RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
> I am thinking quite clearly. It makes no sense for a > profit-motivated firm > based that derives most of its earnings from sales in the US and > Europe to > devote resources in a two nations with per capita income for less > than $500 > per year and little potential growth in consumer demand. If Nike or Fila > is doing something this absolutely stupid from a management position, and > the auditors are failing to note the large (must be > multi-million) in East > Africa, then Nike stock deserves to plunge even more than it has--and I'm > not making this statement from a moralistic standpoint, but > purely from one > of greed. > > How Nike or Fila might actually be able to overcome the societal barriers > that have stymied every other institution in the world in developing a > coherent organization in these two nations is yet another thought > to consider. > > I don't buy into conspiracy theories because the people at the highest > levels of large institutions that I've encountered simply have not been > competent enough to pull such things off. Willie Brown is the exception > that proves the rule. > > Richard McCann > Richard McCann. malmo. Two people. Two different backgrounds. Two different perspectives. The people that I've encountered are competent enough to pull such things off...and have. malmo
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
It really does not hurt that bad to think sometimes! Bold letters, and easy accusations, do not a genius make. The G.O.A.T.
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
I've just received five copies of a message sent under this subject line. I'll reprint it below, just in case anyone was fortunate enough to miss it. It is not clear to me why subscribers to this list ([EMAIL PROTECTED] edu) would receive mail addressed to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. It is even less clear why the sender would have sent it to both lists, if the recipients are the same. It is yet less clear why he would apparently have sent it *twice* to both lists. There is no possible way it could be made clear, how the sender could have managed to clog my in-box with *five* copies, since I was not included in the personal addressees who might possibly not have been included in the two copies sent to each of the t-and-f@darkwing or t-and-f@lists. Give us a break. It's bad enough for people to reply both to the list and to individual poster (since he/she will receive the list posting). But *five* copies to everyone on the list?? Cheers? The original post I'm complaining about receiving five copies of: >Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I >suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time >wasted by members of this list(myself included) on people, especially those >who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. If they >have something intelligent to add to the discussion, fine...otherwise, it's >just not worth it folks. amen, amen, amen, amen, amen
Re: t-and-f: Anyone know of a good stopwatch?
Dan, If you have a Palm III or one of its "family" (PDA running Palm OS) there's a great stopwatch program called Stop3Watch. It as 3 stopwatches displayed, each with the ability to take and remember 100 splits. You can "zoom" in on any watch to increase the display size. You can start all 3 at the same time or start them individually. You can program the buttons on the Palm to control each watch. Perhaps the best feature is you can instantly save the splits taken to the Palm memopad for later viewing. Oh yeah, the really good feature is the program cost $10! The low end Palms can be had for around $150-170. The program is available for downloading from www.palmgear.com. The programer is in Hong Kong and very good about help and updates. Andy Ferrara HS Track Team Power Ratings www.hstrack.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Eisenhower HS, Houston, TX
t-and-f: Mea Culpa
Sorry about the multiple messagesdidn't think the message got through, so I kept hitting send. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Netters Ben Hall writes: In response too mantis: > That is an idiotic statement. Mantis wrote: > > The question is Do you have to take the drugs to be an elite athlete? You would think that some people might learn... but Ben Hall Came to the same conclusion I already have... My wife is elite she is not nor ever has done drugs. You are wrong. Again. Note on the idea that African are too poor to buy drugs. Might I remind us all inner city dwellers are too poor to buy drugs?
t-and-f: Anyone know of a good stopwatch?
Just curious if anyone knows of any kick-butt stop watches; preferably something that can time two or three things simultaneously (as opposed to multiple split/lap times). I envision a three part display with the ability to jump from one to the next to start/stop the individual times. Anything like that out there? Other than that, the fewer features the better. Thanks, Dan = http://AbleDesign.com - AbleDesign, Web Design that Can! http://Run-Down.com - 9,400 Running Links, Free Contests... @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lifetime forwarding address) / / (503)370-9969 phone/fax __ Do You Yahoo!? >From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer. http://experts.yahoo.com/
t-and-f: Kipchumba's age
In a message dated Thu, 2 Nov 2000 7:19:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: << It used to be that the KAA sent to Junior competitions (and World Univ. games) what appeared to be high school kids...AND they ran like high school kids. Now their "Junior" teams all look 25 years old...AND they run like it. malmo >> Robert Kipchumba, the World Junior Cross Country and 10,000 champ is reportedly 16. I am not one to believe most Kenyan birthdates, but I do believe he is a Junior at least. Ever seen pictures of him? I wouldn't be shocked if he WAS 16. He also ran 27:42 this year in Rovereto. In a few years, watch out! sideshow
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
We can accept Jim Ryun running what, 3:51 for a mile as a junior some 35 years ago with nothing but admiration and respect, but 27:40 and 12:54 today are considered absolutely impossible unless they are on some drugs?!?!?!?!?!?!??!!??! This seem like a ridiculus double-standard to anyone else? Dan (out pounding the roads in hopes of achieveing what apparently only the Africans have discovered by now...success through honest SCARRY hard work, 2000) In a message dated Thu, 2 Nov 2000 5:04:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The question is Do you have to take the drugs to be an elite athlete? Hell yes. -Original Message- From: Mcewen, Brian T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:08 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping >The "16-17 year olds" in Kenya ... are not always 16-17 years old. Not >unless you believe that a 15 or 16 year old boy can run 27:43. This was >submitted during the World juniors: > ><< >1 (M) >As for the other finals, the 10,000 was a race for the Kenyans and >Ethiopians only. After the first serious increment in pace, only Robert >Kipchumba, Duncan Lebo, Abraha Hadush and Kedebe Tekeste were left. With >Lebo setting the pace, the Ethiopians were gone very soon too. In the >final kilometers, Kipchumba proved the strongest setting a strong >28:54.37 in the 30 degrees Celsius heat. His performance, I hate to >admit, does cast doubts on the year-of-birth that was listed as '84 >(Kipchumba ran a 27:43 earlier this year). > >If he WAS born in 1984 ... he would have been 15 and many months, or 16 >years old when he ran 27:43. > >Why would a nation say that some of their top young athletes are 16, 17, or >18? So they can set World Junior Records this season and next. > >12:54 WJR for 5000m? Come on. > >-Original Message- >From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:57 PM >To: malmo >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > >At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. >>Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC hasn't seen >>the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it doesn't >>exist. > >Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation >about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about >development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") However, my point >is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most if not all >of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about >performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to >demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting EPO while >Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable >incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including >steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn >fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these >accusations. > >As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's >performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief which may have >been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement actions). However, >I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances >involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a >relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; >the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by >many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times in 1 event) >in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though >the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), >nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again >repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in >question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended >period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has >substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the >nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. > >If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can >construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start listening, but until >then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. > > >>I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or >>Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to >administer >>an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long >>history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel >>visas in order is a monumental task. >> >>malmo > >You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, >effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ >classmates have worked on developme
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time wasted by members of this list(myself included) on people, especially those who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. If they have something intelligent to add to the discussion, fine...otherwise, it's just not worth it folks. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time wasted by members of this list(myself included) on people, especially those who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. It's just not worth it folks. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time wasted by members of this list on people, especially those who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. It's just not worth it folks. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time wasted by members of this list on people, especially those who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. It's just not worth it folks. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
Before everyone goes nuts responding to yet another mindless post, might I suggest that we all just ignore it. I can't believe the energy and time wasted by members of this list on people, especially those who won't identify themselves, who make these ridiculous statements. It's just not worth it folks. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
Dismiss everything that you don't know as a "conspiracy theory". There are many more Willie Browns out there. malmo > -Original Message- > From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:44 PM > To: malmo > Cc: T&FMail List > Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > > At 12:43 PM 11/2/2000 -0800, malmo wrote: > > To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > > > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain > > > access to EPO, > > > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized > institution. Unless > > > Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders > > > would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these > > > countries, even > > > if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other > > > countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. > > > > > > > > > Richard McCann > > > > > > > > >Richard, now you're getting warm. Institutional flouting of doping rules. > >It's been done many times before > > > >THINK > > > >malmo > > I am thinking quite clearly. It makes no sense for a > profit-motivated firm > based that derives most of its earnings from sales in the US and > Europe to > devote resources in a two nations with per capita income for less > than $500 > per year and little potential growth in consumer demand. If Nike or Fila > is doing something this absolutely stupid from a management position, and > the auditors are failing to note the large (must be > multi-million) in East > Africa, then Nike stock deserves to plunge even more than it has--and I'm > not making this statement from a moralistic standpoint, but > purely from one > of greed. > > How Nike or Fila might actually be able to overcome the societal barriers > that have stymied every other institution in the world in developing a > coherent organization in these two nations is yet another thought > to consider. > > I don't buy into conspiracy theories because the people at the highest > levels of large institutions that I've encountered simply have not been > competent enough to pull such things off. Willie Brown is the exception > that proves the rule. > > Richard McCann > >
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
It used to be that the KAA sent to Junior competitions (and World Univ. games) what appeared to be high school kids...AND they ran like high school kids. Now their "Junior" teams all look 25 years old...AND they run like it. malmo > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mcewen, Brian T > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:09 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > > The "16-17 year olds" in Kenya ... are not always 16-17 years old. Not > unless you believe that a 15 or 16 year old boy can run 27:43. This was > submitted during the World juniors: > > << > 1 (M) > As for the other finals, the 10,000 was a race for the Kenyans and > Ethiopians only. After the first serious increment in pace, only Robert > Kipchumba, Duncan Lebo, Abraha Hadush and Kedebe Tekeste were left. With > Lebo setting the pace, the Ethiopians were gone very soon too. In the > final kilometers, Kipchumba proved the strongest setting a strong > 28:54.37 in the 30 degrees Celsius heat. His performance, I hate to > admit, does cast doubts on the year-of-birth that was listed as '84 > (Kipchumba ran a 27:43 earlier this year). > >>> > > If he WAS born in 1984 ... he would have been 15 and many months, or 16 > years old when he ran 27:43. > > Why would a nation say that some of their top young athletes are > 16, 17, or > 18? So they can set World Junior Records this season and next. > > 12:54 WJR for 5000m? Come on. > > -Original Message- > From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:57 PM > To: malmo > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > > At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. > >Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC > hasn't seen > >the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then > it doesn't > >exist. > > Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation > about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about > development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") However, > my point > is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most > if not all > of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about > performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to > demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting > EPO while > Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable > incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including > steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn > fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these > accusations. > > As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's > performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief which > may have > been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement actions). > However, > I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances > involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a > relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; > the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by > many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times > in 1 event) > in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though > the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), > nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again > repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in > question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended > period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has > substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the > nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. > > If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can > construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start listening, > but until > then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. > > > >I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or > >Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to > administer > >an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long > >history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel > >visas in order is a monumental task. > > > >malmo > > You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, > effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ > classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African > nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain > access to EPO, > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless > Nike or Fila is ma
RE: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
That is an idiotic statement. I will bet every cent that I have and ever will have that Derrick Adkins, the 1996 Olympic Gold Medallist in the 400m Hurdles, has never taken performance enhancing drugs. Was he elite? YES Did he take drugs? NO Therefore- YOU'RE WRONG > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:58 PM > To: Mcewen, Brian T; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS > > > The question is Do you have to take the drugs to be an elite athlete? > Hell yes. > -Original Message- > From: Mcewen, Brian T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:08 PM > Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > > >The "16-17 year olds" in Kenya ... are not always 16-17 years old. Not > >unless you believe that a 15 or 16 year old boy can run 27:43. This was > >submitted during the World juniors: > > > ><< > >1 (M) > >As for the other finals, the 10,000 was a race for the Kenyans and > >Ethiopians only. After the first serious increment in pace, only Robert > >Kipchumba, Duncan Lebo, Abraha Hadush and Kedebe Tekeste were left. With > >Lebo setting the pace, the Ethiopians were gone very soon too. In the > >final kilometers, Kipchumba proved the strongest setting a strong > >28:54.37 in the 30 degrees Celsius heat. His performance, I hate to > >admit, does cast doubts on the year-of-birth that was listed as '84 > >(Kipchumba ran a 27:43 earlier this year). > > > > >If he WAS born in 1984 ... he would have been 15 and many months, or 16 > >years old when he ran 27:43. > > > >Why would a nation say that some of their top young athletes are > 16, 17, or > >18? So they can set World Junior Records this season and next. > > > >12:54 WJR for 5000m? Come on. > > > >-Original Message- > >From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:57 PM > >To: malmo > >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > > > > >At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. > >>Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC > hasn't seen > >>the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it > doesn't > >>exist. > > > >Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation > >about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about > >development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") > However, my point > >is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most > if not all > >of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about > >performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to > >demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting > EPO while > >Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable > >incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including > >steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn > >fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these > >accusations. > > > >As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's > >performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief > which may have > >been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement > actions). However, > >I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances > >involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a > >relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; > >the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by > >many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times > in 1 event) > >in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though > >the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), > >nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again > >repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in > >question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended > >period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has > >substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the > >nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. > > > >If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can > >construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start > listening, but until > >then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. > > > > > >>I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or > >>Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to > >administer > >>an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long > >>history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel > >>visas in order is a monumental task. > >> > >>malmo > > > >You only make my po
Re: t-and-f: No NYC Marathon TV coverage????
