By Sean Ingle in Beijing/The Guardian
Question: What was your reaction as Dafne Schippers finished like a bullet train to defeat the Jamaican Elaine Thompson in the last desperate strides of the women’s 200m final at the World Championships?
And another: How much did it change when you saw she had run 21.63 seconds, the third-fastest time in history, behind only Florence Griffith Joyner and Marion Jones, whose performances are regarded as legal only by the record books given their dubious histories?
Let me guess: Shock, then awe, and then an unwelcome jolt of doubt.
Such a reaction would be understandable given athletics’ past and present problems. Schippers’ skin colour may have coloured your opinion too. We have become used to Jamaicans dominating sprinting. Schippers’ home town of Utrecht is better known for its doorbells.
In the mixed zone, the place where athletes, coaches and journalists mingle, it was open season. There were questions about the acne on Schippers back and face, which can be a sign of steroid abuse.
But the Dutch journalists I spoke to all said the same thing—her mum and sister had both had acne, and that it was hereditary. As Mark van Driel, a writer for de Volkskrant, put it: “I have known Dafne since she was 16 and I believe her, because I have asked all the difficult questions many times and her answers are always convincing. Her coach, Bart Bennema, is always open too.”
The respected Dutch agent Michel Boeting, who has known Bennema for two decades, went further.
“It may be a strong statement but I would bet my house on Bart,” he says. “If he needs to cheat to win he would leave the sport. I 100% trust him.”
Boeting had no doubts about Schippers either, and confirmed the story about her sister and mother’s acne. Sceptics may think that because Van Driel and Boeting are also Dutch they might be guilty of national bias. But you can’t say that about Jessica Ennis-Hill’s coach Toni Minichiello, who always speaks his mind.
He criticised Mo Farah for missing two doping tests earlier this year, and has urged the IAAF to triple the number of doping tests they conduct.
“I’ve known Bart a long time,” he says. “He’s a good guy and I find it very difficult to believe he would do, allow, or be involved in that sort of thing. Dafne is a very driven person and has always been a strong, powerful and fast lady.”
That is certainly true. As a 19-year-old, while still mostly training for the heptathlon, she ran 11.19 seconds for the 100m and 22.69 for the 200m. And as a teenager she beat the 2012 Olympic champion Allyson Felix and missed out on the 200m final at the 2011 World Championships in Daegu by 0.04 seconds. Last year she ran 22.03—the second fastest 200m time in the world—a time bettered only by Felix, who ran 22.02.
It is worth pointing out that Thompson, who finished in second, has made a much bigger improvement this season. No one is questioning her.
As those inside athletics point out, there are other factors to consider. Schippers has given up the heptathlon to focus on sprinting—which means she doesn’t have waste training and recovery time from jumping, hurling and hurdling any more. Her starts have vastly improved. And she has been working with the renowned sprint coach Rana Reider, who used to consult for UK Athletics and trains a lengthy list of world-class athletes.
Still, can all that explain a jump of 0.4 seconds? Probably not. I understand Schippers was staggered by her time too. But there is another reason why it might have been so fast.
It is the same reason three men went under 44 seconds in the men’s 400m final, and eight men went under 10 seconds in the heats of the men’s 100m. The new Mondo track. When I spoke to Andrea Vallauri from Mondo Italy, he talked about its “latest nanotechnology”, “new honeycomb design”, and “special trampoline effect” —but the key point he mentioned was this: it is their fastest ever.
That is not just marketing spiel. As Stuart McMillan, coach to Anaso Jobodwana, South Africa’s bronze medallist from the men’s 200m in Beijing, puts it: “This surface is very different. Look at how it affected the male long jumpers and the hurdlers. The power guys just got too close to the hurdles and the long jumpers didn’t hit the board as much as usual. That is the speed of the track.”
As McMillan argues, when you take into account the fact athletics is “definitely cleaner than it was in the 80s, coaching and programming improvement is probably negligible in a general sense, genetic advancement does not move that quickly, grassroots participation hasn’t really changed, what else can the upsurge in times come down to?”
According to physiologists, the cinder tracks on which Roger Bannister broke his four-minute mile are about a second a lap slower than typical synthetic tracks. Even if this new track provided a tiny percentage of extra speed it could easily make superb times—yes, times like 21.63—look outrageous.
Does all this mean Schippers is undeniably, certifiably clean?
Of course not. Yet you could say that about anyone. For some people the clock alone can make you suspected of doping. But the supporting voices that are backing Schippers make a more compelling case.
