The entirety of slowwer's posts is given to the denial of the obvious and now proven truth, that Kenya has shown itself to be amongst the worst doping cheaters on the planet for distance running. None of their previous achievements can escape that taint because there is no point where it can be assumed they were clean. They have shown doping is their norm. It would be the same for any other country, but in this the Kenyans lead the pack.
My posts have nothing to do with this string of Kenyan doping busts, they are not denying this in any way.
Kenya was the most successful distance running nation in the period 1964-1979.
That's what my posts have clearly showed.And that yours and Coevett's stupidity is without any limit.
Your posts are a mere distraction from Kenya's doping busts. There is no way that its record escapes the stain of chronic doping. If any runners were doping from the late '60's to the late '70's - and they were - then the Kenyans would have been, too. They have shown that they have embraced the practice.
If Kenya was able to be a successful running nation without doping - as slowwer tries to argue - then why has it become one of the worst doping offenders in the sport?
If Kenya was able to be a successful running nation without doping - as slowwer tries to argue - then why has it become one of the worst doping offenders in the sport?
It's obvious Kenya would be still successful (for sure less successful than they are with doping) without any Kenyan doper (and all the others still doping).
Those dopers are trying to get more successful then they normally would be - it's not so hard to comprehend. Not for you, who can't grasp that Coe is faster than Ovett and Ovett is faster than Coe.
Kenya clearly was the most successful distance running nation (men, track) in the period 1964 - 1979. It's backed up by an enormous amount of statistics.
To challenge this
- by some individual performances from outside this time frame
- by stating nobody cared about the long distances (btw. Kenya also was the most - successful nation in the middle distances in this time frame)
- by adding the results of different nations
- by the early career ends by some runners
- by claiming the level was low
- and not by just giving ONE SINGLE COUNTRY
is not to beat in his pure ridiculousness.
I'm expecting more exposure of both of you.
Coe was not two seconds faster than Boit, but one. But that's irrelevant for the question.
1. Kenya was not the most successful distance running nation on Earth 1964-1979. They did not even have a single guy in the top 150 marathon times in that period.
2. What success they had on the track during that period was due to their athlete's fortunate ability to continue running into their late 20's and beyond, the fact that Mexico was at altitude, and possibly doping (very likely in the case of Keino).
Coe ran 2 seconds faster than Mike Boit.
Ovett trounced Rono at Rono's event while waving to the crowd.
Keino NEVER came close to reproducing his (highly suspicious) performance in Mexico. His fastest sea level 1500m was 3:36.9. Jim Ryun had run 3:31.1 Less than 10 years later and Coe and Ovett were running 3:31.
There is NOTHING about Kenya between 1964 - 1979 to suggest they had any kind of special genetic advantage, or that they were 'destined' to dominate distance running.
Before EPO, no Kenyan had broken 3:32.5. That performance (Kirochi) was the 57th best of all time. It took over 19 years for a Kenyan to run (0.03 seconds) faster than Jim Ryun (1986 - Cheryiut).
Before EPO, Brazil had more performances in the top 25 all-time 800m list than Kenya.
Before EPO, only four Kenyans had broken 13:14 for 5000m, and one of those was suspended for evading tests, and another's brother later banned for EPO use.
Before EPO, ZERO Kenyans had broken 2:09 for the marathon, while FOUR Japanese had, THREE Australians, THREE Ethiopians, and TWO Brits had.
That is the way to go, dude! Just double down when I pointed out that even you haven't made up your mind about what Charlie Francis (allegedly) claimed about the Kenyan team at the 1968 Olympic Games! :)
When you keep complaining about Kip Keino "possibly" or "very likely" doping, it would help your case if you could locate a single published source agreeing with your assessment about Kip Keino being suspicious or at least a published source making a reference to a such a rumour.
I can find (albeit unreliable and unconfirmed) sources or references to rumours claiming that Sebastian Coe blood doped and reliable sources about British runners wanted tot blood dope in the 1980s. I am not making the case that Coe doped, but based on the amount on evidence + what doping methods existed or were known in the early 1980s vs the late 1960s, the case against Coe is by a magnitude more strong than that against Keino.