In a message dated 11/2/0 1:27:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <> It will be on the local NBC affiliate. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
At 12:57 PM 11/2/2000 -0700, P.F.Talbot wrote: >On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Richard McCann wrote: > > You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, > > effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ > > classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African > > nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain access to EPO, > > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless > > Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders > > would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these countries, even > > if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other > > countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. > >I tend to agree that it is unlikely Kenyan teenagers are doping en mass, >but let us not forget that KAAA is one of the most corupt organizations in >our sport. > >Paul > Corruption is rampant throughout Africa, but that doesn't mean that they have the organizational wherewithall to implement such a program. Corrupt officials tend to line there own pockets in the easiest manner possible, not to develop an elaborate scheme that lifts the well being of others as an indirect way of generating personal gain. Again, something other than insinuation is required here. Richard McCann
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
At 12:43 PM 11/2/2000 -0800, malmo wrote: > To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain > > access to EPO, > > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless > > Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders > > would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these > > countries, even > > if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other > > countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. > > > > > > Richard McCann > > > > >Richard, now you're getting warm. Institutional flouting of doping rules. >It's been done many times before > >THINK > >malmo I am thinking quite clearly. It makes no sense for a profit-motivated firm based that derives most of its earnings from sales in the US and Europe to devote resources in a two nations with per capita income for less than $500 per year and little potential growth in consumer demand. If Nike or Fila is doing something this absolutely stupid from a management position, and the auditors are failing to note the large (must be multi-million) in East Africa, then Nike stock deserves to plunge even more than it has--and I'm not making this statement from a moralistic standpoint, but purely from one of greed. How Nike or Fila might actually be able to overcome the societal barriers that have stymied every other institution in the world in developing a coherent organization in these two nations is yet another thought to consider. I don't buy into conspiracy theories because the people at the highest levels of large institutions that I've encountered simply have not been competent enough to pull such things off. Willie Brown is the exception that proves the rule. Richard McCann
Re: t-and-f: knowing for a fact
> >Brian McEwen replied to Sideshow Bob saying: > I'm not going to add much to David Honnea's excellent respone on this, except on a couple of points: > Man has not evolved enough to lap the greatest runners of just 15 years >before. Training methods have not changed and it doesn't have anything to >do with more people running. This is my opinion. Just as it is your >opinion that man has made a quantum leap in performance in the sport ... so >much that the fastest men from ten years earlier (12:58/27:08) would be >also-rans. What do you thinkg happened in 1965-67 when times plunged so much that performances up through 1960 became trivial? Kuts marks from 1956 were barely world class by the end of the 1960s. We've seen these kind of rapid evolutions before, and they will happen again. >But since you asked, take a crack at providing me with "clean" runners who >have run: It is simply impossible to EVER prove that an athlete has been entirely "clean." That's why US law says "innocent until proven guilty." The burden is on YOU and others who accuse athletes of drug use to come forward with some form of credible evidence that they are using. Otherwise you MUST presume that they are clean--they simply cannot prove that they are clean, unless they subject themselves to drug testing every single day from the beginning of their careers! Your standard is simply untenable. On David's point that East Africans have greater talent, I counter that those populations probably have a greater dispersion of traits so that there is a higher concentration (denser distribution) in the extremes of the population distribution. This means that there are more elite to draw from. This does NOT mean that the population as a whole necessarily has more talent, just that more individuals have the necessary traits. Richard McCann
t-and-f: YES ALL ELITE ARE ON DRUGS
The question is Do you have to take the drugs to be an elite athlete? Hell yes. -Original Message- From: Mcewen, Brian T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, November 02, 2000 4:08 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping >The "16-17 year olds" in Kenya ... are not always 16-17 years old. Not >unless you believe that a 15 or 16 year old boy can run 27:43. This was >submitted during the World juniors: > ><< >1 (M) >As for the other finals, the 10,000 was a race for the Kenyans and >Ethiopians only. After the first serious increment in pace, only Robert >Kipchumba, Duncan Lebo, Abraha Hadush and Kedebe Tekeste were left. With >Lebo setting the pace, the Ethiopians were gone very soon too. In the >final kilometers, Kipchumba proved the strongest setting a strong >28:54.37 in the 30 degrees Celsius heat. His performance, I hate to >admit, does cast doubts on the year-of-birth that was listed as '84 >(Kipchumba ran a 27:43 earlier this year). > >If he WAS born in 1984 ... he would have been 15 and many months, or 16 >years old when he ran 27:43. > >Why would a nation say that some of their top young athletes are 16, 17, or >18? So they can set World Junior Records this season and next. > >12:54 WJR for 5000m? Come on. > >-Original Message- >From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:57 PM >To: malmo >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > > >At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. >>Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC hasn't seen >>the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it doesn't >>exist. > >Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation >about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about >development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") However, my point >is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most if not all >of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about >performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to >demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting EPO while >Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable >incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including >steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn >fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these >accusations. > >As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's >performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief which may have >been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement actions). However, >I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances >involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a >relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; >the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by >many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times in 1 event) >in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though >the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), >nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again >repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in >question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended >period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has >substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the >nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. > >If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can >construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start listening, but until >then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. > > >>I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or >>Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to >administer >>an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long >>history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel >>visas in order is a monumental task. >> >>malmo > >You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, >effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ >classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African >nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before >these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain access to EPO, >would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless >Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders >would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these countries, even >if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other >countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. > > >Richard McC
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
