• 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 @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Olympics Doping Thread

Page 38 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 29, 2012
422
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

El Pistolero said:
Zypherov said:
motty89 said:
luckyboy said:
lmao ITV report on how Bolt is so great. He eats yams and puts in "hard graft". It mentioned that 21/30 fastest 100m times were by dopers.

Conclusion: "Usain Bolt has probably saved the reputation of his sport"

I've just scanned through the top 100m times and it seems the only person not to test positive apart from bolt in the top 50 is maurice greene!

There were doping allegations made against Maurice Greene, which first appeared in the New York Times.

Explosive 'Boldon letter' adds to Greene crisis
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/apr/20/ussport.drugsinsport

The author, clearly a sprinter, deals furiously with allegations by Angel Guillermo Heredia, a Mexican former discus thrower, that Greene gave him up to $40,000 for advice, steroid creams, EPO, insulin and stimulants in 2003 and 2004.

In an interview, Ben Johnson once claimed that his best 100 metre time clean was 10.18 seconds. After years of steroid use and heavy training we all know what happened in Seoul. Yes, that now infamous 9.79 seconds in the final.

We have that famous quote from Carl Lewis on Usain Bolt.

Carl Lewis raises doubts over Usain Bolt's record-setting performances
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/2826070/Carl-Lewis-questions-Usain-Bolts-record-setting-performances.html

"The reality is that if I were running now, and had the performances I had in my past, I would expect them to say something. I wouldn't even be offended at the question. So when people ask me about Bolt, I say he could be the greatest athlete of all-time. But for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool. Period."

Carl Lewis is a major hypocrite. Even back in the day he was constantly accusing others who beat him of doping use, while we know now that he tested positive himself 3 times in 1988. He really should shut his mouth.

But, US media, who are the only ones Lewis has ever cared about, still treat him as a Demi-God and rebuff any suggestion at all that he was glowing green even during the 1988 Olympics - even as he heaped scorn on Johnson.

The US media believe now, as they did then, that Lewis truly walks on water.
 
Re: Re:

[quote
Robbie Canuck wrote
Caster Semenya is not a man. She is biologically inter-sex. She was born without a womb or ovaries but with internal testes that produce more testosterone than the "normal" woman produces. She had no control over her biological circumstances. She identifies as a woman. I agree with El Pistolero. Every elite athlete has some biological advantage such as height, the length of the arms or legs or the size of ones hands etc. The Olympic Code is based on inclusiveness and not exclusiveness and she should be allowed compete just as she is. She is after all, first and foremost a human being! She deserves her success![/quote]

gooner wrote
True, but not all women are biologically intersex. Women's and men's sport are categorized for good reason. Performance and the difference in athletic sport would be testosterone. This gives a big advantage over her other competitors. It is simply not the same as saying all top female athletes would have some advantage be it the length or their arms or legs. All Caster's competitors have those physical parts, but not all are biologically intersex. Why not get rid of weight divisions in boxing then?

No one is saying she shouldn't perform, it's that there should be a limit on testosterone in these circumstances.[/quote]


Yes, I hear you and in her case testosterone is the issue because of her testes. I note with truly trans gender athletes (male to female or female to male) they are required under the rules to have sex reassignment surgery. If had before puberty the IOC says they are good to go. The problem is how many trans athletes can make an informed decision before puberty. If had after puberty then there is the additional requirement of 2 years post op hormone therapy plus the sex change has to be legally recognised.

The problem for Semenya is her inter-sex status. It is unclear in Semenya's case if she has had any hormone therapy to minimize the T advantage. The T to E ratio is quite a generous one. There are not much facts known about her case because of the understandable privacy issues involved. But her times are certainly not in the male realm. It may be she has a TUE of some sort.

Her case most resembles Eero Mantyranta whose family had a genetic aberration whereby as many as 100 members of his family including Eero had high levels of haemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying molecule in red blood cells, averaging 200gm per litre (a normal person would have about 150gm per litre). The levels are a consequence of having more red blood cells. Eero competed in 4 Winter Olympics and won 3 gold, 2 silver and 2 bronze. There was no outcry then. His clear performance advantage was simply accepted as a biological - physiological phenomenon, which is the same as Semenya.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Zypherov said:
motty89 said:
luckyboy said:
lmao ITV report on how Bolt is so great. He eats yams and puts in "hard graft". It mentioned that 21/30 fastest 100m times were by dopers.

Conclusion: "Usain Bolt has probably saved the reputation of his sport"

I've just scanned through the top 100m times and it seems the only person not to test positive apart from bolt in the top 50 is maurice greene!

There were doping allegations made against Maurice Greene, which first appeared in the New York Times.

Explosive 'Boldon letter' adds to Greene crisis
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2008/apr/20/ussport.drugsinsport

The author, clearly a sprinter, deals furiously with allegations by Angel Guillermo Heredia, a Mexican former discus thrower, that Greene gave him up to $40,000 for advice, steroid creams, EPO, insulin and stimulants in 2003 and 2004.

