Was Usain Bolt's stunning loss last night actually a great development for track as it proves Bolt is clean?

9.58s is obvious roids. 9.9*s has always been a minimum time throughout history, since Owens. Then the drugs got good and the testing disappeared. Jamaicans are notoriously lazy, yet at one point (a decade ago?) they had 8 of the 10 fastest 100 metre times in history, with sprinters who were all still running (not retired).

They either all had evolved for no reason, or were off their face on PEDs.

All yesterday proved was they were either on less good 'roids or they were getting old. If anything it proved they were on the PEDs before, but maybe less decent meds now.

The weather in London was terrible for sprinting too. But there is no way in hell Bolt was clean. Go back to 08' and see what his coach was saying about Bolt wasn't a 100 meter runner, then Bolt exploded to a 9.72 in the spring. Even his own team couldn't believe what he was running. Every time we have seen a runner toy with a world class field they have been very dirty ie Marion Jones, Flo Juice(allegedly) and Ben Johnson.

Paula Radcliffe Quits Cries wrote:

9.58s is obvious roids. 9.9*s has always been a minimum time throughout history, since Owens. Then the drugs got good and the testing disappeared. Jamaicans are notoriously lazy, yet at one point (a decade ago?) they had 8 of the 10 fastest 100 metre times in history, with sprinters who were all still running (not retired).

They either all had evolved for no reason, or were off their face on PEDs.

All yesterday proved was they were either on less good 'roids or they were getting old. If anything it proved they were on the PEDs before, but maybe less decent meds now.

There is at least one error on that chart. The world record was 10 sec flat on June 21, 1960. It was set by Armin Hary.

No sale, that was hand timed. He gets credit for 10.25

recorder wrote:

http://i.imgur.com/5wc4b45.png

There is at least one error on that chart. The world record was 10 sec flat on June 21, 1960. It was set by Armin Hary.[/quote]

The other error is that they're *all* doping after 1980 or so.

Reconsideror wrote:

Bolt has been injury prone his entire career. Where have you been?

Please, Tyson Gay is injury-prone. Bolt had a charmed career on the juice by comparison.

A simple Newtonian analysis of forces involved show how improbable tall sprinters are. The whole turnover and stride length argument is for the feeble-minded. The strain on his muscles and connective tissue must've been enormous. I think one day we will find that he was one of the first prominent athletes to do gene therapy in addition to whatever sauce he was on.

Texas HS Coach wrote:

alaba wrote:

The fact that sprint times are much slower this year tells me that it's quite possible that whatever drug they were all on to get into 9.5* to 9.7* is now detectable and they haven't worked out a replacement yet.

Agree

That makes two.

Llort_vbo wrote:

There is at least one error on that chart. The world record was 10 sec flat on June 21, 1960. It was set by Armin Hary.

No sale, that was hand timed. He gets credit for 10.25

Nonsense. It is recognized by IAAF as legitimate 10.0 world record as of June 21, 1960.

He actually ran 10.0 three times before it was recognized. The record was invalidated the first time he ran 10.0 because the track declined 11 cm instead of the allowable 10 cm.

The second race when he ran 10.0 was invalidated because it was a false start and the starter failed to recall the runners.

An hour later they ran the race again and Hary finally got his 10.0 recognized.

Later that year he won the gold medal at the Rome Olympics with 10.2.

Nothing stunning about it, a lot of us in the know how him losing.

Texas HS Coach wrote:

alaba wrote:

The fact that sprint times are much slower this year tells me that it's quite possible that whatever drug they were all on to get into 9.5* to 9.7* is now detectable and they haven't worked out a replacement yet.

Agree

This BIG TIME!!! Bolt is as dirty as it gets.

Llort_vbo wrote:

There is at least one error on that chart. The world record was 10 sec flat on June 21, 1960. It was set by Armin Hary.

No sale, that was hand timed. He gets credit for 10.25

rojo wrote:

That's what a buddy of mine thinks:

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2017/08/usain-bolts-stunning-loss-last-night-actually-great-development-track-proves-bolt-clean/

What say you?

ROjo,

Are you saying (in other words) that UB is a doper?

llort_vbo wrote:

http://i.imgur.com/5wc4b45.png

This chart smokes crack. The 100m dropped 2 whole tenths in the 50's and 60's and then another 3 hundredths over the 70's, 80's and early 90's. You don't draw a straight line through that.

