Doping In Athletics

Page 104 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
"A sub 2:06:00 time for a marathon (male), may not be possible without the use of performance-enhancing drugs. I recall, reading an article on the internet, which I can no longer source, in which a high-level European male marathoner, with a personal best time in the 2:07's, was under no illusion, although he couldn't prove it, that this is the case. There is no one better qualified, to provide opinions, expressed as facts, than those athletes who are participating at the highest level."

I would venture to say that even a sub 2:10 for a marathon is already in the grey area. The first person to run a sub 2:10 was Derek Clayton of Australia, all the way back in December 1967. He broke the record by almost 3 minutes, which was set just two years prior.

A 2:01:39 (official) marathon is ridiculous. The last 5-10 years has seen a lot of top Kenyan runners and coaches busted for doping. While Kipchoge is very talented, I don't see him running clean for that WR.
 
I would venture to say that even a sub 2:10 for a marathon is already in the grey area. The first person to run a sub 2:10 was Derek Clayton of Australia, all the way back in December 1967. He broke the record by almost 3 minutes, which was set just two years prior.

A 2:01:39 (official) marathon is ridiculous. The last 5-10 years has seen a lot of top Kenyan runners and coaches busted for doping. While Kipchoge is very talented, I don't see him running clean for that WR.
I would venture to say that Derek Clayton breaking 2:10 in 1967 suggests that the best possible time for a marathon clean is significantly faster. I am not saying that is 2:01:39, but come on; one only needs to look at the style and lifestyle of past greats like Clayton and Decastella, and see that it is possible for talented east africans, combining new age professionalism, to run the marathon a great deal faster.
 
One interesting item is that whereas track times improved significantly in the 1990s after the introduction of rHuEPO and were very fast from the mid-1990s until c:a 2005 allegedly slowing only after the introduction of new blood doping tests, there is no similar trend in marathon. In fact, there is no noticeable fast progression in the 1990s, and the improvement seems almost linear without blood doping availability / anti-doping testing having next-to-no effect on the results.

Of course there are many explanatory factors such as that the marathon runners of the 1980s (de Castella, Lopes et al) could've been also the most talented runners of the era whereas marathon wasn't "trendy" in the 1990s and I can't even name that many marathon runners of the decade because the talent was elsewhere.
 
Reactions: Invicituz

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS