-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Re: Re:
Just one from Grantham probably means Lincolnshire takes the title though
robertmooreheadlane said:
Just one from Grantham probably means Lincolnshire takes the title though
Was just thinking though that they do tend to breed them a little odd up there
Boycott, Keegan, Clough, Trueman, Ennis, Gough, Jamie Reeves.
All rather marmite type personailities
Boycott, Keegan, Clough, Trueman, Ennis, Gough, Jamie Reeves.
All rather marmite type personailities
Re: Re:
Oh, it all makes sense now.
robertmooreheadlane said:
robertmooreheadlane said:
robertmooreheadlane said:
Oh, it all makes sense now.
Re: Re:
Donovan Bailey 1996[/quote]
What is your evidence that Bolt is not 'clean'?[/quote]
I didn't say he was clean!
But when someone is alleging someone cheats or is a doper it is not up to me to try to prove a positive, which cannot be done. It is up to you to prove your allegation if you are saying Bolt is dirty.
The real world works on the principle that he who alleges must prove. That is what Darwin did with evolution. It is what Einstein did with general relativity. It is the rule of law. It is what is done in the workplace. It is the fundamental principle in every civilized democratic society.
It is not the governing principle in the Clinic because in the Clinic an athlete is presumed to dope if he performs well, by innuendo, by who he hangs out with, by speculation, and so on. And that is okay. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
Bolt was asked if he was clean in the context of the positives for Asafa Powell and Tyson Gay and he stated as follows:
"The 26-year-old, who was last tested by anti-doping officials on Tuesday, said: "I was made to inspire people and made to run. I was given a gift and that's what I do. I know I'm clean so I'm just going to continue running and using my talent."
I know of no evidence or facts that suggests Bolt is dirty. If you have some facts or evidence please share them with us.
Or, go on Bolt's website and ask him or make the allegation with your evidence. Bolt can be reached at
usainbolt.com[/quote]
When you say Bailey is the last clean sprinter you are also saying Bolt is not clean.[/quote]
FoxxyBrown1111
I guess he was a little confused...
That happens when your national bias gets in the way of rationality (as it always happens in discussions of doping; "my" national "hero" is clean, only the others dope).
Ofc there is no tiny doubt to any human with common sense following how pro sports and especially the most dope riddled pro sports work, that Donovan Bailey was max jacked up to come out of nowhere at age 29 (!!!) to beat old doper world records on his 2nd international showing up.
... LA like transformation, or in track & field proportions: a Carmelita Jeter/ Florence Griffith-Joyner like transfo. He was one of the most disgusting sprinters that came and go.[/quote]
This is the same old brain addled, illogical, tired, worn out, poverty stricken and nonsensical argument that gives you zilch credibility with your comment. You bait and troll with vacuous rhetoric like "Baily was maxed jacked up ..." with absolutely no evidence, fact or logical argument to back it up. None, Zip. Zero. You are so out of touch with reality you have to resort to the use of cynicism, mockery and sarcasm in a futile attempt to puff up your baseless and uninformed opinions.
I invited you to produce some facts or evidence that Bailey was doped. Your non response was as effective as the captain of the Titanic. Are you so fundamentally bereft of a single scintilla of acumen you cannot muster even one rational argument?
You are not worthy of having an opinion, even in the Clinic, because no one is entitled to be so ignorant. You must therefore come by it naturally. When I read trash like your comment I am reminded that nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. And you my friend are very dangerous.
Your intellectual dishonesty in a hopeless attempt to make a point is so obvious it runs right off the gag-meter. You should be sued for intellectual neglect and being a bloviating bully!
Catwhoorg said:
Donovan Bailey 1996[/quote]
What is your evidence that Bolt is not 'clean'?[/quote]
I didn't say he was clean!
But when someone is alleging someone cheats or is a doper it is not up to me to try to prove a positive, which cannot be done. It is up to you to prove your allegation if you are saying Bolt is dirty.
