>I apologize for my misdirected frustration.
>However, you cannot uphold the ideals of a
>courtroom when we are bound to a debate with only
>our knowledge of track trivia via a track and
>field forum. At least in a court there are
>accusations and interrogations, you can interview
>witnesses and use physical evidence. Here we
>cannot. Something that is common knowledge to
>some can be hidden from others. I don’t think
>that being found guilty of doping is the only
>criteria for actually being dirty. I think using
>drugs is. And it happens without the public
>knowing about it. Hopefully, with time, the
>technology for catching cheaters will somehow
>catch up with the technology of cheaters and this
>forum will no longer be necessary.
I agree that we can't gather real evidence and really try the facts. What I'm looking for a coherent story that leads us to a supportable suspicion, not even necessarily a conclusion, that drug use is as widespread as is claimed by many in this and other forums. What I was doing by posing my questions was pointing out that the story had to have enough internal logic that it can account for the performance anamolies that I pointed out. These anamolies are broad statistical trends across a large group of individuals, perhaps thousands of elite athletes. Perhaps widespread use is consistent with these anamolies, but I have yet to see a coherent story that explains why. As I've explained in another post, I am highly suspect of the 1993 Chinese women's performances, and I can tell an internally consistent coherent story as to why, having to do with venue, sequence and quantity of performances, national motivations, access to drug-usage expertise, and known simultaneous drug violations in a related sport managed by the same national organization. Not concrete proof, but certainly a story that should get anyone's attention. We need the same type of story from those who believe in widespread usage today before its credible.