater annual improvement rate than just about any other period. The latest improvements are not extraordinary in comparison except for the 5k. I picked each year to reflect the end of a set of dominant runners' careers, e.g. Ryun, Coe and Ovett, Kuts, Clarke, Rono, Aouita, Barrios, which corresponded with a quiescence in record breaking activity. The improvement in the 1500 from 1980 to 1985 is greater than subsequently. While the 5k improvement is rapid, it's about comparable to Clarke's improvements. The 10k is close to Clarke's but I've shortened the time horizon which accentuated the improvement. It's only 5.05 second from 89 to 98. Distance World Record Progressions Dist/Yr Time Improvement Impr/Yr 1500 194403:43.0 195703:38.1 4.9 0.377 196703:33.1 5.0 0.500 198003:31.4 1.7 0.134 198503:29.5 1.9 0.380 199803:26.0 3.5 0.266 5000 194213:58.4 195713:35.0 23.41.560 196613:16.6 18.42.044 197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 198712:58.4 10.01.112 199812:39.4 19.01.730 1 194429:35.4 195628:30.4 65.05.417 196527:39.4 39.47.880 197827:22.5 16.91.300 198927:08.2 14.31.297 199426:52.2 16.03.200 199826:22.8 29.57.365 RMc At 11:56 AM 10/9/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard, save the marathon, the mens distance records did not show steady improvement during the eighties, they all flattened out until the years I cited. Do your research. malmo > > From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2003/10/09 Thu AM 11:21:59 CDT > To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: "'T&FMail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > My point is that since 1985, the men's records have continued to fall at a > relatively steady rate (I just got done reading the men's portion of > Quercetani's distance running history. While Rono's steeple record stood > for an extraordinarily long time, the records in the other events were > broken regularly through the 80s and early 90s. The 1500 was under 3:30 by > 1985, the 3k under 7:30 in 1989, the 5k under 13 in 1987, and the 10k under > 27 in 1991. > > I'm not sure which marks Malmo is pointing to on his list. Certainly > Gebreselassie drove down the 5k and 10k records in 1995 to 1998, but those > sort of individual-driven bursts are far from unusual. And usually, the > records are being broken by other individuals at the same time. That was > true for Nurmi (the other Finns), Zatopek (didn't hold 5k record until the > end of his career), Kuts (Pirie, Chataway, and Iharos), and Clarke (Keino). > > RMc > > At 08:29 PM 10/8/2003 -0400, malmo wrote: > >Actually, it wasn't until the 1990s that the men's distance marks made > >the dramatic gap. > > > >1500 1991 > >3000sc 1992 > >5000 1995 > >10000 1993 > >Marathon 1998 > > > >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard McCann > >Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:46 PM > >To: T&FMail List > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > >What's equally striking is that the > >men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is > >true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, > >women > >are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone > > > >else has an adequate explanation, I can only attribute this to the > >deterrent value of testing. Baseball may see a similar outcome. > > > > > >Richard McCann > >
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: (T&FMail 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/Te
Re: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
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
RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
Richard, with your unabashed willingness to deliberately distort the data you clearly have the aptitude to become a political operative (economist is close enough). Here let's see how the numbers work when you run calculations with these significant intermediate dates(***).: The figures show that clearly the events made huge drops after the dates I supplied in my previous post. For those who are the visual type, what follows are some "purdy" graphs to further illustrate.: http://digilander.libero.it/rzocca/ 1500 194403:43.0 195703:38.1 4.9 0.377 196703:33.1 5.0 0.500 198003:31.4 1.7 0.134 198503:29.5 1.9 0.380 ***199103:29.5 take a wild guess (85-91) or recalc 1980 to 1991 199803:26.0 recalcrecalc 3000sc (none provided by you, because you can't manipulate the data) 1976 8:08.0 1978 8:05.4 2.6 1.3 ***1991 8:05.4 take a wild guess (78-91), or recalc 1976 to 1991 1997 7:55.72 __ __ 5000 194213:58.4 195713:35.0 23.41.560 196613:16.6 18.42.044 197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 198712:58.4 10.01.112 ***199312:58.4 take a wild guess (87-93), or recalc 1978 to 1993 199812:39.4 recalc recalc 1 194429:35.4 