JonnyO wrote:
after her achievements in 88 there was no way FLO JO would have been able to motivate herself anymore
Yeah, same thing happen with Geb after the 96 Olympics. Got his gold and then...
JonnyO wrote:
after her achievements in 88 there was no way FLO JO would have been able to motivate herself anymore
Yeah, same thing happen with Geb after the 96 Olympics. Got his gold and then...
Nobody in their right mind would accuse Michael Johnson of doping and he owns the 200m record by a huge margin. So the margin itself shouldn't be contested. Neither should her improvement in ranking - which appears gradual over a series of years. Her physical attributes and early death are what keeps me wondering about her cleanliness though.
>>
Johnny O - just out of curiosity why have you decided to defend her so vehemently? Did you know her personally?
thinkingback wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would accuse Michael Johnson of doping and he owns the 200m record by a huge margin. So the margin itself shouldn't be contested. Neither should her improvement in ranking - which appears gradual over a series of years. Her physical attributes and early death are what keeps me wondering about her cleanliness though.
>>
Johnny O - just out of curiosity why have you decided to defend her so vehemently? Did you know her personally?
While I denied it at the time, I am currently in my right mind, and therefore can't help but question Michael Johnson's 200 record. I'm not saying that either he or Flo Jo be busted as they apparently weren't caught, but common sense tells me both of them were using. Yes, I'm cynical, but I'm certainly not alone on my views on this discussion.
BDG
thinkingback wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would accuse Michael Johnson of doping and he owns the 200m record by a huge margin. So the margin itself shouldn't be contested. Neither should her improvement in ranking - which appears gradual over a series of years. Her physical attributes and early death are what keeps me wondering about her cleanliness though.
>>
Johnny O - just out of curiosity why have you decided to defend her so vehemently? Did you know her personally?
no i have never met her but i do know things about her running that other people dont know and this is something which i have been researching for a while.
i intend to publish my findings about certain legal methods which Flo Jo used in 1988.
thinkingback wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would accuse Michael Johnson of doping and he owns the 200m record by a huge margin. So the margin itself shouldn't be contested.
I think Michael Johnson was on drugs as well. Same goes for Mo Greene, Jon Drummand, Carl Lewis, Tim Montgomery, Ato Bolden, that Greek guy and others. I would be more inclined to believe that Frank Fredericks was clean. Of course I don't have any special evidence one way or another in any of these situations. Just based on what I have witnessed, this is what I believe.
hey read 'positive' by werner reiter? think thats his name. hes an aussie discus thrower whos admitted to taking drugs and it his book says flo jo was on drugs
up too late ... or too early,
Thanks for your post. Whatever happened to FLo Jo, I think in her own ways, and in her own right, she was great!
Also, I very much disagree with those who accuse Michael Johnson of doping. He is just hilarious.
OK JonnyO,
I just got sick of your defense of Flo Jo. Everything points to Flo Jo being doped big time yet you defend her endlessly. Why? Will it destroy you emotionally to face the truth about her? Sure we can't convict Flo Jo in a court of law, but if my life was on the line choosing between doped and not doped, I would most certainly choose doped for Flo Jo. Are you going to stand there and say that if it was a matter of life and death choosing correctly between doped and not doped that you would actually pick not doped? I can see sweat rolling down your face with your eyes closed if not doped was really going to be your answer. I bet you think OJ was innocent as well? After all, he was found to be not guilty in a court of law.
Joe Trout, please explain what you mean when you say everything points to her being doped? i'm not fooling around here, tell me something i havent heard before.
see, here's the thing that I can believe the MJ was a clean athlete:
a.) he was consistent. he first broke 20s in 1990 and did so every year through 200, with the only exceptions being 1993, 1997 and 1998 (400m focus) and two of those years were sub20.10. At 400m he first broke 44s in 1992 and never had another season where he didn't run sub44 (except the all relay year of 2001).
b.) his 200m record is so astounding because he is such a rarity. 99% of American sprinters who run sub10.1 and sub20 will focus their efforts on the 100 and 200. But Johnson (and Hart) neede to train as a 400m runner. How many other 10.09 or better guys train for the 400m? To me, that translates into a huge potential at 200m and 400m. Take our 10.0 guys and train them as Johnson trained. I think you'll see more 19.7s and 43s.
c.) shit happens. conditions can be just perfect and the perfect fluke performance can arise. Beamon in Mexico City is the most comparable example. he had everyone beat in that atlanta final becuase he was the only 400m runner in that race.
mondo bondage wrote:
Joe Trout, please explain what you mean when you say everything points to her being doped? i'm not fooling around here, tell me something i havent heard before.
No, I don't have the energy to go on and on about Flo Jo being juiced.
So you believe that Flo Jo embraced the sport of track and field in the purist form of athletic determination to eventually be rewarded by Olympic glory only to be unfortunately cut down in her youth by a seizure that was just due to a bad luck type health situation?
As long as we have enough gullable people out there, I guess cheating does pay off well enough to be seriously considered.
