Faith Kipyegon so close!

This thread was already ruined by Armstronglivs and other doping zealots long before I initially posted about the fastest Kenyan performances.

The "data" on doping includes information from coaches, athletes and anti-doping experts, who speak from their experiences, that includes doping. But as you lack their experience - at any level - you have no idea about any of it. Most of what we learn about what people do in the world is based on their experiences, which we can observe and they can relate to us. To ignore that is to learn nothing. You have learned nothing. The kind of "data' you rely on, of laboratory studies, tells us very little about doping in sports because NO athletes who are doping participate in such studies. Nor do your historical studies help because you don't know which athletes are doped and which aren't. Yet you base virtually all your conclusions on this "data" - which is conspicuous only for what it lacks. Your purpose is transparent: to shore up predetermined conclusions that minimise doping and eradicate its influence at the top of the sport. That is of course a denier.

Einstein didn't "ignore Newton and follow the data". If that's all it took then he wouldn't have been Einstein - anybody could have done what he did by "following the data". He imagined what no one else did - including Newton. There was no obvious or simple path to that but a way of seeing the world - the universe - in a new way. It wasn't mere "data" that enabled that. But as you are incapable of imagination you would have no idea about how that leap in understanding occurred. You are a bean-counter who forms his opinions on no data or only the "data" that suits your prior conclusions. You are like a mediaeval cleric who thinks he has proved God exists on the "data". That isn't a scientist.

You misunderstand. The "doping zealots" are your Kenyan runners. Even the Kenyan authorities have acknowledged that.

Unfortunately, the information from coaches and athletes and anti-doping experts is too unreliable, especially coming from no name sprinters and throwers from the '80s.

You are right to reject data from poorly designed and poorly executed studies which measure the wrong things on the wrong people under the wrong conditions, drawing wrong conclusions. For the same reason, you should avoid over-interpreting information from the wrong athletes and wrong coaches and the wrong "experts", who have observed the wrong things, making wrong measures (if at all), and especially from the wrong era or the wrong sports.

I am not so gullible as to rely on such unreliable data and information.

I do have sufficient performance data to support my limited claims about performance. No amount of experience, or data from studies, or extent of doping can change my historical observation that few Kenyan women have run sub-4:00 for 1500m before Faith Kipyegon, despite the "rife" doping.

Regarding Einstein, it was contradictory data that triggered his search for new models, achieving what two centuries of scientists before him did not.

This one is ranked as Top 1 of all times in his field by several sources:

en.wikipedia.org

Bernhard Riemann

Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann (German: [ˈɡeːɔʁk ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈbɛʁnhaʁt ˈʁiːman] (listen); 17 September 1826 – 20 July 1866) was a German mathematician who made contributions to analysis, number theory, and differential geomet...

Link:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Riemann