195628:30.4 65.05.417 196527:39.4 39.47.880 197827:22.5 16.91.300 198927:08.2 14.31.297 ***199227:08.2 take a wild guess (78-89), or recalc 1978 to 1992 199826:22.8 recalc recalc -Original Message- From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 1:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'T&FMail List' Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll I disagree. The trend analysis shown below refutes your point. We see steady record breaking through the 1980s, and more interestingly, the top 10 marks compressed around the records, showing broader improvement, which lead to the 1995 burst. For example, a 13:15 5K was an excellent mark in 1980. By 1990 it might not make the top 10. The same cannot be said about women's marks. The trend analysis reinforces a point I made earlier--the record burst in the 1960s lead by Ron Clarke and Jim Ryun shows a greater annual improvement rate than just about any other period. The latest improvements are not extraordinary in comparison except for the 5k. I picked each year to reflect the end of a set of dominant runners' careers, e.g. Ryun, Coe and Ovett, Kuts, Clarke, Rono, Aouita, Barrios, which corresponded with a quiescence in record breaking activity. The improvement in the 1500 from 1980 to 1985 is greater than subsequently. While the 5k improvement is rapid, it's about comparable to Clarke's improvements. The 10k is close to Clarke's but I've shortened the time horizon which accentuated the improvement. It's only 5.05 second from 89 to 98. Distance World Record Progressions Dist/Yr Time Improvement Impr/Yr 1500 194403:43.0 195703:38.1 4.9 0.377 196703:33.1 5.0 0.500 198003:31.4 1.7 0.134 198503:29.5 1.9 0.380 199803:26.0 3.5 0.266 5000 194213:58.4 195713:35.0 23.41.560 196613:16.6 18.42.044 197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 198712:58.4 10.01.112 199812:39.4 19.01.730 1 194429:35.4 195628:30.4 65.05.417 196527:39.4 39.47.880 197827:22.5 16.91.300 198927:08.2 14.31.297 199426:52.2 16.03.200 199826:22.8 29.57.365 RMc At 11:56 AM 10/9/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Richard, save the marathon, the mens distance records did not show >steady >improvement during the eighties, they all flattened out until the years I >cited. > >Do your research. > >malmo > > > > > > From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2003/10/09 Thu AM 11:21:59 CDT > > To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > CC: "'T&FMail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > > > My point is that since 1985, the men's records have continued to > > fall at a relatively steady rate (I just got done reading the men's > > portion of Quercetani's distance running history. While Rono's > > steeple record stood for an extraordinarily long time, the records > > in the other events were broken regularly through the 80s and early > > 90s. The 1500 was under > 3:30 by > > 1985, the 3k under 7:30 in 1989, the 5k under 13 in 1987, and the > > 10k > under > > 27 in 1991. > > > > I'm not sure which marks Malmo is pointing to on his list. > > Certainly Gebreselassie drove down the 5k and 10k records in 1995 to > > 1998, but those sort of individual-driven bursts are far fro
RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
Try as I might, I cannot find any previous reference to record bursts in the 1960s by you until this post. Perhaps I slept through this one? malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard McCann The trend analysis reinforces a point I made earlier--the record burst in the 1960s lead by Ron Clarke and Jim Ryun shows a greater annual improvement rate than just about any other period. The latest improvements are not extraordinary in comparison except for the 5k. I picked each year to reflect the end of a set of dominant runners' careers, e.g. Ryun, Coe and Ovett, Kuts, Clarke, Rono, Aouita, Barrios, which corresponded with a quiescence in record breaking activity. The improvement in the 1500 from 1980 to 1985 is greater than subsequently. While the 5k improvement is rapid, it's about comparable to Clarke's improvements. The 10k is close to Clarke's but I've shortened the time horizon which accentuated the improvement. It's only 5.05 second from 89 to 98. Distance World Record Progressions Dist/Yr Time Improvement Impr/Yr 1500 194403:43.0 195703:38.1 4.9 0.377 196703:33.1 5.0 0.500 198003:31.4 1.7 0.134 198503:29.5 1.9 0.380 199803:26.0 3.5 0.266 5000 194213:58.4 195713:35.0 23.41.560 196613:16.6 18.42.044 197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 198712:58.4 10.01.112 199812:39.4 19.01.730 1 194429:35.4 195628:30.4 65.05.417 196527:39.4 39.47.880 197827:22.5 16.91.300 198927:08.2 14.31.297 199426:52.2 16.03.200 199826:22.8 29.57.365 RMc At 11:56 AM 