- May 17, 2013
- 7,559
- 2,414
- 20,680
Yes Foxxy, that's why I asterisked the 9"86. But it shows that one can plateau at age 20, that it's not because you run 20"00 at age 20 that you can run 19"50 a couple of years later...that's rubbish. Funny though how the controversial jump in '82 (at Indy if I remember correctly) could have shattered Beamon's record, I believe dope free. He really had it, like Bolt. But for Bolt and his contemporaries, 19"80 is not enough. Thank Johnson for that, Mr. WR and retire, like FloJo before him.
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
All the things young Carl Lewis did (the 10.0s, the 19.8s, the 8.70s) might have been clean. There was not much money in T&F. It was a amateur sport still. Earnings were not payed until after retirment. Starting fees were around 10.000 $ max. His first contract with Nike earned him 50.000 a year (yes 50.000, not absurd 5+ millions that are payed to the super charged super cheaters of now). So even if CL got that money "under hand", hardly enough to finance a sophisticated dope program. All changed mid 80s when rules were changed, starting fees skyrocketed, Ben Johnson hired his own Doctor Ferraris, and Lewis begun to wear braces. All barriers went down.
So, "it shows that one can plateau at age 20, that it's not because you run 20"00 at age 20 that you can run 19"50 a couple of years later" is perfectly true. But then come the liars who tell you about bigger hearts, cadence, stride length, and other shit that matters... not. All lies to explain doping away, selling the "Incredible Hulk" stories to naive fans. All those "experts" are guilty too, by misleading those who can´t know better (the youth, and uninformed grown ups).
So, "it shows that one can plateau at age 20, that it's not because you run 20"00 at age 20 that you can run 19"50 a couple of years later" is perfectly true. But then come the liars who tell you about bigger hearts, cadence, stride length, and other shit that matters... not. All lies to explain doping away, selling the "Incredible Hulk" stories to naive fans. All those "experts" are guilty too, by misleading those who can´t know better (the youth, and uninformed grown ups).
- Jul 16, 2011
- 3,251
- 812
- 15,680
Yeah, ok. Carry on Foxy. I know to just ignore you now. You have little to contribute to the debate.
For the others, most of you won't have heard of Bolt back in 2005. He was though, in the world of T&F already news.... a great natural talent re-writing the junior record book. Someone used the term "outlier", yes, he was. He could propel a 6'5" frame to a sub-20 sec 200m. He smashed the previous best. At that time he was immature, physically and emotionally/mentally yet moved the goalposts a long way. I don't believe for a single second that he was doping then as it was also known that he wasn't a particularly dedicated athlete. This stuff wasn't made up retrospectively to explain some huge leaps in performance ( like the Badzilla yarn). His unwillingness to train for the 400m, which his morphology would suggest might be his best distance also, I think, speaks volumes. It may be, however, now that we have seen an athlete of his shape and size breaking records at 100m, that others will follow.... we don't know that yet.
My point (and I repeat, I can't say he isn't doping) is that it isn't far fetched to imagine that the same athlete with a mature physique and a more dedicated training regime could move the senior records a long way too, especially at his peak (now past). If at 17 he had the right combination of stride length and turnover to run sub 20 secs, then he obviously had the right make up of power/FT muscles, balance and form to run much faster when he strengthened up.
I appreciate that he comes from Jamaica and all the nuance that comes with that at the moment. I'm in Jamaica next month, I'll maybe do a bit of digging, see if there are any suggestions that he was on a programme.
For the others, most of you won't have heard of Bolt back in 2005. He was though, in the world of T&F already news.... a great natural talent re-writing the junior record book. Someone used the term "outlier", yes, he was. He could propel a 6'5" frame to a sub-20 sec 200m. He smashed the previous best. At that time he was immature, physically and emotionally/mentally yet moved the goalposts a long way. I don't believe for a single second that he was doping then as it was also known that he wasn't a particularly dedicated athlete. This stuff wasn't made up retrospectively to explain some huge leaps in performance ( like the Badzilla yarn). His unwillingness to train for the 400m, which his morphology would suggest might be his best distance also, I think, speaks volumes. It may be, however, now that we have seen an athlete of his shape and size breaking records at 100m, that others will follow.... we don't know that yet.