This sport will never be clean.
I believe that you are from the North East of England. Flo Jo ran at a Gateshead meeting some years ago and was treat by a local physio - the physio was a runner which Flo Jo didnt know. That physio saw evidence of Flo Jo's drug taking, in the NE of England. If I introduce you will you then believe or do you need to see her actually have the injections ?
well lofty, I have an open mind and I'm not as gullible as Joe Trout might think, but all I hear are stories, just as I hear stories about myself, and I wonder, where did that come from? sorry to talk about myself again, I really would rather talk about Flo Jo.
I want this thread to keep going because there is an awful lot more to the story of Florence Griffith Joyner than whether she took drugs or faulty wind guages or whatever.
I want to hear other peoples opinions about her, who was the physio? Norman Anderson?
morceli1978 wrote:
JonnyO wrote:after her achievements in 88 there was no way FLO JO would have been able to motivate herself anymore
Yeah, same thing happen with Geb after the 96 Olympics. Got his gold and then...
Wow Geb. decided to get pregnant and had a baby, that's news!
Not to take anything away for Michael, but that Atlanta track was built esp. for him to break the world record. It was very hard (and a killer for the distance folks) and it no longer exists. He's the greatest at those distances but the "huge margin" is a least partly due to the surface he ran it on.
Lid E. Ard wrote:
Not to take anything away for Michael, but that Atlanta track was built esp. for him to break the world record. It was very hard (and a killer for the distance folks) and it no longer exists. He's the greatest at those distances but the "huge margin" is a least partly due to the surface he ran it on.
don't forget those 80 gram golden Nike shoes
he had to win wearing Gold shoes the cocky b&$!&rd
JonnyO, let's take this thread in a positive direction since most are probably decided already on the drug issue.
I'm viewing a few of the low-quality clips of her races on the internet, and about all I can make out about her technique is a slightly exaggerated front kick-out as her leading knee reaches it's forward-most point.
Here's a clip:
http://www.cmfaq.com/cgi-bin/shasg/viewnews.cgi?id=EpZpylkEZZRwvVDCSu&tmpl=tracku
As far as training, can you shed any light on her methods or lifting regime? I've seen a reference that suggested an unusual focus on the lunge (330lbs.), but that's about it.
Here's the reference:
http://www.faccioni.com/articles/USA%20Speed%20Presentation%202000.zip
Speaking of mustaches, Evelyn Ashford had a pretty good ones herself. Lots of women do and they aren't even athletes.
But I agree that its a shame Evelyn Ashford gets overshadowed by Griffith-Joyner, but only because she had a fantastic career. I was watching a tape from Seoul in 1988 and admist all the hoopla over Flo-Jo, Ashford ran one of the all-time greatest come from behind anchor legs to win the 4x100 relay. Not as dramatic as Bob Hayes' in 64 but its is pretty awesome. Does anyone remember this?
Thanks joel, i have kept this thread running hoping to get a response from someone like you to my assertion that we look at video of her running to spot the different technique required to run those outrageous times.
my computer isnt powerful enough to see the video, but thanks for the link, i will watch it on a more powerful computer.
now here is where it starts to get a bit freaky, but please have an open mind about this joel because this is Flo Jo we are talking about here, and the way she ran was definately very freaky indeed.
look at her closely when she is running, i had to watch my video about 100 times before i spotted this, but it just goes to show how serious i am about investigating what sort of techniques she was using.
look closely at her when she is running, look what happens as she accelerates. she just pulls further and further away from the field until she is going so fast that she just lifts her knees ridiculously high and lets the ground fly beneath her feet.
now look at her hair when she is running, it forms an aerofoil shape like a cyclists aerodynamic helmet. this must be giving her an aerodynamic advantage. what is this advantage worth? its worth .2 of a second.
this would be very easy to test i am sure, we just need a wig and the right amount of hairspray. i know this sounds ridiculous, but she ran ridiculously fast so we must consider it. anyway the evidence is before our eyes.
anyone who cycles knows that the slightest change to position on the bike or change to the clothing slows us down by .5 kmh which is .14 in 100m in 10 seconds.
the way flo jo runs over the final 50m shows us that she is just cruising along and not straining like the other runners she looks as if she is running downhill
While you were watching your video of her 100 times, were you also sniffing glue? "now look at her hair when she is running, it forms an aerofoil shape like a cyclists aerodynamic helmet. this must be giving her an aerodynamic advantage. what is this advantage worth? its worth .2 of a second.
this would be very easy to test i am sure, we just need a wig and the right amount of hairspray. i know this sounds ridiculous..."
YES, THIS SOUNDS RIDICULOUS, BECAUSE YOU AND YOUR STATEMENTS ARE RIDICULOUS. A FUCKING AEROFOIL HAIR STYLE, A WIG AND HAIRSPRAY. YOU HAVE COMPLETELY FUCKING LOST IT.
But I do recommend that you "publish" these "findings" that you have made with all of your careful research. The world awaits your genius...
BDG