UnF****** Believable - Eaton 45.00 for 400!

rojo wrote:

I've cleaned up this thread as I think a few people misunderstood the title and thought we thought Eaton's performance was 'too good to be true.' Far from it.

The guy is a SICK athlete.

He ran 48.69 in the 400h last year.

Look, we consider ourselves leaderes in the anti-doping movement but some of the talk at these worlds are driving me nuts.

Here my new policy. If I see post that says, "doper" with no reasoning behind it, then it will be deleted by me. It's fine if you want to say, "Wow, does anyone think running a .55 pb at the end of 5 competitions is a sign of PED use?"

Ashton Eaton celebrated like he ran a WR and he is a modest guy. That was awesome since it's not all a huge surprise given his other PRs, previous PRs, and the fact he is priming right now. I would think if he was actually doping he wouldn't be so stoked at running that time.

That said though, do decathletes have a (event) history of dopers? Just curious because I was explaining to my GF how the decathlete might be the best even in track considering athletes compete for points (i.e. win/loss is based on exploitations of strengths and weaknesses)

45.0 is a fantastic mark. I have met and interacted with Aston, his wife and their Coach Harry Mara. If ANY athlete is CLEAN it is Ashton. Straight up good guy as is his coach. Period. JM

I saw Bill Tomey run sub 46 in Mexico OG and knew it would be a long time to see a faster Decathlon 400.

To run 45.0 is head shaking.

Old Man Runner wrote:

Would have finished 7th in the 400m as a stand-alone event. Pretty damn impressive.

actually, he wouldn't have made the final. needed 44.7 to get in

Not a surprising time considering his 100m (and 400mh) pb. But to do it at the end of day 1 is really impressive.

Bout time, by the reasoning of some of the folks on these boards, there's no performance that isn't "tainted" or "suspect", with typically no evidence to back it up.

This is one American who appears to have peaked at the right time! As a possible candidate for the 4X400 final? Mos Def!!! He could probably run a 44.50 relay leg!

Let's see him follow up with a 4:10!

rojo wrote:

I've cleaned up this thread as I think a few people misunderstood the title and thought we thought Eaton's performance was 'too good to be true.' Far from it.

The guy is a SICK athlete.

He ran 48.69 in the 400h last year.

Look, we consider ourselves leaderes in the anti-doping movement but some of the talk at these worlds are driving me nuts.

Here my new policy. If I see post that says, "doper" with no reasoning behind it, then it will be deleted by me. It's fine if you want to say, "Wow, does anyone think running a .55 pb at the end of 5 competitions is a sign of PED use?"

Oh so he was taking all of the medicine because he was SICK! Got ya.

OXYRUNR wrote:

45.0 is a fantastic mark. I have met and interacted with Aston, his wife and their Coach Harry Mara. If ANY athlete is CLEAN it is Ashton. Straight up good guy as is his coach. Period. JM

Give me a break. Plenty of nice people with good coaches dope.

Ashton may or may not dope but how some anonymous guy views him doesn't matter.

I am certain Ashton Eaton is thanking those 'Slave Genes' Michael Johnson was talking about.

Old Man Runner wrote:

Would have finished 7th in the 400m as a stand-alone event. Pretty damn impressive.

Not quite. 18 people broke 45 in the heats.

rojo wrote:

I've cleaned up this thread as I think a few people misunderstood the title and thought we thought Eaton's performance was 'too good to be true.' Far from it.

The guy is a SICK athlete.

He ran 48.69 in the 400h last year.

Look, we consider ourselves leaderes in the anti-doping movement but some of the talk at these worlds are driving me nuts.

Here my new policy. If I see post that says, "doper" with no reasoning behind it, then it will be deleted by me. It's fine if you want to say, "Wow, does anyone think running a .55 pb at the end of 5 competitions is a sign of PED use?"

Very interesting, Paula, potential Doper, won't release blood tests...does that work.

Eaton could have been a great 400 runner forever, 45 not that shocking, 45.00 is a little shocking at the end of the day decathlon.

Dennis Reynolds -69 wrote:

Give me a break. Plenty of nice people with good coaches dope.

Hear hear.

Can we get all "X isn't a doper, I met X and he seemed like a nice guy" posts deleted as well?

Vlad The Inhaler wrote:

Let's see him follow up with a 4:10!

Wow, that was a great race. China is fast for the 400 race.

4:10 maybe not dude. I take a 4:30 though and 9000 +

Maybe we can just have a thread of who is clean. It would be short, but a lot easier to do it this way as everyone else is a doper.

rojo wrote:

I've cleaned up this thread as I think a few people misunderstood the title and thought we thought Eaton's performance was 'too good to be true.' Far from it.

The guy is a SICK athlete.

He ran 48.69 in the 400h last year.

Look, we consider ourselves leaderes in the anti-doping movement but some of the talk at these worlds are driving me nuts.

Here my new policy. If I see post that says, "doper" with no reasoning behind it, then it will be deleted by me. It's fine if you want to say, "Wow, does anyone think running a .55 pb at the end of 5 competitions is a sign of PED use?"

^^^ This

Go Duckss wrote:

Vlad The Inhaler wrote:

Let's see him follow up with a 4:10!

Wow, that was a great race. China is fast for the 400 race.

4:10 maybe not dude. I take a 4:30 though and 9000 +

there's no way Eaton will run as slow as 4:30 UNLESS he is way ahead of 2nd place but not close to his WR or even 9000 pts, in which case he might just take it easy to secure the win.

First time on this forum today. Interesting how 'we' decide who dopes and who doesn't. And who moderates our discussions and with what rules. Different countries have very stringent internal controls (I think to give some examples, Canada, Scandinavian countries, Australia, and the Netherlands are very strict, while other countries, often with less resources, or less willingness, are less strict). Someone's nationality or someone's skin color, or someone's complexion, are not good guidelines. Rigorous and surprise testing help but maybe the doctors and coaches are ahead of the associations. When an athlete tells us he or she clean we assume they are until proven otherwise (a famous cyclist comes to mind). We assumed Lewis, FloJo, ad Jones were clean, while the east Germans and Russians were always suspect, some have since been found out, others may have gotten away with it. I think testing is better than ever before, more people are being caught. But it is not surprising that given the opportunity people will just about do anything to follow their dream. Ultimately history will tell and most will get found out.

At least in this era we may assume people make personal choices, in the past (east block countries) sport academies played with peoples lives without the athletes knowledge.