Lord Coe - "Kenya incurred 40% of doping positives in the sport in 2022". Up to date enough for you? But you will try to say his figures are wrong - like you always do when they make you look like an ass.
I never said the figure of 40% was wrong. What is wrong is your explanation of 40%.
First you are misquoting Lord Coe. It has been reported with 4 or 5 different minor variations, but it was more like "insidethegames" quote: "Over the course of one year, 40 per cent of all doping positives reported involved Kenyan athletes."
Second, I've consistently accepted Coe's figure of 40%. 40% is consistent with AIU decisions in 2022, and AIU reports in 2021, and 2020, with their increased attention on East Africans athletes and long distance events.
Notably, all these figures and reports exclude the test results of NADOs, RADOs, and any other WADA signatories.
What is more ridiculous is your inability to speak with numbers. "Avalanche" is another one of these colorful emotional terms that describe how you feel, but are unable to put a number on it, and gain a proper perspective.
The WADA's 2021 Testing Report (two years ago) suggests roughly the same rates of busts as 2019.
And the AIU's 2022 (last year) first instance decisions similarly suggests a similar rate of Kenyan busts. In fact, the AIU's Kenyan Decisions peaked in 2017, and 2018 (with 24 busts) and declined in 2019 (22) despite the increased enforcement of "Whereabouts Failures", and again in 2022 (20), beside reporting an increase in positive tests for "triamcinolone acetonide", after changes in its status from WADA from being permitted in some cases, to being banned.
It only seems like an avalanche to the impressionable as each Kenyan suspension, and then sanction, makes the headlines twice per athlete, while busts in the rest of the world rarely make headlines at all. Without looking at official centralized and global data sources, you could easily get a distorted perception.
Lord Coe - "Kenya incurred 40% of doping positives in the sport in 2022". Up to date enough for you? But you will try to say his figures are wrong - like you always do when they make you look like an ass.
More insults from the chief troll and not one actual sentence of contribution.
Lord Coe - "Kenya incurred 40% of doping positives in the sport in 2022". Up to date enough for you? But you will try to say his figures are wrong - like you always do when they make you look like an ass.
More insults from the chief troll and not one actual sentence of contribution.
I rebut doping apologists, as he is. But it appears you can't follow an argument. But, then, neither can he.
You have never ever said what you mean by doping apologist. You run away when asked.
But that is what the chief troll does.
Talks rubbish and then when cornered go hiding.
It is interesting how you say the same things again and again but always under different user names. You appear to have a multiple personality disorder.
Lord Coe - "Kenya incurred 40% of doping positives in the sport in 2022". Up to date enough for you? But you will try to say his figures are wrong - like you always do when they make you look like an ass.
I never said the figure of 40% was wrong. What is wrong is your explanation of 40%.
First you are misquoting Lord Coe. It has been reported with 4 or 5 different minor variations, but it was more like "insidethegames" quote: "Over the course of one year, 40 per cent of all doping positives reported involved Kenyan athletes."
Second, I've consistently accepted Coe's figure of 40%. 40% is consistent with AIU decisions in 2022, and AIU reports in 2021, and 2020, with their increased attention on East Africans athletes and long distance events.
Notably, all these figures and reports exclude the test results of NADOs, RADOs, and any other WADA signatories.
What is "wrong' is my "explanation" of 40% of total positives are Kenyan? I haven't offered an explanation for it - I have simply referred to Lord Coe's statement (which I haven't misquoted - it is fairly unequivocal) which you have just indicated you accept (that's news). If I have an "explanation" it is that a very large number of Kenyan athletes are doping.
It is also the case that Kenya may receive more attention from antidoping because it has long been seen as a major offender. It has shown with the numbers being busted that that attention is well warranted.
You have never ever said what you mean by doping apologist. You run away when asked.
But that is what the chief troll does.
Talks rubbish and then when cornered go hiding.
It is interesting how you say the same things again and again but always under different user names. You appear to have a multiple personality disorder.
It is interesting how you say the same things again and again but always under different user names. You appear to have a multiple personality disorder.
Insults and no educated contribution.
So what has been your "educated contribution" to the subject of the thread?
I never said the figure of 40% was wrong. What is wrong is your explanation of 40%.