10/9/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Richard, save the marathon, the mens distance records did not show >steady >improvement during the eighties, they all flattened out until the years I >cited. > >Do your research. > >malmo > > > > > > From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2003/10/09 Thu AM 11:21:59 CDT > > To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > CC: "'T&FMail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > > > My point is that since 1985, the men's records have continued to > > fall at a relatively steady rate (I just got done reading the men's > > portion of Quercetani's distance running history. While Rono's > > steeple record stood for an extraordinarily long time, the records > > in the other events were broken regularly through the 80s and early > > 90s. The 1500 was under > 3:30 by > > 1985, the 3k under 7:30 in 1989, the 5k under 13 in 1987, and the > > 10k > under > > 27 in 1991. > > > > I'm not sure which marks Malmo is pointing to on his list. > > Certainly Gebreselassie drove down the 5k and 10k records in 1995 to > > 1998, but those sort of individual-driven bursts are far from > > unusual. And usually, the records are being broken by other > > individuals at the same time. That was true for Nurmi (the other > > Finns), Zatopek (didn't hold 5k record until the end of his career), > > Kuts (Pirie, Chataway, and Iharos), and Clarke (Keino). > > > > RMc > > > > At 08:29 PM 10/8/2003 -0400, malmo wrote: > > >Actually, it wasn't until the 1990s that the men's distance marks > > >made the dramatic gap. > > > > > >1500 1991 > > >3000sc 1992 > > >5000 1995 > > >1 1993 > > >Marathon 1998 > > > > > >-Original Message- > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard > > >McCann > > >Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:46 PM > > >To: T&FMail List > > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > >What's equally striking is that the > > >men's distance marks have improved dramatically since 1985 (and this is > > >true across all continents), while except for the Chinese outburst, > > >women > > >are only now surpassing the WRs set in the previous era. Unless someone > > > > > >else has an adequate explanation, I can only attribute this to the > > >deterrent value of testing. Baseball may see a similar outcome. > > > > > > > > >Richard McCann > > > >
RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
c (none provided by you, because you can't manipulate the data) >1976 8:08.0 >1978 8:05.4 2.6 1.3 >***1991 8:05.4 take a wild guess (78-91), or recalc 1976 to 1991 >1997 7:55.72 __ __ > >5000 >194213:58.4 >195713:35.0 23.41.560 >196613:16.6 18.42.044 >197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 >198712:58.4 10.01.112 >***199312:58.4 take a wild guess (87-93), or recalc 1978 to 1993 >199812:39.4 recalc recalc > >1 >194429:35.4 >195628:30.4 65.05.417 >196527:39.4 39.47.880 >197827:22.5 16.91.300 >198927:08.2 14.3 1.297 >***199227:08.2 take a wild guess (78-89), or recalc 1978 to 1992 > >199826:22.8 recalc recalc > > >-Original Message- >From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 1:40 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: 'T&FMail List' >Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > >I disagree. The trend analysis shown below refutes your point. We see >steady record breaking through the 1980s, and more interestingly, the >top 10 marks compressed around the records, showing broader >improvement, which >lead to the 1995 burst. For example, a 13:15 5K was an excellent mark >in >1980. By 1990 it might not make the top 10. The same cannot be said >about >women's marks. > >The trend analysis reinforces a point I made earlier--the record burst >in the 1960s lead by Ron Clarke and Jim Ryun shows a greater annual >improvement rate than just about any other period. The latest >improvements >are not extraordinary in comparison except for the 5k. I picked each >year >to reflect the end of a set of dominant runners' careers, e.g. Ryun, Coe > >and Ovett, Kuts, Clarke, Rono, Aouita, Barrios, which corresponded with >a quiescence in record breaking activity. > >The improvement in the 1500 from 1980 to 1985 is greater than >subsequently. While the 5k improvement is rapid, it's about comparable >to Clarke's improvements. The 10k is close to Clarke's but I've >shortened the >time horizon which accentuated the improvement. It's only 5.05 second >from >89 to 98. > >Distance World Record Progressions >Dist/Yr Time Improvement Impr/Yr >1500 >194403:43.0 >195703:38.1 4.9 0.377 >196703:33.1 5.0 0.500 >198003:31.4 1.7 0.134 >198503:29.5 1.9 0.380 >199803:26.0 3.5 0.266 > >5000 >194213:58.4 >195713:35.0 23.41.560 >196613:16.6 18.42.044 >197813:08.4 8.2 0.683 >198712:58.4 10.01.112 >199812:39.4 19.01.730 > >1 >194429:35.4 >195628:30.4 65.05.417 >196527:39.4 39.47.880 >197827:22.5 16.91.300 >198927:08.2 14.3 1.297 >1994 26:52.2 16.03.200 >199826:22.8 29.57.365 > > >RMc > >At 11:56 AM 10/9/2003 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Richard, save the marathon, the mens distance records did not show > >steady improvement during the eighties, they all flattened out until > >the years >I > >cited. > > > >Do your research. > > > >malmo > > > > > > > > > > From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: 2003/10/09 Thu AM 11:21:59 CDT > > > To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > CC: "'T&FMail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll > > > > > > My point is that since 1985, the men's records have continued to > > > fall at a relatively steady rate (I just got done reading the > > > men's portion of Quercetani's distance running history. While > > > Rono's steeple record stood for an extraordinarily long time, the > > > records in the other events were broken regularly through the 80s > > > and early 90s. The 1500 was under > > 3:30 by > > > 1985, the 3k under 7:30 in 1989, the 5k under 13 in 1987, and the > > > 10k > > under > > > 27 in 1991. > > > > > > I'm not sure which marks Malmo is pointing to on his list. > > > Certainly Gebreselassie drove down the 5k and 10k records in 1995 > > > to > > > > 1998, but those sort of individual-driven bursts are far from > > > unusual. And usually, the records are being broken by other > > > individuals at the same time. That was true for Nurmi (the other > > > Finns), Zatopek (didn't hold 5k record until the en
Re: Re: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
Well, as long as he's not using them :-) (Sorry, it was too easy) 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 -- Lee Nichols Assistant News Editor The Austin Chronicle 512/454-5766, ext. 138 fax 512/458-6910 http://austinchronicle.com
RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
At 09:28 PM 10/9/2003 -0400, malmo wrote.. Post-modernism at its finest, but sorry, your original post only spoke of a time-frame "...since 1985" And the improvement since 1985 went like this: And I would argue that you are confusing "bursts" of record activity, which are extremely common over history (e.g., 1924-28, 1942-44, 1955-57, 1965-67, 1975-78, and yes, 1993-98). But my premise is that those "bursts" are built on a build up of talent and various training and racing expectations that are let loose by one or a few individuals who coincide with that period (eg. Nurmi, Haag/Anderson, Zatopek/Kuts/Bannister, Clarke/Ryun, Bayi/Walker/Rono, Morcelli/El G/Komen/Gebresellasie). So what I measured was the rate of improvement from burst to burst, not the rate within a burst. This is akin to measuring economic growth. It's not appropriate to measure the average rate from the bottom of a recession to the top of a boom--the proper measurement is taken from the same point in the economic cycle, e.g., the bottom of one recession to the bottom of the next. That's my approach, which is probably colored by my profession... RMc
RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll
You can't bullshit a bullshitter. If the price of gold and other precious metals was flat from 1985 to 1991 then broke out dramatically in 1992 and continued unabated until 1998, even the sloppiest of economists wouldn't dare suggest that there had been "a steady increase in the metals markets since 1985" would they? malmo -Original Message- From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 7:13 PM To: malmo Cc: T&FMail List Subject: RE: RE: t-and-f: The Study was a 1995 poll At 09:28 PM 10/9/2003 -0400, malmo wrote.. >Post-modernism at its finest, but sorry, your original post only spoke >of a time-frame "...since 1985" And the improvement since 1985 went >like >this: And I would argue that you are confusing "bursts" of record activity, which are extremely common over history (e.g., 1924-28, 1942-44, 1955-57, 1965-67, 1975-78, and yes, 1993-98). But my premise is that those "bursts" are built on a build up of talent and various training and racing expectations that are let loose by one or a few individuals who coincide with that period (eg. Nurmi, Haag/Anderson, Zatopek/Kuts/Bannister, Clarke/Ryun, Bayi/Walker/Rono, Morcelli/El G/Komen/Gebresellasie). So what I measured was the rate of improvement from burst to burst, not the rate within a burst. This is akin to measuring economic growth. It's not appropriate to measure the average rate from the bottom of a recession to the top of a boom--the proper measurement is taken from the same point in the economic cycle, e.g., the bottom of one recession to the bottom of the next. That's my approach, which is probably colored by my profession... RMc