In an interview, Ben Johnson once claimed that his best 100 metre time clean was 10.18 seconds. After years of steroid use and heavy training we all know what happened in Seoul. Yes, that now infamous 9.79 seconds in the final.

We have that famous quote from Carl Lewis on Usain Bolt.

Carl Lewis raises doubts over Usain Bolt's record-setting performances
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/2826070/Carl-Lewis-questions-Usain-Bolts-record-setting-performances.html

"The reality is that if I were running now, and had the performances I had in my past, I would expect them to say something. I wouldn't even be offended at the question. So when people ask me about Bolt, I say he could be the greatest athlete of all-time. But for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool. Period."

i reckon only a few could have ever broke 10secs flat in the 100metre dash.

Carl Lewis maybe one. But I would question how fast Carl could have accelerated out of the blocks without roids and his other PEDs. if Lewis is taking stimulants, surely he is on at a minimum testosterone. at a minimum. remember he had braces on his teeth because of his mandible. his mandible moving his teeth. when it grew. dislaimer/caveat/acknowledgement, he may have always had poor teeth like the sino distance swimmer sun yang

but a long levered athlete, cannot get out of the blocks as quick as a short levers athlete... its engineering, applied physics

I reckon the intelligent designer[sic] (nt serious) who placed laws of nature and mathematics and particle physics placed a limit of 10secs for the hundred metre dash
 
Re: Re:

RobbieCanuck said:
Eero competed in 4 Winter Olympics and won 3 gold, 2 silver and 2 bronze. There was no outcry then. His clear performance advantage was simply accepted as a biological - physiological phenomenon, which is the same as Semenya.
the bolded suggests the advantage wasn't that great, which may be why there wasn't too much of an outcry?
Those bleating about Semenya clearly can't get near her when she's not being chemically hobbled
 
Re:

sniper said:
Was reading about Australia implementing new stricter antidoping legislation quite.recently. I believe they had a rather disappointing Olympics didn't they?
:lol:

Reeeeeeeeally strict :D

27d620d68431567ed49fd73be2b77824


f29d2dbdf5fa9c3d5b380a5bbb1208df


Having said that, I certainly rate Bronte Campbell :eek:
 
Re: Re:

Nellyspania said:
the asian said:
motty89 said:
luckyboy said:
lmao ITV report on how Bolt is so great. He eats yams and puts in "hard graft". It mentioned that 21/30 fastest 100m times were by dopers.

Conclusion: "Usain Bolt has probably saved the reputation of his sport"

I've just scanned through the top 100m times and it seems the only person not to test positive apart from bolt in the top 50 is maurice greene!


What about Frankie Fredericks?

Calvin Smith?

just to clarify i mean top 50 times. Frankie Fredericks is just outside the top 100 and calvin smith outside top 300
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

42x16ss said:
sniper said:
Was reading about Australia implementing new stricter antidoping legislation quite.recently. I believe they had a rather disappointing Olympics didn't they?
:lol:

Reeeeeeeeally strict :D

27d620d68431567ed49fd73be2b77824


f29d2dbdf5fa9c3d5b380a5bbb1208df


Having said that, I certainly rate Bronte Campbell :eek:
lol!
well, dopers will be dopers, obviously.

This was the article I drew on earlier, btw:
http://www.news.com.au/national/athletes-who-cheat-and-lie-about-drugs-facing-jail-time-due-to-australian-crime-commission-powers/story-e6frfkp9-1226574349233
So anti-dope regulations got a bit tightened up in 2013, post-London.
I agree it's mostly PR (comparable to what the Germans did recently), but still, it may have put off a few people (?).

Here's an article comparing Australia's medal haul in Rio with previous Games:
http://www.foxsports.com.au/olympics/comparing-australias-rio-2016-medal-performance-to-previous-olympics/news-story/3de51c1551c53f4c084c28adc2a9df27
So it certainly was disappointing, but at the same time it wasn't that much worse than London (only six medals less in Rio than in London).
 
Aug 17, 2016
53
0
0
Visit site
You guys need to stop posting pictures of readily achievable physiques...makes me wonder about the flab content of Clinic posters, LOL! I have no idea if those Aussie swimmers are doping or not, but please...those bodies are not even remotely close to being only attainable through drugs!
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
I certainly agree about Mack Horton.
At least on that photo his physique looks pretty much within normal range.
The two women (no idea who they are) are a bit too bulky (especially in the neck/shoulder area) for my liking, but fair enough, they aren't Serenas either.

But not sure if 42x16 posted the pics in reference to their physique, or in reference to their results, which at least in Horton's case are in fact indicative of doping.
 
Re:

mike75 said:
You guys need to stop posting pictures of readily achievable physiques...makes me wonder about the flab content of Clinic posters, LOL! I have no idea if those Aussie swimmers are doping or not, but please...those bodies are not even remotely close to being only attainable through drugs!
Certainly, however I chose that photo of Mack Horton thanks to the nice lantern jaw he's developed. His physique was actually a lot more impressive at the Olympics but I couldn't find a decent photo. Horton's results also speak pretty loudly.

