HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS Gabby Thomas Improvement

whaletail wrote:

Wowzee wrote:

This Shelby photo seals the deal for me. Among other things

What makes you think that photo is remotely legit?

Or you that it isnt?

Of course she is doping. She has a ton of company.

Gabby Thomas had a solid college coach in Kebba Tolbert who previously developed Blessing Okabare at UTEP so the drop in times is suspicious on that front. But toss in her agent is Paul Doyle who has represented nearly a dozen athletes who have run afoul of doping rules from serious ones to missed tests and you can see why no one is buying her OT’s 100 and 200 performances as clean.

aztec the moronic wrote:

Nope not even close. Prandini was always legit. USA 200m CHAMPION in 2018. 3rd in the 100 with a wind legal 10.98.

Which does not say much, as 2018 was a non-Olympic/ World Championships year, meaning usually, a watered down USATF championships (yes, the Diamond League is more financially lucrative for sponsors than the NACAC champs...)

Also as mentionned before , Thomas was that very same year (2018), a 200m NCAA CHAMPION and equalled the 22 yr-old NCAA record over 200m (indoor), and furthermore went on running a 22"19 after a long college season.

And you got the most important part right, Prandini has never missed a drug test. And Thomas' 21.61 is WORLDS AWAY from 21.89. 0.28 is a huge gap in the 200m

You are missing the point, the subject of this thread is that Thomas improvement is suspicious on the basis that she did not progress in 2019 and 2020.

It was already explained that in 2019 she was still in college graduating from HARVARD and 2020 was a COVID disrupted year. Notice, that I also find it suspicious but it is slightly explainable.

It was simply noticed that Prandini had the very same kind of stalling both years (Why?), the difference is that she was far removed from college and therefore did not have any other occupation than being a professional athlete in her late twenties ( as a 200m specialist who went from a decade of running 22"xx irregularly and then turn into a 21" at nearly 29, any kind of improvement will be defintely eyebrow-raising)

Thomas went to Harvard which means that athletics may not have been her primary focus (yet she is an NCAA record holder) , also she is still at an age where athletes improve. Still, she is indeed suspicious because she ran the 2nd best time ever.

Prandini went to Oregon, an university specialized in the development of athletes and with a rather poor academic reputation and she is also at an age where people should be stalling.

She is now the 3rd oldest female to break into 21" territory over 200m for the 1st time. Only older than her are Jarmila Kratochvilova in 1981 and Shelly-Ann Fraser Price this year (and both are not 200m specialist)

You don't really believe that G.Thomas couldn't have made into LSU, Alabama, Oregon, graduate with a phony degree in "Communications" (or not graduate at all) focus her collegiate career entirely on T&F and smash 21" well before this year don't you ?

Wtf. Look at your Gabby post again. Jenna's best since 2019 was 22.54 before the. 21.89 . Your analysis of Gabby was based on this very same pattern, but you don' t suspect Jenna.

oh sorry, Jenna is diferent because she ran 10.92 six years ago. By that logic, English Gardner should anchor the 4x100. She ran 10.79 six years ago.

aztec the moronic wrote:

Her fastest 200s by year:

2018 - 22.18 (her PR before this year)

2019 - 22.69

2020 - 22.63

2021 - 21.61

She ran a .58 PR and ran a full second faster than she ran in all of 2019 and 2020? Sorry, I call BS. Remember, she missed 3 drug tests last year.

Yeah probably not.

21.6 is normal.

People will twist themselves into knots in order to explain away what is obvious...They just don't like reality/truth.

Prandini had been injured a lot. It's not unreasonable to think a 10.92 runner can run 21.89. Allyson Felix's PRs are 10.89 and 21.69. It's like when Centro ran 13:00 in the 5k, nobody was really surprised because he was an Olympic Gold Medalist in the 1500 with a 3:30 PR. With that speed you'd expect that time.

The point remains that Gabby Thomas improved by more than a full second, running the 2nd fastest time in world history. Prandini did not run the second fastest time in history. Thomas ran .28 fast than Prandini, thus is LIGHT YEARS more suspicious. She's never run a wind legal sub 11 yet somehow she runs wind legal 21.61 which would be sub 11 on the turn and sub 11 on the straight??????????

You must not know that thise other schools require students to be self starters. Many flunk out. Harvard babies the students. They all graduate with a 3.5. Show up at class and you get a B. Now that they are waiving test scores, they will have morons graduating with 3.5 GPA.

Professional athletes getting faster and looking more fit as their careers progress? There's no way that is possible without cheating!! How dare she take her diet more seriously and how dare her muscles grow from lifting weights! It's not possible. It has to be drugs.

aztec the moronic wrote:

Manbearpig15 wrote:

Not going to waste time reading all the comments...

