football, essendon, and cycling, and cycling and essendon and football.

[blackcat]

ask yourself, do you really just want the plausible deniability and SSDD?

If you say no, I wish there to be no doping and a clean and pure sport. I ask you, have you ever investigated the last decades of professional and olympic sport and PEDs, or do you merely imbibe the WADA motherhood statements holus bolus without questioning? I reckon most just want a scarlet sash on a pituitary, no, pitbull, no, pitard

I enter into evidence from HelmutRoole over at cyclingnews forum

just think about Chief, he of unmatched wisdom's hits and clickthru's and media sales for the HTB AAWDS

You have to stratify the media. You can’t expect a top strata news organization like the New York Times – and it is print journalists who mostly do this work – to give a rat’s ass about someone like, for example, a Tom Danielson. Armstrong: clearly a different beast in terms of coverage since he has celebrity outside of cycling.

(Sidebar: In defense of the media reference Armstrong, you have to balance that coverage in perspective with 9-11, Afghanistan and the Iraq rematch, all going down during this timeframe. Comparatively, an Armstrong doping piece is uninteresting, unimportant and not even on an editor’s radar. Although, there was SI. They probably should’ve looked at it a little closer. )

For something like the Danielson story, that work has to be done by Velonews, Cyclingnews, Pez... In other words, a news organization on the lower rungs of the media strata that cover that specific sport, this case cycling. Problem with this is, those reporters are cozy with the athletes. This is true with sports reporting in general. It’s like that everywhere, every sport. The only way around it is to have a dedicated doping reporter on staff who doesn’t interact with the athletes in any other way. I’ll bet that any reporter covering cycling in North American has at some point sat down for a beer with an athlete whom they were reporting on or had reported on. I’ve done it myself. It probably happens everywhere.

Look, I’m a fan of professional cycling not despite the doping but in large part because of it. The doping makes it real. Not the performances. The performances are unreal. But when an athlete gets caught up in an investigation or pisses hot, that’s when things get real. That’s when all parties involved go into crisis mode, spinning truthiness, marginal gains, special diets and high cadence. People’s livelihoods and reputations hang in the balance. Millions of dollars at stake. And it’s all based on a lie.

High drama. You can’t make this stuff up.

If all the top pro cyclists are doping, why does anyone on this forum still follow pro cycling? I would have thought you would have given up in disgust long ago.

Personally I enjoy the doping aspect of the sport. It makes it more interesting. Call it intangibles.

I wouldn't watch cycling if there weren't doping raids, investigations, cover ups, conspiracies, bribes, six positives from 1999 and, of course, fan boys with inflatable Lance dolls lubed and ready for the Tour.

The investigations. The denials. The comebacks. The tales of redemption. The enemies. The heroes. The corruption. The Elisa Bassos. The coke. The strippers.

..(doesn't this make it more interesting than just the sport alone?)

Of course it does. I'd make this statement over at cyclingforums and people'd get so ****ed off over there. Man, they did not like having the rug pulled out from under them. What's going on behind the curtains is always more interesting.

Vaughters had a couple more years of racing left in his legs but instead departed for the more fiscally fertile and safer grounds behind the scenes. Hell, Livingston, if memory serves me, jumped the small cesspool that is pro cycling and went straight to Wall Street.

Don't get too attached to your idols. They aren't genuine. Armstrong got lucky. Good genes, a good connect and he responded well to the drugs of his generation. Raas, Kuiper, Merckx... the same. Drugs dictated and continue to dictate everything.

What's happening in cycling happens in every sport. There was a guy over at cyclingforums -- I've forgotten his handle but BroDeal likely remembers -- he used to state over and over that cycling is a dirty sport. Not just the doping but everything about it.

He was right. Embrace it. Embrace it or find another sport where the muckety mucks haven't tried to clean it up yet. Some say cleaning up the sport has ruined it, but I'm with Sanitiser on this one. It's only made it mroe interesting.

FFC_RoyBoys jenny61_99 Lance Uppercut Bunk Moreland RussellEbertHandball Chameleon75

 

[Chameleon75]

mark of the year, every week

 

[gavaniacono]

May we all have found supplements in our socks this morning.

 

[Parkerman]

May we all have found supplements in our socks this morning.

