Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stember's comments

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stember's comments

    We already know what Gabe stands for...and now we know about Stember. Gutsy stuff. Way to go!

    http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercuryn ... 103265.htm

  • #2
    Re: Stember's comments

    Too bad that such a large part of sports now are revolving around cheating athletes. It's hard to explain to my students and athletes WHY top athletes think it is OK to CHEAT! Sad that I am cheering for the scientist to keep up with the cheaters! Punishment should be severe and cheating athletes should be ashamed! THANK YOU TO THE TRUE ROLE MODELS

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Stember's comments

      Gutsy? I understand that he would have questions about Lagat, since he did produce a positive A sample (although the A results should never have been released), but to paint the Kenyans with such a broad brush is insulting and simply wrong, IMHO.

      This morning I spoke with an agent, one who manages many top Kenyans, and he was upset with Stember's remarks. To paraphrase, he told me, "Why doesn't Stember go to Kenya and train with these guys and see just how clean they are."

      But he wouldn't even need to do that. Stember was at Stanford when many of the world's top Kenyans trained in Palo Alto for a few months each spring. I would doubt he would accuse any of those athletes, including Ngeny, Kipkosgei, et. al., of being doped. If he has any proof, he should come forth with it. Otherwise, he should save his energy in order to train for to hit the Olymipc A standard.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Stember's comments

        >Gutsy? I understand that he would have questions about Lagat, since he did
        >produce a positive A sample (although the A results should never have been
        >released), but to paint the Kenyans with such a broad brush is insulting and
        >simply wrong, IMHO.

        agreed, he shouldn't paint the kenyans with such a broad brush. still, the questions he has about legat were raised by pretty much everyone in the running community; when the guy goes from 3:39 to 3:31 overnight (first year out of college). i'm not accusing him as i have absolutely no evidence... still, those types of progressions will catch peoples' attention. here's a guy who got spanked by sulli for his entire college career, and then overnight makes sulli his bitch.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Stember's comments

          As DL said, is "gutsy" really the right response?
          Again, I too agree that Stember has the right to question the system and I too agree that dopers need to be caught,but this doesn't justify him personally attacking or pointing the finger at a particular athlete (one who also just happens to have proven his innocence via the B sample).

          If anything, it shows that he's not man enough to critically look at himself and deal with the fact that it is HIS fault (and maybe his coach's?) that he hasn't made the next level.
          Of course, there will be some athletes who are doping and will come ahead of him in this or that race, but don't tell me that all the guys he's up against on the European circuit and in the OG, WC and WIC final are doped. This is pure fantasy and one hell of an excuse. Catch all the dopers and you will see that Stember will still never win a medal at a major championship.

          Gutsy? More like chicken shit.

          I wish him the best for his career but if he starts off this way he'll never go anywhere.

          One more thing: What's up with him saying something about Lagat should have known what he was taking? What the f--- is he talking about?! Lagat never said that he was taking EPO but didn't know what it was. I think Stember is confusing Lagat with someone else. Another dumb move.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Stember's comments

            I don't mean to come off as Lagat's lawyer. But let's not distort the facts. His improvement is perhaps not as dramatic as one might think. Remember he ran a fast 1500 in Europe the summer before his final season at Wazzu (he graduated in '99):

            1997  3:41.19
            1998  3:34.48
            1999  3:30.56
            2000  3:28.51
            2001  3:26.34

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Stember's comments

              Its seems kind of funny that a runner who has never made either a world championship or olympic final feels a need to criticize the world's best 1500meter runner.

              I think stember would be wise to concentrate on running a 3:35 before he shoots his mouth off.

              Hey, look I can edit my own message.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Stember's comments

                Stember can have his views on individual Kenyans, but in general, the number of Kenyans using drug assistance would be counted by a single hand.

                I don't believe it's a systematic kenyan policy to cheat.

                However Legat came to be positive, might be due to having encountered a person who provied the opportunity to cheat. SINCE I HAVE NO DETAILS, this is SOLELY my speculation.

                As to Stember being disgruntled by those who cheat, who isn't DISGRUNTLED.

                I'd like to have seen the interview between the writer and Stember to hear the sequence of questions and answers, and HOW the article used the STEMBERS comments...

                The interesting piece of the article was NOT that Stember wasn't working TOO hard...but perhaps NOT as SMARTLY as possible.

                The Coe emphasis on quality is the model I think best....
                ....and that's where too many Americans miss in their training...

                Krummenacker adheres to this quality mantra too.

                And I believe that's the proper approach for many of our young milers.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Stember's comments

                  I like Stember, always have, but he should remember the old saying, along the lines of:

                  "The mouth's for talkin', the legs are for runnin' and walkin'. ."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Stember's comments

                    Stember should critize and attack someone like Mike Inge of Kent State. Poor guy works his best from high school to college and drops his PR from 1.54,7 to 1.47.9 in one season. Cheat? No way.

                    Just hard work, good coaching, commitment and a self-challenge to be his best.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Stember's comments

                      >Its seems kind of funny that a runner who has never made either a world
                      >championship or olympic final feels a need to criticize the world's best
                      >1500meter runner.

                      I think stember would be wise to concentrate on running a
                      >3:35 before he shoots his mouth off.

                      Aye, reeks strongly of sour grapes.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Stember's comments

                        >Stember should critize and attack someone like Mike Inge of Kent State. Poor
                        >guy works his best from high school to college and drops his PR from 1.54,7 to
                        >1.47.9 in one season. Cheat? No way.

                        Just hard work, good coaching,
                        >commitment and a self-challenge to be his best.

                        1:54 to 1:48 is not the same as 3:41 to 3:30 in two years. now look, it'd be one thing if he ran 3:48 the year before, but he didn't. he'd been running in the low 3:40's for a few years. then all of a sudden, out of the clear blue he's running low-mid 3:30's? accusations aside, please, can somebody at least admit that this is a massive progression?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Stember's comments

                          1:54 to 1:48 is
                          >not the same as 3:41 to 3:30 in two years. now look, it'd be one thing if he
                          >ran 3:48 the year before, but he didn't. he'd been running in the low 3:40's
                          >for a few years. then all of a sudden, out of the clear blue he's running
                          >low-mid 3:30's? accusations aside, please, can somebody at least admit that
                          >this is a massive progression?

                          Whoa! What Dan didn't show with his Lagat progression was that Lagat ran 3:37.7 at altitude in 1996. Factor that in, and you see that his '97 season is a regression, and the '98 and '99 seasons move into the realm of realistic progress.

                          1996 3:37.7A
                          1997  3:41.19
                          1998  3:34.48
                          1999  3:30.56
                          2000  3:28.51
                          2001  3:26.34

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Stember's comments

                            Hasn't every era in the history of the sport had competitors in most events that suddenly improve to world class level? Maybe one of the historical guru's on the board could address this question better than I could.
                            My point is that just because Lagat was able to improve his time dramatically in a short period of time one cannot assume drugs were involved. I would bet that kind of improvement has been happening since before drugs were available.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Stember's comments

                              Of COURSE nearly all great athletes have "breakthroughs" of one kind or another. Dave Johnson's statistics above are most helpful in disproving this strange notion that Lagat came from nowhere. It seems completely hypocritical to pretend, in hindsight, that all the smart people "knew" he was on drugs all along. That seems false to me.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X