My point (and I repeat, I can't say he isn't doping) is that it isn't far fetched to imagine that the same athlete with a mature physique and a more dedicated training regime could move the senior records a long way too, especially at his peak (now past). If at 17 he had the right combination of stride length and turnover to run sub 20 secs, then he obviously had the right make up of power/FT muscles, balance and form to run much faster when he strengthened up.
I appreciate that he comes from Jamaica and all the nuance that comes with that at the moment. I'm in Jamaica next month, I'll maybe do a bit of digging, see if there are any suggestions that he was on a programme.
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
Do you think it likely people close enough to know would share anything as damaging as that? It sort of presupposes a desire to exact revenge or air a grievance, which you would think had already had an opportunity to be aired no? Or am I looking at it too simplistically?
Would be interested in even a basic explanation of how you would seek to accumulate this information, if it's not too personal? I have had similar thoughts regarding other aspects and claims from other sports, alas my work keeps me local to home and my confidence that useful information could be garnered as an ordinary joe citizen are low.
Would be interested in even a basic explanation of how you would seek to accumulate this information, if it's not too personal? I have had similar thoughts regarding other aspects and claims from other sports, alas my work keeps me local to home and my confidence that useful information could be garnered as an ordinary joe citizen are low.
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Re:
Nice try. Distracting from one doper by joking about another. Sure Bolt hasn´t the usual "jumping from the death bed/sickness story" to sell. But in the very same post you come up with Bolts own "incredible Hulk" story.
The one of the outlier that was just too lazy to train.
Mix in a little bit of pseudo science like him having the make up of power/FT muscles no one else had before. Who, with just a little knowledge of T&F, actually believes that BS? Sure you can trap the naive... that is why guys like you are dangerous for our youth, but those who saw & heard the stories of the likes of FloJo, Jeter, caught training colleges of Bolt, the Gays, Johnsons, Montgomerys, Gatlins, Powells, Christies, and so on, and so on, don´t buy that crap. Not for a second. They simply know better. Like Tonton, and other posters who really tried to help you out in that case.
Edit: BTW, have not yet got the example from you of another sprinter downing his own world class bests by half a second in sprints when being grown up. Come on, that should be easy. I just asked for one. There must be one, right?
armchairclimber said:
Nice try. Distracting from one doper by joking about another. Sure Bolt hasn´t the usual "jumping from the death bed/sickness story" to sell. But in the very same post you come up with Bolts own "incredible Hulk" story.
The one of the outlier that was just too lazy to train.
Mix in a little bit of pseudo science like him having the make up of power/FT muscles no one else had before. Who, with just a little knowledge of T&F, actually believes that BS? Sure you can trap the naive... that is why guys like you are dangerous for our youth, but those who saw & heard the stories of the likes of FloJo, Jeter, caught training colleges of Bolt, the Gays, Johnsons, Montgomerys, Gatlins, Powells, Christies, and so on, and so on, don´t buy that crap. Not for a second. They simply know better. Like Tonton, and other posters who really tried to help you out in that case.Edit: BTW, have not yet got the example from you of another sprinter downing his own world class bests by half a second in sprints when being grown up. Come on, that should be easy. I just asked for one. There must be one, right?
Re:
The only small chance you'd have of finding any substantial intel, imo, would be to go undercover, pretend to be a (top)athlete, and try and buy PEDs, then have a chat with the dealer(s) and hope that Bolt's name might accidentally come up.
Good luck with that.
I'm with Dear Wiggo. This is pretty far-fetched. What did you have in mind? At best you get your ass whiped if you start asking explicit questions.armchairclimber said:
The only small chance you'd have of finding any substantial intel, imo, would be to go undercover, pretend to be a (top)athlete, and try and buy PEDs, then have a chat with the dealer(s) and hope that Bolt's name might accidentally come up.
Good luck with that.
Does anyone think that Bolt was tested along with his team mates who got busted and his results covered up?
Foxy brown quote" BTW, have not yet got the example from you of another sprinter downing his own world class bests by half a second in sprints when being grown up. Come on, that should be easy. I just asked for one. There must be one, right"
Doping is widespread in sport but if someone does genuinely make a breakthrough in times/performance in their chosen sport is it always going to be down to doping ?
Foxy brown quote" BTW, have not yet got the example from you of another sprinter downing his own world class bests by half a second in sprints when being grown up. Come on, that should be easy. I just asked for one. There must be one, right"
Doping is widespread in sport but if someone does genuinely make a breakthrough in times/performance in their chosen sport is it always going to be down to doping ?
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Look Ray... All the top sprinters bettered their already world class times by max 0.1 seconds (may 0.2 in the extreme conditions of 1968 in Mexico). Be it Calvin Smith, Hayes, Lewis, Johnson, Glance, whoever... and than Bolt comes around doing it by half seconds. Setting new world records in the tenths of seconds while his predecessors did it in thousands and needed decades? You really believe that he is such a far outlier at the extreme end of a bell curve that he did something no one of the top end sprinters ever did? In an era where sprinterts get/got caught by dozens. In an era with high tech doping?
Leave out Hitch´s post about the non testing, caught training colleges, corruption in Jamaica, all the other world record sprinters that were caught or had strong indications of doping links... just look at the single fact of bettering world records in short sprint distances by crazy jumps, bettering own PBs by half seconds. You believe Bolt did it on bread and water?
Leave out Hitch´s post about the non testing, caught training colleges, corruption in Jamaica, all the other world record sprinters that were caught or had strong indications of doping links... just look at the single fact of bettering world records in short sprint distances by crazy jumps, bettering own PBs by half seconds. You believe Bolt did it on bread and water?
Re:
I see what you and others are saying and your points are well made and if this was cycling I would agree.
I just don't think Bolt was doping from an early age and I do think that he is a one of a kind in athletics.
Usually I think everyone's at it but Just this once I am not convinced.
What's your view on Michael Phelps i.e. Talented or a great responder or both?
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
I see what you and others are saying and your points are well made and if this was cycling I would agree.
I just don't think Bolt was doping from an early age and I do think that he is a one of a kind in athletics.
Usually I think everyone's at it but Just this once I am not convinced.
What's your view on Michael Phelps i.e. Talented or a great responder or both?
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
Well cycling is actually better. Much better. They were the first to implement the 50% rule, ooc tests, "health tests" before a GT, blood tests, passport... Nothing came from T&F. Zilch. Same as swimming. They really protect their dopers. Even if their "superstars" take the green stuff from the incredible Hulk, they wouldn´t be busted.
Many who know Bolt is a big time dope junkie don´t think he doped as a teenager (me included). Same goes with Bonds or Lewis for example. All once-in-a-century-talents. No doubt. But all of them got into dope big time. Some pretty early, some pretty late. And of all three mentioned, you can pretty much say when it exactly started.
If you are not yet convinced about Bolt´s over the top doping, just go back to Hitch´s post.
If you think Bolt is clean, then you also think he isn´t just better than the usual 9.9 sprinter (since most of them were caught or linked to doping rings/trainers), but better than the dope-free 10.0/10.1 sprinters that certainly exist. That is a half second faster than them. So No 1 (Bolt) runs 9.5, and then the next best 100 guys run 10.1/10.2. You think that is a logical bell-curve? No it´s not. Such things are not existing. Nowhere in nature. Not in this world.
And now go back to Hitch´s post of Jamaicans not tested before Olympics, corruption, training partners caught later on, the illogical thing that many of the super sprinters are born on one far away small island. And so on.
Phelps? Yes ofc a doper...
ray j willings said:
Well cycling is actually better. Much better. They were the first to implement the 50% rule, ooc tests, "health tests" before a GT, blood tests, passport... Nothing came from T&F. Zilch. Same as swimming. They really protect their dopers. Even if their "superstars" take the green stuff from the incredible Hulk, they wouldn´t be busted.
Many who know Bolt is a big time dope junkie don´t think he doped as a teenager (me included). Same goes with Bonds or Lewis for example. All once-in-a-century-talents. No doubt. But all of them got into dope big time. Some pretty early, some pretty late. And of all three mentioned, you can pretty much say when it exactly started.
If you are not yet convinced about Bolt´s over the top doping, just go back to Hitch´s post.
If you think Bolt is clean, then you also think he isn´t just better than the usual 9.9 sprinter (since most of them were caught or linked to doping rings/trainers), but better than the dope-free 10.0/10.1 sprinters that certainly exist. That is a half second faster than them. So No 1 (Bolt) runs 9.5, and then the next best 100 guys run 10.1/10.2. You think that is a logical bell-curve? No it´s not. Such things are not existing. Nowhere in nature. Not in this world.
And now go back to Hitch´s post of Jamaicans not tested before Olympics, corruption, training partners caught later on, the illogical thing that many of the super sprinters are born on one far away small island. And so on.
Phelps? Yes ofc a doper...
Phelps of course but what degree is talent and what degree, him being a good responder?
Can we define Talent any more?
Look at Froome's results until Sky? He showed nothing. Look at the many potential climbers who looked more promising but are just now stage winners.
Can we define Talent any more?
Look at Froome's results until Sky? He showed nothing. Look at the many potential climbers who looked more promising but are just now stage winners.
Re: Re:
Then lets talk about improvement curves. We know that gold medalists live on the edge of bell curves. Most Junior World beaters are there because they are insanely talented, but also because they're more mature than the rest. The result is that their career isn't as long. American Milers Jim Ryun to Alan Webb are example of great juniors who still had typical career paths; those paths just started several years earlier than normal.
Want to talk sprinters? Lets talk about Obea Moore: 16 year old runs 45.15 400m and never goes faster. J-Mee Samuels runs 10.08 in high school and only 10.03 3 years later. Their career fits a normal curve, just that it started at a younger age.
The case of diminishing returns is typical. (and if you regularly see proportional improvements from 19.75 to 19.19, then you must be witnessing some incredible coaching). Even more than that though, is the "double peak". The familiar case is the 30-35+ year old who is on the end of their career and turns to doping instead of face the realities of life after. But for an athlete who just moved the whole curve ahead a few years? A double peak shouldn't happen.
A junior phenom is, by definition, beyond the curve. Applying the same averages and expectations for the general population can't work with the athletes never started on that curve to begin with.
2015 20.20 -0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 11 APR
2013 19.66 0.0 Moskva (Luzhniki) 17 AUG
2012 19.32 +0.4 London (Olympic Stadium) 09 AUG
2011 19.40 +0.8 Daegu 03 SEP
2010 19.56 -0.8 Kingston (NS), JAM 01 MAY
2009 19.19 -0.3 Berlin (Olympiastadion) 20 AUG
2008 19.30 -0.9 Beijing (National Stadium) 20 AUG
2007 19.75 +0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 24 JUN
2006 19.88 +0.4 Lausanne 11 JUL
2005 19.99 +1.8 London (CP) 22 JUL
2004 19.93 +1.4 Devonshire 11 APR
2003 20.13 0.0 Bridgetown, BAR 20 JUL
2002 20.58 +1.4 Kingston, JAM 18 JUL
2001 21.73 +0.6 Debrecen 14 JUL
Started working with Glen mills in 2005
I see a career in three phases: Pre-Mills (2004 and earlier), 400m/200m in 2005-2007, and 100m/200m 2008- on.
I see an athlete who started their improvement curve early, and got their peak years around 18-22. I see one who then got frustrated that he wasn't living up to the hype and expectation to keep progressing, and with some insane intervention, arrived on the world scene in a wholly new way.
armchairclimber said:FoxxyBrown1111 said:armchairclimber said:
Take Carl Lewis as comparison: He always ran his 10.00s to 9.97s & 19.8s, jumped his usual 8.75 when around age 22. Later he started to wear braces and downed his time from 9.93 to 9.86, & jumping close to 9 meters.
