Sleepy wrote:
Well just as clearly that Bolt is the currently #1 sprinter in the world-Gatlin is clearly the #2. Guess who has been running in more meets and probably will continue to run keeping track and field in the public's eye? Cut Justin Gatlin some slack for he might be the last really competitive American 100/200 sprinter for awhile on the world stage.
I don't like Gatlin at all but this is a good point
another cyclist wrote:
And, although Armstrong did win a World Championship, pre-cancer he showed very little talent for the grand tours. Almost all winners of grand tours demonstrated early on the ability to excel in stage racing.
No, no, no, no. Armstrong's wins were all doped with USA Cycling supporting dopers and doping the whole time. This goes back to being a teenager under Chris Carmichael's USA Cycling doping program.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dope-and-glory-10-04-2001/Not to mention that compared to other elite Tour riders - even other doped ones like Indurain - Armstrong's VO2 max (the biggest limiting factor in endurance cycling) was decidedly average.
peekay wrote:
He JOGGED the last 20 meters
No he didn't, it was more like the last 10 meters -or less; at 180 meters, the race wasn't decided yet and he was still competing. You need to look at his leg turnover before you say jogged. His upper body was celebrating, but his legs were still moving pretty fast. Because he has a long lopping stride and has mastered the art of celebrating while maintaining his momentum often make's Bolt look like he is shutting down more than actually he is. Bolt is a showman and this is an art he has mastered since his teens. With that said, Bolt ran a great race, won by a comfortable margin, but it was by no means a cakewalk.
http://jadco.gov.jm/nikeman wrote:
Get back to me when Jamaica actually has a drug testing program including out of competition testing.
You're welcome !
Mark Allen wrote:
supreme non sequitur wrote:The myth that Lance Armstrong was identified as a rare talent from young needs to die. It's never been true and anyone who knows anything about cycling knows it's all part of Armstrong's post facto fabricated pedigree.
Yes that video of him hanging with us on the bike leg when he was 15 was all smoke and mirrors.
At a time when there was no depth in Triathlon... As a kid under Carmichael he went to Europe and routinely got his ass handed to him when he wasn't "on cycle."
Was Armstrong Nationally elite? Yes, probably. International elite? No.
If it was a different time and place, Lemond would have buried Mark Allen as a teenager as Lemond was beating American pros in Pro events as a teenager.
pop_pop! wrote:
No, no, no, no. Armstrong's wins were all doped with USA Cycling supporting dopers and doping the whole time. This goes back to being a teenager under Chris Carmichael's USA Cycling doping program.
"No, no, no, no." Huh?
And I agree that he was doped at a young age. His doping just got a lot more sophisticated post-cancer.
COUSIN OF JAKIR wrote:
ALLAHU AKBAR!!! THIS JOSTIN CHEETING FAT AMERICAN NO MAKE GOLD. NO GLORY FOR MAN NOT HAVE HONEST. ONLY STRONG TRIBE MAN EAT BEESAND CAMELS MILK TO WIN BIG RACE.
ALLAHU AKBAR!
ALLAHU AKBAR!!!!!
ALLAHU AKBAR!!!!!
ALLAHU SANBAR!!
ALLAHU APPLECAR!!!
ALLAH FARAH!
Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:
Sleepy wrote:Well just as clearly that Bolt is the currently #1 sprinter in the world-Gatlin is clearly the #2. Guess who has been running in more meets and probably will continue to run keeping track and field in the public's eye? Cut Justin Gatlin some slack for he might be the last really competitive American 100/200 sprinter for awhile on the world stage.
I don't like Gatlin at all but this is a good point
Bolt's last gasp. I'm tired of him already.
The good vs evil thing was fairly stupid.
Before the World Championships, if anyone asked me about Bolt, I would have told them that he needed to stay home and get healthy instead of going to worlds and losing. I did like how they finally had both Bolt and Gatlin starting closer to each other unlike what they did in the 100 meters and I honestly think that if the two would have lined up next to each other in the 100 meters Gatlin would have beaten Bolt.
I like both sprinters, Bolt for what he's done for the sport, and Gatlin because most people don't and I think that his first failed test should count against him it was when he was in college and it was because he's hyper.
I think if Track and Field really wanted to clean up the sport then there would be some disappointed people/countries.
Have you ever seen an Olympic or World Champion gold medalist winner get carted off the track? When medals are won or records are broken most of the individuals are being interviewed and talking about their race. Winners may hurt and have aches and pain but it doesn't feel as bad when you win!
I think it just brought even more attention to athletics.
"Bad news" is sometimes better than good (boring) news...
completely agree....the guy is clean. He's a genetic freak & they do pop up every now then
another cyclist wrote:
pop_pop! wrote:No, no, no, no. Armstrong's wins were all doped with USA Cycling supporting dopers and doping the whole time. This goes back to being a teenager under Chris Carmichael's USA Cycling doping program.
"No, no, no, no." Huh?
And I agree that he was doped at a young age. His doping just got a lot more sophisticated post-cancer.
Very much like Bolt, the UCI wasn't ever going to test him positive. that is a distinct advantage over other athletes who couldn't be sure if they would test positive.
So, it might not have been advanced dope, just a federation 'tailwind.'. Do I know one way or another? No.
hawaiidani wrote:
I think it just brought even more attention to athletics.
"Bad news" is sometimes better than good (boring) news...
No such thing as bad press!!!
Why does he always have to showboat? I don't understand why people think he is so good for the sport.[/quote]
Jealousy looks really ugly on you [quote]ItsClear wrote:
Lance Armstrong raised his hands before he crossed the finish line many times as have other athletes. It's part of the sport and we like it. We don't want to watch robots. We know what's really pissing you off :). You are partially jealous and there may be other reasons too. Just shut up and let us enjoy the sport
ItsClear wrote:
Why does he always have to showboat? I don't understand why people think he is so good for the sport.
Because he is the greatest EVER. You have to think you are the best to be the best at ANYTHING. He is great for the sport because he comes out every couple years and dominates his sport. For a website centered around running/ performance/ competition, it is astonishing how self confidence is such a foreign concept. People are going to project themselves differently in a sport that is comprised of so many different nations and cultures. That was his 6th WC/O medal of his career in the 200m...
ItsClear wrote:
Why does he always have to showboat? I don't understand why people think he is so good for the sport.
Because he is the greatest EVER. You have to think you are the best to be the best at ANYTHING. He is great for the sport because he comes out every couple years and dominates his sport. For a website centered around running/ performance/ competition, it is astonishing how self confidence is such a foreign concept. People are going to project themselves differently in a sport that is comprised of so many different nations and cultures. That was his 6th WC/O medal of his career in the 200m...
ItsClear wrote:
Why does he always have to showboat? I don't understand why people think he is so good for the sport.
Because he is the greatest EVER. You have to think you are the best to be the best at ANYTHING. He is great for the sport because he comes out every couple years and dominates his sport. For a website centered around running/ performance/ competition, it is astonishing how self confidence is such a foreign concept. People are going to project themselves differently in a sport that is comprised of so many different nations and cultures. That was his 6th WC/O medal of his career in the 200m...