Olympics Doping Thread

[The Hegelian]

Re: Re:

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/olympics-cycling/rio-olympics--2016-track-cyclists-coach-ask-awesome-team-gb-whats-your-secret-20160816-gqtlbh.html

You could also post links to the myriad of articles out there that give reasoned explanation for Team GB's success, rather than frustrated outbursts by the vanquished. The truth is straightforward and simple, if not as lazy as jumping to the PEDs conclusion.

O goody, a reasoned explanation for the simple and straightforward truth. I love a good syllogism, especially one grounded in substantive empirical evidence.

Let's hear it.

 

[bikenrrd]

Number of medals per capita, current standings:

1 Grenada 1 106,825 106,825
2 New Zealand 8 4,595,700 574,462
3 Slovenia 3 2,063,768 687,922
4 Bahrain 2 1,377,237 688,618
5 Denmark 7 5,676,002 810,857
6 Hungary 12 9,844,686 820,390
7 Fiji 1 892,145 892,145
8 Jamaica 3 2,725,941 908,647
9 Lithuania 3 2,910,199 970,066
10 Australia 22 23,781,169 1,080,962

How can New Zealand win so many medals, with such a small population and, therefore, such a small talent pool?
Are New Zealand actually the new GDR?

Edit: source: http://www.medalspercapita.com

 

[Brian Butterfield]

Re: Re:

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/olympics-cycling/rio-olympics--2016-track-cyclists-coach-ask-awesome-team-gb-whats-your-secret-20160816-gqtlbh.html

You could also post links to the myriad of articles out there that give reasoned explanation for Team GB's success, rather than frustrated outbursts by the vanquished. The truth is straightforward and simple, if not as lazy as jumping to the PEDs conclusion.

O goody, a reasoned explanation for the simple and straightforward truth. I love a good syllogism, especially one grounded in substantive empirical evidence.

Let's hear it.

"The simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play"

 

[sniper]

Re:

Number of medals per capita, current standings:

1 Grenada 1 106,825 106,825
2 New Zealand 8 4,595,700 574,462
3 Slovenia 3 2,063,768 687,922
4 Bahrain 2 1,377,237 688,618
5 Denmark 7 5,676,002 810,857
6 Hungary 12 9,844,686 820,390
7 Fiji 1 892,145 892,145
8 Jamaica 3 2,725,941 908,647
9 Lithuania 3 2,910,199 970,066
10 Australia 22 23,781,169 1,080,962

How can New Zealand win so many medals, with such a small population and, therefore, such a small talent pool?
Are New Zealand actually the new GDR?

Edit: source: http://www.medalspercapita.com

Good stats. For the small countries there is obviously a larger element of chance involved.
More interesting is UK there with a staggering 14th place. Easily first among the big countries.
As I said earlier, UK are the dopers of the moment. Big style.
As others have said, gold medals replacing education. UK politics in a nutshell.

 

[WillemS]

Re: Re:

I don't know if this has been asked before, but I'd find it very interesting to hear which sports at this Olympics people believe are PED-free. Not counting beta-blockers or anything purely designed to calm the competitors.

The list is depressingly short. Looking at the sports I only see four that I would have confidence in being clean: archery, sailing, shooting, and table tennis (maybe fencing as a fifth).

Why does everyone disregard archery and sailing for the use of PEDs? Both sports require strength and endurance.

This is a video of the training of Dutch sailor Bouwmeester, currently placed first in her class. In the video, she claims to be the "thinnest bodybuilder" and the "strongest and fittest" in her class. A bit later, she comments on the fine balance between strength and body/muscle mass. Seems like a fine opportunity for PEDs to me.

The video may be geo-restricted, so here's a pic of her training:

Now I'm not claiming that she is using PEDs or that the required fitness level can't be acquired by natural means, just that with such a training regime, PEDs might be beneficial. And, I believe that if there were a chance PEDs might help, then people will be tempted to use them. So, I wouldn't easily dismiss sailing.

