19.59!!! That's the fastest 200m time of 2009 by far Gay has no chance!!!!!!
Oh wait....who ran 19.58 recently?
19.59!!! That's the fastest 200m time of 2009 by far Gay has no chance!!!!!!
Oh wait....who ran 19.58 recently?
wordddddddd
You are not from the caribbean. In an attempt to get your point across you are being an impostor.As idiotic as you seemed, i find it enigmatic that you wouldnot realise that
they do not yet have the technology and facility to produce
high tech undectectable narcotics in Jamaica.You fail to discern are made and use in either the United States and western europe.secondly if you were from the caribbean
which i bet my life you are lying. You would have know this success is not an overnight thing.Jamaica high school's sprinters have been the best in the world for decades.Now that alot of the sprinters have an option of staying home to train rather than going over seas and get lost in the system,we began to see this tremendos success.
Next time get some facts before you post negative assumptions.the facts are there ,you just have a little
longer with your soring loser attitude and stop being jealous(badminded). we have fastest runner
faster than car faster than bike
pull it pull it jamaican faster than bullet
Apologies in advance as this post is not about drugs.
The conditions were not terribe.
Steady rain that is not a downpour can be handled.
.9 wind is not too strong and can help the first 50m and be negligible the second 50m depending on the angle.
There are a lot of of fast 200m times with negative wind
Mentally those conditions can be tough if it gets you out of the mood, but if you don't let it bother you it won't physically slow you down too much.
The conditions were slow but not horrible
We say "wow, Gay ran that early and is getting fitter" or "wow, Bolt ran in bad conditions."
There seems to be a great need to handicap or convert all perfomances.
The bottom line is that Gay still has the fastest time of the year.
Nobody thinks think that time will hold up, though.
Bolt's achievements at age 17 reflect awesome talent, and not the use of drugs.
But in response to Insight - this is the problem with our sport, right? I am inclined to believe Bolt is the real deal - and he is incredibly impressive. But with so many taking performance enhancing drugs, and the perception that so few are caught, the question will inevitably arise. And it will continue to do so.
PED's can cause a lot of us long time fans to be turned off to the sport. I used to relish the Olympic 1500 as my favorite sports event - enjoyed with glee every four years. Ramzi's positive test just takes all of the air out of that balloon. What did I see? A juiced guy both win and impact a race so we don't know what would have happened with a "real" clean field.
Again, I say this to explain just why so many are so skeptical. And Wejo and Rojo have been right all along in fighting the good fight. But for me - it just doesn't make any difference any longer.
Gay has run 19.58 so far this year, so quit superhyping like Bolt will destroy Gay. Please, I think that Bolt is in for a surprise this year when Gay knocks him off his high horse. Gay WILL win gold in 200m @ Worlds-mark my words.
I think GAY has a chance in the 100 but little in the 200 ,assuming no injuries.When BOLT gets rolling he is the fastest man who ever lived.
I will go even further and say Gay will get double gold. I'm going Gay 2x.
Gay had good weather and a +1.3 wind, Bolt had shit weather and a -.9 wind. Bolt's performance was superior, although not by a huge margin.
Pepsitwist wrote:
Not a recent finding in science? Well, you are right about one thing, there is no evidence supporting the claim that lack of eye contact is a sign of deception. In fact, the opposite tends to be true. Liars tend to make more eye contact. The reason has to do with the fact that they want to see your reaction and judge whether or not you are believing the lie. Evidence also shows that police officers do no better than chance when detecting deception. I recommend you do some research in this area before you start accusing people again. Check out the work of Vrij or Ekman, you'll find scientific support there.. unlike anything in your statement.
This is bogus and everyone knows it from personal life experience. It doesn't even take science to explain it, it's plain as day common sense. Professional liars, polititions, CIA etc. may be trained to lie straight faced and look you in the eye and people with absolutely no concience. For everyone else, they squirm and dodge like you can't believe.
The difference between glancing away and not being able to keep eye contact is completely obvious. The research for this is done on a daily basis for anyone who interacts with other people. Just ask someone a tough question that you know they won't like to answer and watch their reaction.
Yesterday was also July 7, as opposed to May 30 when Gay ran his world leading time. It was also Bolt's fourteenth race of the year, while the 19.58 was Gay's first 200m and only his third race of the entire season.
Bolt is not human wrote:
Gay had good weather and a +1.3 wind, Bolt had shit weather and a -.9 wind. Bolt's performance was superior, although not by a huge margin.
X Runner wrote:
The conditions were not terribe.
Steady rain that is not a downpour can be handled.
.9 wind is not too strong and can help the first 50m and be negligible the second 50m depending on the angle.
There are a lot of of fast 200m times with negative wind
What planet are you from? This was an astonishing performance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl0-LTPuA2Exfit wrote:
The last time a nation stepped up like this was the Chinese women in the 90's and we all know what that was all about. I've been on the Bolt Express since last summers. But as I put this all together this is my stop. I'm getting of this train because something isn’t right.
