Interessante post di Canova da Letsrun

[Zedemel]

Clerk, your post has many questions, and I want to answer to any of them.

Your reasonings about physiology are well known, as part of the "official" physiology. I don't need to read again something I know very well : the fact is that I don't believe in the conclusions, because I have too many REAL data, coming from training of top Champions, contradicting them.

The data I have are REAL. The explanations I try to give are only conjectures, the fact is that, using the "official" conjectures, it's not possible to justify the performances of many athletes connected with their blood data. For this reason, it's clear there is something different from the "official" explanation of physiologist, when we go to examinate training, values and performances of top runners, I repeat, born, living and training in altitude.

I'm not sure my attempts to explain what happens in the body of these athletes with their training arrives to right conclusions : however, official science NEVER tried to investigate this fact, analyzing one clear fact : the effect of training on their physiology.

In ALL the researches of physiologists, including the experts of antidoping, NEVER there is a real interest for the effects of training.

What is TRAINING for these scientists, who are pharmacologists, biologist, biochemicals, but don't know anything about training ? Do you think somebody of them can know the real training of top athletes ? Which is their idea of training when they general speak about "well trained athletes" ?

For having a REAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH, that it's possible to approve in scientific way, we need to detail ANALYTICAL TYPE OF TRAINING, that means :

a) How many sessions per day and per week
b) How much continuity
c) How much total volume
d) How much maximal volume in a single session
e) The speed of every run
f) The intensity of intervals
g) The recovery times between every interval in the same session
h) The frequency of sessions of intensity
i) The general recovery among sessions, connected with the global load of every session
l) The periodization
m) The place of training (not only altitude, but surfaces, profile of the courses, type of tracks, etc...)
n) The organization of their life
o) The training modulation
p) The frequency of competitions

We can still find some other point regarding TRAINING, METHODOLOGY AND IMPROVEMENT OF PERFORMANCES. However, all these points are already enough for demonstrating that, for physiologists interested in doping, THERE IS NO INTEREST AND NO IDEA OF WHAT TRAINING IS AND ABOUT ITS EFFECTS.

After this premise, that is one of the reasons because I can't follow the general idea about the effects of EPO with this very selected kind of runners,
I go to answer your questions.

1) In the world of international athletics, many times there are rumors and smoke about some athletes using drugs, and the most part of times where there is smoke there is fire too. So, we have opinions about who is clean, and who uses some doping (not necesseraly EPO).

For example, during African Championships 2002 in Tunis, my athletes running steeple (Wilson Boit Kipketer and Stephen Cherono) before their warm-up came to me telling that in the dressing room there was a doctor coming from Belgium meeting Brahim Boulami, they went in the WC, and immediately after Wilson and Stephen found a syringe.
Boulami showed a top shape, winning the competition in front of Wilson and Stephen, and after few days bettered the WR in Zurich, with a fantastic "solo". But this record never was accepted, and Boulami was banned, because he had two tests, one with blood the day before the race, and the other with urine after the record, showing he used EPO.
After that race, IAAF changing the rule for the approval of official WR in all endurance events (from 800m to Marathon), asking as condition to take both the samples (blood and urine).

So, we have well clear idea about who is clean, and who isn't.

Always we had suspicions about athletes of the East, continuing to use the systems of the old Soviet Union and East Germany. We Always had doubts about many Moroccans, many Turkies, and also many Spanish for some period.

About managements, I frankly think the best manager don't want their athletes take something illegal, because the management has only to lose. For my knowledge, the best managements have, in their contracts with the top athletes, a rule where it's written that, in case of doping, guilty athletes are thrown out from the management, and have to refund the amount they won during the period between the test and the start of the sanction.

I can say, for example, that athletes as David Rudisha, Asbel Kiprop, Wilson Kipsang, Eliud Kipchoge, Brimin Kipruto, Ezekiel Kemboi, Viviane Cheruiyot, Faith Kipyegon, Mary Keitany, Edna Kiplagat (speaking about Kenyan) are totally clean, such as in Ethiopia Kenenisa Bekele, Haile (during his best period), and athletes that use my training plan from two years only, but I had the opportunity to know well, referred to a period before training with me, such as Tsegaye Kebede, Ayele Abshero, Yenew Alamirew, Tiki Gelana, Aselefech Mergia and other female Marathon runners (Tirfi, Aberu and Shure Demise).

