One more....

.. what do you think Donald Trump's 10k time is?

That’s where a new race, the 2015 Run Internacional: The U.S.-Mexico 10K, comes into play. The new event is set for August 8 and aims to serve as a sign of the cities’ reunification. Participants will start in El Paso, then cross a bridge into Juárez before finishing on the borderline at the crest of a neighboring bridge.

I don't get this one:

 

Describing the latest doping allegations leveled against track and field as a "declaration of war," Sebastian Coe rushed to the defense of the IAAF's drug-testing system Tuesday and said it was time to "come out fighting" to protect the reputation of the sport.

 

...The use of that database, however it got into their possession, displayed either breathtaking ignorance or a level of malevolence around a set of readings you can simply cannot extrapolate beyond," Coe said. "The idea that my sport sat there either covering up wrongdoing or just being incompetent could not be wider of the mark."

 

...The ARD and Sunday Times reports were based on analysis of the leaked test results by Australian anti-doping scientists Robin Parisotto and Michael Ashenden. Coe questioned their credentials, saying, "These so-called experts — give me a break."

 

Coe is mad at the experts? I thought this stuff was pretty black & white. So we need new people to take a look at the data. Im sure that can be done. And, if they come to the same conclusion, then what?

 

oh.. and no matter how bad the doping is in track.. its still better than what goes on in major sports.

If only it WERE black and white.  Unfortunately, it is not.  Think about when you get blood work done.  You are given a number for each parameter, and a range.  Not only does the range differ depending upon which analytic facility runs the test (many of them establish the range based on their own historical lab performance), but upon the unique biology of the individual person.  So in order to have conclusive proof of doping, you need to set the bar at a relatively extreme level so that you are outside the range that normal people could be at.  This is a pretty large departure from normal, and therefore gives a normal person a lot of room to manipulate themselves without testing positive.

This is the entire basis for the biological passport system.  It establishes a baseline for each individual.  Most parameters have pretty limited variability over time when you are only looking at one person...and more importantly, limited ability to change them through any accepted (non-doping) intervention (training, diet, etc).  This makes it possible to identify doping with much smaller changes on a per-athlete basis.

Take for example hematocrit.  For years, cycling set the limit at 50 to be able to race...anything over 50 they would not let you race "for safety" -- ie your blood was too thick -- but really it was because it was essentially impossible to get over 50 without doping, so it was a de facto identification of doping.  Well, guess what, all of a sudden pretty much the entire peloton had hematocrits in the 46-49.X range.  They just doped right up to the limit.  Under the biological passport system, for most of them the change needed to get there would have triggered additional, more robust analyses for doping and more frequent testing.

I think what Coe is saying is that they are making conclusions from pre-passport data that cannot be made unless you have the passport for baseline.  From the information published, anyways, this is my read on it.

Pretty good article in Outside.

Finally, there’s an important question about how Seppelt and the Sunday Times framed their stories. In some years, Seppelt says, athletics has had a higher proportion of abnormal blood values than cycling. That was an eye opener. But it matters who you’re talking about when you refer to track and field athletes. Russian middle distance runners and race walkers appear to be among the dirtiest athletes in the world. Though discouraging, that's been an open secret for more than a decade. On the other hand, marathon runners, many western athletes, and 2012 Olympians come out looking okay. And while a large segment of Seppelt’s documentary focused on the availability of EPO in Kenya, only 11 percent of Kenyan samples were suspicious. That number should be lower, but at this point I’m not sure it means there's a crisis.

Well, the question of whether Farah can win anything other than a sit-and-kick race has just been answered...

Pretty good wc so far. 100m final.. incredible. Mo F'ing Farah.. amazing. Ive never seen him that tired at the end of a race. Even in losing and going 2-3-4, Kenya has to be at least a little pleased.

815.. he lost to Dan Huling and four Kenyans. Winner was Kemboi in 811. So, maybe he didn't do that poorly. Just wasn't at his best.

 I heard Jaeger did poorly in the steeple final but haven't gotten details.

I saw the race replay on Universal Sports. He was leading at the bell. But the Kenyans flew past him and he was done. Huling said after the race that there was lots of pushing / shoving. So, he stayed in the back and ran the rail the whole time. He only caught Jager b/c he was going for gold. Huling picked off half the field in the last 800-400m of the race. He was never going to medal.

 

That's not all that slow for a tactical race, sounds like he just got out-kicked.

Fun fact... After running 13:05 today... 2015 is the first time Ben True has NOT PR'd in the 5000m.