Sideshow says:
<><><><><><><><<><><><><><><
I know you said you couldn't think of what exactly were the times that would
reflect the barriers of human performance, but I ask you to try.
Would you say the following were dopedg times?
8:05 steeple?
27:48 10K in Nairobi (the fastest altitude time ever)?
I know for a FACT that un-doped athletes ran these times.
If you're going to attack all fast performances, give some standards and
I'll
chime in with athletes I know are clean and have run those times.
It's your move.
sideshow
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
I didn't say I "couldn't think of the barriers" of human performance ... I
said: I don't know the Limits of human performance in distance running, but
they are NOT at the level where today's runners would lap Viren, Yifter,
Rono, Schildhauer and Cova at their very best.
Man has not evolved enough to lap the greatest runners of just 15 years
before. Training methods have not changed and it doesn't have anything to
do with more people running. This is my opinion. Just as it is your
opinion that man has made a quantum leap in performance in the sport ... so
much that the fastest men from ten years earlier (12:58/27:08) would be
also-rans.
But since you asked, take a crack at providing me with "clean" runners who
have run:
* an 8:03 steeple as a 19 year old.
* under 7:25 for a 3000m.
* under 12:44 for 5000m.
* under 26:40 for 10,000m.
* 12:54 5000m as a 19 year old.
* 27:24 as a 19 year old.
BTW, How many times did you test these guys and what testing method did you
use? Can you send me the negative test results?
You see, when you say that you "know for a fact" that anyone is clean ...
that is as much proof as me saying I "know for a fact that they are using".
And, I don't "know" that, and I never said I did. It is my opinion that
they are.
It is my opinion that the current world class standards for the 1500m to the
marathon are just not humanly possible without the blood drugs. If they
were, then the world would have run them in the 80's.
The article (submitted by OZTRACK) gave more evidence that this opinion is
widely held in Cycling. It also outlines what I already knew: doping is
practiced by more than 95% of the professional riders in Europe. There are
currently two doctors in Italy under indictment for sporting fraud
(supplying drugs to athletes) among other crimes ... one was named in the
article (Conconi) the other is Dr. Michele Ferrari. They both have been
forced to relinquish the patient files that detail the treatment of more
than 100 athletes apiece, over many years.
Certainly, runners will be named as those who have paid for the services of
these two.
Until then, I will try to concentrate on facts only, and identify my
opinions as just that: opinions based on evidence.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 2:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
In a message dated Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:04:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
"Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Substitute "distance running" for professional cycling in the last sentence
and you have the ESSENCE of the reason for my anti-drug blather that has
been so unpopular for a year. An unaided male cannot ride at 33 mph ...
just as routine 2:06 and 2:07 marathons and 27:00 10k's cannot be done
without the dope.
For those of you who always say: Prove to me there is a fundamental limit
to human performance! I say: It looks like someone is here who will do
that for you. I don't know whether the current limits are 27:40 or 26:58 or
something else ... but it is not 26:22.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Brian, I don't think anyone would deny that there is doping in track &
field.
But what I object to is that you seem to believe that every distance runner
who is running fast is doping.
That is simply not true, and don't dismiss it as naiveté or having my head
in
the sand.
It is true that the rash of fast times in the distances has coincided with
the availability of EPO. But this does not necessarily mean there is a cause
and effect relationship. Sure, some athletes are doping, but I would posit
that the Ethiopians and Kenyans are now fully realizing their potential, and
that's why they're running so well.
Marathon times are fast, yes, but where are the times being run? We're not
seeing many faster times at Boston or New York than we saw 15 years ago.
We're seeing them in Amsterdam, Berlin and Chicago. These races are pancake
flat and are using a seemingly endless string of rabbits.
Just a few years ago on this list we were discussing how unusual it was for
Kenyans to be so dominant on the track, roads and cross country but be so
weak in the marathon. Now we're seeing what they can do in the event now
that
they know how to train for it.
Did you look at Marty Post's data on the number of Kenyans who have run
under
2:14? Those guys running 2:12s are the "D" squad. Is it really that
surprising you have a bunch running 2:07's and faster?
I know you said you couldn't think of what exactly were the times that would
reflect the barriers of human performance, but I ask you to try.
Would you say the following were dopedg times?
8:05 steeple?
27:48 10K in Nairobi (the fastest altitude time ever)?
I know for a FACT that un-doped athletes ran these times.
If you're going to attack all fast performances, give some standards and
I'll
chime in with athletes I know are clean and have run those times.
It's your move.
sideshow
