Usain Bolt 19.30 -.9 mph

Runningart2004 wrote:

1. Drugs are everywhere. Who cares. If you think MJ was clean I have a bridge to sell you.

2. I bet Bolt can run a 1:30 800m too! 400m is too far. Bolt has been a great 200m runner because he's a great sprinter who starts horribly. That's why he hadn't tried the 100m much because his 6'5' frame is slow as ass out of the blocks. He wouldn't break 45 in the 400m. Different beast.

Alan

Too far? Watch some of those 200 prelims. The one's where he jogs <20's. If he can't run a 25 after that, then his drugs aren't as good as I thought they were.

Has anyone ever held the 1,2,4 WRs simultaneously? because UB could be the man to do it.

rippev wrote:

this will probably be down soon but the real video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_25PzND1sOU

Wow.

Does anyone know if he has ever attempted the long jump? With his speed, and large frame, he could certainly be a very serious long jumper. Doubtful that he would want to put in the time/focus to master the technique, but it might be worth a shot.

Total Drugs

By assuming hes on drugs, you are saying that no human being can be that good, correct?

You are implying that MJs record, clean or not, cannot be broken EVER by a clean human being, correct? Same for the 100m record (pre Bolt).

Or can they be broken, but just not by Bolt?

Because I don't see how anyone can possibly be cleaner than him. I'm highly suspicious by nature, but there is nothing to even suggest hes dirty. This isn't a guy with a dirty or shady past.

He is young and tall, and he sprints in a very unique fashion. These things need to be factored in before you start ranting about drugs.

And so good luck "busting" Bolt. I just dont think its going to happen.

I really don't even think its about drugs, I think its typical US "foreigner" bashing.

If Bolt was a young American it would all be legit.

Would he have also maybe run a few hundredths of a second faster if he had hugged the left line a bit more?

I'm just throwing that out there, but I couldn't begin to imagine how tough that'd be because he must be running what ... 23.3 miles per hour on average? The torque on the turn must be real strong.

Runningart2004 wrote:

1. Drugs are everywhere. Who cares. If you think MJ was clean I have a bridge to sell you.

2. I bet Bolt can run a 1:30 800m too! 400m is too far. Bolt has been a great 200m runner because he's a great sprinter who starts horribly. That's why he hadn't tried the 100m much because his 6'5' frame is slow as ass out of the blocks. He wouldn't break 45 in the 400m. Different beast.

Alan

even though he rn 45.3 at the age of 16, in the heats of the world youth championship. Well done retard.

He's undoubtedly on drugs! AFTER THIS OLYMPICS, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT DRUG USE IS RUNNING RAMPANT IN THE CARIBBEAN JUST AS CONTE POINTED OUT. THERE IS ZERO OFF-SEASON TESTING IN JAMAICA, AND ZERO ANTI-DOPING FEDERATION IN JAMAICA. THIS IS SICKENING, BLATANT CHEATING AND WE WILL NOT BE HEARING THE LAST OF IT. MJ WAS DIRTY, BOLTS IMPROVEMENT OVER ONE YEAR IN THE 200M IS ILLOGICAL. LETS DO THE MATH:

BOLT'S 2007 200M PR: 19.75

2008 PR: 19.30

19.75-19.30 = .45

(.45/19.75) X 100 = 2.28% IMPROVEMENT IN ONE YEARS TIME

NOW LETS ASSUME THAT MY 1500M PR IN 2007 WAS 3:30.00 AND I IMPROVED BY THE SAME MARGIN OVER ONE YEAR.

3MINS:30SEC = 210 SECS X.0228 = 4.79 SECS IMPROVEMENT

3:30.00 - 4.79 = 3:25.21!!!

IF SOMEBODY WENT FROM 3:30 ONE YEAR TO WORLD RECORD 3:25 IN ONE YEAR IN THE 1500M, EVERYBODY AND THEIR BROTHER WOULD BE SCREAMING CHEATER CHEATER PUMPKIN EATER!!!

MY CONCLUSION?

BOLT IS THE DIRTIEST OF ALL TIME.

Bolt is on some amazing PEDs. You don't see how anyone can possibly be cleaner? Are you that naive? He's the guy that jogged a 9.69 and ran 19.30 into a headwind. No one else has run under 19.6 (besides MJ who was on something).

It's not the times necessarily, it's the fact someone is demolishing everyone and beating times of people that used drugs. It's like Lance Armstrong in the TDF. We don't know the times, but we know he's whipping people that are using PEDs, so that should tell you he's on something too.

I just can't believe people buy that a guy can demolish a bunch of PED users and be considered clean.

repsonse to "sickening"

OK so he made a 2.8% improvement, so what?

What shape was he in when he ran in 2007? Injuries, inconsistent training?

And dont forget that he is 22 yrs old. He can improve hugely at that age.

Do people gain height the same amount ( percent) every year of their lives?