The "16-17 year olds" in Kenya ... are not always 16-17 years old. Not unless you believe that a 15 or 16 year old boy can run 27:43. This was submitted during the World juniors: << 1 (M) As for the other finals, the 10,000 was a race for the Kenyans and Ethiopians only. After the first serious increment in pace, only Robert Kipchumba, Duncan Lebo, Abraha Hadush and Kedebe Tekeste were left. With Lebo setting the pace, the Ethiopians were gone very soon too. In the final kilometers, Kipchumba proved the strongest setting a strong 28:54.37 in the 30 degrees Celsius heat. His performance, I hate to admit, does cast doubts on the year-of-birth that was listed as '84 (Kipchumba ran a 27:43 earlier this year). >>> If he WAS born in 1984 ... he would have been 15 and many months, or 16 years old when he ran 27:43. Why would a nation say that some of their top young athletes are 16, 17, or 18? So they can set World Junior Records this season and next. 12:54 WJR for 5000m? Come on. -Original Message- From: Richard McCann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 1:57 PM To: malmo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. >Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC hasn't seen >the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it doesn't >exist. Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") However, my point is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most if not all of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting EPO while Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these accusations. As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief which may have been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement actions). However, I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times in 1 event) in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start listening, but until then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. >I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or >Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to administer >an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long >history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel >visas in order is a monumental task. > >malmo You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain access to EPO, would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these countries, even if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. Richard McCann
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain > access to EPO, > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless > Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders > would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these > countries, even > if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other > countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. > > > Richard McCann > Richard, now you're getting warm. Institutional flouting of doping rules. It's been done many times before THINK malmo
Corruption (was:Re: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping)
- Original Message - From: P.F.Talbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I tend to agree that it is unlikely Kenyan teenagers are doping en mass, > but let us not forget that KAAA is one of the most corupt organizations in > our sport. > > Paul Yes, but that is corrupt as in "self-aggrandising, and looking out more for the welfare of officials than athletes", a trait shared by many other African sports bodies. There are for instance countless stories of officials bumping trainers, coaches and physios from national teams in order to take their places to the Olympics or WC or wherever. Elite athletes who have to beg unknown self-important officials for basic things: visas, permits, allowances, access to locked training facilities -- the examples I have heard during the 15 years I lived in Africa are sometimes so absurd they stretch belief. Nigeria's contingent to the Olympic games in Atlanta came back with an *extra* 747 chartered to ferry the *luggage* of the "officials" who had gone on a frenzied spending spree in the US. (This while long jumper and gold medalist Chioma Ajunwa was almost stricken out of the Nigerian team for "disobedience" --- showing up too late for a training camp -- and had to literally beg the official in charge on her knees for forgiveness before being reinstated). With friends like these, who needs enemies? State sponsored EPO programs? By these clowns? Cheers, Elliott
Re: t-and-f: No NYC Marathon TV coverage????
At 01:10 PM 11/02/2000 EST, you wrote: >Am I to understand that the NYC Marathon won't be on TV this year? This is wrong. It WILL be on TV this year. The full race will be shown locally on WNBC in New York, and there will be a national 1 hour highlight show on Sunday afternoon on NBC at 3:00 p.m. ET. Check local listings. David Bummer. >After being dumped by ABC a while back it's at least been on ESPN 2 the last >couple of years. Does anyone know if it'll be on local NYC TV? > >The Chicago Marathon coverage on Fox wasn't bad. IMHO they should have had >Tim Hutchings doing the play-by-play instead of just being the guy on the >lead truck. I've seen marathon broadcasts where he does the whole thing solo >and does a great job. >sideshow >
t-and-f: World Road Racing Rankings
World Road Racing Rankings Updated Who's #1 on the roads? Khannouchi? Kimani? Kiplagat? Ndereba? For the latest World Road Racing Rankings go to the website: http://www.runningusa.org. To-date between January 1 and October 30, there have been a total of 721 performances by men at the 28:40 10K equivalent or better standard and 552 performances by women at the 33:00 or better standard in the same time period. Top single performances in time period (based on a 10K equivalent): Male Performances #1 world Paul Tergat, 59:06 in Expo '98 Lisbon Half-Marathon = 27:11 (with drop) #2 world Sammy Kipketer, 13:00 win at Carlsbad = 27:12 #4 world/#1 U.S. Khalid Khannouchi, 2:07:01 Chicago = 27:16 #2 U.S. Khannouchi in Philadelphia Distance HM, 1:00:28 = 27:48 #3 U.S. David Morris, 2:12:00 in Chicago = 28:20 Female Performances #1 World Lornah Kiplagat, 1:06:56 City Pier City HM, = 30:15 #2 World Catherine Ndereba, 2:21:33 Chicago = 30:16 #1 U.S. Deena Drossin, 15:08 win at Carlsbad 5000 in March = 31:36 Ryan Lamppa, Running USA www.runningusa.org
t-and-f: Need contact phone number for Speed Dynamics
Hello Track Net Folks: I need a contact phone number for Speed Dynamics. Can someone help me off list? Kevin Galbraith Long Beach State
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Richard McCann wrote: > You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, > effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ > classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African > nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before > these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain access to EPO, > would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless > Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders > would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these countries, even > if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other > countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. I tend to agree that it is unlikely Kenyan teenagers are doping en mass, but let us not forget that KAAA is one of the most corupt organizations in our sport. Paul *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
Justin says: << When we can show that the record is improving by a smaller margin with each succeeding 20 yr period, we'll be able to make some intelligent predictions (rather than simple assertions, which is all you've managed so far). >> You can make the WR's say whatever you want them too ... if you choose the years correctly and only look at large 20 year blocks. I said that I believe that a 50 second improvement in the seasonal-best level of the 10k over 15 years was due to more than more Africans running. By 1983, 2 guys had broken 27:24 and by 1998 two guys had broken 26:29. Looking more carefully at the progression of the WR (every 10 years from the last one set): 98 26:22 (51 seconds/10 yrs - 2.04 secs a lap) 88 27:13 (9 seconds/10 yrs - .36 secs a lap) 78 27:22 (17 seconds/10 yrs - .68 secs a lap) 68 27:39 (50 seconds/10 yrs - 2.00 secs a lap) 58 28:30 48 ??? You say: "Clearly, as we reach the point of maximum potential, we will see diminishing returns. As was elegantly shown to us all, there is no evidence of diminishing returns in the event you chose to highlight, the 10k." Based on the WR progression, was the world seeing DIMINISHING RETURNS from 1955 to 1988, or not? Clearly it was. Based on the progression over the very long term ( the last 50 years ) has the world seen an unexpected rate of improvement of the 10km WR from 1988 to 1998? Clearly we have. What does that prove about drug use? Nothing at all. But, those who say we have been improving 60 seconds every 20 years, and we should expect that to continue until we reach the "limits" of endurance, whether they are 26:20, 25:20 or 24:20 ... are just plain wrong. We had already reached the point of diminishing returns by 1980. By 1983 the top-ten men in history were all within EIGHT seconds. They ranged from 27:22.4 to 27:30.x. Clearly, the world was near the limits of what was possible for the time. Men from many nations had run 27:30 ... two Kenyans, two Portuguese, two East Germans, two Americans, two Englishmen, a Finn. Since the late 1980's the WR has improved by close to the same margin that used to separate the top-ten ALL-TIME: 27:13 27:08 27:07 26:58 26:53 26:43 26:31 26:27 26:22 What does that prove about drug use? Nothing at all. But, it is not true to say that the WR has advanced at about the rate the world should expect, based on our knowledge of the last 50 years. Based on World experience over 1950-1990 ... you would expect the WR now to be 27:05 or slower. I am not saying that is the limit of human performance in 2000 ... just that if you had never seen the dramatic escalation from 1992-1998 ... but were presented with the WR progression of the previous 40 years, you