Re: Re:
In every sporting competition someone is going to win. That is a given. That performance is therefore the best performance in the race that day. |Bailey was a truly remarkable athlete not just in track but in other sports as well such as Basketball. (If you follow basketball at all Canada has made an amazing contribution recently to Division 1 NCAA basketball and the NBA.) Donovan was also born in Jamaica where there is a gene pool of sprinting talent. The bottom line he was (is) one of the best athletes in the world.
Is it reasonable that a better athlete is on any given day going to win the competition. Logic and reason say that is the case. Therefore Bailey was capable of a "truly remarkable" performance. And that performance came at Atlanta. 9.84 is not very remarkable today given what Bolt and others have done.
Merely because an athlete has a great or "remarkable" performance does not even come close to being evidence he was doped. Merely because an athlete wins a race does not even come close to being evidence of doping. Except in the Forum!
When I refer to evidence I refer to facts. A fact is actual and absolute reality, as distinguished from mere supposition or opinion. A fact is truth, as distinguished from fiction or error.
So for example your quote from the Globe and Mail does not even cite the author of the article, his/her credentials, his/her knowledge of facts, or on what basis the uncited person's opinion is based. That is unsubstantiated hearsay and worse still unsubstantiated hearsay about an opinion i.e. hearsay of a mere supposition.
I agree that the era was nasty. I agree that a lot of athletes whose only interest in life is their specific sport would cheat to get ahead. But Bailey was a stockbroker making good money. He didn't need track. The facts are he was just too good not to give it a go. Do you agree that some people in this world are simply more gifted athletically than others?
I do not consider the Forum even close to a court of law, because it is rife with ill-informed opinion, speculation, rhetoric, cynicism (justifiably), mockery of other persons point of view, trolling, baiting, incivility, and plain old trash talk. It is not a forum where an opinion has much credibility in the real world. The Forum is an artificial world where anonymity allows anyone to say anything they want and pretend it has credibility.
I agree that performances in the environment of the late 80's and early 90s well up to say 2010 were in an era in cycling very suspicious because as we know now there is a plethora of evidence and fact about it. The USADA Reasoned Decision on Armstrong, Hamilton and others have provided that evidence.
An I respect Bassons opinion about riders today. But he is speculating based on his own experiences in another era. That does not mean his opinion should be dismissed but how valid is it without fact and evidence?
There are also lots of reasons to be sceptical about track - Marion Jones, Flo Jo, Carl Lewis, and a host of others. Keep in mind Ben Johnson ( who was a about 15 years before Bailey and not a contemporary of Baileys) was caught in a drug test.
In my view people who post in the Forum can sound off about anything they want, express any opinion they want etc. It is free for all. Some opinions have more logic than others. But if a poster wants to be taken seriously the opinion needs to be informed with fact and evidence.
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison
mrhender said:
In every sporting competition someone is going to win. That is a given. That performance is therefore the best performance in the race that day. |Bailey was a truly remarkable athlete not just in track but in other sports as well such as Basketball. (If you follow basketball at all Canada has made an amazing contribution recently to Division 1 NCAA basketball and the NBA.) Donovan was also born in Jamaica where there is a gene pool of sprinting talent. The bottom line he was (is) one of the best athletes in the world.
Is it reasonable that a better athlete is on any given day going to win the competition. Logic and reason say that is the case. Therefore Bailey was capable of a "truly remarkable" performance. And that performance came at Atlanta. 9.84 is not very remarkable today given what Bolt and others have done.
Merely because an athlete has a great or "remarkable" performance does not even come close to being evidence he was doped. Merely because an athlete wins a race does not even come close to being evidence of doping. Except in the Forum!
When I refer to evidence I refer to facts. A fact is actual and absolute reality, as distinguished from mere supposition or opinion. A fact is truth, as distinguished from fiction or error.
So for example your quote from the Globe and Mail does not even cite the author of the article, his/her credentials, his/her knowledge of facts, or on what basis the uncited person's opinion is based. That is unsubstantiated hearsay and worse still unsubstantiated hearsay about an opinion i.e. hearsay of a mere supposition.
I agree that the era was nasty. I agree that a lot of athletes whose only interest in life is their specific sport would cheat to get ahead. But Bailey was a stockbroker making good money. He didn't need track. The facts are he was just too good not to give it a go. Do you agree that some people in this world are simply more gifted athletically than others?
I do not consider the Forum even close to a court of law, because it is rife with ill-informed opinion, speculation, rhetoric, cynicism (justifiably), mockery of other persons point of view, trolling, baiting, incivility, and plain old trash talk. It is not a forum where an opinion has much credibility in the real world. The Forum is an artificial world where anonymity allows anyone to say anything they want and pretend it has credibility.
I agree that performances in the environment of the late 80's and early 90s well up to say 2010 were in an era in cycling very suspicious because as we know now there is a plethora of evidence and fact about it. The USADA Reasoned Decision on Armstrong, Hamilton and others have provided that evidence.
An I respect Bassons opinion about riders today. But he is speculating based on his own experiences in another era. That does not mean his opinion should be dismissed but how valid is it without fact and evidence?
There are also lots of reasons to be sceptical about track - Marion Jones, Flo Jo, Carl Lewis, and a host of others. Keep in mind Ben Johnson ( who was a about 15 years before Bailey and not a contemporary of Baileys) was caught in a drug test.
In my view people who post in the Forum can sound off about anything they want, express any opinion they want etc. It is free for all. Some opinions have more logic than others. But if a poster wants to be taken seriously the opinion needs to be informed with fact and evidence.
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram