Is there any clean athlete? Please name one

Nick willis

i dont know for sure,but id have said brendon rodney,crystal emmanuel,and aaron brown (all canadians)are clean,plus throw in ezinne okbarebo of norway.she looks clean,or at least she doesnt look like she walked out of a laboratory.

Olympic Truth wrote:

Sopwith Camel wrote:

What discussion?

The 200 posts and the fact that I think 3-4 of the athletes mentioned are clean and others I don't and there was a back and forth..... discussion.Even others had a discussion about EPO and the Kenyan runners.

I think your question is just meant to discredit the thread for no reason. BYE FELICIA

I don't see a discussion. Just posts.

I do have a few questions:

1. If you know the sprinters are taking, what are they taking, how much, and when in the cycle?

2. How do they not get busted? Do they gamble that they won't get busted while cycling onto something? Are you alleging corruption? They go somewhere where the is less OOC testing? Do they microdose?

3. If you know the distance runners are they taking, what are they taking, how much, and when in the cycle?

4. You seem to suggest that aving a hot streak is sus. Are people not allowed to exceed what you achieved? Surely if they're in tip form, they rbn a few wdifferent races to get good conditions and a PR.

- Andre DeGrass (100m)

- Melissa Bishop (800m)

their progressions are not suspicious at all. Im serious. DeGrass is just naturally talented and only been coached well for the last few years. and Bishop is a grinder who built up to her time very consistently

It's tough watching Olympic running these days. I'd say most athletes are dirty to varying degrees. It almost feels like cycling during the Armstrong era. And everyone is posting articles about how Bolt is superhuman....well....I guess he would appear that way considering what he's doing isn't confined to human nature. I keep seeing these pockets of athletes from single coaches dominating as if they "magically figured out the secret to running". The Jamaican sprinters, the Oregon/Salazar crew, the East African distance runners... And even when we see stories about doping in the US or Jama Aden get caught it gets swept away pretty quickly. I guess if it's a Russian it stays in the headlines because well...cold war round 2! Nearly all of my friends think that the runners at the olympics are clean because "well they test them" even when we know the testing is really not that great and countries are clearly not playing by the same rules. Hard to watch the sport with any sort of regard for how well the athletes do when one is so clearly blowing away everyone else....as if all these elite runners that have focused on this their entire life are just a bunch of bums compared to one superhuman that "had the better genetics" (which everyone says without any proof that any receptor or hormone is different in these people or even which ones would cause that)....or "figured out the training" (as if in the 21st century there are secrets of running that haven't been figured out yet). It's sad really. Just my take.

As my trainer puts it you will always just be an athlete unless you take "supplements" lol. This is why Im stuck at 10.4-10.7 typing on letsrun and the rest of my teammates are running 10 flats and went to the olympics lol. I really dont care though track and field is a joke i enjoy running in college meets maybe one day I can run in those small canadian/overseas meets or something if I can go 10.3/10.2. You cant even do the training to get to those crazy times without drugs its pounding every day. I skip practice days because I cant handle one training session and takes me two days to recover lol. You guys in here saying you dont need drugs come join me in a training session with some guys on boost and see how you make it when they blast a 32 second 300 meter and 20 minutes later run 33 seconds then back it with another 32-33 second run after a short rest lol Ill go 33 seconds and 20 minutes later run about a 42 haha

You're training too hard. That's why you're not recovering.

Karma Police wrote:

I do have a few questions:

1. If you know the sprinters are taking, what are they taking, how much, and when in the cycle?

2. How do they not get busted? Do they gamble that they won't get busted while cycling onto something? Are you alleging corruption? They go somewhere where the is less OOC testing? Do they microdose?

3. If you know the distance runners are they taking, what are they taking, how much, and when in the cycle?

4. You seem to suggest that aving a hot streak is sus. Are people not allowed to exceed what you achieved? Surely if they're in tip form, they rbn a few wdifferent races to get good conditions and a PR.

1. GW5150 altered with another Peptide.no need to cycle. amt depends

2. Designer drugs alter the chemical make up and it will never test positive

3.See above and EPO

4.Here is where you get into trouble by insulting me, if you have read any of my posts. I was slow, I dont care if someone was faster. If the PR is so much faster than your previous PR are you sus? Or as long as they dont test positive.. Marion, same test for Lance..

Now questions for you

1. Why do you feel the need to go after me

2. What is a realistic PR drop

3. Have you read anything on the subject of PED in a scientific journal

4. How do you explain a "clean" runner beating known PED users

If a person never tried to run fast, they will not understand. Over half of the people run distance and they have never done a speed or speed end. workout of a sprinter. I was around the same speed. Which is why I ran for another country, I got a couple of small sponsors and went to alot of meets. I did not have to see guys run like that for a season, but I saw a couple of HS kids get fast in 1 year i mean really fast. another college kid go from losing to me in the 400 to getting a medal at the Olys in short time. It was hard, but I was doing what I wanted and it led me to a different career and I am doing very well. It took a while over 10 years.