WOULD NOT be expecting the WR to be 26:22. What does that prove about drug use? Nothing at all. -Original Message- From: Justin Clouder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 12:30 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping Oh come on Brian, at least try to debate intelligently. Of course it's true that no race can be run in zero time. Limits are above zero time, we can all agree on that. Clearly, as we reach the point of maximum potential, we will see diminishing returns. As was elegantly shown to us all, there is no evidence of diminishing returns in the event you chose to highlight, the 10k. The record has come down (in fits and starts) by a lap or so every 20 years. That's a rolling stat of course - every year we can compare 20 year periods going back as far as we like and measure the diminishing returns. When we can show that the record is improving by a smaller margin with each succeeding 20 yr period, we'll be able to make some intelligent predictions (rather than simple assertions, which is all you've managed so far). There are two major objections to your limits argument: 1. For it to be right, literally every single distance runner has to be on drugs. There are only two statements about drugs in sport that we know are rubbish - that everyone is clean, and that everyone is dirty. If even one athlete has been competitive while clean (ie run say 13:00 and 27:10) then your argument falls down. 2. You have to show that we have ALREADY REACHED the natural limits of human potential and that improvements since then are solely down to drugs. In fact, you have to argue that we reached human limits before the advent of EPO, ie in the late 80s. Damn, if I'd realised that I'd have paid better attention!! If even one athlete can be shown to have exceeded late 80s standards while clean, again your argument falls down. Most of us completly buy your contention that EPO and other drugs are rife at all levels of the sport. You do not need to use these patently absurd arguments to make your point. Justin ** Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
At 07:14 PM 11/1/2000 -0800, malmo wrote.. >Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC hasn't seen >the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it doesn't >exist. Perhaps I'm being too demanding given the general lack of documentation about much of anything in Africa. (One colleague has a book about development economics entitled "Planning with Facts.") However, my point is that the claim that East Africans are using EPO to gain most if not all of their advantage is simply illogical in the face of the facts about performances by very young runners in that region. The accusers have to demonstrate somehow that 16 to 17 year olds in Kenya are getting EPO while Europeans and American teenagers with substantially higher disposable incomes (and a demonstrated greater preponderance of drug use, including steroids) apparently are not. Just saying "they're just running too damn fast" is in absolutely no way a legitimate means of making these accusations. As a counterpoint, I will repeat my belief that the Chinese women's performances in 1993 were enhanced in some manner (a belief which may have been confirmed with the recent Chinese drug enforcement actions). However, I make that statement based on several logical steps: the performances involved sudden dramatic improvements; the improvements were for a relatively large group of athletes within a concentrated period of time; the WR in at least one event was broken repeatedly over several days by many athletes; one athlete broke at least 4 WRs (multiple times in 1 event) in a 5 day period, none of which have been approached again; even though the athletes showed excellent performances beforehand (the 1993 WCs), nothing indicated this level of condition; none of the athletes again repeated performances at these levels subsequently; the athletes in question trained together under controlled conditions for an extended period of time (i.e., years, not weeks); the Chinese government has substantial resources and good institutional control throughout the nation. Even the 1997 Chinese performances pale in comparison. If those making similar accusations about EPO usage by Africans can construct a similar line of reasoning, then I'll start listening, but until then, they're just blowin' smoke as far as I'm concerned. >I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or >Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to administer >an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long >history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel >visas in order is a monumental task. > >malmo You only make my point here. There are virtually NO well-organized, effective institutions in those countries (several of my former ag econ classmates have worked on development projects in Kenya and other African nations). To create the wave of performances at such young ages, before these athletes have traveled to Europe where they might gain access to EPO, would require a concerted effort by a well-organized institution. Unless Nike or Fila is making such an investment, (and I suspect shareholders would question such expenditures, however hidden, in these countries, even if as "market development;" and why not spend similar money in other countries?), there are no other institutions ready and able. Richard McCann
Re: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
Justin wrote: > Oh come on Brian, at least try to debate intelligently. > > Of course it's true that no race can be run in zero time. Limits are above > zero time, we can all agree on that. Clearly, as we reach the point of > maximum potential, we will see diminishing returns. As was elegantly shown > to us all, there is no evidence of diminishing returns in the event you > chose to highlight, the 10k. The record has come down (in fits and starts) > by a lap or so every 20 years. That's a rolling stat of course - every year > we can compare 20 year periods going back as far as we like and measure the > diminishing returns. When we can show that the record is improving by a > smaller margin with each succeeding 20 yr period, we'll be able to make some > intelligent predictions (rather than simple assertions, which is all you've > managed so far). > > There are two major objections to your limits argument: > > 1. For it to be right, literally every single distance runner has to be on > drugs. There are only two statements about drugs in sport that we know are > rubbish - that everyone is clean, and that everyone is dirty. If even one > athlete has been competitive while clean (ie run say 13:00 and 27:10) then > your argument falls down. > > 2. You have to show that we have ALREADY REACHED the natural limits of human > potential and that improvements since then are solely down to drugs. In > fact, you have to argue that we reached human limits before the advent of > EPO, ie in the late 80s. Damn, if I'd realised that I'd have paid better > attention!! If even one athlete can be shown to have exceeded late 80s > standards while clean, again your argument falls down. > > Most of us completly buy your contention that EPO and other drugs are rife > at all levels of the sport. You do not need to use these patently absurd > arguments to make your point. > > Justin I'm going to throw a different log on the fire of this discussion .. One thing that hasn't been looked at in the discussion of limits and potential are youth .. I would like to think that THEY are as close we are going to come to a group of performers that are totally "clean" .. And perhaps a look at the progression of youth would give some indication of the "evolution of us as humans" and therefore how close we may actually be coming to limits .. I'll start with the year 1976 .. The year I graduated high school so sort of familiar with what was going on . The first year auto timing really played a role in times as well as metric distances .. An Olympic year .. And makes for a nice quarter century .. And excuse me if I mix a couple of close years in here .. Sprint wise I know Houston McTear ran 10.18, Dwayne Evans ran 20.22, and Tony Darden ran 45.7 .. In the distances I believe Dale Scott ran 1:47.8 a couple of years earlier in 72 or 73, and Rich Kimball had run around 4:01 and Eric Hulst ran around 8:41 .. Now a quarter century later(using this past school year as a barometer) today's youth are still chasing these marks .. I know that the records have all since been broken .. But not dramatically .. And the elite of the day are still trying to get to those same marks .. In contrast - while I do not have the specific figures at hand - do know that the marks for the same events 25 years before that were no where close .. The implication here being that: 1) We are getting much closer to human limits 2) That there has not been any tremendous change in the basic human being in the last quarter century 3) That the tremendous changes in world records, consistency at the elite level, etc is due to forces other than the natural evolution of human beings towards "perfection of marks" .. And let me say that could mean any number of things from drugs to better training methods, better equipment, the "professionalization" of the sport .. But would indicate that the natural evolution of humans has flattened out .. Therefore the question seems to be "What outside of the human condition is responsible for the tremendous "raising of the bar" for performance levels at the elite end of the spectrum" ? Conway Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
Larry Wrote:
> In a message dated 00-11-01 03:35:33 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> <<
> Fact is, the WRs for age 40 and over are hard as nails. ("Soft records"
in
> masters track are pretty rare after a dozen world veterans championships
and
> countless national and regional masters championships around the world).
