What drug is Asafa Powell taking????

Is there even any circumstantial evidence?

Does he have guilty associations?

I don't know if he is clean, but you can't just bring out the drug card every times someone breaks a WR without any shread of evidence.

Aparece que no conoces bien este foro.

The whole thing looks suspect. The guy wasn't running that well coming into Worlds. Runs poorly at Worlds and then runs sub 9.8 twice in the same day. Maybe they don't test a Rieti. Most likely though a wind gauge malfunction or inthe case of Flo Jo someone standing in the way of the wind guage and drugs.

If you run under 9.80 seconds...you are not clean. With the exception of Powell and Gay (Greene doesn't count...guilty by association) everyone else under 9.8 has been dirty. How...how can a clean guy run a time that everybody else had to cheat to run. In today's world, how can anybody strongly support ANYBODY as being clean. Every athlete, except Kelli White, denies any wrong doing until they CAN'T deny it anymore.

"Their is too much $$$ at stake and everyone else is dirty, so why not" and deny it until the end!

I have been involved in this sport for 20 years, as a coach, at all levels, and life lessons have taught me to be skeptical.

To produce the amount of force that these guys have to produce to run under 9.80 takes a tremendous amount of strength. What's more...to do this time after time with little rest between races, just enough time to travel to the next meet and do another pre-meet warmup and, maybe a workout of questionable quality before the next race - that's a sure sign.

It will never happen, but the way to know the truth is to draw blood. USATF, IAAF, NFL, NHL, NBA, whatever will never go to this method of testing. Why?...it would be shooting themselves in the foot. Where would cycling be if the poster boy of the Tour ever tested positive. NO WAY. Cover-ups galore. You start drawing blood there are no outs, except to cover up more and that would be too ominous.

mobile9 wrote:

For some perspective, Alan Webb's 3:46.91 AR is a 5.4% improvement on a 4:00 mile. Asafa's 9.74 is a 2.6% improvement on a 10.00 100m.

That's not really perspective at all.

Webb might be on something, but he ran 1:47/3:53 in 12th grade, so 1:43/3:46 at what should be his prime isn't a big surprise. If you want to talk about Webb on drugs that's fine, but that's something for a different thread.

People don't run under 9.8 unless they use drugs. While I actually would propose legalizing drugs, that's not how it is now and it would be fraud to use them.

I get what you are saying but the Tour hates Lance no one in the tour was trying to cover-up for him. here is my solution there are some flaws but... For non-championship meets when someone tests positive dont say anything. develop a test for it and presumably over the next year or two more and more athletes will use this drug because it works and they dont think there is a test for it. Then prior to an olympics bust them all. What happens now is one or two test positive for a new method or new drug. And then everyone else says ok dont do that try something new. If they thought what they were doing was working the method would spread because the cheats think its safe. Obviously you have to bust people at the olymipcs and WC immediately after because people care who won.

How can you intelligently write something like that? 9.80 is perfectly acceptable but 9.79 is IMPOSSIBLE? On what basis do you arbitrarily decide this, that you know how fast a human is capable of running? You should know that all performances will reach asymptotes where gains are made but at smaller improvements over longer periods of time. Is 18.29m also impossible without drugs?

You might argue that of the five people to post wind-legal marks under 9.80 all but two have drugs convictions. Ok. That shows that those three individuals ran those times with illegal chemicals aids. There's nothing to suggest that the other two used drugs (note that both of the men to coach the other three sub 9.80 runners had a history with drugs). And what's more, how can you determine that a talented athlete could not achieve similar performances without such aid?

And if you like, Powell ran 10.12 as a 19 year old and 9.74 as a 25 year old -- 3.75% improvement over six years. Or take Walter Dix: for him to go from 9.93 to 9.79 would be 1.4%. Is that so hard to fathom? That's Webb going from 3:50 to 3:46.8 over three or four years. And in the sprints, conditions play such a huge roll: Montgomery ran his 9.78 with a 2.0 mps behind him. Take that away, and he's close to 9.90.

Bottom line: there's no basis to draw the line in the sand and say, "This is as far as a homo sapien can go, because I think so." Sure, you won't see us running a 3.0sec 100m or a 1min mile, but incremental improvements (right athletes, right training, right conditions) over time should be expected. Better resources, more athletes in the gene pool and improved training should yield improvements. I'd be disappointed if they didn't.

