All success now is due to doping. The reason for that is that the best athletes - in any sport - will dope.
Then it's safe to assume that your professional success is also due to cheating.
So if I can identify cheating in sports I must therefore be a cheat? So WADA and antidoping officials are therefore cheats. I can certainly identify a moron when I see one.
The point is that the doping is what is creating the separation and the alleged talent gap. There is no magic running gene. Clean athletes cannot compete, period. Even if certain groups have a genetic predisposition to certain traits that are more conducive to distance running success, it is the widespread doping that is absolutely decisive. You mention certain tribal groups, but is the doping culture that creates the supposed talent. Remove the doping and the supposed "natural talent" does not amount to a hill of beans. Every major marathon winner and record holder is doping, which we usually find out in a few months, at which point the next anonymous doper steps up.
The point is that your point misses the mark, completely lacking any basis in scientific or observed reality, building on top of the false set of choices of just "doping" or "magic running gene". It is neither.
If doping could create the separation and the talent gap, it would equally be able to close the separation and the talent gap. Yet well funded Americans, Europeans, Oceanians, Russians, and Chinese, have been unable to bridge that gap, and cannot even create a separation and talent gap from their former 1980s selves. The Japanese have made the most progress in the longer road races, and most doping prevalence estimates for Japan are near 0%. I'll leave it to the reader to debate whether the 1980s were clean, or whether the maximum doping benefit was already achieved by the 1980s.
The example of Ma's Army and Russia does suggest that doping can work for women, mainly in the shorter distance events, as does Russia's limited success on the world stage. The fact that neither the Chinese or Russia ever succeeded with the men, suggests against any significant advantage over clean runners, for the men in distance events.
The examples of East Africans dominating other nations after they move to America, or Europe, or Canada, or Japan, or the UK, or Denmark, where they are subject to first world testing, suggest that the talent gap is real, due to some combination of nature and nurture.
The point is that the doping is what is creating the separation and the alleged talent gap. There is no magic running gene. Clean athletes cannot compete, period. Even if certain groups have a genetic predisposition to certain traits that are more conducive to distance running success, it is the widespread doping that is absolutely decisive. You mention certain tribal groups, but is the doping culture that creates the supposed talent. Remove the doping and the supposed "natural talent" does not amount to a hill of beans. Every major marathon winner and record holder is doping, which we usually find out in a few months, at which point the next anonymous doper steps up.
The point is that your point misses the mark, completely lacking any basis in scientific or observed reality, building on top of the false set of choices of just "doping" or "magic running gene". It is neither.
If doping could create the separation and the talent gap, it would equally be able to close the separation and the talent gap. Yet well funded Americans, Europeans, Oceanians, Russians, and Chinese, have been unable to bridge that gap, and cannot even create a separation and talent gap from their former 1980s selves. The Japanese have made the most progress in the longer road races, and most doping prevalence estimates for Japan are near 0%. I'll leave it to the reader to debate whether the 1980s were clean, or whether the maximum doping benefit was already achieved by the 1980s.
The example of Ma's Army and Russia does suggest that doping can work for women, mainly in the shorter distance events, as does Russia's limited success on the world stage. The fact that neither the Chinese or Russia ever succeeded with the men, suggests against any significant advantage over clean runners, for the men in distance events.
The examples of East Africans dominating other nations after they move to America, or Europe, or Canada, or Japan, or the UK, or Denmark, where they are subject to first world testing, suggest that the talent gap is real, due to some combination of nature and nurture.
Your arguments assume that other countries dope as prolifically in running as do the Africans. As usual with you, that is "completely lacking any basis in scientific and observed reality".
The point is that your point misses the mark, completely lacking any basis in scientific or observed reality, building on top of the false set of choices of just "doping" or "magic running gene". It is neither.