Every present I opened said Made in China.

 

[blackcat]

mark of the year, every week

Jeremy Howe <

medusala

 

[Cylon7]

ask yourself, do you really just want the plausible deniability and SSDD?

If you say no, I wish there to be no doping and a clean and pure sport. I ask you, have you ever investigated the last decades of professional and olympic sport and PEDs, or do you merely imbibe the WADA motherhood statements holus bolus without questioning? I reckon most just want a scarlet sash on a pituitary, no, pitbull, no, pitard

I enter into evidence from HelmutRoole over at cyclingnews forum

just think about Chief, he of unmatched wisdom's hits and clickthru's and media sales for the HTB AAWDS

I’m sure there are some hooked on doping dramas, but with respect to AFL how can you be satisfied with a fragmented story?

If WADA are genuine, I’ll expect them to question and give an explanation as to why and who gave Robinson money and a job.

I’ll want them to expose why no one has chased Dank for the damage done.

I’ll expect them to explain exactly why AOD wasn’t pursued.

If they can chase Russia and the IAAF, surely they can expose these minor mysteries.

 

[blackcat]

If they can chase Russia and the IAAF, surely they can expose these minor mysteries.

implicit here is the wish to expose. The intent and objective.

I dont think it is there. Lets say, they can tie a nice ribbon around a case that is acceptable to all parties, lets say Collingwood presented their players like Abraham willing to kill Isaac, but instead of God its WADA and ASADA, and Collingwood present Josh Thomas and Lachie Keefe, and St Kilda fall into step and offer up Ahmed Saad for his Powerade shower post-game.

That is all for the ruse of the succour moms.

Is it a grand conspiracy? No. I think the conspiracy is in the system and the bureaucracy.

It is Paul Hayes' Olympic Edition Cereal Box
http://www.39essex.com/content/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/The-Olympic-Edition-Cereal-Box-2010.pdf

The true sport is on the local suburban ovals and amateurs and country fields. what you are watching is automatons and entertainment and multiple tiers of manipulation that is so far divorced from sport. It is not like the Victoria Park and VFL games of yesteryear where there was a centralised tribe. We have money, and vested interests and business. The boards of the AFL clubs are proof, you will never find a social worker or a teacher on the board will you, it is an insular section of society that seeks the status and networking that a position on a board will avail.

 

[MaddAdam]

WADA Claus you Hird, where's my far king bans?

 

[chelseacarlton]

We win.
We get richè.
We get to mix in circles and get richierè.
Sumfin liken that I sposè.

 

[pablo668]

It would be interesting to know what the next movement in PEDs will be. Surely it's getting to a point where the current crop are almost detectable.

 

[blackcat]

We win.
We get richè.
We get to mix in circles and get richierè.
Sumfin liken that I sposè.

forgot my john wren caveat on vic park. Still best band venue in Mels is The Tote on Wellington and Johnston. evo some of those summertime gigs where you get out into the beer garden for the support acts before the main set. the waxy skunkie olfactory was rich in the sweaty air, my denim jacket smelled the next day like a joint, reminded me of gigs a decade ago before they brought in the tobacco smoking laws, when you would smell the next morning and your pillow would stink of Peter Jackson blue. Always been a Galoises bleu post-coitus man meself...
@mariekes grandad

 

[blackcat]

It would be interesting to know what the next movement in PEDs will be. Surely it's getting to a point where the current crop are almost detectable.

IQ test. The last era were, if you had a GED and could calculate glow time. gutsroy #glowtime

edit: you said detectable. I read it first as undetectable. Are you sure you meant detectable and undetectable? Well, again, there are two parts to this, if there are only a few labs in the world that will test for these peptides, you need to send your samples there. Secondly, this is game theory, the athletes will move on to a new drug when they have been told that these pharmaceuticals are now tested for and you can piss hot. Because no one will be like Lachie Keefe and Josh Thomas and take a PED to match their competition, or, get an edge, and then disqualify themselves by taking the PED. this is a conflict/paradox. They dont take something to DQ themselves. There will be a new product that does the equivalent of what they were doing but without the prospect of getting caught. Saad, Keefe, Thomas, these are the exceptions that proves the rule. The were the village idjits, the scapegoats, in a large part d'Affaire Windy Hilll needs to be sending a few christmas hampers and hams to Saad and Keefe and Thomas, because they are paying a part of the price for the "tough on drugs" exterior the AFL wishes to project in the wake of the bombers...

the peptides are where it is at. No way that Usain Bolt runs 9.5 on steroids and the USSR/GDR doping plan. The peptides get your own pituitary to do all the work for yourself, and picque your own endogenous hormones. No need for the gene doping... yet.

and RussellEbertHandball you wanna tell everyone my "sweetspot" theory on Usain Bolt.