It's not the fact it's 9.8, it's the fact that a TON of the fastest sprinters have been busted. This means they certainly took performance enhancing drugs. I'm confident that of the men who have gone under 9.90 or whatever time you want to put out there (not because it's an arbitrary time as you seem to think, but because it's a time that so few people run) not all were caught. So yes, they got Chambers and Gatlin and Montgomery and Johnson and Mitchell and others but they certainly missed others too.

It's not a case of me saying "X is the limit, anything faster is cheating". It's a case of "A surprisingly high percentage of people that run really fast have been caught using PEDs and even more were not almost certainly not caught, so it doesn't make sense that someone can go out there and demolish something that even druggies couldn't run". It's one reaon that its logical to believe Lance Armstrong was doped. He was beating people that were doped up and it's much more believable that he was on something than to believe he was such a genetic freak as to be able to completely own amazing athletes that were on drugs.

Don't compare distance times to sprint times either. Using percentages doesn't work with sprints in the way it does distances for a multitude of reasons. There are more variables in longer races.

That's probably cause 10.00 is way better than 4:00.

Nicole Teter beat Regina Jacobs. Tyree Washington beat Jerome Young. Kim Collins beat Tim Montgomery and Dwain Chambers.

There are a number of people in this sport I suspect of using drugs, but I look for valid reasons to support such suspicions. Gatlin and Montgomery were no surprises: anyone working with Trevor was going to get popped sooner or later. No such connections exist for Powell or Gay.

There's a huge difference between beating someone and running a very, very fast time.

Regina Jacobs set records, Teter might have beaten her, but time wise wasn't in the same area.

Tyree Washington's 400m PR is slower than Young's.

Collins has a PR of 9.98, Chambers ran faster and Montgomery ran a lot faster.

Powell, Gatlin, Greene, Johnson and Montgomery are the only men under 9.80. Three of the four have been caught for using PEDs. So a majority of people that have run under 9.80 are steroids users and cheats. I find it hard to believe that Powell just happens to be better than very talented drug users. Would he run 9.65 if he used drugs then? Come on.

After an athlete sets a WR, do they have to wait for their drug test to come back negative before their time gets ratified as a WR?

I bet he's high on life...cereal.

You mean three of five?

Tim Montgomery ran 9.92 with 0.2mps. 9.78 with 2.0mps wind is roughly worth 9.87 with no wind. In five years and with BALCO Montgomery less than half a percent. What did drugs do for him?

You can't assume that giving drugs to talented athletes will automatically result in better performances. Do you doubt that 18.29m was clean? How much further could he have gone with drugs? Any further? Canova has said how Alberto Cova ran no faster when he was blood doping than when he wasn't.

Tell me who would be giving Powell drugs. Doyle has no history of it and neither does Franno.

Yes, three of five. 60%. A majority.

You are saying drugs don't improve the performance of an athlete? You're serious about that?

Anybody could give Powell drugs. Just because someone hasn't been caught doesn't mean they aren't. The fact someone hasn't done something in the past (or rather, hasn't been caught) doesn't mean they are't doing it now even though someone that has been caught is thought to be more likely to do it in the future.

And those same three came from only two coaches, both with long drug histories. That isn't true with either Powell or Gay's camps.

I'm saying that you can't assume that drugs will impact an athletes performances. Canova brought up the really good point that they don't test these drugs on world class athletes. Cova didn't run any faster with blood doping and Montgomery's improvements under Graham were marginal at best.

Of course you have people like Kelli White, Cathal Lombard, Randy Barnes, Ben Johnson, etc. showed marked improvement and later got popped. But take Shaheen -- Canova swears up and down this guy is the real deal. Let's assume that he is -- what would you expect from him if he gave him a host of drugs? 7:20 in the 3kSC? What could JE jump with drugs? 20m?

A 7:20 steeple or 20m TJ are asinine numbers. They are humanly impossible no matter what drugs are administered.

Maybe with drugs he'd drop to a 7:48 steeple and 12:40 5k. I don't know. I don't know exactly how each drug affects individuals in different events. I do know that the 100m has had a ton of athletes get busted and that it seems illogical that you have a couple guys that are heads and shoulders above others, many of whom took drugs.

It doesn't seem illogical to me, given that of the three coaches so far responsible for sub 9.80 performances, two have long histories with drug users.

Some people are really, really good.

The latest documents show Lewis tested positive for the banned stimulants found in cold medications: pseudoephedrine, ephedrine and phenylpropanolamine.

A far cry from steriods.......he took cold medicine..big deal.

*** MASKING AGENTS ***