But just maybe she was a little busy getting a degree from Harvard. And it might be possible that the Harvard coaching staff isn't as good as her current coach.

Yeah it's definitely because the Harvard genius couldn't find a couple hours to train each day while in school........definitely NOT because she misses drug tests and is almost definitely doping.

Cole Hocker was in school full time this year and he was so busy he barely won the USA Championship by outkicking an Olympic Gold Medalist. Clearly he'll run 3:26 in the 1500 immediately after finishing school.

Yep, degree's from Harvard on Oregon are pretty similar.

Interesting how Hocker has had a break through year, with a kick that can beat the defending olympic champ (who everything things is doping)....but no one talks about him. Funny how our selective bias works.

aztec the moronic wrote:

Breton wrote:

Quit saying she improved a second in one year. She ran 22.3x INDOORS in 2018 as a Harvard undergrad. She regressed for a couple years after leaving Harvard (injury? transition issues?) but she was the collegiate indoor record holder. Look, I have no idea who is using PEDs and who isn't, but it's not surprising at all that an NCAA record holder in the sprints is contending for a medal 3 years later...

don't be a fool, she couldn't break 22.6 for 2 years, then all of a sudden she runs a 21.61?? #2 time in world history?

She had one of the best sprint coaches in the USA at Harvard. He teaches and coaches for USATF.

You mean she didn't break 22.60 in 2019 but then had an incomplete season in 2020. You're going to assume if she ran the Olympic trials in June of 2020 she wouldn't have ran faster than she did in 2019. Like somehow the buildup in an 2020 Olympic year, at the Olympic trials with the best competition and spot to Tokyo on the line, on a lightning fast track, your 100% sure wouldn't have run faster than 22.60 last June? Amazing foresight.

Does everyone here assume that if one year your run slower than the year before, its impossible to improve and PR the following year? If that's the case, I feel sorry you had such crappy training/coaching. To assume that training and racing is a linear path up with no setbacks or regressions is sadly mis-informed and pathetic, especially in a year when your whole season ended in 2020 even before it started. sad.

runnerboy70 wrote:

People will twist themselves into knots in order to explain away what is obvious...They just don't like reality/truth.

The same how some people assume that everyone who's successful cheats, especially if they have a bias against certain training groups or people.

All these belly aching by whites isn't going to get Prandini

to run faster and make no mistake this is what all the fuss

is about.Prandini isn't going to medal in either sprint and

all the woe is us wailing from whites will not change the

fact she just isn't good enough.

Prandin is faster than a clean Richardson. Cheaters always lose in the end.

John_James_413 wrote:

aztec the moronic wrote:

Her fastest 200s by year:

2018 - 22.18 (her PR before this year)

2019 - 22.69

2020 - 22.63

2021 - 21.61

She ran a .58 PR and ran a full second faster than she ran in all of 2019 and 2020? Sorry, I call BS. Remember, she missed 3 drug tests last year.

Yeah probably not.

21.6 is normal.

To be second fastest in history, only 0.27 behind a doped Flojo (ran with +1.3 wind) is not natural. How many doped 200 runners have tried and failed to run as fast as 21.61?

astro wrote:

Of course she is doping. She has a ton of company.

Zero proof.

aztec the moronic wrote:

Her fastest 200s by year:

2018 - 22.18 (her PR before this year)

2019 - 22.69

2020 - 22.63

2021 - 21.61

She ran a .58 PR and ran a full second faster than she ran in all of 2019 and 2020? Sorry, I call BS. Remember, she missed 3 drug tests last year.

WOW so amazing so what you're saying is like she went from 22.18 in 2018 to 21.61 in 2021?

For a HUGE improvement of like .57 of a second? WOW that's like so cool!

And then had off years in 2019 and 2020 prob due to a training error.....

Wow your evidence is like really really good right now.

Because you know like .57 of an improvement over the course of 3 FULL years is like so much. WOW. And also yay.

STEVE THE ADDICT^^^^^^""""-""""--'-"--^' wrote:

The fact that they allow 3 missed tests shows you they dont take testing seriously and it's just a PR front and opportunity to get bribe money. Appalling and disturbing. WADA and USADA should be ashamed of themselves.

Or it could be because they don't have the PROPER TECHNOLOGY. That could be it.

You act like steroid testing has been around for 1.3 quintillion years or something.

How long has steroid testing been around for? What year? I'm guessing like what 1951 or something? So do the math.

Wow a full 61 years of steroid testing. I'm sure they are like so advanced right now.