If doping could create the separation and the talent gap, it would equally be able to close the separation and the talent gap. Yet well funded Americans, Europeans, Oceanians, Russians, and Chinese, have been unable to bridge that gap, and cannot even create a separation and talent gap from their former 1980s selves. The Japanese have made the most progress in the longer road races, and most doping prevalence estimates for Japan are near 0%. I'll leave it to the reader to debate whether the 1980s were clean, or whether the maximum doping benefit was already achieved by the 1980s.
The example of Ma's Army and Russia does suggest that doping can work for women, mainly in the shorter distance events, as does Russia's limited success on the world stage. The fact that neither the Chinese or Russia ever succeeded with the men, suggests against any significant advantage over clean runners, for the men in distance events.
The examples of East Africans dominating other nations after they move to America, or Europe, or Canada, or Japan, or the UK, or Denmark, where they are subject to first world testing, suggest that the talent gap is real, due to some combination of nature and nurture.
Your arguments assume that other countries dope as prolifically in running as do the Africans. As usual with you, that is "completely lacking any basis in scientific and observed reality".
Then it's safe to assume that your professional success is also due to cheating.
So if I can identify cheating in sports I must therefore be a cheat? So WADA and antidoping officials are therefore cheats. I can certainly identify a moron when I see one.
I’m not sure you could hit the broadside of a barn with accurate accusations but it is shockingly condescending to label every single person in any field as a dishonest cheat.
Can you explain why you have a sense of morality about your job and they don’t? Why wouldn’t you steal? What’s stopping you?
Your arguments assume that other countries dope as prolifically in running as do the Africans. As usual with you, that is "completely lacking any basis in scientific and observed reality".
Or they do? But not as prolifically as "Africans"? Or they do? But not in running?
Dozens of times you said in this forum practically any top athlete is doped. But the "African" doping is more sophisticated?
What about the GDR? Did they dope? The womens 10000m GDR record is an immense 7.5% slower than Gidey's world record.
What you write makes no sense at all.
You repeatedly show you have no grasp of an argument. To say that it is an assumption that other countries "dope as prolifically as the Africans" is not to say those other countries do not dope. It is simply saying there isn't the evidence they dope to anything like the same level. But this simple point is clearly beyond you, as you create a veritable army of straw-men.
So if I can identify cheating in sports I must therefore be a cheat? So WADA and antidoping officials are therefore cheats. I can certainly identify a moron when I see one.
I’m not sure you could hit the broadside of a barn with accurate accusations but it is shockingly condescending to label every single person in any field as a dishonest cheat.
Can you explain why you have a sense of morality about your job and they don’t? Why wouldn’t you steal? What’s stopping you?
I didn't say that every single person in a given field is a cheat. You clearly didn't understand what I said. However I have no interest in explaining the culture of doping in professional sport to someone who knows little, if anything, about it.
I’m not sure you could hit the broadside of a barn with accurate accusations but it is shockingly condescending to label every single person in any field as a dishonest cheat.
Can you explain why you have a sense of morality about your job and they don’t? Why wouldn’t you steal? What’s stopping you?
I didn't say that every single person in a given field is a cheat. You clearly didn't understand what I said. However I have no interest in explaining the culture of doping in professional sport to someone who knows little, if anything, about it.
Or they do? But not as prolifically as "Africans"? Or they do? But not in running?
Dozens of times you said in this forum practically any top athlete is doped. But the "African" doping is more sophisticated?
What about the GDR? Did they dope? The womens 10000m GDR record is an immense 7.5% slower than Gidey's world record.
What you write makes no sense at all.
You repeatedly show you have no grasp of an argument. To say that it is an assumption that other countries "dope as prolifically as the Africans" is not to say those other countries do not dope. It is simply saying there isn't the evidence they dope to anything like the same level. But this simple point is clearly beyond you, as you create a veritable army of straw-men.
You repeatedly show you have no interest in serious discussions which might question your theories a little bit.
Africans dope better than the rest of the world? They have more advanced techniques? When those prolifically doped athletes from high-tech areas like Burundi or Somalia change to not so advanced regions like central Europe, they still use their own african-based doping techniques?