The same goes for archery. While technique is massively important, probably even the deciding factor, the sport does require both strength and endurance (albeit not cardiovascular but muscular endurance). The margin for error in archery is very, very small, requiring very precise control of the muscles. When muscles tire, that control goes down as the muscle starts to react differently to the same input signals. The best way to avoid that is to have massive muscle endurance, so you're able to shoot the last arrow as if it were your first.

The draw weight of Dutch archer Sjef van den Berg, who finished fourth in this Olympics, is currently listed as 53 pounds (~ 24 kg). As you can see in this video (youtube), he has massive control over his draw and is able to hold it at full draw while still being able to very precisely control the last 0.5 mm of his draw before he shoots. (As soon as his hand touches his face [anchoring], watch the tip of the arrow to see the arrow being drawn back the last 0.5 mm with great precision.)

Again, I'm not claiming that the level of fitness required cannot be reached without PEDs, but given that strength and muscular endurance is involved, I wouldn't be surprised if some archers abuse PEDs to enhance their training. (One was recently caught for clostebol, got suspended for twelve months, although the ruling stated that is was probably unintentional..)

 

[el chava]

Re: Re:

Good stats. For the small countries there is obviously a larger element of chance involved.
More interesting is UK there with a staggering 14th place. Easily first among the big countries.
As I said earlier, UK are the dopers of the moment. Big style.
As others have said, gold medals replacing education. UK politics in a nutshell.

According to that Scandinavia must be the doping center of the world...

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:all-time

 

[Bolder]

It is naive to think that there's a sport in which no advantage can be gained through the use of illegal therapies or drugs, or "off label" use of legal medicines. Someone cited pole vault as one, but surely it favors a high strength to weight ratio -- and how best to build lean muscle mass. Not to mention the recovery advantages that let you train harder and longer.

Even shooters/archers could benefit from any drugs that would block surges of adrenaline etc.

 

[WillemS]

Re:

It is naive to think that there's a sport in which no advantage can be gained through the use of illegal therapies or drugs, or "off label" use of legal medicines. Someone cited pole vault as one, but surely it favors a high strength to weight ratio -- and how best to build lean muscle mass. Not to mention the recovery advantages that let you train harder and longer.

Even shooters/archers could benefit from any drugs that would block surges of adrenaline etc.

I agree, but in Archers, muscle endurance day-after-day is very important, too, so I wouldn't rule out mild anabolic steroids or SARMs for recovery there. Drawing a competition strength bow isn't as easy as people think it is. My measured draw weight is ~37 pounds, so about a third less than Sjef van den Berg's, and my muscles a sore after a day of shooting.

A lot of archers start losing their form and technique towards the end of a match due to muscle fatigue, even those just below the top level, as they usually have a day job and no time to train as much as the elite archers. I wouldn't be surprised if some turn to PEDs to make it to the top level, just like some (elite) amateur cyclists turn to doping to achieve maximum fitness with fewer training hours.

 

[Brullnux]

Diving?

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re:

It is naive to think that there's a sport in which no advantage can be gained through the use of illegal therapies or drugs, or "off label" use of legal medicines. Someone cited pole vault as one, but surely it favors a high strength to weight ratio -- and how best to build lean muscle mass. Not to mention the recovery advantages that let you train harder and longer.

Even shooters/archers could benefit from any drugs that would block surges of adrenaline etc.

you're misinterpreting, it's not that there's no advantage, it's that it's not the determinant factor, the technique is. They probably use drugs, like every other sport, even if only by the placebo effect, but it's not going to make you jump higher than 6m: you either have a superior technique, or you just can't do it. That makes the advantage minimal, even irrelevant in a contest context. Therefore, it is silly, foolish and irresponsible to be suspicious of a pole vaulter based on a result. You go look for a different explanation: you check that the boy is a 22 year old former junior world champion, trained by Vitaly Petrov (who has trained the pole vaulters with the best technique in history) and you got your answer.

You don't accuse Bubka or Isinbayeva of being dopers, the same way you don't accuse Jan Zelezny of the same. It's obvious to all that their domination is due to a superior technique than all the others.