He hit a sweetspot around 7 years back, with his power to weight. Usually power to weight is strictly in other sport disciplines, mebbe a nordic skiing, roadrace cycling for the climbers, p'raps Kenyan and Ethiopian long distance runners... but mostly it is working against gravity. But in the 100 metre dash, when the race is differentiated by the ten thousandths of a second, getting your "weight" out of the blocks requires you to move a static object to a terminal velocity. someone else can do the applied physics on this re: work required to move the object.

 

[blackcat]

WADA Claus you Hird, where's my far king bans?

Lindsay .... ---> Hird .... ---> tent .... ---> inside .... ---> Albert .... ---> Betty Ford .... --->rehab .... ---> greed AFL hq ....---> dissociative fugue
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-in-sport-administration-20151220-gls03q.html
Albert, dont conflate Frank Hardy's Power without Glory please... hi Marieke. MaddAdam

wrt Lindsay Tanner, it reminds me of what Bill Clinton said about Lance Armstrong to his former lawyer who was Armstrong's attorney and go-between negotiating with the Feds when the Feds has a suit all nicely bow-tied and wrapped up for fraud and laundering and racketeering and drugs, they could have put Armstrong away. Fabiani was actually the lawyer, but he was an adviser to Bill in the Whitehouse, and he was dialed down deep in the Democratic party.

Clinton said to Birotte the Fed's attorney in LA, (Los Angeles, coulda been Sacramento I s'pose)... well, someone told Birotte the US attorney, to wrap this up, we dont hang our heroes, and the case went no where. Birotte the US attorney, Fabiani Armstrong's counsel/attorney and ex-Clinton adviser (but high up advice), and Clinton is Clinton, and Armstrong is a pr!ck, but a champion, that Clinton was correct in assessing.
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3x8w9q/i_am_a_former_dea_agent_that_opened_the_case/cy2jk35

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugue_state

Dissociative fugue, formerly fugue state or psychogenic fugue, is a DSM-5 Dissociative Disorder.[1] It is a rare psychiatric disorder characterized by reversible amnesia for personal identity, including the memories,personality, and other identifying characteristics of individuality. The state is usually short-lived (ranging from hours to days), but can last months or longer. Dissociative fugue usually involves unplanned travel or wandering, and is sometimes accompanied by the establishment of a new identity. It is no longer its own classification or diagnosis as it was in the DSM-IV, but now a facet of Dissociative Amnesia according to the DSM-5.​

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

....the peptides are where it is at. No way that Usain Bolt runs 9.5 on steroids and the USSR/GDR doping plan. The peptides get your own pituitary to do all the work for yourself, and picque your own endogenous hormones. No need for the gene doping... yet.

and RussellEbertHandball you wanna tell everyone my "sweetspot" theory on Usain Bolt.

He hit a sweetspot around 7 years back, with his power to weight. Usually power to weight is strictly in other sport disciplines, mebbe a nordic skiing, roadrace cycling for the climbers, p'raps Kenyan and Ethiopian long distance runners... but mostly it is working against gravity. But in the 100 metre dash, when the race is differentiated by the ten thousandths of a second, getting your "weight" out of the blocks requires you to move a static object to a terminal velocity. someone else can do the applied physics on this re: work required to move the object.

2008-09 was his sweet spot when he was in the 84 to 86 kgs weight range. He now is listed at 94 kgs and over the last 3 years he hasnt got anywhere near his best 100m and 200m time, ie since the London Olympics when he first built up to 94 kgs, as his best times are still at when he was in the 84-86kgs.