So, I can't say I trust everybody. But of sure I trust the most part of Countries, managers and coaches, because there is still a common denominator in these categories, that is the PASSION for running, not only for having results. Also if the economical stimulus is fundamental, this is not the only motivation, and all the managers I well know (the Italian Federico Rosa and Gianni Demadonna, the Dutch Jos Hermens, Valentijn Throuw and Gerard, the late Zane Branson before, the English Ricky Simms) have a deep passion for athletics, not only connected with the money they can earn.

2) I don't think any top athlete was fully developed in his career, speaking about African runners. It's not a fact of my athletes, or athletes with some other coach. The fact is that in Africa is practically not possible to have all the supports we can have, for example, in Oregon fromNike, or in UK from the Federation and individual choices (the case of Paula Radcliffe).

African runners have something more under point of view of talent and motivation, for part of the seasons, but face situations disturbing a correct application of training : problem of life connected with their families, lack of facilities (especially for physiotherapy), risks of the surfaces, both on the roads and on tracks, medical problems, due to a lot of diseases they frequently have in Africa and not in Europe, specifically typhus and similar, and not optimal organization of free time.

So, in my opinion it's not a problem connected with doping : I say that the best talents, if in theory could be possible to assemble together the "killer instinct" they have also in training, with the professionalism of European or American best runners, the WR could have the opportunity to reach higher levels (f.i., Asbel Kiprop under 3'25", or Geoffrey Kamworor under 58' in HM, or Ayana under 14'10" and probably 29'30" in 5000 and 10000 for women).

Personally, for example, I never was fully satisfied about the WR of my athletes. I put the real limit of Shaheen under 7'50" in steeple, and the WR of 10000 of Bekele well under 26'10" (when he bettered twice the record, in the first occasion was a little sick, in the second was not in top shape).

In any case, I think the further development could not happen using EPO. These athletes were already at a level so high, that only tough training could further develop their aerobic house

How I wrote several times, if I have a car Fiat 500 (normal athlete) I can find the system to add 20 HP with a good manipulation of the engine with a good mechanic (doctor giving EPO), but if I have the Formula One winning WCh, I need 100 top engineers working for one year for improving of, maybe, 2HP (good coach and good training). In this case, there is no more margin to any improvement.

Knowing the effects of hard and proper training in altitude (and for athletes living their with continuity), I'm pretty sure nothing can be added to the results achieved in clean way (honestly, I think in these cases EPO has negative effects more than advantages).

Where blood doping can work, also with athletes belonging to the "class of subjects" we are speaking about, is to cut the time needed for reaching a good aerobic level (maybe 80% of max level), starting from very low level.

This is the case of athletes after a long stop for injury o for different reasons, who want to recover a high level of shape in short time, in order to compete for winning some money after a too long period of rest (frequent situation in Africa, where, also if today we can find more professionalism, normally athletes take a long period of rest after winning good money).

But this is not the case of the best, who are the best because understood the rules of professionalism, having continuity in their training and never resting too long time after top performances.

3) This, instead, is another good point. Yes, I'm sure the "perceived benefit" exists and is important factor in the development of the final performances.
This is nothing else than the "placebo effect" we named many times in several posts.

There is no doubt that athletes of good international level in Kenya (mainly women) used doping. There is also no doubt the most part of them improved their PB. This situation is exactly, in my opinion, a product of the "perceived benefit" : taking doping (90% of case steroids, not EPO) they SUPPOSE possible to train more, so finally they have a jump of quality in their training in both volume and intensity.

The real fact is that they didn't try these volumes and these intensities when clean, thinking it was not possible to recover. So, their improvement is induced by training, not by EPO or steroids, but the level of their training changes because EPO or steroids.

Could these athletes be able to use the same level of volume and intensity if able to approach training with another mentality ?

The results achieved by the top in the world say "YES", simply they were not mentally strong enough for trying.

In all this situation, I'm not surprised when I discovered Kisorio positive, because he showed very fragile mentality approaching the training needed for running full Marathon (while instead was clean when running 10000m and HM). I'm, instead, very surprised by Rita Jeptoo, who was already able in 2006 to run 2:21 in a paced race (winning her first Boston, she ran the last 12.2 km faster than all the first 10 men), because she is the athlete able to train more hard I saw in my life (nothing to do with Mary Keitany and Florence Kiplagat, for example). Her logic evolution was to run also under 2:18 in 2-3 years, if in 2007 she was not restrained in her evolution by a wrong technical choice, moving from the camp in Iten (when was every day with me) to her new house in Mosoriot, with her husband as coach and without Group around. After this, she had a baby in 2009, came back in 2011 with little training, and started again to improve in 2013, when, after many family problems, left the husband concentrating totally in training.

So, for me her improvement has nothing to do with EPO, but I don't understand because she was so stupid to listen to some cheater, losing the jackpot, the face and the possibility to run again Major marathons and Olympics, with concrete possibility to win.

Final thing : give the true importance to the fact that all the athletes of top level taken for EPO or different type of doping (Boulami, Mouhrit, Saidi Sief, Sanchez, Ramzi, the Russian, the fmous Chatal Lombard also if not elite, the first taken for EPO who is the Italian Roberto Barbi, Goumri and the Maroccan marathoners) were athletes born and normally living at sea level, going only occasionally in altitude, and NEVER in high altitude (Ifrane is 1600m, while Iten is 2400 and Addis - Solulta 2600).

My thought is that EPO can give, for the aerobic system, advantages till the altitude of about 1800m (connected with training), no advantage till about 2200m, and NEGATIVE EFFECTS compared with training in altitude between 2200m and 3000m (in higher altitude, I don't think the body can have advantages, but only prioblems since the demand is too high).

But all my hypothesis must be investigated, and till now no scientists had interest, knowledge and possibility to do this kind of research with the top runners in the world.

Read more:http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... z3x4Bst9Bj

[Ericradis]

Molto interessante questo post. Spiega in modo esauriente anche alcune affermazioni sull'inefficacia del doping ematico che sentì fare da Canova e che non mi convincevano.

[chippz]

Interessantissimo! Grazie per la condivisione!

[lucaliffo]

al di là dei contenuti, dovremmo sempre lodare canova:
- parla chiaro
- parla dettagliato
- parla di numeri e esempi pratici
- parla di cose di cui in pochi parlano
- parla con "comuni mortali"
- se qualcuno lo critica non risponde "ma tu quante medaglie hai vinto?" come qualche pallone gonfiato di nostra conoscenza.

[chippz]

-scrive in "inglese" . Scherzo, sfido io a trovarne uno che fa di tutto per esporre il proprio pensiero (senza sminuire quello altrui)!

[Zedemel]

Si esatto, ha fin troppa pazienza a rispondere a certi personaggi sul forum.
è interessante anche la sua teoria, tendo a credergli quando dice che suoi atleti erano puliti perché sostanzialmente ci dormiva insieme. Lui pare dare molto peso al vantaggio di nascere vivere e correre in notevole altura, che forse sviluppa capacità di usare meglio l ossigeno, aldilà di parametri fisiologici che non sembrano così determinanti.

[Zedemel]

Normally I don't reply to statements that are not correct, but in this case I want, again, to explain why we can't have any confidence in what scientists say, about long distance runners and EPO.

The research of Glasgow University was paid by WADA, with the motivation
"to investigate the opinion of the Italian International Coach Renato Canova, who says EPO dosen't work with Kenyan people".

Some point about this fact :

1) I NEVER SAID "Epo doesn't work with Kenyan". I Always said "EPO doesn't work with TOP KENYAN AND ETHIOPIAN RUNNERS, BORN, LIVING AND TRAINING IN ALTITUDE". This is a basic, and very big, difference.

2) In order to verify if my hypothesis could be acceptable, the pool of scientists
selected two Group of boys : one from Scotland (19 runners), and one of Kenyans (15 runners).

3) The runners carried out a test of 3000m before 4 weeks of assumption of
Recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEpo), receiving injections every two day for 4 weeks of 50 IUkg-1 body mass.

4) Blood samples were taken 2 weeks before treatment, during treatment and 4 weeks after treatment

5) VO2 max and 3000m time trial were misured before the administration, at the end of the administration and 4 weeks after the end of the study.

These runners are generally considered "trained".

However, the average of the test PRE-EPO-ADMINISTRATION for the 19 Scottish boys was 11'08" (from 10'30" to 11'55"), and the average for the 15 Kenyan boys was 9'20" (from 9'11" to 9'40").

In this "research", there are no infos about the training these runners did, before, during and after the EPO administration.

Now, we must consider all the points that make of this study not somnething scientific, but a total bullshit, clearly showing that ALL THE RESEARCHERS INVOLVED didn't have ANY CLUE AND ANY IDEA ABOUT TRAINING.

1) When I speak about "Top Runners", I refer myself to athletes able running in top 50 or maximum 100 athletes all time in their event. In another thread, I explained who are, in my opinion, the "elite athletes" who don't benefit from EPO. Boys running 9'20" in Kenya are simply NOT athletes, and have nothing to do with top runners, both as talent and training.

2) The homogeneous "class of subjects" for such investigation had to be "Top Runners of Middle and Long distances born, living and training in altitude", not "Kenyan boys without talent and little training". I never had any doubt, and I never wrote something difference, that NORMAL KENYAN POPULATION CAN BENEFIT IN THEIR PERFORMANCES FROM ASSUMPTION OF EPO ; but this is not the subject of my opinion and my explanation.