Just take the truth: Bolt is a big time doper, which does not mean he did it at age 18. The same that CL was big on drugs, which doesn´t mean he was on it at age 18.
Look, don't patronise me. You want to learn about another sport, go and friggin learn and don't be so lazy. Why, and explain fully, is 19.75 to 19.30 a huge leap? I see proportionally better improvements year in year out from growing athletes and it has naff all to do with drugs. Even in the clinic "Just take the truth, Bolt is a big time doper" is an idiotic thing to say.
How does "Just face the truth Foxy, you're talking about a sport which you clearly know jack about" sound to you?
Then lets talk about improvement curves. We know that gold medalists live on the edge of bell curves. Most Junior World beaters are there because they are insanely talented, but also because they're more mature than the rest. The result is that their career isn't as long. American Milers Jim Ryun to Alan Webb are example of great juniors who still had typical career paths; those paths just started several years earlier than normal.
Want to talk sprinters? Lets talk about Obea Moore: 16 year old runs 45.15 400m and never goes faster. J-Mee Samuels runs 10.08 in high school and only 10.03 3 years later. Their career fits a normal curve, just that it started at a younger age.
The case of diminishing returns is typical. (and if you regularly see proportional improvements from 19.75 to 19.19, then you must be witnessing some incredible coaching). Even more than that though, is the "double peak". The familiar case is the 30-35+ year old who is on the end of their career and turns to doping instead of face the realities of life after. But for an athlete who just moved the whole curve ahead a few years? A double peak shouldn't happen.
A junior phenom is, by definition, beyond the curve. Applying the same averages and expectations for the general population can't work with the athletes never started on that curve to begin with.
2015 20.20 -0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 11 APR
2013 19.66 0.0 Moskva (Luzhniki) 17 AUG
2012 19.32 +0.4 London (Olympic Stadium) 09 AUG
2011 19.40 +0.8 Daegu 03 SEP
2010 19.56 -0.8 Kingston (NS), JAM 01 MAY
2009 19.19 -0.3 Berlin (Olympiastadion) 20 AUG
2008 19.30 -0.9 Beijing (National Stadium) 20 AUG
2007 19.75 +0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 24 JUN
2006 19.88 +0.4 Lausanne 11 JUL
2005 19.99 +1.8 London (CP) 22 JUL
2004 19.93 +1.4 Devonshire 11 APR
2003 20.13 0.0 Bridgetown, BAR 20 JUL
2002 20.58 +1.4 Kingston, JAM 18 JUL
2001 21.73 +0.6 Debrecen 14 JUL
Started working with Glen mills in 2005
I see a career in three phases: Pre-Mills (2004 and earlier), 400m/200m in 2005-2007, and 100m/200m 2008- on.
I see an athlete who started their improvement curve early, and got their peak years around 18-22. I see one who then got frustrated that he wasn't living up to the hype and expectation to keep progressing, and with some insane intervention, arrived on the world scene in a wholly new way.
Attachments
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
1++
I can remember seeing a totally frustrated Bolt finishing 8th in the 200m WC in 2005. The US sprinters totally dominating, going 1-2-3-4 in 200m, and Gatlin doing the double. Two years later, Bolt is manhandled again, this time Gay stealing the show by doing the double. Nothing to see of the Jamaican sprint domination... Fast forward twelve months later... boom, Bolt sleep walking to a new 100 m WR, beating the old doped one by 0.1 (!!!) secs, Jamaica shattering the US 4x100 WR they owned since forever. Yes, all done without doping in no-testing heaven Jamaica, sure Armclimber.
More Strides than Rides said:armchairclimber said:FoxxyBrown1111 said:armchairclimber said:
Take Carl Lewis as comparison: He always ran his 10.00s to 9.97s & 19.8s, jumped his usual 8.75 when around age 22. Later he started to wear braces and downed his time from 9.93 to 9.86, & jumping close to 9 meters.
Just take the truth: Bolt is a big time doper, which does not mean he did it at age 18. The same that CL was big on drugs, which doesn´t mean he was on it at age 18.