>
> Anyway, these are the records for men 40 and over:
>
>
> 200m 21.86 Bill Collins
>
> 400m 47.87 Manuel Ulacio
>
> 800m 1:50.69 Colm Rothery
>
> 1500m 3:44.89 Luiz Jose Gonsalves
>
> Mile 4:02.53 David Moorcroft
> 3:58.15 (indoors) Eamonn Coghlan
> >>
> These Masters records are quite "soft". With the exception of the 200m,
the
> 400, 800, 1500, and mile are all within his range. If I'm not mistaken,
> doesn't he have the 800m already?
>
>
I would have to agree with Larry that the records are (with the exception of
the mile) quite soft .. While the masters have had a myriad of championships
over the past decade or so, what they haven't had are too many individuals
that have competed through their 30's and then on into the masters level ..
Most have been athletes that have retired/semi retired for periods of time
and then come out of retirement to resume their competitive fires .. We are
just now reaching the point where (due to professionalism) athletes are
competing at the elite level longer and THEN stepping over to masters
competition .. I would think that within about 5 years there will be
wholesale changes in the masters lists .. I would expect for the above
events something on the order of 20.90, 46.50, 1:47, 3:39, and 3:58 ..
Conway Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:25:20 -0600, you wrote: > > When linear extrapolation is extended over large ranges >the choice of dependent variable becomes important. In the >case of running records, plotting race time vs calendar >time eventually produces meaningless results as witness >below. It is better to take average speed as the dependent >variable. Then the achievement of zero elapsed time is >infinitely far off. Before anyone "breaks 00:00:00", Maybe we already achieved 00:00:00 and blew right by it without anybody noticing- I keep hearing stuff about negative splits :-) RT
t-and-f: PV UIL
A second pole vault question... What's the status of the girls' high school pole vault issue in Texas? Apparently the University Interscholastic League (UIL) on October 15 in Austin had its (third?) annuall discussion on the topic. I gather... http://www.polevault.com/community/messages/762.html ...that a referendum ballot is being sent out to school superintendents but don't understand how this referendum ballot differs from the preceding superintendent survey that failed to obtain a majority. Chris Kuykendall Austin, Texas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
When linear extrapolation is extended over large ranges the choice of dependent variable becomes important. In the case of running records, plotting race time vs calendar time eventually produces meaningless results as witness below. It is better to take average speed as the dependent variable. Then the achievement of zero elapsed time is infinitely far off. Before anyone "breaks 00:00:00", the sun will expand to include the earths orbit, and the earth will spiral inward from the frictional drag, causing great heating and the obliteration of all life forms. Further predictions about the improvement of running records will be moot. Dave Carey On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Mcewen, Brian T wrote: > > So, Drew, based on the below progression of the WR (roughly 60 seconds every > 20 years) how long before man breaks 00:00.00? In my lifetime, will we see > a 23:30 10k? Good one. >
t-and-f: PV TV?
The U.S. for the time being, in the pole vault, has two Olympic gold medalists and one Olympic silver medalist. It's a growing women's event and is gymnastics-like but with more objective, easy-to-understand scoring than the uneven bars or whatnot. So, a question: Is this winter's indoor Pole Vault Summit going to be televised? (...because it seems an opportune time to take advantage of the Sydney successes, if the Summit hasn't been televised and/or sufficiently hyped previously...) Chris Kuykendall Austin, Texas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
t-and-f: No NYC Marathon TV coverage????
Am I to understand that the NYC Marathon won't be on TV this year? Bummer. After being dumped by ABC a while back it's at least been on ESPN 2 the last couple of years. Does anyone know if it'll be on local NYC TV? The Chicago Marathon coverage on Fox wasn't bad. IMHO they should have had Tim Hutchings doing the play-by-play instead of just being the guy on the lead truck. I've seen marathon broadcasts where he does the whole thing solo and does a great job. sideshow
Re: t-and-f: more Rono
In a message dated Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:23:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: << either Geb nor Tergat have done anything close to Rono's incomparable 13:2? in a horizontally blowing blizzard (Pullman, WA 1978). malmo > Precisely. Get Rono training in a camp for 6 months (with no beer available), send him to Europe, get some world class pacemakers and watch him run 7:55, 12:45 and 26:40. sideshow
t-and-f: Masters mile, Gray vs. Spivey?