Carl Lewis was 22 in 1983 when he won the 100/200 double at the 1st IAAF World Championships in Helsinki in 1983. His career ending stats were 191 cms / 81 kgs. Lewis put on a bit of weight between 1983 and the 1987 Rome World Championships maybe 2 kgs, but was basically the same weight from then until the 1996 when he won the Long Jump gold in Atlanta. Lewis pretty much gave up the 200m after he lost to countryman Joe DeLoach at Seoul - his only Olympic silver, and he was 27. So Lewis' height/weight differential was around 110 (191-81) for most of his career. Bolt at the height of 195cms and currently 94kgs was in that 111-109 differential range back in 2008 and 2009.

So I cant see him running at 9.5 or 9.6 in Rio. He might be able to run another time around 9.77 to 9.80 range for the 100m final, and I cant see him breaking 19.60 in the 200m, unless he loses a lot of weight. Lets assume the chemical assistance is equal among finalists in both 100m and 200m, what Bolt will have going for him is the mind games. He will be able to spook his opponents as they know he can lift for the Games and World Champ meets. But if there is someone running regularly in 9.65 to 9.75 range in the lead up to the Games, then barring injury, Bolt's only real weapon is the psychological one to spook that younger opponent. Also Bolt will be 30, so he wont break his records unless he is on some really good stuff!

According to this IAAF profiles found using internet archive he started 2008 at 76kgs but that might have been his 2007 weight for most of the year.
https://web.archive.org/web/2008042...iographies/letter=0/athcode=184599/index.html

At both Beijing in 2008 and the the world championships in Berlin in 2009, he achieved his peak performances ie the final, in the week leading up to his 22nd and 23rd birthday respectively and he was in that 84-86kg weight range. His top 10 times in the 100 and 200 metres are
http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_100ok.htm
9.58 2009 Berlin World Championships
9.63 2012 London Olympics
9.69 2008 Beijing Olympics - his last 10m was 0.90 the previous 4x10m splits were 0.82/0.82/0.82/0.83 so a 9.62 if no showboating was likely
9.72 2008 May - New York City
9.76 2008 May - Kingston Jamaica
9.76 2011 September Brussels after disqualification in 2011 World Champs final
9.76 2012 May - Rome Diamond League meet
9.77 2008 September - Brussels Diamond League meet
9.77 2013 Moscow World Championships
9.79 2012 June Oslo Diamond League meet
9.79 2015 Beijing World Championships

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_200ok.htm
19.19 2009 Berlin World Championships
19.30 2008 Beijing Olympics
19.32 2012 London Olympics
19.40 2012 Daegu World Championships
19.55 2015 Beijing World Championships
19.56 2010 Kingston Jamaica
19.57 2009 Brussels - September Diamond League meet
19.58 2012 Lausanne - August Diamond League meet 2 weeks after London Olympics
19.59 2009 Lausanne - July Diamond League meet month before Berlin World Champs
19.63 2008 Lausanne - September Diamond League meet 2 weeks after Beijing Olympics
19.66 2012 Zurich - August Diamond League meet 3 weeks after London Olympics
19.66 2013 Moscow World Championships
19.67 2008 July Athens Diamond League meet a month before Beijing

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

It would be interesting to know what the next movement in PEDs will be. Surely it's getting to a point where the current crop are almost detectable.

Why would you expect everything to become easily detectable? Have a look at medical science, the knowledge is doubling every 5 years or so, which means in that 5 years we have learned more stuff than we have the last 10,000 years. eg look at the doubling of 8 to 16, 1+2+4+8=15. So if in the last 5 years we learnt a billion new medical science facts, then the 10,000 years before that we learned 999 million medical science facts, and in the next 5 years we will learn 2 billion new medical science facts. That means there is plenty of room for learning about new potential doping drugs and techniques and there isnt any current method of detecting them.

That's why the all encompassing S.0 clause about new and unapproved drugs was inserted in the WADA prohibited list in 2011.

The real big advance in doping will be genetic manipulation which will probably be completely undetectable, so probably the equivalent of the current biological passport for blood samples will be needed for genetics, which will have to be introduced and maybe kids as young as 14 have to have a genetic screening and you can only play professional sport if you have a genetic passport regularly kept and updated since you are 14, or maybe even younger. No genetic passport no professional career might be the future model.