And for about the millionth time, why that happened is no mystery - amphetamines are a better PED than steroids, by far. In-comp testing started in 1968 and killed them off.

If there's a new PED, it's a stimulant.

llort_vbo wrote:

Reconsideror wrote:

If Bolt was doping, he would've doped himself to a 9.6 last night.

His progression (peaking in his early-20's and slowing down year after year) is what you'd expect from a normal athlete through aging and physical wear and tear.

It's been documented over and over again how and why he's a physical anomaly. When you have a 6'5'' stride with a 5'11'' turnover and take 41 steps to finish the race to everyone else's 44-45, you're gonna be the best.

It's the fast times that put people at doubt, but Bolt ran his first WL (the 19.93 WJR) when he was 17, and finished that season #2 in the world. Who does that, unless he was doping as a teen?

Here we are again - the same BS was said about Lance and his magical training.

Not true. Lance was a good one day rider as a young guy a teen but he wasn't good at the multi-stage TDF. He was a study one day rider. Suddenly after doping, he was amazing at the TDF.

People tried to say the difference was due to how his body changed from cancer treatments.

This chart smokes crack. The 100m dropped 2 whole tenths in the 50's and 60's and then another 3 hundredths over the 70's, 80's and early 90's. You don't draw a straight line through that.

And for about the millionth time, why that happened is no mystery - amphetamines are a better PED than steroids, by far. In-comp testing started in 1968 and killed them off.

If there's a new PED, it's a stimulant.

As usual, you miss the point, probably due to weak quantitative skills. The point of drawing a line is to draw the eye to where it dips unaccountably.

In the past, the anomalies have been traced to drugs.

Nowhere do I make a claim about the type of PED that is responsible - only that something has caused a substantial deviation from the natural progression.

I get it, you've gone soft and weak sparring with feebs and loons, but I'm the wrong mfer.

rojo wrote:

llort_vbo wrote:

Here we are again - the same BS was said about Lance and his magical training.

Not true. Lance was a good one day rider as a young guy a teen but he wasn't good at the multi-stage TDF. He was a study one day rider. Suddenly after doping, he was amazing at the TDF.

People tried to say the difference was due to how his body changed from cancer treatments.

You should read more about Lance and his training post-cancer.

Lets review the Data again...

Athletes who have run Under 9.8 seconds

Ben Johnson 9.79 (Doped)

Maurice Green 9.79 (Caught selling Dope)

Tim Montgomery 9.78 (Doped)

Nesta Carter 9.78 (Doped)

Asafa Powell 9.74 (Doped)

Justin Gatlin 9.74 (Doped)

Yohan Blake 9.69 (Doped)

Tyson Gay 9.69 (Doped)

And Then we get to Usain Bolt 9.F@#King 58

Clean? gota be right...

https://mariakeogh.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/greatcitygamespreviewsjspw0fyrlhrl.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/08/22/19/3772314600000578-3753474-image-a-59_1471892339595.jpg

Didn't even bother getting braces like the rest of them...

NietzschesDelight wrote:

Lets review the Data again...

Athletes who have run Under 9.8 seconds

Ben Johnson 9.79 (Doped)

Maurice Green 9.79 (Caught selling Dope)

Tim Montgomery 9.78 (Doped)

Nesta Carter 9.78 (Doped)

Asafa Powell 9.74 (Doped)

Justin Gatlin 9.74 (Doped)

Yohan Blake 9.69 (Doped)

Tyson Gay 9.69 (Doped)

And Then we get to Usain Bolt 9.F@#King 58

Clean? gota be right...

https://mariakeogh.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/greatcitygamespreviewsjspw0fyrlhrl.jpghttp://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/08/22/19/3772314600000578-3753474-image-a-59_1471892339595.jpg

Didn't even bother getting braces like the rest of them...

Yeah, this point seems to be lost on a lot of people. Somehow, Bolt has run 0.22 faster than known dopers BUt he's clean cuz of stride length/turnover/height/yams/lulz.

NietzschesDelight wrote:

Didn't even bother getting braces like the rest of them...

Gulp.

Proves that he is lazy.

Bolt has left a lot of the table through out his career because he has poor work ethic

Always expects to get by on the bare minimum

Also all the drug talk/ clean talk should stop

You still have to put in the work and have the talent

People keep talking like you take the drug and the next week you are an elite runner.