I think one of the exciting prospects for the 2001 season is if both Johnny Gray and Jim Spivey are making sub-4:00 attempts. Both have a reasonable chance of doing it. I think that the betting odds are with Spivey if he makes a go of it but Gray could make it very ineteresting. How about a heads-up 1000m race? Paul *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
Oh come on Brian, at least try to debate intelligently. Of course it's true that no race can be run in zero time. Limits are above zero time, we can all agree on that. Clearly, as we reach the point of maximum potential, we will see diminishing returns. As was elegantly shown to us all, there is no evidence of diminishing returns in the event you chose to highlight, the 10k. The record has come down (in fits and starts) by a lap or so every 20 years. That's a rolling stat of course - every year we can compare 20 year periods going back as far as we like and measure the diminishing returns. When we can show that the record is improving by a smaller margin with each succeeding 20 yr period, we'll be able to make some intelligent predictions (rather than simple assertions, which is all you've managed so far). There are two major objections to your limits argument: 1. For it to be right, literally every single distance runner has to be on drugs. There are only two statements about drugs in sport that we know are rubbish - that everyone is clean, and that everyone is dirty. If even one athlete has been competitive while clean (ie run say 13:00 and 27:10) then your argument falls down. 2. You have to show that we have ALREADY REACHED the natural limits of human potential and that improvements since then are solely down to drugs. In fact, you have to argue that we reached human limits before the advent of EPO, ie in the late 80s. Damn, if I'd realised that I'd have paid better attention!! If even one athlete can be shown to have exceeded late 80s standards while clean, again your argument falls down. Most of us completly buy your contention that EPO and other drugs are rife at all levels of the sport. You do not need to use these patently absurd arguments to make your point. Justin ** Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in the message (or responsible for the delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply Email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent to Internet Email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO Ltd or its Group/Associated Companies shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by them. Abbott Mead Vickers.BBDO Limited. Registered in England. Registered Number 1935786. Registered Office 151 Marylebone Rd, London NW1 5QE. Telephone 020 7616 3500. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
Watching three of his 800 races this summer, he went out quite fast- 51ish, and the last 150 meters when he realized he was 'out of it', he just jogged the final straightaway. He was trying to be competitive with a 1:45. Jogging the final straightaway, he finished around 1:51. That tells me that he was fully capable of a 1:47, had he gone out at a more sane pace and pushed it all the way to the finish line. Would therefore destroy the Masters record by over 3 seconds. And a 1:47 800 should equate very closely to being able to turn a 47+ second 400m. He wouldn't destroy the 400 record, but might be able to nip it. The mile might need work, but I could see him getting down to 4:01 this year. RT
RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
So, Drew, based on the below progression of the WR (roughly 60 seconds every 20 years) how long before man breaks 00:00.00? In my lifetime, will we see a 23:30 10k? Good one. If I have riled you up, that is tough for you. Keep the putdowns to yourself, or send them to me only. I haven't attacked Drew Eckmann or anything he is about ... and I don't intend to. Keep the discussion on a high level, no matter how much you disagree with me. > Brian T McEwen says > > I said: I don't know the Limits of human performance in distance running, > but > they are NOT at the level where today's runners would lap Viren, Yifter, > Rono, Schildhauer and Cova at their very best. > Well, Henry ran 27:22 in 1978, 22 years ago. 22 years before that, 1956, the WR was 28:30. Hmmm, Curiously, just about a 1 lap difference. Now, guess what? 20 years before that, 1936, the WR was 30:06, or approximately a lap and a half behind Kuts. Wanna go back 20 more years to 1916? I bet even you can guess what's gonna happen here. Yep!! One more time. Not quite a lap this time, but...30:58, 52 seconds slower. I don't know about 1896, but, how do you explain Nurmi being a lap better than Bouin, Kuts being a lap better than Nurmi, Rono being a lap better than Kuts, but Gebrselassie NOT being able to be a lap better than Rono? /Drew
t-and-f: Gray and the record book
Netters: I would imagiane there will be a special race somewhere this winter, possibly at the NY Armory, to give Johnny Gray his best shot at the 800M master's mark. As far as the other's go, I would have to agree they are long shots at this point. I am surprise that my good friend Neville Hodge does not hold the 200M mark; what about the 100 Ed Grant
Re: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
Buck Jones wrote: Imagine a typical 800m runner (ie someone whose BEST event is the 800, ie Gray) whose best is 1:51 (Gray as of now). How many 1:51 half-milers do you know that can run 47.87 or 3:44/4:02? Three points: 1) The fact that Gray ran around 1:50 last season does NOT make him equal to a runner with a 1:51 PR. Gray has a huge advantage over such an athlete, having run significantly faster many times. 2) Regardless, a 1:51 runner ought to be able to run around :48, so :47.87 should not necessarily be out of reach. 3) And to boot, Gray has always been more of a 400-800 runner than a "pure" middle distance athlete. All three of those factors lead me to believe that Gray should be able to take the 400 and 800 masters records rather easily, but I don't believe he could ever get the 200 or mile-ish records. AGB
t-and-f: Historic Names
Netters: The Union County (NJ) cross-country meet yesterday may not have been the strongest of its kind in the nation this fall, but the boys'; race may have set a record for historic names in the top 10. They included: (Mike) Nison, Scotch Plains 3rd; (KC) Brown, Cranford 44th' (David) Webster, Summit 6th; (Nelson) Castro, Elizabeth 7th and, last but not least, (Ed) Clinton, Cranford 8th. Another record may be the nyumber of times two almost next-door rivals have battled in title meets within such a short perios. The score is now 2-1 in favor of Cranford (over Scotch Plains) with a state title up for grabs Nov. 11. Both schools have a long and honored history in the sport in our state and Scotch Plains is, of course, the alma mater of, among others, Renaldo Nehemiah and the still indoor HS record-holder (in a purely HS race), Vince Cartier. Ed Grant
t-and-f: knowing for a fact
Brian McEwen replied to Sideshow Bob saying: Man has not evolved enough to lap the greatest runners of just 15 years before. Training methods have not changed and it doesn't have anything to do with more people running. This is my opinion. Just as it is your opinion that man has made a quantum leap in performance in the sport ... so much that the fastest men from ten years earlier (12:58/27:08) would be also-rans. But since you asked, take a crack at providing me with "clean" runners who have run: * an 8:03 steeple as a 19 year old. * under 7:25 for a 3000m. * under 12:44 for 5000m. * under 26:40 for 10,000m. * 12:54 5000m as a 19 year old. * 27:24 as a 19 year old. BTW, How many times did you test these guys and what testing method did you use? Can you send me the negative test results? You see, when you say that you "know for a fact" that anyone is clean ... that is as much proof as me saying I "know for a fact that they are using". And, I don't "know" that, and I never said I did. It is my opinion that they are. >>> That is flat-out wrong. Dan Lilot's brother works very closely with a lot of Kenyan runners, and Dan himself has spent quite a bit of time with some of them. Dan works for Track & Field News, which last year had a writer spend