Doping In Athletics

Page 103 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
There's some discussion on running forums about the new/current use of Wavelights and how much of a role they play in pacing a runner to a record time, some think they're another form of cheating, some think they aren't all that helpful and are merely an amusing lightshow for the spectators. I don't know yet for sure, but with the Wavelights, the bouncy shoes, and PEDs records were bound to be broken. Nothing shocks or surprises me in the world of athletics anymore.
Whatever the new dope is, it's amazing for running marketing.
 
Reactions: Tricycle Rider
One thing I actually am curious about is why athletics is breaking world records and *** while cycling is still a few minutes away from peak EPO era climbing times?

Or can we put that down to EPO benefitting guys with the physical build of marathon runners considerably less? Finally, I'd love that graph to start considerably earlier like clearly before the start of the EPO era.
 
At the Valencia half marathon today (6 December 2020), four runners went under 58.00 minutes, breaking the previous world record of 58:01, with the winner Kibiwott Kandie (Kenya) coming in at 57:32! :eek: World half marathon champion Jacob Kiplimo (Uganda) was just a few seconds back in second place at 57:37, followed by 19-year-old Rhonex Kipruto (Kenya) in 3rd for his first competitive effort at this distance (57:49). Great training, great shoes! :tongueclosed:
 
Last edited:
Fancy Bears send very interesting documents regarding the whole Schwazer chase to a local journalist who contacted them.
I don't have time to sumarize everything, but WADA contacted the Cologne lab that tested him positive and has the sample and told them that they shouldn't send the sample to Italy, so that they couldn't make the DNA test, that was ordered by the court of Bolzano.
Source: https://www.salto.bz/de/article/05072017/part-plot-against
I have zero sympathy for the guy and he made a few pretty disgusting statements a few years ago when he got busted for the first time ("I'm not a crook, I'm from South Tyrol, not from Napoli") and I don't think that he was able to perform on that level durning his comeback without any help, but it looks like he got screwed.
Hmm


and

View: https://twitter.com/wada_ama/status/1362526213064052739


I don't know the specifics, but it all sounds very weird
 
The Italian spin:


Alex Schwazer,'s mother:
“I was afraid if he lost the case that he might kill himself.
These wounds will never heal.
I am proud of him and he must not give up now, but competing will be difficult:
Alex will go to the Olympics if he's told he can .
He does not participate just to finish tenth!"
Translated from Corrriere
 
He said to local TV that he doesn't believe that he'll be allowed to compete at the Olympics.
The guy now has a wife and a child, he said that he mainly wanted to prove that it wasn't his fault this time.
I guess he was an easy target and they mainly pucked him because he worked with Donati, who has a ton pf enemies in the Italian sports federations. He was one of the driving forces behind the blood tranfusion ban in the 80ies.
 
Feb 5, 2021
7
3
35
There's some discussion on running forums about the new/current use of Wavelights and how much of a role they play in pacing a runner to a record time, some think they're another form of cheating, some think they aren't all that helpful and are merely an amusing lightshow for the spectators. I don't know yet for sure, but with the Wavelights, the bouncy shoes, and PEDs records were bound to be broken. Nothing shocks or surprises me in the world of athletics anymore.
What are wavelights? I tried looking it up but cant find any info on it.
 
It’s like the red dot you shine on the floor with a laser for your cat to chase, except for T&F it zips around the track inside Lane 1, moving at the WR pace. So you can see (on TV) and in stands whether a runner is ahead of behind WR pace at any moment.
 
Reactions: Intra45
What I find more intriguing than who cheated/what is cheating and who didn't cheat/what isn't cheating is how athletes of past years would compare to today's athletes if they had the kind of track surfaces, starting blocks, spikes, timing systems and wave lights. Take Jesse Owens world record of 10.2 in the 100 metres of 1936, and compare it to Usain Bolt at 9.58. 62/100 of a second is a lot of ground to make up, but Owens was good - really good and there is no question in my mind he would have easily gone under 10. The question is by how much to challenge Bolt's record.

It is sort of like speculating if LA would have won the TDF without doping, assuming no one else doped. I have had countless arguments that he would not, but there are equally a large number who say he would have. It is a real shame there is not a metric by which these athletes can be compared (or is there?).

But this debate is a lot more interesting than the did he or didn't he, that dominates every doping article in the Clinic.
 
Feb 5, 2021
7
3
35
It’s like the red dot you shine on the floor with a laser for your cat to chase, except for T&F it zips around the track inside Lane 1, moving at the WR pace. So you can see (on TV) and in stands whether a runner is ahead of behind WR pace at any moment.
I see thanks for explaining
 
He said to local TV that he doesn't believe that he'll be allowed to compete at the Olympics.
The guy now has a wife and a child, he said that he mainly wanted to prove that it wasn't his fault this time.
I guess he was an easy target and they mainly pucked him because he worked with Donati, who has a ton pf enemies in the Italian sports federations. He was one of the driving forces behind the blood tranfusion ban in the 80ies.

and


I still don't know what to think of it all
 
I just can't imagine how good the stuff FGJ was on when she did 10.49 30+ years ago.
Good dope + illegal wind = 10.49s.

Here's an excerpt from an article I read yesterday:

On July 16, 1988 Florence Griffith-Joyner ran 10.49 in the 100-meters at the United States Olympic Trials. In a quarterfinal heat, she slashed almost three tenths of a second off the old world record of 10.76. More startling was the wind reading, which read 0.0 for the race despite the presence of windy and gusty conditions that afternoon at Michael A. Carroll Track and Soccer Stadium in Indianapolis. The time defied logic. 10.49 and 0.0 were both greeted with equal parts shock and skepticism.

And it wasn’t just Griffith-Joyner who ran fast that afternoon. Her heat and the next heat (which also had a wind reading of 0.0) were littered with personal and lifetime bests. The other wind readings from that day, including the triple jump, which was taking place concurrently, all suggested that the race had an aiding wind in excess of the legal limit of 2.0 meters per second. Omega, the timing company for the meet, maintained that the wind reading was correct. The Athletics Congress (TAC) the sport’s national governing body at the time, accepted the mark. The international federation, the IAAF, followed suit and 10.49 was ratified as the world record in the women’s 100.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS