|
 Where Your Dreams Become Reality |
|
You are reporting the following post to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum Poster: Sprintgeezer Subject: RE: Gay, Powell, and Collins on the London startlist Body: 1. In the truest sense of the word "reliable", the word does not denote either accurate, precise, or correct. It happens to minimize false positives, I think, which is the basis for testing 2 samples. Nobody, myself included, is arguing that any particular lab-based testing protocol is inherently flawed in detecting what it aims to detect, assuming it is conducted correctly--and if conducted correctly, can certainly be reliable. However, my methods are probably equally reliable. Look up the meaning of reliable. 2. Thank-you for the opinion, but it was very weak indeed. I never suggested that the only evidence of Bolt having doped in 08 and 09 was that he was running faster then, than he is now. Your opinion is based upon a number of false premises--not only that first one, but also your inherent assumption that "developing fast" and "injury status" are independent of doping status, which they are not. 3. Everybody knows by now that my "idea of a clean limit" is not something I pulled out of my a$$, it is based on FACT, although the quality of some of those facts may not be the very best. It is based on the FACT that Bailey ran 9.84 in less than max allowable wind, the FACT that he would have run it faster with a max allowable wind, all things being equal, the FACT that he could have gotten a better start, as he himself previously demonstrated, and the likely fact that he was clean when he did so. Again, he and Surin are IMO the 2 top historical modern-era sprinters most likely to have been completely clean, and it is they who should form the basis of any belief about clean 100m ability. Each sprinter is an individual, but that is not to deny the qualities inherent in the ever-enlarging historical GROUP of modern-era sprinters. Just because someone runs 9.9 doesn't mean that he is not doping--he could be a doped 10.4 guy--but just because someone runs 9.58 DOES effectively mean that he is doping. Just because someone runs 9.69 with a max wind after having a great technical race doesn't mean that he is doping--but because someone runs 9.69 under still conditions while giving up 30 yards from the finish and negative-leaning DOES effectively mean that he is doping. Even if he is Bolt, unless Bolt is the historical anomaly. Granted, we are early in the modern era of sprinting, but sprinting speed is something that is observable, and that is noticed, and that is rewarded. It is very likely that the WR-holders in the 100m are ACTUALLY the fastest men in the world, IMO. To expect Bolt to be the historical anomaly stretches credibility. It is easy to show that he has no particular advantage due to the regularly-offered factors such as height, nutrition, culture, youth, etc.. To be the historical anomaly he would have to be the perfect storm--something that is rationally MUCH easier to disbelieve than to believe. Put another way, it is MUCH easier to believe that he is doping than that he is clean. The same goes for Blake, only more so. Much more so. Whereas 9.76 (-0.1) from Bolt running a technically excellent race in Rome (one of the very best clean sprints ever) is not IMO evidence of doping, Blake running 19.2 after missing the start and "deciding" to switch gears near the end of the curve is IMO evidence of doping. 3. So, I'm NOT "against anyone who runs a fast time", as you suggest. I believe that Bailey and Surin were clean at 9.84, Lewis, Boldon, Obikwelu, and Fredericks were clean at 9.86, Bolt was clean at 9.76, Thompson was clean at 9.85, Gay was clean at 9.69, etc. There you have it--different eras, different athletes, different nationalities, and that list is not exhaustive. USA, Jamaica, Namibia, T&T, Portugal, Canada, whatever. Although I believe them to have all been clean, the best arguments for cleanliness have to go to Surin and Bailey. Bailey is the best example of possible speed other than Bolt, because he proved that he could have gotten a much better start than he did, whereas in those other great times, there weren't any glaring inadequacies or deficiencies that the athlete had demonstrated they could have bettered. Gay's 9.69 is the best clean unadjusted time, Bolt's 9.75 is the best clean adjusted time, and Bailey's 9.84 is the fast time with the greatest potential to have been substantially faster. Hit the submit button below if you want us to review the post. If you feel this is urgent or want a reply, email us at letsrun@letsrun.com about the post and please include a link to the thread the post is on and what page number/post on that page it is
|