a significant amount of time in Kenya with a large training group, which included many runners who have never been outside the country. When he says he "knows for a fact" something about a specific runner, it may not be based on the same caliber of evidence that he has about his own use of needles or pills, but it is based on a lot more than sheer speculation. When you say you know for a fact that some world-class is using drugs, and you have never met that runner (or met anyone who has met that runner, or spoken to anyone who has heard a first-hand report about that runner), that is sheer speculation. Perhaps the speculation is grounded in reasonable logic, but it is still different from evidence. You asked for proof that certain standards have been achieved by clean athletes, and then provided a list for which each entry covers 1-4 people in history, with some overlap. This proves that you completely misunderstand the difference between Dan's statement that he "knows for a fact" about certain athletes and your speculation that you have conflicting knowledge. He did not claim any personal knowledge about the athletes covered by your list of standards; presumably any statement he made about them would be speculation. He did claim specific knowledge about a couple of performances that are of an exceedingly high standard. To respond to that with the statement "Well, what about these times, then?" completely ignores the point and is a failure of logic worthy of the current election ads. While I can't speak for Dan, I would assume his point is "Here are some very good performances that were achieved without drugs. I do not have any knowledge about other world class performers, or about the very few people who have done significantly better - in fact, some may be using drugs. But the fact that specific individuals achieved these performances without drugs indicates that it is possible to be world class without drugs, and that in the entire world population it is likely there is someone better who could break the world record without drugs." Going even further to speak someone else's mind: I don't know the specific evidence Dan has that the athlete's he refers to were clean. But the fact is that a few months supply of EPO costs more than the average annual family income in Kenya. It is certainly possible that in specific cases agents or coaches have supplied unknown runners with drugs. To suggest that it is being done for every single one of a huge number of world-class runners who have never been to a city before - in some cases never even met someone with a medical degree - to me stretches credulity even more than the claim that every world class runner is clean. The number of runners who have bettered the times run by Aouita or Barrios is supposed to be proof that cheating is occurring. I suspect that is true, but that does not mean it is obvious or indisputable. Aouita would not be an also-ran today - he would be 10 seconds faster and revelling in the fact that he had competition. There are vastly more people now competing in the countries which have the most talented athletes. (Those who do not believe East Africans have a natural advantage, please leave the room. You failed the pre-requisite and are not eligible for this course.) Numerous reports on the Kenyan training camps indicate it is quite possible that training has changed substantially in the past decade. In that same time the number of Kenyans contesting the marathon in a serious way has exploded. I think it is probable that most of the top runners from the most s
Re: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping
You are reading too much into what he is saying, I believe. Because RC hasn't seen the evidence, *RC* doesn't believe it exists. Same stance I take, actually. I refuse to approach the discussion already assuming that most runners are doped. While I accept doping occurs, nothing I have observed has convinced me that athletes cannot perform at the levels we have seen without doping. Thus, believing in the innate fairness of MOST competitors (most of the time), I believe most are clean. Now you can all just go away and leave me happy in my sandbox. -Buck Jones -Original Message- From: malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; T&FMail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 7:51 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: Not EVERYONE is doping > to buy these drugs. Unless you can come up with documentation that the > Kenyan or Ethiopian governments are out in the hinterlands distributing > these drugs, when they can't even distribute food adequately, I > doubt that > drugs are behind the widespread depth of African performances. > > Richard McCann > Ah, there's that rhetorical shield of yours again. Because RC hasn't seen the evidence it doesn't exist. If there is no documentation then it doesn't exist. I don't believe anyone has ever suggested that either the Kenyan or Ethiopian governments has, or even possess the ability or will to administer an American-style doping program. These countries, both known for a long history of neglect of its citizenry, prove each year that getting travel visas in order is a monumental task. malmo
Re: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
I can't see Gray getting any of the records outside the 800 - and that one
only if he generates the will to do so - something that was missing from
last summers efforts. Imagine a typical 800m runner (ie someone whose BEST
event is the 800, ie Gray) whose best is 1:51 (Gray as of now). How many
1:51 half-milers do you know that can run 47.87 or 3:44/4:02?
Best regards,
Buck
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 12:55 AM
Subject: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
Y ask Y:
When I posted a note to the Masterstf egroups list that Johnny Gray had made
it his goal to break all masters WRs from 200 to mile, the response was
nearly universal scoffing. These folks have a lot of respect for the current
set of records.
Fact is, the WRs for age 40 and over are hard as nails. ("Soft records" in
masters track are pretty rare after a dozen world veterans championships and
countless national and regional masters championships around the world).
Anyway, these are the records for men 40 and over:
200m 21.86 Bill Collins
400m 47.87 Manuel Ulacio
800m 1:50.69 Colm Rothery
1500m 3:44.89 Luiz Jose Gonsalves
Mile 4:02.53 David Moorcroft
3:58.15 (indoors) Eamonn Coghlan
Ken Stone
http://www.masterstrack.com
t-and-f: Santiago de Chile - points classifications ?
Hello, I am looking points classifications of Santiago de Chile and splits 4x400 OG Sydney. Best regards Zbigniew Jonik (ATFS) ul. Głogowska 18/4 41-809 Zabrze, Poland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t-and-f: Masters chair interviews all posted
Greetings, all: All four candidates for USATF Masters T&F Committee chairman have responded to my e-mail questionnaire and all four interviews are now posted at: http://www.masterstrack.com/USATFpage.html The last two are from George Mathews and Scott Thornsley. Earlier, I posted interviews from Doug Schneebeck and John Cosgrove. All four responded with thoughtful answers. This online candidates forum is a first for masters track, and I'm happy it's gotten 100 percent participation. But even more important is the involvement of delegate voters at the Albuquerque USATF convention and attention of masters athletes throughout the United States. Please share the interview page URL with your friends at the track and online. And don't be shy about contacting any of the candidates with your own questions. Thanks for your interest! Ken Stone http://www.masterstrack.com
Re: Re: t-and-f: Masters records for 200, 400, 800, mile
In a message dated 11/1/0 9:53:23 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <> Soft? You've got to be kidding! Ask Eamonn Coghlan how much pain he went through when he was chasing the 4-minute barrier when he turned 40. Gray was expected to shatter the Masters 800 record when he turned 40 this year, but he "failed" in at least three attempts. Gray, who is the rare exception among world-class athletes still competing at his age, may yet get all of the above records, but it won't be easy. Walt Murphy