Canadarunsnice wrote:

- Andre DeGrass (100m)

- Melissa Bishop (800m)

their progressions are not suspicious at all. Im serious. DeGrass is just naturally talented and only been coached well for the last few years. and Bishop is a grinder who built up to her time very consistently

Degrass no way

Bishop jury's still deliberating.

Not sure a "grinder" is the new way to determine if someone is clean.

Canadarunsnice wrote:

- Andre DeGrass (100m)

- Melissa Bishop (800m)

their progressions are not suspicious at all. Im serious. DeGrass is just naturally talented and only been coached well for the last few years. and Bishop is a grinder who built up to her time very consistently

By the way they said the exact same thing about Ben.

Olympic Truth wrote:

Canadarunsnice wrote:

- Andre DeGrass (100m)

- Melissa Bishop (800m)

their progressions are not suspicious at all. Im serious. DeGrass is just naturally talented and only been coached well for the last few years. and Bishop is a grinder who built up to her time very consistently

Degrass no way

Bishop jury's still deliberating.

Not sure a "grinder" is the new way to determine if someone is clean.

You are SO stupid.

Even if you had inside information (which you don't) on some runners you raced etc that does not give you the magic ability to point at athletes that you know nothing about and claim if they are clean or dirty. It is insanity. It's like looking at someone and trying to guess their sexual preference.

This thread is honestly the stupidest shit I've ever read. The confidence with which you decide if someone is doping is one of the clearest examples of the Dunning–Kruger effect I have ever seen on this site.

I think this thread wins for the most posts with zero actual information.

Olympic Truth, this thread has thoroughly cemented the fact that you don't actually know anything. So far it has been only random speculation and being "convinced" people are dirty because they improved too fast or remained fast for too long in a given season. You probably are right about some dopers, but it is random luck, not actual knowledge.

I think it's all in the performances, I get suspicious in the these following scenarios.

1.Winning multiple individual events in major competitions (excluding field events)

2.Being injured for the majority of the season, only to run a season's best suddenly at the world champs or olys

3.Guilty by association (ie Van Niekerk training with the Bolt camp, then running a WR at the Olys)

4.Hitting personal bests after the age of 30 (especially sprints)

5.Dominating an event for several years

Samuel DeChamplain wrote:

Sorry I run at 5:30 every morning lol

Just wanted to know, I guess I better stop getting better though because I'll be accused of using drugs in a year or two as well

Only if you go from 13:58 to 13:08.

An Aggie wrote:

I think this thread wins for the most posts with zero actual information.

Olympic Truth, this thread has thoroughly cemented the fact that you don't actually know anything. So far it has been only random speculation and being "convinced" people are dirty because they improved too fast or remained fast for too long in a given season. You probably are right about some dopers, but it is random luck, not actual knowledge.

Correct. Except I have some knowledge just not proof for the IOC. I have done alot of research when I was at Grad School got a few studies published. I could anyone know,,,, until they know. Its total speculation. But Did you think Lance was on ? I did. I predicted Jamaica in 2005. I also incorrectly said Japan and Mexico and Portugal.

For those willing to post without going after me, its been ok. Way more good than bad.

So you knew about GW5150? You can alot of people do, but I'm asking you.

Metric Miler wrote:

Olympic Truth wrote:

Degrass no way

Bishop jury's still deliberating.

Not sure a "grinder" is the new way to determine if someone is clean.

You are SO stupid.

Even if you had inside information (which you don't) on some runners you raced etc that does not give you the magic ability to point at athletes that you know nothing about and claim if they are clean or dirty. It is insanity. It's like looking at someone and trying to guess their sexual preference.

This thread is honestly the stupidest shit I've ever read. The confidence with which you decide if someone is doping is one of the clearest examples of the Dunning–Kruger effect I have ever seen on this site.

FELICIA!! I SAID BYE MAKE ME A SANDWICH

Metric Miler wrote:

Olympic Truth wrote:

Degrass no way

Bishop jury's still deliberating.

Not sure a "grinder" is the new way to determine if someone is clean.

You are SO stupid.

Even if you had inside information (which you don't) on some runners you raced etc that does not give you the magic ability to point at athletes that you know nothing about and claim if they are clean or dirty. It is insanity. It's like looking at someone and trying to guess their sexual preference.

This thread is honestly the stupidest shit I've ever read. The confidence with which you decide if someone is doping is one of the clearest examples of the Dunning–Kruger effect I have ever seen on this site.

Thats is a good one. I didn't know about it. It is odd that you did. Almost like you looked it up in order to use it to put someone else down.LOL

The miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."[1]

I guess im the second miscalibration. and your the others