First you are misquoting Lord Coe. It has been reported with 4 or 5 different minor variations, but it was more like "insidethegames" quote: "Over the course of one year, 40 per cent of all doping positives reported involved Kenyan athletes."
Second, I've consistently accepted Coe's figure of 40%. 40% is consistent with AIU decisions in 2022, and AIU reports in 2021, and 2020, with their increased attention on East Africans athletes and long distance events.
Notably, all these figures and reports exclude the test results of NADOs, RADOs, and any other WADA signatories.
What is "wrong' is my "explanation" of 40% of total positives are Kenyan? I haven't offered an explanation for it - I have simply referred to Lord Coe's statement (which I haven't misquoted - it is fairly unequivocal) which you have just indicated you accept (that's news). If I have an "explanation" it is that a very large number of Kenyan athletes are doping.
It is also the case that Kenya may receive more attention from antidoping because it has long been seen as a major offender. It has shown with the numbers being busted that that attention is well warranted.
Well if you didn't invent/paraphrase the quote yourself, what source did you use that said "incurred", "doping positives" and "in 2022"? Where does your "quote" come from?
It's not new that I accepted 40%. As long ago as Feb. 19, I told you "I have produced no fact challenging 40%, because I agreed with 40% ..." 40% is consistent with AIU's test reporting over the past few years.
What is "wrong" with your "explanation"? You interpret/argue/insist it is representative figure for all athletes in athletics for 2022, rather than an AIU-only figure:
- I have yet to see a quote that Coe specified "in 2022". Indeed it would be unusually prescient for Coe to make such a statement in Nov. 2022.
- Coe, as President of World Athletics, can only officially speak for World Athletics and AIU testing, and not for all athletes globally subject to WADA.
- To compile the statistic you want "doping positives by country in 2022" takes more time to collect all the data, and produce a report. WADA will produce a test report for 2022, likely sometime early next year, combining the AIU's data with all the other NADOs and RADOs, and other WADA signatories. And maybe one year after that, WADA will produce an ADRV report for 2022.
- Due to the World Athletics non-uniform strategic testing strategy, expressly complementing the testing of NADOs, the AIU has reported around 40% of positives from their testing were from Kenyan athletes in recent years, while WADA consistently reports a much smaller figure around 10% of worldwide doping positives from Kenyan athletes.
- Note even WADA's compilation of tests is not uniform as testing strategies are employed to make testing more cost effective.
So, with #2 and #3 busted and # 1 ahead of them by an ocean...is there any more sus record in track and field? Well, lets just say track.
For the record, if I ran a sport where I worked around the clock to be on the bubble for world medals and keep seeing these gals busted for doping...I am not sure I would be as polite as Emma...or Jenny or any of them. Its your life's work. You cant get those moments back.
What is "wrong' is my "explanation" of 40% of total positives are Kenyan? I haven't offered an explanation for it - I have simply referred to Lord Coe's statement (which I haven't misquoted - it is fairly unequivocal) which you have just indicated you accept (that's news). If I have an "explanation" it is that a very large number of Kenyan athletes are doping.
It is also the case that Kenya may receive more attention from antidoping because it has long been seen as a major offender. It has shown with the numbers being busted that that attention is well warranted.
Well if you didn't invent/paraphrase the quote yourself, what source did you use that said "incurred", "doping positives" and "in 2022"? Where does your "quote" come from?
It's not new that I accepted 40%. As long ago as Feb. 19, I told you "I have produced no fact challenging 40%, because I agreed with 40% ..." 40% is consistent with AIU's test reporting over the past few years.
What is "wrong" with your "explanation"? You interpret/argue/insist it is representative figure for all athletes in athletics for 2022, rather than an AIU-only figure:
- I have yet to see a quote that Coe specified "in 2022". Indeed it would be unusually prescient for Coe to make such a statement in Nov. 2022.
- Coe, as President of World Athletics, can only officially speak for World Athletics and AIU testing, and not for all athletes globally subject to WADA.
- To compile the statistic you want "doping positives by country in 2022" takes more time to collect all the data, and produce a report. WADA will produce a test report for 2022, likely sometime early next year, combining the AIU's data with all the other NADOs and RADOs, and other WADA signatories. And maybe one year after that, WADA will produce an ADRV report for 2022.
- Due to the World Athletics non-uniform strategic testing strategy, expressly complementing the testing of NADOs, the AIU has reported around 40% of positives from their testing were from Kenyan athletes in recent years, while WADA consistently reports a much smaller figure around 10% of worldwide doping positives from Kenyan athletes.
- Note even WADA's compilation of tests is not uniform as testing strategies are employed to make testing more cost effective.
And so, in his time-honoured fashion, he sets about whittling Coe's "40%" figure to something that will be much less. Of course you do.
And so, in his time-honoured fashion, he sets about whittling Coe's "40%" figure to something that will be much less. Of course you do.
Of course Coe, President of World Athletics, gave a 40% figure for World Athletics. It is not more and not less. World Athletics is not WADA.
Meanwhile, you failed to provide any source for your quote, so I conclude you just paraphrased what you understood, again.
So "40%" is really only about 4% of athletes. It's wrong but that's where you are headed. An exchange with you is always like engaging with a member of the Jim Jones cult.
Of course Coe, President of World Athletics, gave a 40% figure for World Athletics. It is not more and not less. World Athletics is not WADA.
Meanwhile, you failed to provide any source for your quote, so I conclude you just paraphrased what you understood, again.
So "40%" is really only about 4% of athletes. It's wrong but that's where you are headed. An exchange with you is always like engaging with a member of the Jim Jones cult.
No -- 40% will remain 40% for World Athletics. I agree 4% is wrong, but it came from you. Oooh -- Jim Jones -- another colorful emotional, yet weird, analogy when challenged with interpreting numbers and hitting a dead-end. How would you know what it is like "engaging with a member of the Jim Jones cult"? How many have you engaged with, and about what?
I tend to side with published data -- and it has to be said, that Coe did not publish any in his verbal quote to the press.
Unfortunately we will only see next year whether WADA confirms your interpretation of Coe's 40%, or mine, when they publish their 2022 Testing Report with data from all anti-doping testing. I have confidence that 2022 will not be signficantly different than the data that the AIU and WADA have both already published for 2021, 2020, and 2019, although it has been reported a significant increase of positives in Kenya for 2022 for Triamcinolone acetonide, after changes in the WADA Code regarding when Triamcinolone acetonide is legal.
Come on Reky, admit it. There's problems out there in running land. A truck load of Kenyans have been done for the gear. Like I said previously, big fish, small fish. Do the exact numbers and semantics really matter? Despite all the angst and arguing they are still producing cheats at a regular rate; pop pop pop. Lord Coe and the other bureaucrats will be forced to act eventually. How do you solve a problem like Maria?
So "40%" is really only about 4% of athletes. It's wrong but that's where you are headed. An exchange with you is always like engaging with a member of the Jim Jones cult.
No -- 40% will remain 40% for World Athletics. I agree 4% is wrong, but it came from you. Oooh -- Jim Jones -- another colorful emotional, yet weird, analogy when challenged with interpreting numbers and hitting a dead-end. How would you know what it is like "engaging with a member of the Jim Jones cult"? How many have you engaged with, and about what?
I tend to side with published data -- and it has to be said, that Coe did not publish any in his verbal quote to the press.
Unfortunately we will only see next year whether WADA confirms your interpretation of Coe's 40%, or mine, when they publish their 2022 Testing Report with data from all anti-doping testing. I have confidence that 2022 will not be signficantly different than the data that the AIU and WADA have both already published for 2021, 2020, and 2019, although it has been reported a significant increase of positives in Kenya for 2022 for Triamcinolone acetonide, after changes in the WADA Code regarding when Triamcinolone acetonide is legal.
WA said it was "40% of total positives" in the sport. There was no suggestion that there was a whole bunch of athletes that weren't accounted for and should have been, which would undermine Coe's claim.
You are like a member of a weird religious cult. Everything is distorted to fit into your ideology - as mad and wrong as it is.
Come on Reky, admit it. There's problems out there in running land. A truck load of Kenyans have been done for the gear. Like I said previously, big fish, small fish. Do the exact numbers and semantics really matter? Despite all the angst and arguing they are still producing cheats at a regular rate; pop pop pop. Lord Coe and the other bureaucrats will be forced to act eventually. How do you solve a problem like Maria?