Should Frank Shorter be Given a Retroactive Gold for 1976 Olympics?

Try taking them from Frank....you'd be messing with the wrong guy.

jherut wrote:

Try taking them from Frank....you'd be messing with the wrong guy.

Well yeah...Frank threw his own father under the bus....so yeah.

They're both white they should share the gold

"Don't fukk with me Frank "

That's what they called him in college

Of course Frank should get the gold. He won.

Cheaters are cheaters.

I was there and watched the marathon live. Cherpinski just didn’t look “right”. Rolly polly, pale effortless.

OhGoodGod wrote:

Does anyone seriously believe that a chemically enhanced Frank Shorter would not have beaten a confirmed PED user Cierpinski????

If memory serves, Shorter had a nagging foot injury and was not as fit as he could have been for Montreal.

Yes, let's hear it for Don Kardong. Hell, he was only 3 seconds behind Lismont too.

That whole US marathoning crew back then should have statues: Shorter, Rodgers, Galloway, Bacheler, Barry Brown, Kardong. And Kenny Moore. Kenny f*cking Moore, best writer ever for Sports Illustrated.

But Shorter was the god and everyone knew it. He just floated along...

MidpackSam wrote:

I was there and watched the marathon live. Cherpinski just didn’t look “right”. Rolly polly, pale effortless.

Because someone looks good means they're dirty?

I disagree! wrote:

I do NOT want to see the record changed. Shorter Sucks, lost a race, immediately cried foul. When he lost to other Americans, he didn't. Never whined about Rodgers breaking any rules. He is a slow, zenophobic bigot. By his own admission (several pages in more than one reworking of his autobiography) he trained primarily for 5k. Wasn't aware of specific training. Was lucky to get 2nd. What did he do 4 years after that? What did Cierpinski do? By the way, I don't believe he can run a mile without stopping now.

VirtueSignaler wrote:

Field guys Mac Wilkins (discus) and Al Feurbach (shot) made no secret about their doping.

They were hardly alone:

££££ wrote:

MidpackSam wrote:

I was there and watched the marathon live. Cherpinski just didn’t look “right”. Rolly polly, pale effortless.

Because someone looks good means they're dirty?

Yeah....if they're from a nation with a state-sponsored doping program. ?

Think This One Through wrote:

££££ wrote:

Because someone looks good means they're dirty?

Yeah....if they're from a nation with a state-sponsored doping program. ?

"The history of the U.S. legislation on AAS goes back to the late 1980s, when the U.S. Congress considered placing AAS under the Controlled Substances Act following the controversy over Ben Johnson's victory at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul. "

So up till Ben Johnson, the juice market was wide open in the US?

££££ wrote:

MidpackSam wrote:

I was there and watched the marathon live. Cherpinski just didn’t look “right”. Rolly polly, pale effortless.

Because someone looks good means they're dirty?

I can't speak for MidpackSam but I think you're misinterpreting his statement. I'm not exactly sure what he meant by "Rolly Polly, pale effortless" either, but I don't think he meant Cierpinski looked good in the same way most think Kipchoge looks good.

I watched it live on TV and he didn't look "right" to me either - just didn't look elite. Had it actually been Carlos Lopes like Frank thought, at least it would've looked "right" and nobody would have questioned. (re: Lopes having truly flawless, elite form)

After the games Cierpinski was interviewed and described his training/strategy, which sounded even more fishy. Specifically, he knew Frank used track-style surges to break the competition, so he had concentrated on his 10k speed that season to improve from mid-29's to mid-28's, ultimately using the new found "speed" to pull away for victory. Cool story bro! Except… umm … 1) that's a pretty substantial improvement in a single season 2) Frank's 10k PR was 27:45, and he had just won the '76 trials in 27:55. Who's fooling who here - a 29-mid plodder improving to 28-mid AND crediting speed for his victory over a sub-28 guy. Right!

kerkiffle wrote:

....................................................... wrote:

Shorter and his fan boys are just sore losers. It has been almost 50 years, give it a break.

You are not very bright. You really believe that 43 is almost 50?

I mean it’s pretty close. I’d say you’re “almost done” when you have 2 laps left in a 5000m

Lofty Goals wrote:

kerkiffle wrote:

You are not very bright. You really believe that 43 is almost 50?

I mean it’s pretty close. I’d say you’re “almost done” when you have 2 laps left in a 5000m

And if you ran a 43 second 400m and I ran a 50 second 400m, would you say that I am almost as fast as you?

No more medals for Shorter after his brief career as the chirpy ex-athlete color commentator on NBC.

kerfiffle wrote:

Lofty Goals wrote:

I mean it’s pretty close. I’d say you’re “almost done” when you have 2 laps left in a 5000m

And if you ran a 43 second 400m and I ran a 50 second 400m, would you say that I am almost as fast as you?

And if you were 43 years through a 50 year prison sentence, wouldn't you say you were almost at 50?

££££££ wrote:

Think This One Through wrote:

Yeah....if they're from a nation with a state-sponsored doping program. ?

"The history of the U.S. legislation on AAS goes back to the late 1980s, when the U.S. Congress considered placing AAS under the Controlled Substances Act following the controversy over Ben Johnson's victory at the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul. "

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid#Legal_status

So up till Ben Johnson, the juice market was wide open in the US?

Not quite. US athletes were subject to the IOC ruling in 1975 that banned steroids. Testing was introduced at the 1976 Montreal Olympics. The 1989 legislation banned their sale in the US for non-medical purposes.