The real world works on the principle that he who alleges must prove. That is what Darwin did with evolution. It is what Einstein did with general relativity. It is the rule of law. It is what is done in the workplace. It is the fundamental principle in every civilized democratic society.
It is not the governing principle in the Clinic because in the Clinic an athlete is presumed to dope if he performs well, by innuendo, by who he hangs out with, by speculation, and so on. And that is okay. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
Bolt was asked if he was clean in the context of the positives for Asafa Powell and Tyson Gay and he stated as follows:
"The 26-year-old, who was last tested by anti-doping officials on Tuesday, said: "I was made to inspire people and made to run. I was given a gift and that's what I do. I know I'm clean so I'm just going to continue running and using my talent."
I know of no evidence or facts that suggests Bolt is dirty. If you have some facts or evidence please share them with us.
Or, go on Bolt's website and ask him or make the allegation with your evidence. Bolt can be reached at
usainbolt.com[/quote]
When you say Bailey is the last clean sprinter you are also saying Bolt is not clean.[/quote]
FoxxyBrown1111
I guess he was a little confused...
That happens when your national bias gets in the way of rationality (as it always happens in discussions of doping; "my" national "hero" is clean, only the others dope).
Ofc there is no tiny doubt to any human with common sense following how pro sports and especially the most dope riddled pro sports work, that Donovan Bailey was max jacked up to come out of nowhere at age 29 (!!!) to beat old doper world records on his 2nd international showing up.
... LA like transformation, or in track & field proportions: a Carmelita Jeter/ Florence Griffith-Joyner like transfo. He was one of the most disgusting sprinters that came and go.[/quote]
This is the same old brain addled, illogical, tired, worn out, poverty stricken and nonsensical argument that gives you zilch credibility with your comment. You bait and troll with vacuous rhetoric like "Baily was maxed jacked up ..." with absolutely no evidence, fact or logical argument to back it up. None, Zip. Zero. You are so out of touch with reality you have to resort to the use of cynicism, mockery and sarcasm in a futile attempt to puff up your baseless and uninformed opinions.
I invited you to produce some facts or evidence that Bailey was doped. Your non response was as effective as the captain of the Titanic. Are you so fundamentally bereft of a single scintilla of acumen you cannot muster even one rational argument?
You are not worthy of having an opinion, even in the Clinic, because no one is entitled to be so ignorant. You must therefore come by it naturally. When I read trash like your comment I am reminded that nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. And you my friend are very dangerous.
Your intellectual dishonesty in a hopeless attempt to make a point is so obvious it runs right off the gag-meter. You should be sued for intellectual neglect and being a bloviating bully!
Re: Re:
Not going to address the rest of your post, because it's just more of the same: You refusing to consider evidence what obviously and clearly has evidential value, with some insults thrown in. If the Clinic had a poll on every rider with the outcome of the poll determining whether he gets a ban, I'd be right with you.
In the absence of that, we can afford to be more likely to be right by following the lead of science, not law, in how we reason about evidence.
You must be a lawyer, not a scientist. Science and law differ profoundly in how they assess hypotheses. Science isn't bound by the legal burden of proof, legal standards of proof and the rules for admissible evidence. Nor does a judge pronounce judgement or a jury of common people vote on matters of science and then the matter is settled.RobbieCanuck said:
It is not the governing principle in the Clinic because the Clinic doesn't have the power to supend or otherwise punish anyone. Therefore, all those rules you are so fond of serve no purpose whatsoever. It's critical to understand that these rules do not make it more likely that correct positions are being reached, but rather that the process is fair and the rate at which the innocent are convicted is low. Important goals when you have the power to punish, but not the goals of truth seeking communities, like the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, or the Clinic.RobbieCanuck said:
Here is just one. Bolt ran the 100m in 9.58. This is a fact. It's obvious to anyone except perhaps lawyers that this is evidence Bolt is dirty. If you want to respond "but that would never be admissable in my favourite court and would never convince a jury that he is guilty according to my favourite standard of proof used in law", reread my post from the beginning.RobbieCanuck said:
Not going to address the rest of your post, because it's just more of the same: You refusing to consider evidence what obviously and clearly has evidential value, with some insults thrown in. If the Clinic had a poll on every rider with the outcome of the poll determining whether he gets a ban, I'd be right with you.