You are lifting the bar again. How should Coevett close the gap in idioty then?
At least, give him some chance, OK?
I thought we agreed that Keino was faster than Clarke?
Hopefully the post above your last one is also yours.
How is 13.24 faster than 13.16? You are a joke.
Out of curiosity, what would you consider Kipchoge Keino's most brilliant personal best time which shows perhaps the limits (or almost the limits) of his potential capabilities and how would it compare vs. his competitors in your opinion?
Out of curiosity, what would you consider Kipchoge Keino's most brilliant personal best time which shows perhaps the limits (or almost the limits) of his potential capabilities and how would it compare vs. his competitors in your opinion?
I don't know if you have followed this madness, but here are some of Armstronglivs' arguments in this issue:
- Clarke faster than Keino because 13:16 faster 13:24 (nothing more needed)
- Vasala faster Keino because 72 of win (nothing more needed)
- Clarkes's losses against Keino at the big occasions at 5000m(3 Miles) four times in a row are unimportant as well as Keino's much better PBs in various other distances
- Vasala's weaker PB in the 1500 than Keino's is unimportant
- the fact that with his view of "faster" out of two runners very often both are "faster" than the other he didn't understand at all
Keino maybe is the most versatile runner ever. He was the 3rd fastest in history in the 10000m and has an 800m PB faster than the current 1500m Olympic champ. In between he was Olympic champ and has set world records. An Olympic title in the steeple after just a few tries adds strongly. His strongest distance? No idea. His 7:39.6 in the 3000m was extremely strong.
That's 1.84 seconds difference. Are you on the spectrum or something?
1:42.33, 1:43.57 - 1 second
I see you still struggle with country, with year, with event and so much more.
Which COUNTRY was more successful in the period 1964 - 1979 on the men's side in the track distance events?
This are 16 years, 4 full Olympic cycles. Everything what has happened in THIS TIME FRAME is in consideration, nothing else. And only in those events I have mentioned. This is my claim, nothing else. Comprehenda? Jake Wightman's world title? - noooe. Bikila's two Olympic titles? - noooe. Beamon's long jump? - noooe. Ryun's, Ovett's and Coe's success combined?- noooe. No Kenyan marathoners? - not the point here. You can discuss this seperately. That Kenyans are not successful is irrelevant for the question who has won most medals in the 800m and so on.
Name one country which was more successful in this 16 year time frame than Kenya, just one country. Than we can compare the success of this country with the success of Kenya in this 16 year period: all the successes of Kenya in comparison to all the successes of this country. Some individual performance (1:42.33, or 3:32.16) never can solve this issue.
And name just one of those African countries who did as good as Kenya, just one of the many which you claimed exist.
Don't change the subject about doping, not participation and so on. Those are different questions. You can believe that all of Kenya's success in this period was the result of doping and you can discuss this. Maybe it's true. But not the subject here. You can believe Herb Elliott would have won three Golds in Montreal (btw. Keino has better PBs in both 800m and 1500m than Elliott). Maybe it's true. But not the subject here. We also ignore what Kenya would have achieved in Montreal if not for the boycott. They didn't compete.
Kenyans having a genetic inferiority for every other sport than distance running is far more likely than them having a genetic superiority for distance running.
There are probably at least 500 professional soccer players in Europe who could have ran sub 1:45 800m if they had trained since kids for it.
There are a total of 3 professional Kenyan soccer players in the world. There are 6,000 professional soccer players in England alone.
Out of curiosity, what would you consider Kipchoge Keino's most brilliant personal best time which shows perhaps the limits (or almost the limits) of his potential capabilities and how would it compare vs. his competitors in your opinion?