Sorry but there are many explanations you seem to discard.

-------------------------

Response to "MtnDew": I have always contented that Armstrong is a doper. So how am I sure Bolt is not? Because he is young, tall, unique and does not have the shady past of Armstrong. And frankly I don't think Jamaica has the sophistication to have all these dopers on the team and not get caught.

You simply cannot assume everyone who beats a doper has to be doping. Are you implying Bek and Geb are dopers too?

Lets face it, world class athletes ARE outliers, meaning they are capable of amazing superhuman feats. Keep that in mind along with other aspects before accusing them of being druggies. Most aren't doing anything illegal.

Will Bob Costas say that 200 Bolt is faster than 100 Bolt and so he should race himself at 150?

"Michael Johnson was on something"-- way to pull an unproved accusation out of your ass. Your post is completely null and void simply because of this statement.

Watching the vid I thought the same thing. But then, maybe it's akin to a race car driver taking the best line. Give up a bit of distance to maintain the speed.

okayy wrote:

"Michael Johnson was on something"-- way to pull an unproved accusation out of your ass. Your post is completely null and void simply because of this statement.

Well, if an accusation is proved, it's a fact, so of course its unproved - all accuasations are until they are proved at which point they're facts.

[quote]Tomii2Nutts wrote:

By assuming hes on drugs, you are saying that no human being can be that good, correct?

You are implying that MJs record, clean or not, cannot be broken EVER by a clean human being, correct? Same for the 100m record (pre Bolt).

Or can they be broken, but just not by Bolt?

/quote]

you're either simply being argumentative or you are willfully ignoring the more damning facts.

he is now the fastest non-wind-aided 100m runner by around .06 seconds, despite the fact that he was around .03 behind from the gun and he didn't have any tailwind at all. oh, and he didn't run hard for more than 80 meters.

he is also now the fastest 200m runner of all time, more than .30 faster than anyone ever besides one michael johnson race. and by the way he ran into a pretty massive headwind (0.9 mps) and won by 0.2 more than MJ did. heck, the 3rd place guy in 1996 was meaningfully closer than the 2nd place guy (who was subsequently DQ'd) was today. why is that relevant? well, it's clearly not dispositive, but it's relevant. it takes into account track and wind conditions as well as the excitement of the moment to a certain extent.

if bolt ran 19.55 or so today, perhaps even 19.40, and then ran 19.30 with a 1.0 - 2.0 mps tailwind and a good start you wouldn't be hearing all of this drug talk. you'd still hear some, but not as much. same with the 100. if he ran through the line and ran 9.71, people would be excited.

all in all, it's just too much.

and one last thing. can we talk about how many of the jamaican sprinters who have had breakthroughs this year are wearing braces? the women's 100m winner and the women's 400h winner both seem to have them. the latter is 25 years old. sort of unusual don't you think?

or is suspicion under these circumstances racist/nationalistic?

MarathonMind wrote:

I was watching MJ's 19.32 last night and comparing to Bolt's 19.6's. MJ took 22 strides in the turn and 18 on the straight. Bolt also needed 22 on the turn but just 16-17 in the straight. I haven't seen this yet but I imagine it was a mere 16 in the straight. There's your difference.

AND we are talking amere 2/100s here- I hope people don't too soon forget how great MJ is/was.

sorry if someone else has mentioned this but WTF are you on?? 16 strides to cover 100m?? either you're very bad at counting or very dumb. Or both

notnowcato wrote:

MarathonMind wrote:

I was watching MJ's 19.32 last night and comparing to Bolt's 19.6's. MJ took 22 strides in the turn and 18 on the straight. Bolt also needed 22 on the turn but just 16-17 in the straight. I haven't seen this yet but I imagine it was a mere 16 in the straight. There's your difference.

AND we are talking amere 2/100s here- I hope people don't too soon forget how great MJ is/was.

sorry if someone else has mentioned this but WTF are you on?? 16 strides to cover 100m?? either you're very bad at counting or very dumb. Or both

I heard it took him 41 strides to cover 100 meters, which was about 3 less than the average world class sprinter.

Yeah... That's what I heard, uh huh, uh huh!

No need to be so dismissive and rude.

The straight is less than 100 meters and the curves are longer than 100. This coupled with the fact that he can open up the stride fully in the straights makes the difference. And it might be closer to 21/17 depending on where you start to count.

MarathonMind wrote:

No need to be so dismissive and rude.

The straight is less than 100 meters and the curves are longer than 100. This coupled with the fact that he can open up the stride fully in the straights makes the difference. And it might be closer to 21/17 depending on where you start to count.

There's no way someone could cover 100 meters in 21 strides, no less 17!

If you could cover 100 meters in 21 strides, that means you're averaging almost 16 feet per stride!

41 sounds about right and that would give him 8 feet per stride, which is some HUGE stride!