In the absence of that, we can afford to be more likely to be right by following the lead of science, not law, in how we reason about evidence.
Brilliant post, Serious Sam. Simply brilliant. Spot on with the employment record and subsequent bias evident in posts from certain users.
I'm still waiting for RobbieCanuck to explain why he thinks Donovan Bailey (1996) "was the last 'clean' Olympic champion at a sprint distance for this question assume I mean, 100M or 200M." and not Bolt. Obviously he, for some reason, doesn't think Bolt is clean, but why?
Singer01
BANNED
last 10 Olympic champions ranked for likelihood of being clean
not clean
Gatlin, Christie, Lewis
most likely to least likely
Crawford
Hines
Wells
Bolt
Borzov
Green
Bailey
not clean
Gatlin, Christie, Lewis
most likely to least likely
Crawford
Hines
Wells
Bolt
Borzov
Green
Bailey
IMO, the answer is Hines in '68. On the "Cleanish" side, Lewis whose progression was linear from his teenage years to his glory years, and Wells, whose winning times were mediocre.
For the other ones, maybe there's no solid evidence: I refer you to our favorite Wonderboy. It's not because you don't get caught that you don't dope. And the likelihood of being caught in track and fields is minuscule: no retroactive testing, et caetera...
I always chuckle when athletes get busted: usually from emerging or poor countries using twenty year-old substances.
For the other ones, maybe there's no solid evidence: I refer you to our favorite Wonderboy. It's not because you don't get caught that you don't dope. And the likelihood of being caught in track and fields is minuscule: no retroactive testing, et caetera...
I always chuckle when athletes get busted: usually from emerging or poor countries using twenty year-old substances.
I know it's not a popular view in here but I would put Bolt at the top of my list. A physical freak.
is that assessment based on anything other than fanish instinct of "I hope he's clean so I'll say he is"?
What you are saying btw is that drugs don't work because if in 30 years of sprinters doping to within an inch or their life they can't get under 9.74 yet bolt wakes up and does 9.59 and 9.69 while celebrating, then doping is absolutely worthless.
But let me ask you this. Have you paid attention to the bolt threads on here for the last few years or at least know about all the little news that never makes the highlight reels, puma adverts and sports personality of the year awards? about bolt, about jamaican anti doping, about doping in sprinting, about doping in general.
Are you familiar with how doping works in athletics. Do you know what programmes sprinters who used balco were under what drugs they took and how they beat the system. And how the east Germans did it? The ways in which different drugs work and the performance enhancement they provide?
If yes then your opinion that bolt might have some merit, though I'd be interested in what the argument is.
But your laughable earlier defense of brownlee in this thread that he must be clean because you think he's a nice guy, strongly suggests you haven't a clue as to how doping works and make emotion based judgments based on who you like.
What you are saying btw is that drugs don't work because if in 30 years of sprinters doping to within an inch or their life they can't get under 9.74 yet bolt wakes up and does 9.59 and 9.69 while celebrating, then doping is absolutely worthless.
But let me ask you this. Have you paid attention to the bolt threads on here for the last few years or at least know about all the little news that never makes the highlight reels, puma adverts and sports personality of the year awards? about bolt, about jamaican anti doping, about doping in sprinting, about doping in general.
Are you familiar with how doping works in athletics. Do you know what programmes sprinters who used balco were under what drugs they took and how they beat the system. And how the east Germans did it? The ways in which different drugs work and the performance enhancement they provide?
If yes then your opinion that bolt might have some merit, though I'd be interested in what the argument is.
But your laughable earlier defense of brownlee in this thread that he must be clean because you think he's a nice guy, strongly suggests you haven't a clue as to how doping works and make emotion based judgments based on who you like.
Re:
What proof do you have that Bolt is doping?
Bolt has been smashing records since he was young. Nothing to do with him being a nice guy as I don't know him.
Athletics is rife with doping and you can see the steroid effect quite easily in the case of the sprinters.
But Bolt's physique does not look steroid induced at all.
He his a giant of a man and in my view is a one off.
If you have some proof that Bolt is doping and I will accept witness testimony and good Circumstantial Evidence
Then I am happy to admit that I was wrong.
cheers Ray
The Hitch said:
What proof do you have that Bolt is doping?
Bolt has been smashing records since he was young. Nothing to do with him being a nice guy as I don't know him.
Athletics is rife with doping and you can see the steroid effect quite easily in the case of the sprinters.
But Bolt's physique does not look steroid induced at all.
He his a giant of a man and in my view is a one off.
If you have some proof that Bolt is doping and I will accept witness testimony and good Circumstantial Evidence
Then I am happy to admit that I was wrong.
cheers Ray
Re:
Hah really? That's a change. I remember Robbie getting angry with the suggestion bolt doped.
Netserk said:
Hah really? That's a change. I remember Robbie getting angry with the suggestion bolt doped.
Ironically today is the day another member of his list of people who he knows didn't dope, was caught cheating AND lying about it. Of course it was just minor cheating and as gooner and martinvickers always reminded us, just because some people (like froome) cheated a little bit in some aspects of the sport, isn't at all suggestive of whether they would dope.RobbieCanuck said:
Re: Re:
You should ask Valverde or Pantani if being dominant as a kid means you are clean.
And you should ask Bernhard kohl if having a style that fans think looks clean, means you ar clean.
And actually Bolt went from 9.9 for the 200m in 2007 to 19.3 in 2008.
But the Jamaican anti doping agency deliberately protecting their athletes from doping tests, together with the fact that half his training partners ended up failing doping tests should be evidence enough for anyone who is not already convinced by the fact that 100m times have plummeted all round since the year bolt emerged and the fact that 100m in general is like cycling in the 90's.
ray j willings said:
You should ask Valverde or Pantani if being dominant as a kid means you are clean.
And you should ask Bernhard kohl if having a style that fans think looks clean, means you ar clean.
And actually Bolt went from 9.9 for the 200m in 2007 to 19.3 in 2008.
But the Jamaican anti doping agency deliberately protecting their athletes from doping tests, together with the fact that half his training partners ended up failing doping tests should be evidence enough for anyone who is not already convinced by the fact that 100m times have plummeted all round since the year bolt emerged and the fact that 100m in general is like cycling in the 90's.
Re: Re:
Check this out:
Though in his defence, it could be that he just didn't realize the implication his answer has regarding Bolt
The Hitch said:
Check this out:
RobbieCanuck said:
Though in his defence, it could be that he just didn't realize the implication his answer has regarding Bolt
Re:
Despite times not in the latest league Wells being clean needs a lot of faith to justify as a concept. Let's take that Scottish 4 x 100m record of 1978 that still stands. Team-mates were David Jenkins who later confessed to doping throughout his career and went on to serve a jail sentence in the USA for running a drugs ring.
Next up is Drew McMaster who also confessed to using PEDs. He went a little bit further and tried to expose the hypocrisy which then resulted in the Sunday Times doing an expose. Alan D i c k, long term associate and in league with Andy Norman, about whom stories are legion, told everyone he was going to "fight back"
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/***-fights-drugs-claim-1580224.html
but I am not too sure anything ever came to court.
And with Alan D i c k in the frame you get to the 4th member of that squad, Cameron Sharp, who was personally coached by D i c k. Sadly Cameron is now handicapped after poor treatment post a road crash. The Canadian Dubin inquiry stated that organised doping was facilitated in the UK and names Dr Jimmy Ledingham as facilitator. Jimmy Ledingham was based out of Meadowbank with Wells and McMaster.
