EPO required for Iron men and women

[DV1976]

Tha "massive difference" is 7 seconds per mile. In the same period the mile about 4 seconds, the 10,000 about 9 seconds. Not really that massive. From 1965 through 1985 the 5,000 m record dropped 26 seconds. From 45-65 it dropped 33 seconds. In other words it is getting tougher to bring the record lower. Strangely enough this pattern occurs throughout track. What excuses do you have for that? Of course I am sure you will avoid actually commenting on this and simply post a link to your doctor as explanation...even though he has none.

I think you answered your own question. Using your statistics one sees that the world record between 45-65 dropped 33 secs. Now I could argue that this was exaggerated by the WWII but I don't have to. You go on saying that between 65-85 it dropped 26 secs and from 85 to 2005 23 secs. Now, this seems to me like virtually the same drop we've had in the two previous intervals and hardly in agreement with the pattern that you mentioned. On the other hand in the 100 meters and in the same period we've had no improvement whatsoever in men's record and in the women's class no one has ever come close to beating Griffiths' record. Coincidentally, over that period of time EPO came out and we all know what effect it had on long distance events (like the 5,000meters) but in sprints athletes had to make due with good old steroids and GH (which again came out in the mid-80's). I know that it sounds cynical but it fits nicely doesn't it?

 

[wilmar13]

But don't ya see, 20 years ago they weren't training and they knew nothing about nutrition and it was all laid back and sure they wouldn't be able to compete in todays sport !!!!!!!!!

Hey you know what, the answer to all these doping problems is really simple:

Since we have already found the absolute limits of human performance, anytime someone does any better we can be positive they are guilty therefore rendering any new records tainted and meaningless. As for punishment, why don't we just burn them at the stake as soon as they have proven themselves as being cheaters by being just a little too fast.

 

[House]

I think you answered your own question. Using your statistics one sees that the world record between 45-65 dropped 33 secs. Now I could argue that this was exaggerated by the WWII but I don't have to. You go on saying that between 65-85 it dropped 26 secs and from 85 to 2005 23 secs. Now, this seems to me like virtually the same drop we've had in the two previous intervals and hardly in agreement with the pattern that you mentioned. On the other hand in the 100 meters and in the same period we've had no improvement whatsoever in men's record and in the women's class no one has ever come close to beating Griffiths' record. Coincidentally, over that period of time EPO came out and we all know what effect it had on long distance events (like the 5,000meters) but in sprints athletes had to make due with good old steroids and GH (which again came out in the mid-80's). I know that it sounds cynical but it fits nicely doesn't it?

No actually it doesn't fit nicely...unless you are someone who wants to blame all improvements on drug use. The record drops that I talked about work in almost every event in track. As a metter of fact it works in numerous other sports as well. You and limerick also completely dismiss my original post without having a leg to stand on. In other words the two of you twist everything to fit what you want despite obvious changes that prove you wrong. Is there doping? Obviously. Does it account for every record? No. Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[limerickman]

Tha "massive difference" is 7 seconds per mile. In the same period the mile about 4 seconds, the 10,000 about 9 seconds. Not really that massive. From 1965 through 1985 the 5,000 m record dropped 26 seconds. From 45-65 it dropped 33 seconds. In other words it is getting tougher to bring the record lower. Strangely enough this pattern occurs throughout track. What excuses do you have for that? Of course I am sure you will avoid actually commenting on this and simply post a link to your doctor as explanation...even though he has none.

Well we operate in the metric system - 5,000 metres is a clue.

In terms of relative speeds, Bekele time is 1.68 seconds for each of the 12.5 laps in a 5,000 metre race, than Aouita.
This is a massive injection of speed for each and every lap.
Have you tried to run 1.68 secs faster for 12.5 laps ?

There is no point in comparing 1965 records to 1985.
Why not go back to 1865 ?

Athletics was an amateur sport until 1982 - so when you compare 1965 to 1985, you are comparing different eras and different training methods.
Your comparison is invalid and pointless.

 

[House]

Well we operate in the metric system - 5,000 metres is a clue.

In terms of relative speeds, Bekele time is 1.68 seconds for each of the 12.5 laps in a 5,000 metre race, than Aouita.
This is a massive injection of speed for each and every lap.
Have you tried to run 1.68 secs faster for 12.5 laps ?

As a matter of fact I have, I was a national class 500m runner in high school and college. With proper training and physical abilities 1.68 seconds is very reasonable.

There is no point in comparing 1965 records to 1985.
Why not go back to 1865 ?

Of course there is no point...since it doesn't fit what you want it to fit, just like you ignored my comment on the four minute mile barrier and what people sais about it. It's easier for people like you to ignore what doesn't agree with themselves.

Athletics was an amateur sport until 1982 - so when you compare 1965 to 1985, you are comparing different eras and different training methods.
Your comparison is invalid and pointless.

Except for the fact that the top athletes in track were amateurs back then and had the top coaches back then, but that doesn't fit in with what you want to say now does it. Try coming back with something that actually says something.


You know what I don't understand? Why people like you spend so much time on message boards dogging the sport they supposedly love. It really makes no sense, since nothing you say here whether it's true or false will change anything.

 

[DV1976]

No actually it doesn't fit nicely...unless you are someone who wants to blame all improvements on drug use. The record drops that I talked about work in almost every event in track. As a metter of fact it works in numerous other sports as well. You and limerick also completely dismiss my original post without having a leg to stand on. In other words the two of you twist everything to fit what you want despite obvious changes that prove you wrong. Is there doping? Obviously. Does it account for every record? No. Sorry to burst your bubble.

But don't you see? We've only had massive drops in times in those events that athletes could be benefitted from new drugs that came out... It's your pattern I'm using.

 

[House]

But don't you see? We've only had massive drops in times in those events that athletes could be benefitted from new drugs that came out... It's your pattern I'm using.

What part of history don't you understand??? These records have either dropped at the same rate over the same amount of time or dropped less? Learn to comprehend what you read.

 

[bspeedy00]

I am about ready to give up on you. Aouita is a superior athlete, obvious, but what isnt obvious to the average observer is that yes they can be the best at one event, and be better suited for a different race. The margin between his 5K talent and 1500 talent is minor, but it makes a difference at the world class level, and it takes someone like Bekele to show it. Both can run exceptionally fast, but what you fail to realize is the amount of effort for Aouita is supposed to be higher for him to run a 13 flat, as your beloved statistics show. The fact that no one else could run those times yet is not any reason to believe that faster is impossible. You can see this phenonmenon at all levels of track and field.

 

[limerickman]

Of course there is no point...since it doesn't fit what you want it to fit, just like you ignored my comment on the four minute mile barrier and what people sais about it. It's easier for people like you to ignore what doesn't agree with themselves.


Except for the fact that the top athletes in track were amateurs back then and had the top coaches back then, but that doesn't fit in with what you want to say now does it. Try coming back with something that actually says something.


You know what I don't understand? Why people like you spend so much time on message boards dogging the sport they supposedly love. It really makes no sense, since nothing you say here whether it's true or false will change anything.

I'm not ignoring you - I've answered all your pointless points.

The four minute mile was regarded as a massive obstacle - back in 1954.
Try telling us something that we don't know for a change.

Do you know what the mile record now is ?
3:43.
That's 17 secs improvement over 50 years.

You would expect the record to improve over 50 years.
Back in 1954, Bannister, Chataway & Co were amateurs.
In 2004, they're fully professional.
Hicham El Guerrouj holds the record.
If we go with your "logic" - all records between different eras can be substantiated because you're comparing apples with pears.

To do any meaningful comparison, you've got to compare comparable eras.
Aouita and Bekele are comparable because they're both professional full time athletes.

 

[House]

I am about ready to give up on you. Aouita is a superior athlete, obvious, but what isnt obvious to the average observer is that yes they can be the best at one event, and be better suited for a different race. The margin between his 5K talent and 1500 talent is minor, but it makes a difference at the world class level, and it takes someone like Bekele to show it. Both can run exceptionally fast, but what you fail to realize is the amount of effort for Aouita is supposed to be higher for him to run a 13 flat, as your beloved statistics show. The fact that no one else could run those times yet is not any reason to believe that faster is impossible. You can see this phenonmenon at all levels of track and field.

Just give it up, these guys don't care about facts, reality or anything like that they just want to dog anyone who is successfull if it isn't them. I am sure they sit in their offices at work and do the same to their coworkers. They have yet to make a reasonable argument, so I am through with this. I suggest you do the same sine these are the type of people that would come up with a reason why God was wrong if he came down and told us that none of these records were drug aided.

 

[House]

I'm not ignoring you - I've answered all your pointless points.

The four minute mile was regarded as a massive obstacle - back in 1954.
Try telling us something that we don't know for a change.

Do you know what the mile record now is ?
3:43.
That's 17 secs improvement over 50 years.

You would expect the record to improve over 50 years.
Back in 1954, Bannister, Chataway & Co were amateurs.
In 2004, they're fully professional.
Hicham El Guerrouj holds the record.
If we go with your "logic" - all records between different eras can be substantiated because you're comparing apples with pears.