 

[Catwhoorg]

These two images popped up on the live text feed.

Besides showing the field events haven't shifted in the modern era, the swings of dominance can be used to tell a narrative of the "cold war doping era"

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
According to that Scandinavia must be the doping center of the world...

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:all-time

Fair point.
Scandinavian countries definitely deserve much more attention than they are getting.
Blood doping for athletic purposes was practically invented there.
My 2 cents is that doping is both rampant AND highly sophisticated in those countries.
Note that Scandinavia also host a high number of more or less renowned 'anti'doping specialists. Ekblom, Damsgaard, etc.

 

[del1962]

Re: Re:

It is naive to think that there's a sport in which no advantage can be gained through the use of illegal therapies or drugs, or "off label" use of legal medicines. Someone cited pole vault as one, but surely it favors a high strength to weight ratio -- and how best to build lean muscle mass. Not to mention the recovery advantages that let you train harder and longer.

Even shooters/archers could benefit from any drugs that would block surges of adrenaline etc.

you're misinterpreting, it's not that there's no advantage, it's that it's not the determinant factor, the technique is. They probably use drugs, like every other sport, even if only by the placebo effect, but it's not going to make you jump higher than 6m: you either have a superior technique, or you just can't do it. That makes the advantage minimal, even irrelevant in a contest context. Therefore, it is silly, foolish and irresponsible to be suspicious of a pole vaulter based on a result. You go look for a different explanation: you check that the boy is a 22 year old former junior world champion, trained by Vitaly Petrov (who has trained the pole vaulters with the best technique in history) and you got your answer.

You don't accuse Bubka or Isinbayeva of being dopers, the same way you don't accuse Jan Zelezny of the same. It's obvious to all that their domination is due to a superior technique than all the others.

Without getting into whether individuals are or where doping or not, it surprises me that you don't understand the strength needed in either of these disciplines.

I remember in the 1970s we had a competition called superstars on TV and the British Pole Vaulter Brian Hooper came out on top, this included amazing upper body strength for the most dips in a minute, plus most squats in a miniute.

What you are basically saying is that Pole Vaulters and Javelin throwers don't need to do any strength training, just technique training.

Technique is also required with strength and to a lesser extent stamina (still important), but I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

What you are basically saying is that Pole Vaulters and Javelin throwers don't need to do any strength training, just technique training.

No, I didn't say that, I have no idea where you took that from, you'd be welcome to quote the part of my post that gave you that idea. What I said is what makes the difference between Pole Vaulters is technique. You can be the strongest man in the world, that wouldn't make you capable of doing a proper jump

Technique is also required with strength and to a lesser extent stamina (still important), but I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.

Technique is what makes the difference. Try to make an effort in reading, please.

 

[del1962]

What you are basically saying is that Pole Vaulters and Javelin throwers don't need to do any strength training, just technique training.

No, I didn't say that, I have no idea where you took that from, you'd be welcome to quote the part of my post that gave you that idea. What I said is what makes the difference between Pole Vaulters is technique. You can be the strongest man in the world, that wouldn't make you capable of doing a proper jump

Technique is also required with strength and to a lesser extent stamina (still important), but I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.

Technique is what makes the difference. Try to make an effort in reading, please.

This is what you said "That makes the advantage minimal, even irrelevant in a contest context.", if we agree that dope can increase strength (as can training) that means that you think that strength is irrelevant in a pole vault contest, so why would a pole vaulter bother with strength training if it is irrelevant.

 

[Lyon]

Once again this belief that somehow technique exists on a different plane than strenght, endurance etc, when it is in fact dependent on both of those (and other) factors.

Bubka was a well known doper. Very well known within 'the village' at the time. Good career move to become embedded within the IOC.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

What you are basically saying is that Pole Vaulters and Javelin throwers don't need to do any strength training, just technique training.

No, I didn't say that, I have no idea where you took that from, you'd be welcome to quote the part of my post that gave you that idea. What I said is what makes the difference between Pole Vaulters is technique. You can be the strongest man in the world, that wouldn't make you capable of doing a proper jump

Technique is also required with strength and to a lesser extent stamina (still important), but I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.

Technique is what makes the difference. Try to make an effort in reading, please.

This is what you said "That makes the advantage minimal, even irrelevant in a contest context.", if we agree that dope can increase strength (as can training) that means that you think that strength is irrelevant in a pole vault contest, so why would a pole vaulter bother with strength training if it is irrelevant.

Is that quote saying pole vaulters don't require strenght? No, what's happening here is that you just lack comprehension skills. Like a Pole Vaulter that doesn't have good technique won't be able to make a proper jump, I'm afraid you won't be able to understand what is being said.

I'm not saying it "doesn't require strenght", I'm saying in the context of the competition what makes the difference is technique: you could dope as much as Froome or a weightlifter, for that matter, it wouldn't make a difference, you couldn't be a top vaulter without a superior technique.

Gary Player concluded that in golf, the advantage to the doper is that they can practice at the range without getting tired. That is where in pole vaulting doping will assist in the fine tuning of technique.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re:

Bubka was a well known doper. Very well known within 'the village' at the time. Good career move to become embedded within the IOC.

That has the appearance of inability to accept superiority. You say nothing except "I heard about it" and "he now belongs to the IOC"

Once again this belief that somehow technique exists on a different plane than strenght, endurance etc, when it is in fact dependent on both of those (and other) factors.

It's not a belief, it's technical knowledge regarding the specific competition. Everytime, everywhere, Pole Vault was determined by the quality of the technique of the athletes in the long run. The guys with the best technique become the legends of the sport and all experts agree. In specific events, luck and mental strenght were the other determinant factors. That's the history of this event. Try to challenge this claim, go on.

 

[Lyon]

Re: Re:

Bubka was a well known doper. Very well known within 'the village' at the time. Good career move to become embedded within the IOC.

That has the appearance of inability to accept superiority. You say nothing except "I heard about it" and "he now belongs to the IOC"

Once again this belief that somehow technique exists on a different plane than strenght, endurance etc, when it is in fact dependent on both of those (and other) factors.

It's not a belief, it's technical knowledge regarding the specific competition. Everytime, everywhere, Pole Vault was determined by the quality of the technique of the athletes in the long run. The guys with the best technique become the legends of the sport and all experts agree. In specific events, luck and mental strenght were the other determinant factors. That's the history of this event. Try to challenge this claim, go on.

And how did the athletes aquire this mythical technique in the first place? How did they manage to retain it once they aquired it? How did they manage to regain it once they lost it?

 

[gooner]

Not doping related but the Michael Conlan fight where he lost on the judges was a disgraceful decision.

He didn't hold back in his interview.

https://twitter.com/alansmith90/status/765564876987195392

Eddie Bolger, the Irish coach, said there are rumours around the village that they medals are already decided.

Then this article was published a couple of weeks ago.

Senior figures within amateur boxing have warned many bouts, including those to decide medals, could be fixed at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro amid widespread concern about corruption and financial malpractice at the sport’s global governing body, the Guardian can reveal.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/01/rio-2016-olympics-boxing-corruption-allegations?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[del1962]

Re: Re:

What you are basically saying is that Pole Vaulters and Javelin throwers don't need to do any strength training, just technique training.

No, I didn't say that, I have no idea where you took that from, you'd be welcome to quote the part of my post that gave you that idea. What I said is what makes the difference between Pole Vaulters is technique. You can be the strongest man in the world, that wouldn't make you capable of doing a proper jump

Technique is also required with strength and to a lesser extent stamina (still important), but I don't think anyone thinks otherwise.

Technique is what makes the difference. Try to make an effort in reading, please.

This is what you said "That makes the advantage minimal, even irrelevant in a contest context.", if we agree that dope can increase strength (as can training) that means that you think that strength is irrelevant in a pole vault contest, so why would a pole vaulter bother with strength training if it is irrelevant.