Look, don't patronise me. You want to learn about another sport, go and friggin learn and don't be so lazy. Why, and explain fully, is 19.75 to 19.30 a huge leap? I see proportionally better improvements year in year out from growing athletes and it has naff all to do with drugs. Even in the clinic "Just take the truth, Bolt is a big time doper" is an idiotic thing to say.
How does "Just face the truth Foxy, you're talking about a sport which you clearly know jack about" sound to you?
Then lets talk about improvement curves. We know that gold medalists live on the edge of bell curves. Most Junior World beaters are there because they are insanely talented, but also because they're more mature than the rest. The result is that their career isn't as long. American Milers Jim Ryun to Alan Webb are example of great juniors who still had typical career paths; those paths just started several years earlier than normal.
Want to talk sprinters? Lets talk about Obea Moore: 16 year old runs 45.15 400m and never goes faster. J-Mee Samuels runs 10.08 in high school and only 10.03 3 years later. Their career fits a normal curve, just that it started at a younger age.
The case of diminishing returns is typical. (and if you regularly see proportional improvements from 19.75 to 19.19, then you must be witnessing some incredible coaching). Even more than that though, is the "double peak". The familiar case is the 30-35+ year old who is on the end of their career and turns to doping instead of face the realities of life after. But for an athlete who just moved the whole curve ahead a few years? A double peak shouldn't happen.
A junior phenom is, by definition, beyond the curve. Applying the same averages and expectations for the general population can't work with the athletes never started on that curve to begin with.
2015 20.20 -0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 11 APR
2013 19.66 0.0 Moskva (Luzhniki) 17 AUG
2012 19.32 +0.4 London (Olympic Stadium) 09 AUG
2011 19.40 +0.8 Daegu 03 SEP
2010 19.56 -0.8 Kingston (NS), JAM 01 MAY
2009 19.19 -0.3 Berlin (Olympiastadion) 20 AUG
2008 19.30 -0.9 Beijing (National Stadium) 20 AUG
2007 19.75 +0.2 Kingston (NS), JAM 24 JUN
2006 19.88 +0.4 Lausanne 11 JUL
2005 19.99 +1.8 London (CP) 22 JUL
2004 19.93 +1.4 Devonshire 11 APR
2003 20.13 0.0 Bridgetown, BAR 20 JUL
2002 20.58 +1.4 Kingston, JAM 18 JUL
2001 21.73 +0.6 Debrecen 14 JUL
Started working with Glen mills in 2005
I see a career in three phases: Pre-Mills (2004 and earlier), 400m/200m in 2005-2007, and 100m/200m 2008- on.
I see an athlete who started their improvement curve early, and got their peak years around 18-22. I see one who then got frustrated that he wasn't living up to the hype and expectation to keep progressing, and with some insane intervention, arrived on the world scene in a wholly new way.
1++
I can remember seeing a totally frustrated Bolt finishing 8th in the 200m WC in 2005. The US sprinters totally dominating, going 1-2-3-4 in 200m, and Gatlin doing the double. Two years later, Bolt is manhandled again, this time Gay stealing the show by doing the double. Nothing to see of the Jamaican sprint domination... Fast forward twelve months later... boom, Bolt sleep walking to a new 100 m WR, beating the old doped one by 0.1 (!!!) secs, Jamaica shattering the US 4x100 WR they owned since forever. Yes, all done without doping in no-testing heaven Jamaica, sure Armclimber.
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Re:
Nowadays? I don´t know... But I am sure I saw the greatest athlets ever. Them being Bo Jackson and Carl Lewis before they fell into the dope trap (I am not sure if "Bo knows" ever did, but it´s likely, given the sports he was in).
ray j willings said:
Nowadays? I don´t know... But I am sure I saw the greatest athlets ever. Them being Bo Jackson and Carl Lewis before they fell into the dope trap (I am not sure if "Bo knows" ever did, but it´s likely, given the sports he was in).
