Fastest historic untainted 100m times

One might have a decent shot at identifying those sprinters who are NOT using AAS, or at least not using them in substantial amounts - sprinters without big three-dimensional shoulders like Lemaitre, Degrasse, Brommell (the deltoids contain a huge number of androgen receptors, hence decent amounts of AAS blow them up faster than, say, your biceps).

But the inverse isn't easy - there are plenty of dudes naturally blessed with big delts, from some combination of solid natty testosterone levels and genetic gifts, and so not every guy with big delts is using.

That's just AAS. With rHGH, IGF-1Lr, and the related peptides, you're not going to get much muscle development at all. What you will get is increased anaerobic capacity and something like 0.10-0.30 off your 100 meter time without showing any signs of being "dirty."

The most popular AAS for sprinters currently (anavar, winstrol, halotestin) will be out of your system in a matter of weeks. At low doses for short cycles, your T/epiT levels have probably gotten back to normal after 3-4 weeks. You're safe on either a piss test or a blood test at that point. If you're just taking testosterone (either sus or prop, probably), you'd likely be fine injecting all the way up to the day of the meet. They got Gatlin for a longer ester, I believe (perhaps enanthate).

I think some MMA guys have gotten popped for some of the peptides, but GH is notoriously hard to detect. You need a blood test, not a urine test, and it clears fast enough that you may be in the clear if you discontinue use the day before the test; at that point, you may have a residually high IGF level but the "normal range" is wide enough that you might be good.

I'm not knocking sprintgeezer's efforts. This is an interesting exercise and he's very thorough. I'm just saying that while we can identify people who are either directly busted or who have associations with known users, the nature of the substances used and how they are used makes it pretty hard to do guesswork short of that. Big individual improvements in a short period, maybe (one sprinter went from 10.40 in 2019 to 9.9x this year, for instance). But I think looking at it big-picture should give you a clue of how difficult this is - the enormous improvement in sprint performance from, roughly, 2002-2012 is, to my mind, a pretty obvious indicator that the widespread availability of affordable rHGH that began in the early 2000s was not lost on sprinters. Who, in particular? Eh, probably never know.

Obikwelu, Vicaut, any of the SAs and Britons are dirty and so is almost half of that list, that's just the way top sprinting is sadly.

Let me put it differently then, the ones I think there's a good chance of being "clean" or pretty close to it:

Brommel

Patton

Degrasse

Forte

Lemaitre

KBCole

Batson

Yes it’s a tough list to compile, no matter how you look at it.

FOR SURE there are users on this list, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

Yeah there’s a decent argument to be made for many of the guys on your list, and I get where you’re coming from.

Why don't you accept Thompson's 9.82 as legitimate?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF-YzKthRn0

Honestly, I don’t remember. It has something to do with the POS track, like Clermont and now Miramar.

IIRC it had +1.7 or so, so it fits with his 9.89 behind Bolt, with no wind, and also with his 9.85

I liked him, a lot—with that stiff-legged hitchy style, great middle acceleration. IDK what to say about that 9.82 at the moment, I would have to think about it again. Maybe it was that particular race.

so are

Jacobs: 9.80

Su: 9.83

Baker 9.83

Untainted as well?

The only clean sprinters:

Bolt.

M.L. Jacobs.

Baker.

Carl Lewis.

Jesse Owens.

Eulace Peacock.