Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Admit it

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Re: Admit it

    Where is this house???? Who lives there????

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Admit it

      >Where is this house???? Who lives there????

      There is such a house and it is climate controlled a was designed to simulate living at high altitude conditions.

      The house was built by Nike, is located in or near Eugene Oregon, and I know that Dan Browne has lived there. However, I do not know how much it cost to build and maintan. The house is mentioned in another publication's feature story on Dan Browne. The issue was published sometime during the last year.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Admit it

        I think he might be talking about the house where the HSI sprinters live but I'm not sure.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Admit it

          There is no such house for HSI... I have personal friends on that team and former teammates from Texas....

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Admit it

            No more warnings. Post you accusations again and I'll bounce you from the board. Haven't read the rules? Read them. Don't want to post by the rules? Then either go somewhere else or I'll ban you. Clear enough?

            Ben

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Admit it

              I have 100)'s of computers at my deposal as you can see.... you have already tried to ban me......but I can't be held down.... you would have to shut down every last computer in Fort Worth Texas to keep me from posting what I want to when I want to....
              BTW... I would have to say that you do a great job Ben....

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Admit it

                Before anyone goes jumping off the deep end claiming that track is dirty through and through, they need to answer the following questions with sound, empirically backed answers:

                - Why have the women's events largely stagnated since the exit of the Eastern European programs in the late 1980s?
                - Why have the men's throwing performances stagnated since both demise of the East European programs and the institution of stricter testing protocols?
                - If one excludes the Chinese women performances, why have only 16 of the top 50 1500 performances occurred since 1989 for women, but 48 of the top 50 for men have occurred since then?
                - Why have the men's distance WRs progressed at a rate comparable to the long-run average trend, and less than comparable jumps in the 1960s?

                Once you can answer these questions with supportable evidence and/or analysis, then you can start making broad generalizations about the state of drug use in the sport. I have yet to see anyone refute any of these points. (But I'm open to valid consistent explanatoins).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Admit it

                  "Once you can
                  >answer these questions with supportable evidence
                  >and/or analysis, then you can start making broad
                  >generalizations about the state of drug use in
                  >the sport."

                  Any analysis of athletic performances and WR progressions over the last 100 years will throw up countless numbers of statistical anomalies. You have taken just a few examples and stated that broad generalizations can be made about drug use in sport if these four points can be answered. You cannot conclude anything about drug use in sport from these points whether they are true or not.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Admit it

                    Interesting -- and scary -- article in November "Outside" magazine: a 48-year-old serious amateur cyclist (he does 100- and 200-milers commonly) took testosterone, steroids, HGH in an experiment to see if they worked -- and boy did they ever work! Gained muscle, hammered harder with less ill efect, recovered quicker -- this stuff definitely works, which I know isn't the dispute, but it does help to see why it is so appealing to athletes desperate to gain an edge. Wish I could provide a link to the article but I'm technically challenged --

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Admit it

                      read this thread we already had on the piece:

                      http://trackandfieldnews.com/tfn/discus ... sage=24574

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Admit it

                        Any
                        >analysis of athletic performances and WR
                        >progressions over the last 100 years will throw
                        >up countless numbers of statistical anomalies.
                        >You have taken just a few examples and stated
                        >that broad generalizations can be made about drug
                        >use in sport if these four points can be
                        >answered. You cannot conclude anything about drug
                        >use in sport from these points whether they are
                        >true or not.

                        My point was that if one wants to claim that a vast majority of elite athletes are using drugs, they need to answer why these other factors have occurred. As we all know, the East European programs relied heavily on drugs to improve performance. It should follow that if current athletes are using drugs as widely, they should be able to at least duplicate, if not better, those performances. The evidence is that they cannot. I have yet to read a compelling explanation of why this has situation is occurring.

                        BTW, there's other anamolies, such as why are only Northern and Eastern African athletes showing substantial performance improvements in the 1990s? Aren't drugs available to everyone?

                        Except in a few specific cases, the accusers make their statements purely on "gut feelings" with absolutely no analytic support. I'm not looking for "smoking guns" of empty syringes. I'm looking for circumstantial evidence. No one can even produce that.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Admit it

                          >why are only Northern and Eastern African
                          athletes showing substantial performance
                          improvements in the 1990s? Aren't drugs
                          available to everyone?<

                          There's this guy Entine, who'll be glad to splain that to you. :-)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Admit it

                            I'll step up and answer the original question. I competed at a fairly high level for a while and hope to again soon and I'd never under any circumstances take a performance enhancing drug. If I took a PED (performance enhancing drug) even if I won I'd feel like a loser but if I didn't and lost than at least I can keep my head held high.

                            But maybe its also because I'm extermely confident / arrogant like most high level athletes and believe that at my best I can be clean and beat everyone else whether they are dirty or not. Some may call it naive but the two most arrogant/self confident people I ever met were the two of the greatest track athletes of all times, Michael Johnson and Carl Lewis.

                            If you don't belive you are the best you lost the race before you ever started and so you might consider a PED and if you do believe you are the best than you believe that you don't need a PED.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Admit it

                              Of course the problem is that some people are in a big hurry to be the best and want to take shortcuts. They 'know' they could be the best -eventually - but that's not good enough.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Admit it

                                Sorry, I appear to have slightly missed your point on that last post. We both agree that most modern day athletes are clean but you say:

                                "As we all know, the East European
                                >programs relied heavily on drugs to improve
                                >performance. It should follow that if current
                                >athletes are using drugs as widely, they should
                                >be able to at least duplicate, if not better,
                                >those performances. The evidence is that they
                                >cannot. I have yet to read a compelling
                                >explanation of why this has situation is
                                >occurring."

                                I don't think that you can use the East European performances of the 70s and 80s to establish the innocence or guilt of todays athletes. It is more complicated then that. Not all athletes using drugs will produce world beating performances for example. Different training methods and social factors play a huge part in determining whether todays generation of athletes can compete on times and distances with the athletes of yesteryear.

                                The success of the African runners in the 90s could be due to athletics in Europe and America losing its athletes to more popular and lucrative sports. As far as I know tell (and obviously I'm no expert) Kenya and Ethiopia are only successful internationally in the sport of track and field.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X