- May 17, 2013
- 7,559
- 2,414
- 20,680
Re:
armchairclimber, there is not one clean athlete who has ever recorded improvements like Bolt, half a second since turning pro, which regardless of age, is what separates men from boys. Tell me if anyone did. The bell curve principle was convincingly presented by MSTR. I looked all over: I couldn't find one. The closest examples would be FloJo (doped) and Michael Johnson (doped), who took the money, fame, and ran...to retirement. Give me one name.
armchairclimber said:
armchairclimber, there is not one clean athlete who has ever recorded improvements like Bolt, half a second since turning pro, which regardless of age, is what separates men from boys. Tell me if anyone did. The bell curve principle was convincingly presented by MSTR. I looked all over: I couldn't find one. The closest examples would be FloJo (doped) and Michael Johnson (doped), who took the money, fame, and ran...to retirement. Give me one name.
- Aug 6, 2009
- 2,111
- 7
- 11,495
Re:
This is never going to happen. Jamaicans are fiercely nationalistic and will not confide something this sensitive to a foreigner. He'll hear nothing but useless innuendo if there is any talk at all.
If you're talking about procuring PED's and finding out the costs, that is a different story. If you run in certain circles, they are an open secret depending on what country you visit. Some places are easier to procure gear in than others.
Do not expect anyone who knows anything to have a sit-down with you or any other foreigner and tell you everything from A-Z. You must be an active participant in doping to know what is available, but you will never know who does what unless you know them personally, and even then it's too much of a risk to talk.
Dear Wiggo said:
This is never going to happen. Jamaicans are fiercely nationalistic and will not confide something this sensitive to a foreigner. He'll hear nothing but useless innuendo if there is any talk at all.
Dear Wiggo said:
If you're talking about procuring PED's and finding out the costs, that is a different story. If you run in certain circles, they are an open secret depending on what country you visit. Some places are easier to procure gear in than others.
Do not expect anyone who knows anything to have a sit-down with you or any other foreigner and tell you everything from A-Z. You must be an active participant in doping to know what is available, but you will never know who does what unless you know them personally, and even then it's too much of a risk to talk.
Tonton " there is not one clean athlete who has ever recorded improvements like Bolt, half a second since turning pro"
Why not, Bolt fits the bill if anyone is going to do this
So its impossible? People do progress surly, are you saying that all those runners years ago would be as fast today if they had the means of today?
so there is no progress in physical ability just PED's and diet and tech ?
Why not, Bolt fits the bill if anyone is going to do this
So its impossible? People do progress surly, are you saying that all those runners years ago would be as fast today if they had the means of today?
so there is no progress in physical ability just PED's and diet and tech ?
- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
Re:
Ray, Ray... now don´t fool around please. If you read Hitch´s, my, MSTR, Tontons, and some of the others well explained and thought posts, you would not have to post something like this.
All answers were given to you already. So now use them, or ignore them... but don´t ask the same questions again and again. The answers won´t change. In short words summary: It is impossible that Bolt´s 19.1s, 19.3s, 19.4s, 19.5s, 19.6s, and 9.5s, 9.6s, 9.7s were done clean.
ray j willings said:
Ray, Ray... now don´t fool around please. If you read Hitch´s, my, MSTR, Tontons, and some of the others well explained and thought posts, you would not have to post something like this.
All answers were given to you already. So now use them, or ignore them... but don´t ask the same questions again and again. The answers won´t change. In short words summary: It is impossible that Bolt´s 19.1s, 19.3s, 19.4s, 19.5s, 19.6s, and 9.5s, 9.6s, 9.7s were done clean.
Lets all take a quick leaf out of Ray's book on improvement
Right now the human race can run and walk and ride a bike and drive a car and fly a plane
In one years time we will all fly around on our own having developed retractable wings and be able to swim underwater for hours having developed gills - That is Ray's version of evolution in action.
Yes the human race evolves and possibly the human race can get faster and bigger and stronger.
BUT NOT AT THE RATE BOLT DID !!!