 

[blackcat]

2008-09 was his sweet spot when he was in the 84 to 86 kgs weight range. He now is listed at 94 kgs and over the last 3 years he hasnt got anywhere near his best 100m and 200m time, ie since the London Olympics when he first built up to 94 kgs, as his best times are still at when he was in the 84-86kgs.

Carl Lewis was 22 in 1983 when he won the 100/200 double at the 1st IAAF World Championships in Helsinki in 1983. His career ending stats were 191 cms / 81 kgs. Lewis put on a bit of weight between 1983 and the 1987 Rome World Championships maybe 2 kgs, but was basically the same weight from then until the 1996 when he won the Long Jump gold in Atlanta. Lewis pretty much gave up the 200m after he lost to countryman Joe DeLoach at Seoul - his only Olympic silver, and he was 27. So Lewis' height/weight differential was around 110 (191-81) for most of his career. Bolt at the height of 195cms and currently 94kgs was in that 111-109 differential range back in 2008 and 2009.

So I cant see him running at 9.5 or 9.6 in Rio. He might be able to run another time around 9.77 to 9.80 range for the 100m final, and I cant see him breaking 19.60 in the 200m, unless he loses a lot of weight. Lets assume the chemical assistance is equal among finalists in both 100m and 200m, what Bolt will have going for him is the mind games. He will be able to spook his opponents as they know he can lift for the Games and World Champ meets. But if there is someone running regularly in 9.65 to 9.75 range in the lead up to the Games, then barring injury, Bolt's only real weapon is the psychological one to spook that younger opponent. Also Bolt will be 30, so he wont break his records unless he is on some really good stuff!

According to this IAAF profiles found using internet archive he started 2008 at 76kgs but that might have been his 2007 weight for most of the year.
https://web.archive.org/web/2008042...iographies/letter=0/athcode=184599/index.html

At both London in 2008 and the the world championships in Berlin in 2009, he achieved his peak performances ie the final, in the week leading up to his 22nd and 23rd birthday respectively and he was in that 84-86kg weight range. His top 10 times in the 100 and 200 metres are
http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_100ok.htm
9.58 2009 Berlin World Championships
9.63 2012 London Olympics
9.69 2008 Beijing Olympics - his last 10m was 0.90 the previous 4x10m splits were 0.82/0.82/0.82/0.83 so a 9.62 if no showboating was likely
9.72 2008 May - New York City
9.76 2008 May - Kingston Jamaica
9.76 2011 September Brussels after disqualification in 2011 World Champs final
9.76 2012 May - Rome Diamond League meet
9.77 2008 September - Brussels Diamond League meet
9.77 2013 Moscow World Championships
9.79 2012 June Oslo Diamond League meet
9.79 2015 Beijing World Championships

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_200ok.htm
19.19 2009 Berlin World Championships
19.30 2008 Beijing Olympics
19.32 2012 London Olympics
19.40 2012 Daegu World Championships
19.55 2015 Beijing World Championships
19.56 2010 Kingston Jamaica
19.57 2009 Brussels - September Diamond League meet
19.58 2012 Lausanne - August Diamond League meet 2 weeks after London Olympics
19.59 2009 Lausanne - July Diamond League meet month before Berlin World Champs
19.63 2008 Lausanne - September Diamond League meet 2 weeks after Beijing Olympics
19.66 2012 Zurich - August Diamond League meet 3 weeks after London Olympics
19.66 2013 Moscow World Championships
19.67 2008 July Athens Diamond League meet a month before Beijing

I forgot to add, that the sweetspot is ephemeral, temporal, you cannot maintain the 86-88kg sweetspot doing all the androgens, and the training in the weightroom and the olympic lifts and other weightroom movements, on your diet of PEDs and the hormones, there is no way you can maintain that low bodyweight, unless you are on a caloric deficit diet, but then the caloric deficit diet hampers you ability to train at 100% and hit your fastest terminal velocities and explosive efforts out of the blocks...

but I dont think the coaches contemplate this, or have advanced their scientific research with this in mind. There is very little scientific research regarding performance and PEDs, and this would be implicit, or underpinning any study with my above theory in mind.

Also, this "hypothetical sweetspot" would be unique to each and every athlete, some athletes would be better carrying the extra kg, cos pro rata, they could add enough typeII muscle fibres, whilst maintaining the ATP for the speed endurance over 9 seconds... (talking sprinting and the "power" events here, but similarly it would be on the inverse for the endurance athletes and weightloss/weightgain)...

 

[blackcat]

Why would you expect everything to become easily detectable? Have a look at medical science, the knowledge is doubling every 5 years or so, which means in that 5 years we have learned more stuff than we have the last 10,000 years. eg look at the doubling of 8 to 16, 1+2+4+8=15. So if in the last 5 years we learnt a billion new medical science facts, then the 10,000 years before that we learned 999 million medical science facts, and in the next 5 years we will learn 2 billion new medical science facts. That means there is plenty of room for learning about new potential doping drugs and techniques and there isnt any current method of detecting them.

That's why the all encompassing S.0 clause about new and unapproved drugs was inserted in the WADA prohibited list in 2011.

The real big advance in doping will be genetic manipulation which will probably be completely undetectable, so probably the equivalent of the current biological passport for blood samples will be needed for genetics, which will have to be introduced and maybe kids as young as 14 have to have a genetic screening and you can only play professional sport if you have a genetic passport regularly kept and updated since you are 14, or maybe even younger. No genetic passport no professional career might be the future model.

I think even with gene doping, I dont think you can ever recreate a specimen in the lab like the androgen Bolt of Beijing. Because even in the hypothetical lab, I don't think you can dial in each and every variable for the athlete Bolt.

I dont think the human species can trump Bolt in Beijing. evolution has been a process of many tens of thousands of years, and look at the Dutch and the Americans, getting smaller, yet heavier, because the advanced economy West socio demographic where the economic life dictates the nutrition and lifestyle of the populace, put the evolution of the species into reverse. *** this sort of contradicts my thesis, my position was, in the latter half of the C20, the West got as close as possibly it could, to exhausting and reaching the latent evolution. The biochemistry/genes had evolved over the thousands, the millennia, it only required the nutrition. Just like the current North America diet put this into reverse (the fulfilling of the species evolution* that was the latent body) *again, I am mixing the definition, but only idiots will not unnerstan the point I am making.

I dont think you can improve the Bolt specimen in a lab with genes and manipulation and gene-doping. Unless, you could arbitrarily hold bolt at 86kg, on a caloric equilibrium that did not impinge on his training, and his training was still accessible for him to improve his explosivity out of the blocks, and the terminal velocity.

The lipotropic peptides that switch on you metabolism to "go-fast particle accelerator" may have been a solution. If gene doping could handcuff Bolt to the sweetspot weight, then I will give you that RussellEbertHandball then maybe you could get a few extra hundredths of a second out of Bolt. lipotropic peptides > clen. someone shoulda told Lachie and Josh.

Russ I reckon the advances will be with shoes and the track. And I appreciate, that we are also speaking p'raps one thounsandths for the shoes, and mebbe a few one hundredths for the track, because, the track and shoes have already exhausted significant advances... diminishing marginal returns all that jazz. most of the returns have been exhausted, now meager/marginal...

clen cutting coke lol good one guyz. great for the laffs.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Russ I reckon the advances will be with shoes and the track. And I appreciate, that we are also speaking p'raps one thounsandths for the shoes, and mebbe a few one hundredths for the track, because, the track and shoes have already exhausted significant advances... diminishing marginal returns all that jazz. most of the returns have been exhausted, now meager/marginal...

clen cutting coke lol good one guyz. great for the laffs.

The shoes and the track improvements have been an important factor since ex IAAF boss Primo Nebiolo took over the IAAF in 1981 until his death in 1999 of a heart attack. He was about 75. Nebiolo was the one who professionalized athletics, there was both legitimate and dodgy stuff happen in his 18 year reign, working with Samaranch at the IOC and with former Adidas boss Horst Dassler for about 6 years until Dassler died in 1987. . Dassler was considered the king of sports marketing in the 1970's and 1980's. So the professionalization of athletics via setting up their first world championship in 1983 at Helsinki and then ramping up the quality of Grand Prix meets ( now Diamond League) across Europe saw the massive improvement in quality of tracks as well as monies spent on research, the continuous checking of their correct measurements at the various tracks, improvement of facilities like warm up tracks and their facilities, and then when Dassler died in 1987 the IAAF and Nebiolo felt confident enough to court Nike, Reebok and others as well as Puma who Dassler maintained the fierce rivarly from the time of the famous split between the German brothers back in 1948.

