New batch wrote:
Whatever it takes to beat that sham, Merritt. Why everyone is so soft on a former PED abuser is beyond me. Perhaps everyone just forgot?
Please don't use the word "soft" around Mr. Merritt. Its a sensitive topic.
New batch wrote:
Whatever it takes to beat that sham, Merritt. Why everyone is so soft on a former PED abuser is beyond me. Perhaps everyone just forgot?
Please don't use the word "soft" around Mr. Merritt. Its a sensitive topic.
Screwby Doo wrote:
Totally legit. No chance there is anything untoward about two guys from the same country with pretty much no history of 400m running, smashing through 44 seconds in the space of 3 days.
THIS.SPORT.IS.A.JOKE.
1. They are not from the same country, you uneducated moron.
2. Both Botswana and South Africa have pretty solid histories in terms of 400 and 800 running, you uninformed idiot.
YOU.ARE.A.CLOWN.
Botswana and South Africa are not the same country. Sure, Botswana is in SOUTHERN AFRICA, and South Africa has a geographical identifier in its name, so it gets confusing, but they're not the same country. The two athletes are not even the same ethnic group.
South Africa is in Southern Africa just it's not all black people. Also Niekerk and Makwaala share 50% black ancestry but Niekerk is probably half white.
More to the point, I think, is that Amantle Montsho is also from Botswana. Doesn't mean Makwala is doping, but his improvement the last 2 years at a somewhat advanced age definitely stands out, and the Montsho bust is, at a minimum, an interesting coincidence.
dkny64 wrote:
More to the point, I think, is that Amantle Montsho is also from Botswana. Doesn't mean Makwala is doping, but his improvement the last 2 years at a somewhat advanced age definitely stands out, and the Montsho bust is, at a minimum, an interesting coincidence.
yeah, and south africa had oscar pistorius who was PROVEN to have fake legs. wayde van niekerk is from south africa. coincidence?
What exactly is your point here? So he beat the Olympic champ. Okay, and if Justin Gatlin is eyeballs full of whatever and beats Usain Bolt then does this somehow, in a twisted way, validate Gatlin as clean?!
It's a comedy act. It's just "coincidence" that overnight, a nation with no history in 400m running now has 2 sub 44 guys?
The only other nation that has ever had this is obviously the USA - and despite that list being littered with cheats and highly dubious names, in the very least the US has been the dominant 400m running nation in history.
I will give you an equivalent - it is like Poland - a nation with a good 800m running tradition, suddenly producing two sub 13min 5000m runners in the space of 3 days - and even then Polish 800m running has always been better than South African short sprinting.
It's BS, total BS - I mean they could have at least staggered these ridiculous performances to try and throw in some level of plausibility.
Jeff Wigand wrote:
Screwby Doo wrote:Totally legit. No chance there is anything untoward about two guys from the same country with pretty much no history of 400m running, smashing through 44 seconds in the space of 3 days.
THIS.SPORT.IS.A.JOKE.
What country is that?
South Africa? Or am I missing the irony/sarcasm/joke?
Isaac: from BotswanaVan N: from South Africa
Screwby Doo wrote:
Jeff Wigand wrote:What country is that?
South Africa? Or am I missing the irony/sarcasm/joke?
You're missing the sarcasm.
Isaac: from BotswanaVan N: from South Africa
Screwby Doo wrote:
Jeff Wigand wrote:What country is that?
South Africa? Or am I missing the irony/sarcasm/joke?
You're missing the sarcasm.
Screwby Doo wrote:
What exactly is your point here? So he beat the Olympic champ. Okay, and if Justin Gatlin is eyeballs full of whatever and beats Usain Bolt then does this somehow, in a twisted way, validate Gatlin as clean?!
It's a comedy act. It's just "coincidence" that overnight, a nation with no history in 400m running now has 2 sub 44 guys?
The only other nation that has ever had this is obviously the USA - and despite that list being littered with cheats and highly dubious names, in the very least the US has been the dominant 400m running nation in history.
I will give you an equivalent - it is like Poland - a nation with a good 800m running tradition, suddenly producing two sub 13min 5000m runners in the space of 3 days - and even then Polish 800m running has always been better than South African short sprinting.
It's BS, total BS - I mean they could have at least staggered these ridiculous performances to try and throw in some level of plausibility.
I'm assuming you're from the USA? All you Canadians are the same.
I suspect you won't understand my point. If you don't, either read through the numerous responses to your original post, or consult an atlas. It's a big book with maps in. Look for Botswana. Then look for South Africa.
Kind regards
Screwby Doo wrote:
What exactly is your point here? So he beat the Olympic champ. Okay, and if Justin Gatlin is eyeballs full of whatever and beats Usain Bolt then does this somehow, in a twisted way, validate Gatlin as clean?!