It is a tough one for a lot of Brits to contemplate. As I said earlier, I have a lot of peers who just can't handle the idea. If Sir Bradley, Froome and Sir Chris ride off into the sunset with the "rounder wheels/more fluffed pillows" story justifying their success, it will be like in 30 years time Shane Sutton being exposed as a past doper and facilitating their doping, whilst Sir David turned a blind eye. That early 80's period was the golden time for British Athletics with D i c k and Norman orchestrating the whole show.
I remember some time ago somebody suggesting to Scottish Athletics that since 2 of the 4 from that 4 x 100 record team have confessed to doping whilst setting the record, it should be expunged from the books. Their response ? Exactly like the UCI and exactly the attitude that keeps doping at the heart of elite sport - They could see no reason to remove it.
Singer01 said:
Despite times not in the latest league Wells being clean needs a lot of faith to justify as a concept. Let's take that Scottish 4 x 100m record of 1978 that still stands. Team-mates were David Jenkins who later confessed to doping throughout his career and went on to serve a jail sentence in the USA for running a drugs ring.
Next up is Drew McMaster who also confessed to using PEDs. He went a little bit further and tried to expose the hypocrisy which then resulted in the Sunday Times doing an expose. Alan D i c k, long term associate and in league with Andy Norman, about whom stories are legion, told everyone he was going to "fight back"
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/***-fights-drugs-claim-1580224.html
but I am not too sure anything ever came to court.
And with Alan D i c k in the frame you get to the 4th member of that squad, Cameron Sharp, who was personally coached by D i c k. Sadly Cameron is now handicapped after poor treatment post a road crash. The Canadian Dubin inquiry stated that organised doping was facilitated in the UK and names Dr Jimmy Ledingham as facilitator. Jimmy Ledingham was based out of Meadowbank with Wells and McMaster.
It is a tough one for a lot of Brits to contemplate. As I said earlier, I have a lot of peers who just can't handle the idea. If Sir Bradley, Froome and Sir Chris ride off into the sunset with the "rounder wheels/more fluffed pillows" story justifying their success, it will be like in 30 years time Shane Sutton being exposed as a past doper and facilitating their doping, whilst Sir David turned a blind eye. That early 80's period was the golden time for British Athletics with D i c k and Norman orchestrating the whole show.
I remember some time ago somebody suggesting to Scottish Athletics that since 2 of the 4 from that 4 x 100 record team have confessed to doping whilst setting the record, it should be expunged from the books. Their response ? Exactly like the UCI and exactly the attitude that keeps doping at the heart of elite sport - They could see no reason to remove it.
I can understand giving someone the benefit of the doubt, but in Bolt's case, like Flo Jo, Marita and Jarmilla before him, it is too big a pill to swallow (if I may say). Too good to be true.
Re: Re:
but they removed all of jimmy savilles honorariums(honoraria) didnt they? even tho technically, one cannot be a knight in death, you
will they rescind the knighthoods?
gees, frodo cavendish wants his knighthood
Freddythefrog said:
but they removed all of jimmy savilles honorariums(honoraria) didnt they? even tho technically, one cannot be a knight in death, you
will they rescind the knighthoods?
gees, frodo cavendish wants his knighthood
TRENDING THREADS
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 14: Castigliano delle Stiviere – Desenzano del Garda, 31.2k (ITT)
- Started by Nick2413
- Replies: 315
-
Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 12: Martinsicuro – Fano, 193.0k- Started by DenisMenchov
- Replies: 348
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d‘Italia 2024 Stage 15, Manerba del Garda-Livigno (Mottolino), 222 km- Started by QueenStagiaire
- Replies: 26
-
Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 13: Riccione – Cento, 179.0k- Started by Cookster15
- Replies: 201
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 7: Foligno – Perugia, 40.6k (ITT)
- Started by Nick2413
- Replies: 626
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 8: Spoleto – Prati di Tivo, 152.0k
- Started by Nick2413
- Replies: 592
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d’Italia 24, Stage 10: Pompei – Cusano Mutri (Bocca della Selva), 142.0k
- Started by Nick2413
- Replies: 359
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram