Carmalita Jeter! UGH

There's a fairly well know story about a certain fellow who at 24 or 25 was working as a stock broker and sprinting in all-comers meets in Toronto. One coach who saw him and recognized a little talent told him to get serious or quit.

Well, he got with Dan Pfaff and got serious.

I hear he was pretty good. His name was Donavan Bailey.

Of course, it's absolutely impossible to win an Olympic Gold or break a world record when you're pushing 30. Donavan only did it 5 months from his 30th birthday.

We need another thread about how the Jamaican cheaters got found out, and now, with a real, honest to God drug testing agency in place, they are being pwned not just by the USA, but also by Kenya.

That's why we have bullshit threads like this.

As you said, NINE-FIFTY-EIGHT. Bullshit.

Donovan Bailey

TIME......IMPRV...%IMP...AGE

10.42....................24

10.42.....0.00...0.00%...25

10.36.....0.06...0.58%...26

10.03.....0.33...3.19%...27

9.91......0.12...1.20%...28

9.84......0.07...0.71%...29

9.91.....-0.07..-0.71%...30

9.93.....-0.02..-0.20%...31

*10.30...................32

9.98.....-0.05..-0.50%...33

Works out with a professional coach for three years, makes a 3+% leap, followed by a 1+% leap, then plateaus after the FIFTH year of serious training, before the age of 30. If you're trying to tell me I'm wrong, you've made a very poor case.

One single example. The person doesn't exist.

truth--

Well, a couple of things:

1) It was Bailey about whom I was thinking in particular, & I don't have time to actually go looking for another. Seeing the chart you put up confirms my memory fairly well. 4.39% in 2 years at 27/28 yrs of age is entirely comparable to Jeter IMO--and a decent part of that was due to mechanics, not consistent training, as can be seen by the fact that he spent several good years consistently training under Pfaff and showed essentially no improvement. Even though he was just running all-comer's meets before Pfaff, he wasn't in bad shape, although his training did certainly lack in consistency. He went to the track mainly for the girls, IIRC. I consider him not great evidence, but adequate evidence to support my contention that substantial gains can be had late in a career due to form and mechanic optimization, which I consider sufficient to refute your contention that it is "impossible". Even if you don't consider it sufficient, as I do, it was YOU who made the initial assertion, so it is up to YOU to provide some support for it--and more support than "it is impossible because it has never yet been done". If you were to discuss other evidence in combination with this, then you would have made a case that required better evidence to refute.

2) While I'm on the requirement of evidence, I'll remind you that you have still provided absolutely none for your contention that "it is much easier to PR in your late 20s/early 30s in distances versus sprints". Evidence?

Like I said before, I'm not saying that she's clean. The evidence of her improvement is certainly relevant to the premise that she is doping, but it is hardly dispositive of the issue. However, as is well-documented, it can be combined with other evidence to make a stronger case.

Ever heard of one or two instances of a myostatin deficient gene? It would explain why her brother is in the NBA despite being only 5'10".

IF she did serious weight work *before* her coaching change in 2007 (when she said that her coach threw her into the weight room), then that would make her very suspect. Otherwise, she basically ran about the same times from her first 100m ever in high school (when she was the same height as Zersenay Tadese and weighed even less!) until 2006, gained 14 lbs (116 to 130) in 2007-on and then improved.

That being said, it is very difficult to suspend my disbelief, but I do it because I like being naive.

What do people think of Gail Devers? Clean or not in your opinion? Her 60m is fairly fast compared to Jeter's non altitude time.

I think you got the name wrong. Pharmalita Jeter is her name.

If anyone could explain why she looks so obviously different to how she used to look, then this speculation might come to a close.

I frankly don't care about PED's anymore. They're used all over, we know they're used all over and the powers that be know that they're being used all over and they've done sweet f*** all to fix it.

Furthermore I see no reason why marks made in the late 60's early 70's as well as those made by known and convicted dopers be allowed to stand while non-dopers are being compared to and not recognized for failing to meet them.

I don't see why they don't just scrap the entire thing.

Clean league and "constructor's" league. With the former being a recruiting post for the latter. Would end the crap that we're dealing with right now.

As with F1, WINNING should be more important than arbitrary marks. Sure faster marks and speeds would be important to the people interested in the nitty gritty of each sport but only the winners matter.

And I agree with some of the previous remarks.

Steroids don't make you "better", they give you the chance to make yourself better through "hard work".

PS. It should be known that I have never used nor do I advocate the non-controlled use of possibly harmful substances.

1) Like you, I don't have a lot of time to spend arguing about something that we'll each continue to come to differing conclusions about until the Second Coming.

I can understand your argument, and I appreciate it, but I don't believe Donovan Bailey was a)late in his career (it started late and ended early IMO), and b)a single large improvement (4.39% in two years after only five years of training, and then five further years of which four years showed consistent results) is not remotely the same as achieving two similarly large gains in year 7 and again in year 9 of a career after showing very little (.21 seconds) performance improvement following a full six years of high level training.

If you believe they're comparable, we'll just have to disagree.

2) This one is easy. I never wrote the quote you are attributing to me. BeiHall wrote that in another reply in this thread, and someone replied to it with his quote highlighted. I don't need to provide evidence for a claim that I'm not making.

I think we are in agreement that she is very probably doping, but are in disagreement about what constitutes the profile and progression of a doper, and whether it is possible to model a dopers profile while being clean.

I can't believe the idiots who still claim Bolt's progression was "natural". I wonder what they'd say about a Moroccan running 1:40/3:24 in the 800/1500.

Jeter is one of the most blatant dopers I've ever seen, right after Bolt, Solinsky, and Uceny.

Carmelita Jeter is an obvious doper. No natural sprinter has that progression curve. You don't go from 11.5ish in your mid 20s to 10.64 in your late 20s. Then there are other signs; fast muscular development in combination with facial changes. Voice changes and from what I have seen in general she has that defensive doper a-hole attitude. If you put together all these things its obvious she is doping.

I hope she gets busted...don't like her attitude at all.

And this does not mean that other athletes aren't cheating but she such an obvious case.

In regards to Bolt, of course he is doping too BUT he is also an incredible natural talent. He was running amazing 200m times at a very young age.

If you look at Jeter, she is far from the most talented female sprinter. She is a doper who has managed to avoid getting caught and obviously has a good drug response.

Carmalita

Hold me tighter

I think I'm sinking down

And I'm all strung out on heroin

On the outskirts of town.

-Warren Zevon

coach d, are the Jamaicans getting owned? Seems to me they are on the precipice of winning 3 of the 4 sprinters races (100 M (men) and 200 M (women) already achieved and tomorrow Bolt SHOULD win the 200 M (men); I wanna get owned like that too, LMAO...Get over yourself and shove your faux national pride too; you are probably a relative of Pharmalita's so give your cousin my regards on her 200 M loss. Maybe she'll remember to reup her PEDs/steroids before her next big race.

coach d wrote:

There's a fairly well know story about a certain fellow who at 24 or 25 was working as a stock broker and sprinting in all-comers meets in Toronto. One coach who saw him and recognized a little talent told him to get serious or quit.

Well, he got with Dan Pfaff and got serious.

I hear he was pretty good. His name was Donavan Bailey.

Of course, it's absolutely impossible to win an Olympic Gold or break a world record when you're pushing 30. Donavan only did it 5 months from his 30th birthday.

We need another thread about how the Jamaican cheaters got found out, and now, with a real, honest to God drug testing agency in place, they are being pwned not just by the USA, but also by Kenya.

That's why we have bullshit threads like this.

As you said, NINE-FIFTY-EIGHT. Bullshit.

Let me state absolutely unequivocally that I think she's doping, and has been for a while.

No kidding.

Even though she placed well, she doesn't have the speed endurance required to win the 200. I'm surprised that some good 400m women don't try their hand at the 200--or do they, and they're just not fast enough (like Felix)?

Jeter is great, but as somebody else said, she is not the most naturally talented sprinter out there, and I think that natural talent gets you farther in the 200 than in the 100. The longer you have to force something unnatural, the harder it is, or the more time there is to revert to the inferior natural state. That is what happens with Jeter--she has inferior speed endurance, and it is revealed in the 200. Also in the last 30m of the 100, but more-so in the 200.

And where you really gain with sprinter drugs is on the acceleration, where she's great, but which isn't nearly as big a factor in the 200 as in the 100.

She IS a female Ben Johnson--let her go and she would break the 100m WR, but not the 200--in fact, the better she got at the 100, likely the worse she would get at the 200.

Carmelita Jeter--"huge, ripped, and golden"

One HUGE F-you to everybody watching.

You've got to admire the balls.

Even if she's "clean" right now, she is living proof to me that the benefits of sprint PED's are retained after athletes stop using. It's not like she's slowed down from 10.7 to 10.9--it's still like she sped up from 11.5 to 10.9

Let the church say AMEN; I agree with your post from top to bottom (especially the female BJ comparison). I don't think it's emphasized enough that whilst she MIGHT be clean now, there is NO WAY she isn't benefiting from the residual effects of the PEDs she took to take her from a run-of-the-mill sprinter to an upper echelon one (at a relatively advanced age).

I could have gone from 16:50 to 13:40? Damnnnn...when I ran my 16:49 many years ago I was only hoping to drop to 16:30 (didn't happen).

Rec Runner x wrote:

Let's compare her progression with, let's say, a hypothetical 5k guy.

18 17:30 (high school)

19 17:45 (club team college)

20 19:00 (finds girlfriend)

21 18:45 (runs with girlfriend)

22 16:50 (graduates college; runs more miles)

23 16:10 (gets serious)

24 15:20 (stays with mom)

25 14:35 (unemployed)

26 13:55 (finds club team)

27 13:40 (runs for club team full-time)

You see, any time you get serious about something, there are drastic improvements.

It really "grinds your gears" that Jamaica continues to expose some of you for the idiots you are. According to your analysis, it is only due to population and the hue of your skin that should determine medals.

1. Lemaitre, a scrawny man is clean and Blake is dirty despite both being prodigious talents. Blake having run 19.7 nearly beating Tyson Gay without being a 200m runner is dirty. Blake was my schoolmate and your stupidity only serves to motivate us more.

2. If you ever saw where Jamaicans have to train in primary and high school and what we have to endure to make it to the top you would know we work harder than most if not all.

3. Jamaica is poor and struggling so I would like to know where we are getting these undetectable drugs.

4. Our ascendancy is due to having the two BEST sprint coaches in the world. Bolt isn't doping just because he's immature. He has a gift. Live with it!!

5. I am Jamaican and for years I had to watch drug cheats dominate the sport. That list is too long to list but it has an American and Russian flavour.

6. Now that the playing field is now level. People who are now benefiting from the rich tradition are now rising to the top and we are proud

7. I have no problems with athletes who perform well no matter the colour or nationality.

8. By your logic..if you are not white and from GBR, USA, AUS, IRE etc. any improvement is SUSPECT. Give me a F%$%ing break. You just want to know our secret.

9. You come up with the most asinine reasons for every time we run and every injury we get. I compare your existence to COMIC BOOK guy in the Simpsons. Worst PERSON EVER!! Enjoy the sport and celebrate your successes. Leave other people alone and stop your IMBECILIC speculation.

Thank you...

" Blake....will never ever run 9.6x"

KABAYO = MORON

Blake, 9.69, Lausanne, 2012

WRONG. AGAIN.

Taking up where SG left off:

1. Blake has been sanctioned for doping

2. Doesn't matter

3. Germany (Muller-Wohlfahrt)

4. Your ascendancy is due to dope, now coming to light (Powell, VCB, Simpson, etc)

5. Drug cheats like Johnson (Jamaica) and Christie (Jamaica) and Stewart (Jamaica) etc.

6. Level playing field = Tyson Gay busted

7. Irrelevant

8. You don't know what logic is. Pearson, Kilty, and now Allen suspect.

9. Not speculation, but consideration, long ago validated now that it's 2014. I liked his analysis.

SG was right about all of it, the only problem is that they get caught, sanctioned, and are all still running! Blake, Gatlin, Rodgers, Chambers, soon Gay, and soon after him Powell, they will ALL be running! The only guy still out is Mullings, whatever happened to him?

So being right doesn't matter, but it's better than being wrong and not mattering like the Ilemy poster.