This is NOTHING like the Chinese women, don't be absurd. For the last freaking time:
19.9 as a 17 y.o.
45.3 as a 16 y.o.
These times done in his first real years in the sport.
After he did those times, NOTHING that Bolt does during the rest of his career should shock you. Again, unless he was PED'd up the ass at that age (which is truly, truly doubtful), there is absolutely no reason to think that he couldn't progress from that potential at that age to what he is doing now and doing it clean, none.
You can comprehend the insanity of those youth times, can't you??? No sprinter ever has been as talented and fast as him as a 16/17 y.o., therefore, no sprinter ever should be as fast as him as an adult. He is only fulfilling his potential.
Don't bet your life you would have lost it. It's pointless to get involved in an emotional back and forth. As I stated earlier I truly hope Usain is clean but time will tell.
Go to the all time list - more than a third of the top times were run into a head wind.
Bolt's 19.30 WR was run into, again, a .9 headwind.
Bolt's 3 fastest times were run into a .9 headwind.
Gay ran 19.76 into a .8 headwind.
Carl Lewis ran 19.80 into a .9 headwind.
Ato Bolden ran 19.85 into a .9 headwind.
Frank Fredericks ran 19.87 into a 1.2 headwind.
Michael Johnson ran 19.88 into a .9 wind.
OK, it was raining and maybe tough to transition from the turn to the straight but let's not get too excited about a fast time into a .9 headwind. It's been done before.
You have got to be kidding me. BOLT has about 10 guys around him asking questions and about 10 other cameras on him. Not to mention the 14000 people screaming at him from around the stadium. Where the hell was he supposed to look for him to be telling the truth? and it's not like they were asking real difficult questions that he would have to lie about.
Greg Focker wrote:
Pepsitwist wrote:Not a recent finding in science? Well, you are right about one thing, there is no evidence supporting the claim that lack of eye contact is a sign of deception. In fact, the opposite tends to be true. Liars tend to make more eye contact. The reason has to do with the fact that they want to see your reaction and judge whether or not you are believing the lie. Evidence also shows that police officers do no better than chance when detecting deception. I recommend you do some research in this area before you start accusing people again. Check out the work of Vrij or Ekman, you'll find scientific support there.. unlike anything in your statement.
This is bogus and everyone knows it from personal life experience. It doesn't even take science to explain it, it's plain as day common sense. Professional liars, polititions, CIA etc. may be trained to lie straight faced and look you in the eye and people with absolutely no concience. For everyone else, they squirm and dodge like you can't believe.
The difference between glancing away and not being able to keep eye contact is completely obvious. The research for this is done on a daily basis for anyone who interacts with other people. Just ask someone a tough question that you know they won't like to answer and watch their reaction.
Sorry, but the research does not agree with you. You can claim anectodal evidence all you want, but when it comes to deception detection in situations of such an important magnitude, ie- someone's livlihood, you better have more than a gut feeling to support your claim. If you can provide some research that supports your claim, than we'll have to consider your input, but seeing as how this is currently my particular area of study, I am confident you will find no such support.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200512/spotting-the-liarhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WJ9-4T4JDR1-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=952045032&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=d6bb7ef94dd14ec036ce3226fae7f13dhttp://books.google.com/books?id=wJPWxOIhIcEC&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=eye+contact+in+liars+%2B+psychology+research&source=bl&ots=DYS0GfPu7a&sig=TklNEv1zNKF3PjnBrVnmS5L5r7s&hl=en&ei=XT9VSof-Mo3cNrHY2bsC&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9X Runner wrote:
Apologies in advance as this post is not about drugs.
The conditions were not terribe.
Steady rain that is not a downpour can be handled.
.9 wind is not too strong and can help the first 50m and be negligible the second 50m depending on the angle.
There are a lot of of fast 200m times with negative wind
Mentally those conditions can be tough if it gets you out of the mood, but if you don't let it bother you it won't physically slow you down too much.
The conditions were slow but not horrible
We say "wow, Gay ran that early and is getting fitter" or "wow, Bolt ran in bad conditions."
There seems to be a great need to handicap or convert all perfomances.
The bottom line is that Gay still has the fastest time of the year.
Nobody thinks think that time will hold up, though.
It looked like Bolt was having trouble with the traction on the curve--the primary disadvantage of running in the rain. He's practically out in lane six, and his stride looks peculiar until he hits the straight.
On another note, it took the guy almost exactly 80 steps to cover those 200 meters. For those of you looking to emulate him, just turn it over 4.08 times per second and take strides that are 2.5 meters long. You'll be right there.
innocent until proven guilty.
He is not even being charged
How can he be that much better than everyone else?
That was a moranic statement are question which ever you perceived.How is your comprehension skills. For the last time i will explain since you are so indolent to peruse the facts. Yet you are making assumption and baseless accusations. He is being this good way above is peers since he was 15teen and even younger.Go get the facts and come back and post it.