So you are right about the shoes and track and equipment being important in the continuous diminishing marginal improvements. I think genetic manipulation has the potential to be as big an enhancer as chemical substances like steroids, testosterone, EPO and HGH. The troubles is that it will probably be 20 years before we find out, because it will all be done in secret, and those doctors, medical professionals, support staff and athletes who get involved and have half a brain, will go for the Ferrari post EPO drug tests method when he went for micro dosing for continuous marginal improvement. Anyone stupid enough to go for big bang type improvements will get found out very quickly.

 

[blackcat]

The shoes and the track improvements have been an important factor since ex IAAF boss Primo Nebiolo took over the IAAF in 1981 until his death in 1999 of a heart attack. He was about 75. Nebiolo was the one who professionalized athletics, there was both legitimate and dodgy stuff happen in his 18 year reign, working with Samaranch at the IOC and with former Adidas boss Horst Dassler for about 6 years until Dassler died in 1987. . Dassler was considered the king of sports marketing in the 1970's and 1980's. So the professionalization of athletics via setting up their first world championship in 1983 at Helsinki and then ramping up the quality of Grand Prix meets ( now Diamond League) across Europe saw the massive improvement in quality of tracks as well as monies spent on research, the continuous checking of their correct measurements at the various tracks, improvement of facilities like warm up tracks and their facilities, and then when Dassler died in 1987 the IAAF and Nebiolo felt confident enough to court Nike, Reebok and others as well as Puma who Dassler maintained the fierce rivarly from the time of the famous split between the German brothers back in 1948.

So you are right about the shoes and track and equipment being important in the continuous diminishing marginal improvements. I think genetic manipulation has the potential to be as big an enhancer as chemical substances like steroids, testosterone, EPO and HGH. The troubles is that it will probably be 20 years before we find out, because it will all be done in secret, and those doctors, medical professionals, support staff and athletes who get involved and have half a brain, will go for the Ferrari post EPO drug tests method when he went for micro dosing for continuous marginal improvement. Anyone stupid enough to go for big bang type improvements will get found out very quickly.

you will need the gene doping to start in the womb tho, you will need a 6'5" athlete with the levers so they only take the 38 strides or whatever over 100 metres. Each extra stide is a cost. *we are talking the hypothtical perfect stride pattern, because the other sprinter Blake probably takes about 6 extra strides but is only a few tenths slower in the last few seasons... because ofcourse they can get the faster rotation/revolution on those shorter levers

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

you will need the gene doping to start in the womb tho, you will need a 6'5" athlete with the levers so they only take the 38 strides or whatever over 100 metres. Each extra stide is a cost. *we are talking the hypothtical perfect stride pattern, because the other sprinter Blake probably takes about 6 extra strides but is only a few tenths slower in the last few seasons... because ofcourse they can get the faster rotation/revolution on those shorter levers

Parisotto has talked about gene manipulation rather than inserting or removing genes at birth - receptors and the like. Not my area of expertise or even a decent level of knowledge but that invention by Aussie CSIRO scientists in the late 1980's called Gene Shears was all about manipulating genetic structure rather than completely changing it - ie cutting out parts of gene sequence that causes problems. Then a decade later another team of CSIRO scientists discovered Gene Silencing which "turns off" the effect of the gene rather than taking it right out of the genome. As I said, I dont know a lot about it, but a few medical professionals Ive listen to/read have talked about manipulating genes for sporting performance.

 

[pablo668]

You guys are going to have to excuse me a tad. I don't have anything like the knowledge necessary to ask what I'm really thinking.

The way things are going it looks like TB4 at least can be detected. How easy that is to do and how widespread the process.....I don't know, but I'd expect it to get more wide spread over time.
In the 80's it was steroids, not sure what came in between ...EPO? and now the ped-du-jure seems to be peptides, so I was wondering what would come next? Seems RusselEbertHandball answered that for me.