I don't know if you have followed this madness, but here are some of Armstronglivs' arguments in this issue:
- Clarke faster than Keino because 13:16 faster 13:24 (nothing more needed)
- Vasala faster Keino because 72 of win (nothing more needed)
- Clarkes's losses against Keino at the big occasions at 5000m(3 Miles) four times in a row are unimportant as well as Keino's much better PBs in various other distances
- Vasala's weaker PB in the 1500 than Keino's is unimportant
- the fact that with his view of "faster" out of two runners very often both are "faster" than the other he didn't understand at all
Keino maybe is the most versatile runner ever. He was the 3rd fastest in history in the 10000m and has an 800m PB faster than the current 1500m Olympic champ. In between he was Olympic champ and has set world records. An Olympic title in the steeple after just a few tries adds strongly. His strongest distance? No idea. His 7:39.6 in the 3000m was extremely strong.
I am not the idiot that claimed "no one was faster than Keino in his era". Clarke's and Ryun's world records immediately prove that is false, as does Vasala's 1500 victory at Munich. By definition, each had to be faster than Keino of necessity, to have either run faster than Keino's best or to have beaten him.
What this inept Kenyan propagandist is trying to argue - but without realizing it, because his English is manifestly inadequate - is that Keino was the best of his era. That, too, is false.
Out of curiosity, what would you consider Kipchoge Keino's most brilliant personal best time which shows perhaps the limits (or almost the limits) of his potential capabilities and how would it compare vs. his competitors in your opinion?
I don't know if you have followed this madness, but here are some of Armstronglivs' arguments in this issue:
- Clarke faster than Keino because 13:16 faster 13:24 (nothing more needed)
- Vasala faster Keino because 72 of win (nothing more needed)
- Clarkes's losses against Keino at the big occasions at 5000m(3 Miles) four times in a row are unimportant as well as Keino's much better PBs in various other distances
- Vasala's weaker PB in the 1500 than Keino's is unimportant
- the fact that with his view of "faster" out of two runners very often both are "faster" than the other he didn't understand at all
Keino maybe is the most versatile runner ever. He was the 3rd fastest in history in the 10000m and has an 800m PB faster than the current 1500m Olympic champ. In between he was Olympic champ and has set world records. An Olympic title in the steeple after just a few tries adds strongly. His strongest distance? No idea. His 7:39.6 in the 3000m was extremely strong.
I am not the idiot that claimed "no one was faster than Keino in his era". Clarke's and Ryun's world records immediately prove that is false, as does Vasala's 1500 victory at Munich. By definition, each had to be faster than Keino of necessity, to have either run faster than Keino's best or to have beaten him.
What this inept Kenyan propagandist is trying to argue - but without realizing it, because his English is manifestly inadequate - is that Keino was the best of his era. That, too, is false.
Then who was the best of the era (~1965-1973) if not Kipchoge Keino in terms of personal best times / world records and Olympic medals?
And again, what is his best PR that shows most of capabilities?
Who was the "best" depends on your criteria of excellence. It can be a specialist or an all-rounder - as Keino tended to be.
At their peak, I think Ryun and Vasala were superior to Keino over the 1500/mile - notwithstanding the feat at Mexico that was favoured by altitude. Keino was nowhere near the ability of '67 Ryun, with his 3.33 1500 and his 3.51 mile. Vasala, who was a 1.44x 800 runner showed he was simply the better, faster, 1500 man when he beat him at Munich. (Jurgen May also beat Keino in '65, because he had a better finish.) Keino was meanwhile a more versatile athlete than they. Clarke, on the other hand, was a more prolific world record-breaker but did not fare as well in competition as Keino. Keino, however, never got near Clarke's records over the 5k and 10k.
Keino was probably the best all-rounder of his era, being competitive at every distance from 1500-10k, and including the steeplechase. But he held fewer world marks than some of his contemporaries - who had better times over the same distances - and was beaten by shorter-distance exponents - May, Ryun, Vasala - who had more finishing speed. At their best - and at their event - they were better than him and could beat him head to head, even if their careers were not as enduring.
So, in essence, no one else in his era was as versatile or had his range but there were others - specialists - who were better at their distances than he was (again, like Temu over 6m/10k).
Aside from the fluke that was his 1500 at Mexico I tend to think the race that best reflected his capabilities was his 3k record.