Is that quote saying pole vaulters don't require strenght? No, what's happening here is that you just lack comprehension skills. Like a Pole Vaulter that doesn't have good technique won't be able to make a proper jump, I'm afraid you won't be able to understand what is being said.

I'm not saying it "doesn't require strenght", I'm saying in the context of the competition what makes the difference is technique: you could dope as much as Froome or a weightlifter, for that matter, it wouldn't make a difference, you couldn't be a top vaulter without a superior technique.

You can have all the technique in the world but if you don't have the power on launch then you are never going to be a great pole vaulter, pole vault is about technique + power output, which is why strength training is important, not sure what this has to do with endurance cyclists with low upper body strength, weight lifters with technique training might do a good pole vault.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

You can have all the technique in the world but if you don't have the power on launch then you are never going to be a great pole vaulter, pole vault is about technique + power output,

That's a very simplistic formula, I don't think you have an idea how things work. Again, technique is what is determinant. Check the history books.

which is why strength training is important, not sure what this has to do with endurance cyclists with low upper body strength, weight lifters with technique training might do a good pole vault.

Ok, I get it, you're not trying to be serious. Forget about it.

 

[Winnats]

Re: Re:

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/olympics-cycling/rio-olympics--2016-track-cyclists-coach-ask-awesome-team-gb-whats-your-secret-20160816-gqtlbh.html

You could also post links to the myriad of articles out there that give reasoned explanation for Team GB's success, rather than frustrated outbursts by the vanquished. The truth is straightforward and simple, if not as lazy as jumping to the PEDs conclusion.

O goody, a reasoned explanation for the simple and straightforward truth. I love a good syllogism, especially one grounded in substantive empirical evidence.

Let's hear it.

Ok I'll try one. No (or little) empirical evidence but a simple thought experiment. Not one that will convince the harcore cognescenti on here for whom the only answer is duplicitous Brits, undetectable PEDS and high level conspiracy but it may help some readers...

Take as a starting point a very large budget entirely devoted to winning at the Olympics, and reviewed each 4 years cycle based on success at the previous Olympics. Hence; do well and your budget is kept the same or increased. I don't think anyone would contend that this isn't the case for BC?

So if you are a manager or coach in this case how might you go about ensuring success at the Olympics? (so that you can keep your budget high and secure your own job). Bear in mind that your financiers don't really care about the competitions in the intervening years.

With the athletes, one thing you might do (I certainly would) is to undercook them in the intervening years. Push them, but not hard enough. Let them off the leash a little, let them have a bit of fun in their lives. This has a number of effects;

- The r + r does them good
- the athletes get well beaten in the world championships. This means that they get to experience significant failure - and failure to live up to expectation. Then you as a coach can show them exactly how much harder they need to work. You can hear the conversation now - "If you don't pull your ******* fingers out you'll get destroyed at Rio."

It also means that your competitors can get complacent - "GB have gone, we beat them every year, Rio will be easy"

For the tech; if you spend four years developing advances, would you release them a bit at a time or would you hold them all back for when they are most needed?

Like I said, just a thought experiment. Occam's razor and all that.

 

[Brullnux]

The thing is, GB not only beat competitors but also smashed ORs and WRs. Nobody went easy against them. To the tech point, advancements in tech are normally noticed by other mechanics either watching or on another team - I haven't heard of any major ones spotted.

 

[iejeecee]

Re: Re:

You can have all the technique in the world but if you don't have the power on launch then you are never going to be a great pole vaulter, pole vault is about technique + power output,

That's a very simplistic formula, I don't think you have an idea how things work. Again, technique is what is determinant. Check the history books.

which is why strength training is important, not sure what this has to do with endurance cyclists with low upper body strength, weight lifters with technique training might do a good pole vault.

Ok, I get it, you're not trying to be serious. Forget about it.

Women's pole vault record: 5.06m (Yelena Isinbayeva)
Men's pole vault record: 6.14m (Renaud Lavillenie)

Major difference between men and women, upper body strength.

Or are you going to argue that men have better technique as women?