To do any meaningful comparison, you've got to compare comparable eras.
Aouita and Bekele are comparable because they're both professional full time athletes.

More excuses without saying anything. Read my post before this one.

 

[DV1976]

What part of history don't you understand??? These records have either dropped at the same rate over the same amount of time or dropped less? Learn to comprehend what you read.

Although I have the suspicion that I'm loosing my time I will try for a last time
It was you that said that it was becoming more difficult to bring the records down. This is true in the majority of disciplines. The only exceptions are the long distance events. Your self said that the drop between 45-65 and 85-05 was the same... THIS DOESN"T FIT YOUR PATTERN!!!!!! But your pattern generally is true. So it would be logical to suggest that something smells fishy...
I say that EPO is responsible. You say Gatorade... I rest my case.

 

[limerickman]

More excuses without saying anything. Read my post before this one.

I've read your posts - and they're pointless.

You fail to substantiate improvements within the professional era.
You resort to comparing pre-professional records to post-professional records to
substantiate improvements.

You fail to substantiate the 23sec improvement between Aouita and Bekele's times.

 

[Flyer]

I love the sarcasm of the arrogant. And yes I am suggesting Bekele's performance is reasonable.

Even more pathetic is the confidence of the ignorant.




Regarding Donati, he offers only opinion. I read his CV and sure Italy seems to think he is gods gift to coaching, but that doesnt mean that other people do it, especially since he is accusing competators! That is the SUSPECT PART!

What is supect, is your utter dismissiveness of credible people who are honest about sports medicine. Their speaking out offends you, because you are frightened that it may be true.

You do not even know of Sandro Donati and yet are so quick to dismiss him and his experiences.
Of course this is what you do with me or anyone who asks question re: the incredible and marked increase in performance of a world class athlete.

Donati offers far more than 'opinion'. He has hands on experince working with track athletes as well as the corrupt doper doctor Francesco Conconi. Donati has had blood doping discussions with Concini.

Have you even heard of the 'Concini Test'?

Conconi, aka Mr EPO, Dr. Blood, The Wizard is also the mentor and teacher of LA's performance consultant, Michele Ferrari.

Donati is a credible source of the truth. You are not.

There is a reason why David Millar, Johan Museeuw, Alex Zulle, Oscar Camenzind et al... use blood boosting drugs. They work!


EPO, HBOC, RSR-13, thinners, stimulants,vasodilators, are some of the oxygen boosting drugs. Blood pressure, flow and capacity are all elements of top performance.

A work ethic and a great diet are not enough.

 

[Flyer]

The annual sales for EPO are 10 billion US. It was ZERO in 1989.

50% of that money goes to Amgen Corporation in Thousand Oaks California in the form of a royalty.

Johnson & Johnson is the EPO sales distributor as they had a huge sales force in 1989 while Amgen did not. Hence the necessary partnership.

As part of their deal, J&J also gets to 'brand" (rename) the product in the European marketplace. Hence, Museeuw's araNesp or Millar's Eprex.

Now Amgen (age 20) has a greater value than does Lance's Bristol Meyers Squib. (80 billion versus $50 billion) All of because of just one drug, EPO!

If you think that LA and Tyer are not keenly aware of EPO, and other blood boosting methods, and instead in driven to find a better wind tunnel aero position---you are wrong.

The drugs are far more critical than is the equipment.

 

[wolfix]

The drugs are far more critical than is the equipment.

I bet Flyer & Limerickman are a hit with the professional cyclists when they show up at a race asking all their questions ........

 

[Flyer]

I bet Flyer & Limerickman are a hit with the professional cyclists when they show up at a race asking all their questions ........

Or invite them into our homes.

It's no big deal---off the record. A little delicate, but the doping denials are aimed at you (the general public) not amongst friends.

No worries.

 

[wolfix]

Or invite them into our homes.

It's no big deal---off the record. A little delicate, but the doping denials are aimed at you (the general public) not amongst friends.

No worries.

I see.... You invite them into your homes, then you dodge the delicate issues, but then when they leave, you spend countless hours on a forum trying to convince the general public that these men [professional cyclists] are pulling the wool over our eyes........
we "had' a guy like that in out neighborhood once.........

 

[House]

Despite what Flyer may lead you to believe he knows no pro cyclists. He is simply a miserable failure in life who has to boost his own fragile self-esteem by finding fault in everyone elses success. Go back two posts of mine and you will know everything you need to know about this fool.

 

[wolfix]

Let's say for comedy's sake that limerickman & Flyer are 100% in their views....... Let;s say Lance is a doper, and so is 90% 0f the TDF riders ...... Doesn't that make Lance the best rider yet ??????