I have to agree with marknhj. I am certain each of us have a list of records that are, at the very least, suspect. In some cases, we have documented evidence of athletes, still listed as record holders, to include their drugs and associated dosages. The official stance of the IAAF has been that these records should be allowed to stand, since we have no way of knowing that other competitors in those competitions were not also doing drugs.
Each of us is certainly entitled to opinions. The beauty of a forum such as this one is that we can share them with others in our community. But in the larger scope, there must be protocols of evidence that are more stringent than what we "feel", "think", or "know".
As for taking everything that is printed in the press as factual, we need to remember that they generally just reprint what they are told. There are no Woodwards or Bernsteins out there on this subject. And when we think that the press has the goods on someone, even when they claim to have inside information, we should recall the case of Richard Jewel.
>"Here's the supreme irony: Taking performance enhancers is not actually a
>crime. It's a violation of morals, and of the rules of sport, but it's not
She's right but making a point that the general public doesn't understand. As I understand it (see USC 21:13:I:D:844)- use of performance enhancers, whether controlled substances or not is not illegal. Of course, possession of controlled substances (e.g. HGH, EPO, anabolic steroids, Modafinil) is illegal.
>"I think it's generally accepted that female athletes age-peak earlier than
really?! Merlene Ottey and the Russian distance phenoms don't seem
>to notice. I've never heard of that before.
Statistically speaking, the top women performers are on average younger than the men. Also, one only needs look at the high school lists to really see this phenomenon at work. The girls' lists will be populated with sophs, frosh and even 8th graders, whereas there may be one frosh boy and few sophs on the year end list.
I also remember an article from many years ago that stated that men hit their cardiovascular peak between 27 and 35, while women peak at 16 and maintain until about 35 before declining.
There are too many cultural variables present to ascribe a lack of presence of older women elites to body degradation. There is overwhelming societal pressure on women to put down the fun and games and start a family. Men, however, are encouraged to continue sports well beyond their prime years.
>There are too many cultural variables present to ascribe a lack of presence of
>older women elites to body degradation. There is overwhelming societal pressure
>on women to put down the fun and games and start a family. Men, however, are
>encouraged to continue sports well beyond their prime years.
That's becoming less and less true. And the HS lists don't lie--women gain less with increased age even in HS versus men. That they peak earlier is an obvious conclusion given the lower trajectory of improvement in the teens.
Some folks around here seem to have no problem with some subversions of the judicial process, such as leaking sealed grand jury testimony, while getting worked up about others, such as perjury. Nope, no hypocrisy here, folks, move along . . .