3) At the end of the period of EPO administration, the two groups increased their PB, running an average of 10'30" (between 10'03" and 11'15") in the case of Scottish boys, and of 8'55" (between 8'45" and 9'10") in the case of Kenyan boys.

Now, I want to explain you one fact. In Iten, every year, at the end of February, a Group of Polish amateurs, living in Lornah Kiplagat High Altitude Training Camp, put some money in a competition of 3000m on the track of Iten (2400m of altitude) for the first 3 positions : 7000 - 5000 - 3000 Kenyan shillings (about 70-50-30 USD) for the first 3 runners. This runners must be under 18 years of age, of course not training with any management, so come directly from their villages, without a real training.

In 2014, when I was there, there were 68 boys running. The winner ran 8'16", the Polish guys called me for speaking with him, and after 3 months of REAL training he won bronze medal in World Youth Championships in 1500m (Titus Kibyego, 3'39" in 1500m in altitude in his 2nd competition when 17 years old). Other 33 runners ran UNDER 8'45", and NOBODY ran over 9'08".

This means that the "researchers" of Glasgow need to win the Nobel Prize for the best talent scouts, since in Kenya, if you look for a "real" runner, it's practically NOT POSSIBLE to find somebody running slower than 9 minutes.

This means, also, that these boys were NOT trained, and were NOT talented, so to compare them with top athletes in the World is to compare apples with stones.

There are two explanations only for a similar research :

1) All these scientists wanted to confirm their theory, and for achieving this results used specific subjects, able to produce the data they already wanted, and for that reasons are NOT HONEST, or..

2) All these scientists DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF TRAINING, DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH AND IN THIS WAY TRAINING CAN WORK, so they are NOR EXPERT AT ALL and speak about something they don't know.

If I have the Group of boys of the research, and I give them the "administration" of a proper training plan WITHOUT ANY SUPPLEMENT, of sure they can improve, during 4 weeks of training, their PB in higher percentage than what they did during the study, CHANGING THEIR DATA IN OPPOSITE WAY FROM WHAT THE STUDY SHOWED (Haematocrit raising in the case of Scottish from 41.9 to 49.2, and in the case of Kenyan from 46.1 to 49.9), because with training athletes can run faster but at the same time their hct and their hb goes down.

If you think this study was decided by WADA, you understand because I have to think that scientists of antidoping, who don't know anything about the effects of training in altitude WITH THE VOLUME AND INTENSITY USED BY TOP RUNNERS, when speak about blood values are "clowns" speaking about something they don't have idea.

Read more:http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... z3x9jHpWmI

[Zedemel]

Wejo, I wrote a lot of times that for Marathon, and top athletes, there is no advantage, while for 1500m there is advantage.

All the explanation of Bad Wiggins are right. But I want to add another factor :
with EPO we can increase the quantity of Oxygen transported in the blood, but at the same time we increase the viscosity. This means to increase the periferal resistance for the blood circulation, reducing the velocity of circulation.

In a competition where the request is to have high lactic power, such as 800 and 1500m, the ability to transport O2 is more important than the reduction of the velocity of circulation, because we need to have more quantity of oxygen at disposal for short time.

In Marathon, the best athletes run using a percentage of 94-96% of their LT (Anaerobic Threshold), and the ability to transport oxygen depends more on the velocity of circulation than on the power of the enigine.

In other words, for the transport of oxygen, a runner of 800 - 1500m prefers a big lorry, moving at low speed ; a runner of 5000 - 10000m prefers a lorry of medium size, moving at medium speed ; and a Marathon runner prefer small lorries, able to move very fast.

In Marathon, the main enemy is the blood viscosity, which is increased taking EPO. The high viscosity, instead, is not the main problem when the duration of the effort is limited.

Read more:http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read. ... z3x9klTdql

[Ericradis]

Questa ultima considerazione sulla viscosità del sangue è in teoria giusta. Però basta assumere una banale pastiglia di Aspirina per fluidificare sufficientemente il sangue. Quindi il problema della viscosità del sangue per un maratoneta non è in realtà un problema.

[Zedemel]

Questa ultima considerazione sulla viscosità del sangue è in teoria giusta. Però basta assumere una banale pastiglia di Aspirina per fluidificare sufficientemente il sangue. Quindi il problema della viscosità del sangue per un maratoneta non è in realtà un problema.

Armstrong e compagnia in effetti fluidificavano il sangue durante l era epo.