It's a comedy act. It's just "coincidence" that overnight, a nation with no history in 400m running now has 2 sub 44 guys?
The only other nation that has ever had this is obviously the USA - and despite that list being littered with cheats and highly dubious names, in the very least the US has been the dominant 400m running nation in history.
I will give you an equivalent - it is like Poland - a nation with a good 800m running tradition, suddenly producing two sub 13min 5000m runners in the space of 3 days - and even then Polish 800m running has always been better than South African short sprinting.
It's BS, total BS - I mean they could have at least staggered these ridiculous performances to try and throw in some level of plausibility.
MORON. They're from two different nations. Your equivalent is equivalent to you being a stupid bigot that doesn't know what he's talking about. You're logic is the only comedy act here...
According to the sprint basic wind/altitude converter, a 43.72 at 1000m altitude is worth 43.95 at sea level. Last year he ran 44.01, and 44.23 at sea level. So, maybe he could go sub-44 this year but I do think this track has an advantage over sea level tracks, sitting right at the legal altitude limit.
vivalarepublica wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:Yes obviously if it's up in the mountains it might be mostly downhill
I said nothing about being downhill, you over assuming idiot.
If the track is slightly tilted so that the first half is downhill and the second half is uphill, it will result in a faster 400, assuming the magnitude of acceleration is equal in both directions. This is because you start the second half going faster than you normally would. Much like rolling a bike down a hill and then immediately climbing another one is faster than climbing and then rolling down.
I don't think there is any rule in the facilities manual against a tilted track.
Bad Wigins wrote:
vivalarepublica wrote:I said nothing about being downhill, you over assuming idiot.
If the track is slightly tilted so that the first half is downhill and the second half is uphill, it will result in a faster 400, assuming the magnitude of acceleration is equal in both directions. This is because you start the second half going faster than you normally would. Much like rolling a bike down a hill and then immediately climbing another one is faster than climbing and then rolling down.
I don't think there is any rule in the facilities manual against a tilted track.
But the first 200 is faster overall than the second. You would want a downhill start curving back uphill, then flat from 200 to about 300, and a downhill homestretch.
Screwby Doo wrote:
It's a comedy act. It's just "coincidence" that overnight, a nation with no history in 400m running now has 2 sub 44 guys?
It's BS, total BS - I mean they could have at least staggered these ridiculous performances to try and throw in some level of plausibility.
Not to mention a 1:41 guy coming out of thin air in 2012. Here are the Botswana records:
10:19, 19.96,43.72, 1:41.73, 3:39,13:29, 27:48
Steeenkin in Denmark.
Have to be living up a mountain
not to know what ped is heavily involved.
especially when looking at qatari group.
igf-1 lr3 is getting them into the 44's then
need to up the doping to get further.
no secret again where that last 100m endurance so important to fast times
can be improved .
as high a hematocrit as can get away wit.
microdosepo or just even t3 + high altitude.
kirani being doing for years now but competition now from other guys
willing to dope the same.
with rugby culture in south africa not hard
to get hands on peds and probably even most dope in other surrounding countries
been original origin .including botswana.
south african 200m guy. same dope.
that botswana 800m time has still got to
be the dirtiest of the national records.
time all to do with GW501516
and just got in there before
couldnt use anymore .
like rudisha who had been on it for awhile.
but never have that endurance since.
HardLoper wrote:According to the sprint basic wind/altitude converter, a 43.72 at 1000m altitude is worth 43.95 at sea level. Last year he ran 44.01, and 44.23 at sea level. So, maybe he could go sub-44 this year but I do think this track has an advantage over sea level tracks, sitting right at the legal altitude limit.
that convertor only considers physics & nothing at all for hypoxia affecting metabolism
400m has significant aerobic component which woud speed up that basic 43.95
that 43.72 IMO, is ~ full value for 43.72 at sea-level
HardLoper wrote:
But the first 200 is faster overall than the second. You would want a downhill start curving back uphill, then flat from 200 to about 300, and a downhill homestretch.
If you name those changes in elevation dv1, dv2 and dv3, then you'd have to have dv2 > - (dv1) for dv3 to be less than 0. Net change in elevation has to be 0. Down a little hill, up a big hill, then down another little hill. Either the big hill on the backstretch would wipe out the gains from the first downhill, or it would have to be so small that the homestretch hill would give no significant advantage.
Another thing you could do is make the downhill for the first 200 meters, then cut a flat grade into part of the hill going back up, so that only the last 85 meters is uphill. As long as it's not too steep, a strong 400 runner might be able to hold form.
Another trick would be to make the entire track downhill all the way around, so that it finishes 2 meters or so below where it started, and the finishing runners will jump at the end.