The Campbell sisters (moreso Cate) have very impressive shoulders, along with their very impressive results this last year. I also have a soft spot for Bronte Campbell
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
Visit site
Re:

mike75 said:
You guys need to stop posting pictures of readily achievable physiques...makes me wonder about the flab content of Clinic posters, LOL! I have no idea if those Aussie swimmers are doping or not, but please...those bodies are not even remotely close to being only attainable through drugs!
I second this. Obviously not familiar with swimmers if you think it is unusual especially if they have been in squads from a young age.
 
Re:

sniper said:
I certainly agree about Mack Horton.
At least on that photo his physique looks pretty much within normal range.
The two women (no idea who they are) are a bit too bulky (especially in the neck/shoulder area) for my liking, but fair enough, they aren't Serenas either.

But not sure if 42x16 posted the pics in reference to their physique, or in reference to their results, which at least in Horton's case are in fact indicative of doping.

They are supporting themselves at the edge of the pool on their arms/shoulders. Do it yourself and get someone to take a photo and you'll see exactly the same thing happening.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
sniper said:
I certainly agree about Mack Horton.
At least on that photo his physique looks pretty much within normal range.
The two women (no idea who they are) are a bit too bulky (especially in the neck/shoulder area) for my liking, but fair enough, they aren't Serenas either.

But not sure if 42x16 posted the pics in reference to their physique, or in reference to their results, which at least in Horton's case are in fact indicative of doping.

They are supporting themselves at the edge of the pool on their arms/shoulders. Do it yourself and get someone to take a photo and you'll see exactly the same thing happening.
You could be right, although from the position of their arms it looks more like they're standing in undeep water, just resting their hands on the edge for the photo. If you're supporting yourself on the edge, your arms will be stretched.
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
King Boonen said:
sniper said:
I certainly agree about Mack Horton.
At least on that photo his physique looks pretty much within normal range.
The two women (no idea who they are) are a bit too bulky (especially in the neck/shoulder area) for my liking, but fair enough, they aren't Serenas either.

But not sure if 42x16 posted the pics in reference to their physique, or in reference to their results, which at least in Horton's case are in fact indicative of doping.

They are supporting themselves at the edge of the pool on their arms/shoulders. Do it yourself and get someone to take a photo and you'll see exactly the same thing happening.
You could be right, although from the position of their arms it looks more like they're standing in undeep water, just resting their hands on the edge for the photo. If you're supporting yourself on the edge, your arms will be stretched.

Even that will roll the shoulders forward. Posting pictures to show doping is a pet peeve of mine in the clinic, it's as bad as people posting photos of the Loch Ness Monster. In any sport where a decent range of movement is required the physique of an athlete is going to be achievable without drugs. Now that's not to say they are clean or they achieved it clean, but it just makes people's reasonable theories ridiculous if they try and back it up with a photo.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
I tend to agree.
Mostly the photos are just fun.
However, there are Some exceptions where i do think photos are useful.
like when weight estimations are discussed, photos can give some insight, although limited and always to be taken with caution of course.
For instance i think the Rasmussen photo of when he was at his skinniest provides decent evidence that Sky did not invent extreme weight loss without loss of power, something they pride themselves with. But I'm drifting now.
I also think Serena looks ridiculous and it screams hgh.
The other thing is: do certain athletes have time to build such a physique? For instance Nadal has admitted he hardly spends any time in the gym. In that light, photos of his musculature gain curiosity, imo.
 
Re:

sniper said:
I tend to agree.
Mostly the photos are just fun.
However, there are Some exceptions where i do think photos are useful.
like when weight estimations are discussed, photos can give some insight, although limited and always to be taken with caution of course.
For instance i think the Rasmussen photo of when he was at his skinniest provides decent evidence that Sky did not invent extreme weight loss without loss of power, something they pride themselves with. But I'm drifting now.
I also think Serena looks ridiculous and it screams hgh.
The other thing is: do certain athletes have time to build such a physique? For instance Nadal has admitted he hardly spends any time in the gym. In that light, photos of his musculature gain curiosity, imo.

Photos give no guidance for weight estimations. People can't even do it in person, let alone based on a photo. It only works if you have a reference and I think we can all agree that none of use really believe the references we have for anyone.

Serena's physique is very achievable without doping. We treat athletes too much like machines in here because it makes it easier and in some things it's valid, but not really this case.

And yes, I pointed out that just because a physique is achievable naturally doesn't mean it has been achieved naturally, but a photo gives absolutely no clue to that.

On top of all this lets not get into lighting, shade, angle, position, even breathing or breathing out, all of which massively affect a photo which is a single snapshot in time.

My problem with photos is we end up discussing Contador's jaw or Froome's arms etc. which add absolutely nothing to the good discussions that do go on in here and allow people to very easily derail them.
 

TRENDING THREADS