The way I see it, the situation is kind of analagous to code breaking in WWII, people making the codes trying to stay a step ahead of the code breakers. Likewise with the traffic of illegal drugs, the organizations trafficking and selling are always trying to find ways and means of staying a step or two in front of law enforcement.

 

[Chief]

Is the real question: Who does doping hurt?

Not the sponsor. They get more and more records broken - great TV.

Not the viewer: They get the same.

Not Oscar Pistorius and his ilk: They are rich enough to afford the drugs and treatments.

The working-to-middle-class competitor? Our sense of fairness and adventure doesn't want these guys missing out. TV loves the rags to riches story. We love the aspirational idea of work ethic.

But the snobs within think the poor kid will just blow it on European cars for his parents and partying with his yob mates.

 

[blackcat]

The working-to-middle-class competitor? Our sense of fairness and adventure doesn't want these guys missing out. TV loves the rags to riches story. We love the aspirational idea of work ethic.

But the snobs within think the poor kid will just blow it on European cars for his parents and partying with his yob mates.

nah, the PEDs create the barrier to entry. But you still have the freedom at some point where you can enter. You dont have to take the PEDs, you can be a regular Joe, nothing wrong with that.

They can still play their sport, but not on the public stage, and this is some flawed reality and external locus of control. You are not your self-worth with how you perform in an AFL game in the AFL leagueLeague*.

Chief, he of unmatched wisdom, your sense of fairness and adventure is some childhood lore that holds no validity in the adult realworld.

If it is not going to be you who buys the cars, it will be someone else who buys the cars and gets the new car smell in the showroom and loses 20% value on exiting the showroom with the new keys. It is not footballers who buy these cars. Well some do... And Australia is not the NAmercan pro team sport leagues, and look how much money is washing around the sport industry there. trillion. The only thing I resent, is the lack of imagination from AFL House when they seek to imbibe holus bolus from the NFL.

what did Joe Montana say about cheating?
if you ain't cheatin' you ain't trying'.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...patriots-if-you-aint-cheating-you-aint-trying

 

[Chief]

nah, the PEDs create the barrier to entry. But you still have the freedom at some point where you can enter. You dont have to take the PEDs, you can be a regular Joe, nothing wrong with that.

They can still play their sport, but not on the public stage, and this is some flawed reality and external locus of control. You are not your self-worth with how you perform in an AFL game in the AFL leagueLeague*.

Chief, he of unmatched wisdom, your sense of fairness and adventure is some childhood lore that holds no validity in the adult realworld.

If it is not going to be you who buys the cars, it will be someone else who buys the cars and gets the new car smell in the showroom and loses 20% value on exiting the showrood with the new keys. It is not footballers who buy these cars. Well some do... And Australia is not the NAmercan pro team sport leagues, and look how much money is washing around the sport industry there. trillion. The only thing I resent, is the lack of imagination from AFL House when they seek toimbibe holus bolus from the NFL.

what did Joe Montana say about cheating?
if you ain't cheatin' you ain't trying'.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...patriots-if-you-aint-cheating-you-aint-trying

You only have to see the number of dickheads on BF who truly believe that poor kids can't handle the success so top flight schools should be producing all the AFL talent by divine right.

#obligatoryhashtag

 

[blackcat]

You only have to see the number of dickheads on BF who truly believe that poor kids can't handle the success so top flight schools should be producing all the AFL talent by divine right.

#obligatoryhashtag

its cos all those schools give out "scholarships" and think the parents should be prone or on their knees and thank the school bursary for beneficence and white man burden, the most eggregrious examples are those schools like Scotch cherry picking aboriginal footballers for their own ends and making their parents and old boy network feel "warm and fuzzy" evo hehhehehe. school fees are transactional, entry to the professions, and instrument/instrumental for the TER for the slot in law/medicine/accounting. Oh, a degree of consumption in that algorithm, buying the social set mores and middle class respectability. Like Simon Leys/Pierre Ryckmans says, the only learning is the learning achieved with the intent, you learn when you wish to learn the subject. And high-school knowledge has less relevance to study behaviour and learning how to learn, the meta-learning. like that maxim on giving a man a fish versus giving a man a fishing rod and teaching him to fish. If the private schools seek to graduate little johnny with their result and induction to the professional schooling, they merely seek results before knowledge.