the delgados said:Bolt, without a doubt.
Reason being is he absolutely smashed records made by runners who ate steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
100 metres is 100 metres. There can be no talk about race distance, stage of the race, weather conditions, quality of bikes, roads, etc. etc.
Guy made Ben Johnson seem like he was running backwards.
Farcanal said:the delgados said:Bolt, without a doubt.
Reason being is he absolutely smashed records made by runners who ate steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
100 metres is 100 metres. There can be no talk about race distance, stage of the race, weather conditions, quality of bikes, roads, etc. etc.
Guy made Ben Johnson seem like he was running backwards.
Not particularly picking on your post but I'm new to this and, from what I've read in the clinic generally, there seems to be a wide held belief that anyone who breaks records of previous dopers must themselves be doping. Can someone please explain the logic of this to me because it completely passes me by?
Is it really scientific fact that there can be no progression in athletic achievement, that all humans in the future cannot run, ride, swim etc better than there ancestors without the use of PED's? Your example of a runner some 25 years previously to Bolt seems a strange comparison. Anything factually enlightening would be appreciated.
I'm sure your intentions are good and it's just an accident, but such a blatant moving of the goal posts from one sentence to the next, will unfortunately, be by many interpreted as trolling.Farcanal said:the delgados said:Bolt, without a doubt.
Reason being is he absolutely smashed records made by runners who ate steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
100 metres is 100 metres. There can be no talk about race distance, stage of the race, weather conditions, quality of bikes, roads, etc. etc.
Guy made Ben Johnson seem like he was running backwards.
Not particularly picking on your post but I'm new to this and, from what I've read in the clinic generally, there seems to be a wide held belief that anyone who breaks records of previous dopers must themselves be doping.
Can someone please explain the logic of this to me because it completely passes me by?
Is it really scientific fact that there can be no progression in athletic achievement, that all humans in the future cannot run, ride, swim etc better than there ancestors without the use of PED's? Your example of a runner some 25 years previously to Bolt seems a strange comparison. Anything factually enlightening would be appreciated.
Catwhoorg said:Honorable nod the the "Turtle Soup" Chinese women contingent by that coach whose name escapes me.
More Strides than Rides said:Catwhoorg said:Honorable nod the the "Turtle Soup" Chinese women contingent by that coach whose name escapes me.
Ma Junren/ Ma's Army
doperhopper said:Hard to beat weightlifting, essentially all the best performances of certain era are not just suspicious, but basically 100% certified PED-based (while in cycling we still have few riders enjoying benefit of doubt)....
irondan said:Major league baseball in the 1990's.
The performances were hilarious, much more fun than MLB of today.
Cake said:In general, people winning events at world level, when the athlete comes from a country with no background in that event. If your country hasn't the infrastructure, it doesn't matter how talented you are, it's odd to be beating athletes from countries that have specialised in the discipline for years.