Your arguments assume that other countries dope as prolifically in running as do the Africans. As usual with you, that is "completely lacking any basis in scientific and observed reality".
What you fail to grasp is that athletes know what works -- athletes are not idiots, and doping prevelance estimates from experts are as high as 80%, and that athletes are light years ahead of the testers. You are just a doping denier.
The original mythical claim was "doping is what is creating the separation and the alleged talent gap".
What you are suggesting is my "arguments" have exactly the same baseless foundation -- therefore tacitly conceding that they are equally valid.
As usual, when given the opportunity to provide any basis in scientific or observed reality, you spectacularly failed to provide one, leaving my "arguments" completely uncontested.
Or doping is much more accepted and pervasive in East African countries like Kenya or Ethiopia, the antidoping controls are still highly lacking, and apologists then use the results of that doping culture to try to salvage their genetic mumbojumbo. If you want an analogy regarding endemic doping and running success, just look at Jamaican sprinters.
Or doping is much more accepted and pervasive in East African countries like Kenya or Ethiopia, the antidoping controls are still highly lacking, and apologists then use the results of that doping culture to try to salvage their genetic mumbojumbo. If you want an analogy regarding endemic doping and running success, just look at Jamaican sprinters.
How can you believe any of this? Russia has a long and documented history of organized doping and more than 30 Kenyans ran faster than the Russian nation record for 10000m this year. No one invested more into evading doping controls than the Russians and their men’s long distance runners can’t compete on the world stage.
Do you really think that if I gave you 100 people from the Kalenjin tribe, 100 from Tonga and 100 from the Inuit tribes and and gave you six months to all coach them all at 70 miles and two hard workouts a week that the fastest runners would be evenly distributed among all three groups?
I don’t know why this hard to accept. The people in these tribes in East Africa are the descendants of people who have lived at high altitude and needed to use their feet to get around for eons. That seems to be a good environment to produce people that are good at running for a while. It also explains why it’s the ethnic groups with this history that produce almost all their top runners and not all the other ethnic groups in the same country.
Jamaica has always had excellent sprinters. Of the 100 fastest men ever at 100 meters, 89 of them are of West African descent, as is most of Jamaica’s population. Do you suspect that’s because of physical characteristics that are more common in people of that background or because they cheat more?
Why was the greatest marathoner of all time, Paula Radcliffe, so absolutely dominant if genetics are not the greatest factor in running?
Because she was the most efficient and she built the endurance on top of that efficiency. Professor Andy Jones has the numbersto prove it, she was able to run 5:10 miling without using lots of glycogen.
She failed in the Olympics because she wasn't the best in warmer conditions.
We lesser efficient runners use more energy in a race to run a slower time. We can improve a lot, but not to elite levels of efficiency.
I didn't say that every single person in a given field is a cheat. You clearly didn't understand what I said. However I have no interest in explaining the culture of doping in professional sport to someone who knows little, if anything, about it.
“All success is due to doping”
Or was that just a series of typos?
The point was made in response to discussing what top distance runners achieve. Is the thread about another subject or did you just bail in from your own private planet? A "debate" with one such as you is more like trying to assist a child across the road.
Just because someone is successful doesn’t mean they cheated or stole. You really think there’s some hush hush conspiracy where every good track athlete is told, “ok, this is how you dope and get away with it and we all do it” and literally no one has said no and blown the whistle? It’s insane.
Just pointing this out. EPO hit the scene and the world record went from 2:09 to 2:01 in a matter of 20 years. Yet we are supposed to think these athletes are just getting better by magic.
Jonesey ran 2:07 low off a positive split and no pacemakers back in 1985.
Given that, you gotta say 2:06 was possible clean back then. And given today's shoes (VF) and nutrition, you're looking at 2:05 at least being a reasonable cut off for clean athletes.
Then I'm sure there are people more talented than jonesey , so suddenly 2:04 doesnt look so far off