It is also just as likely (and actually more so if you look around you at the general population) that the human race could get slower and weaker. We develop into our surroundings. So while the human race was a hunter and gatherer our natural instincts were to be able to run and hunt or run to survive, Actually there are prehistoric footprints discovered which show that early humans may have been able to run up to twice as fast as we can today.
So as our lifestyles have become more sedentary and more focused on the provision of tools and machines to make life easier it is actually entirely possible that certain parts of the population are becoming slower and will continue to do so.
Right now the human race can run and walk and ride a bike and drive a car and fly a plane
In one years time we will all fly around on our own having developed retractable wings and be able to swim underwater for hours having developed gills - That is Ray's version of evolution in action.
Yes the human race evolves and possibly the human race can get faster and bigger and stronger.
BUT NOT AT THE RATE BOLT DID !!!
It is also just as likely (and actually more so if you look around you at the general population) that the human race could get slower and weaker. We develop into our surroundings. So while the human race was a hunter and gatherer our natural instincts were to be able to run and hunt or run to survive, Actually there are prehistoric footprints discovered which show that early humans may have been able to run up to twice as fast as we can today.
So as our lifestyles have become more sedentary and more focused on the provision of tools and machines to make life easier it is actually entirely possible that certain parts of the population are becoming slower and will continue to do so.
Re:
I did not mention evolution or make any claims about the development of man kind.
I have a different view than you about ONE ATHLETE. JUST ONE, BOLT.
The fact there is no evidence of doping at a young age. The fact that the major Jamaican bust came well after Bolts first success does not convince me that he has doped.
I posted links about stride patterns and the benefit it can have on speed.
I have seen the evidence posted but IMO based on what evidence I have seen I think Bolt is clean.
If you can't post without being a patronising ar%%hole then don't post
robertmooreheadlane said:
I did not mention evolution or make any claims about the development of man kind.
I have a different view than you about ONE ATHLETE. JUST ONE, BOLT.
The fact there is no evidence of doping at a young age. The fact that the major Jamaican bust came well after Bolts first success does not convince me that he has doped.
I posted links about stride patterns and the benefit it can have on speed.
I have seen the evidence posted but IMO based on what evidence I have seen I think Bolt is clean.
If you can't post without being a patronising ar%%hole then don't post
I'm sorry if you feel i was being patronizing, it is never my intention to cause anyone any sort of hurt whatsoever,
So if you can just explain how one man can take so much time out of his PB's in two events, more time than any other male athlete in the history of the sport and more time than a whole plethora of other doped athletes then everything will be fine
But the fact is you haven't and your continuing statements about stride patterns and height etc etc are pointing to factors exactly based in the evolution of a human being and by extrapolation all human beings, as by the first mutant genetic diversion we begin the path of evolution.
So whether you meant to, or whether you did it by happy ignorant accident, you started bringing evolution into the discussion.
I am happy for you that you can believe in ONE athlete who beyond all reasonable evidence and against all historical suggestions within this sport, which is so riddled with drug cheats, has done something no-one else has done and no-one else can seem to have any faith in.
I am sure if you go back to the lance threads in the archives you can find some other people who will be able to share your faith in your fairy tale.
Oh and my first sentence was a joke!!!!
So if you can just explain how one man can take so much time out of his PB's in two events, more time than any other male athlete in the history of the sport and more time than a whole plethora of other doped athletes then everything will be fine
But the fact is you haven't and your continuing statements about stride patterns and height etc etc are pointing to factors exactly based in the evolution of a human being and by extrapolation all human beings, as by the first mutant genetic diversion we begin the path of evolution.
So whether you meant to, or whether you did it by happy ignorant accident, you started bringing evolution into the discussion.
I am happy for you that you can believe in ONE athlete who beyond all reasonable evidence and against all historical suggestions within this sport, which is so riddled with drug cheats, has done something no-one else has done and no-one else can seem to have any faith in.
I am sure if you go back to the lance threads in the archives you can find some other people who will be able to share your faith in your fairy tale.
Oh and my first sentence was a joke!!!!
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Latest posts
-
-
Extreme quadriceps starting pain after 3-4 rest days
- Latest: Getting Old Sucks
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram