Is Bolt doping? An intelligent discussion

You are seeking an intelligent discussion on letsrun.com? This site is absolutely the worst to try to have such talks.

Better you take this discussion to bbc sports where an agenda is not present.

If USA is beaten by anyone they must be on drugs. Tried and sentenced, once the Americans say so judgment has been served.

Even if he is doping, it's the most damn impressive performance ever. Bolt is at the level where it doesn't even matter anymore because even with drugs, those records are a mind-blowing example of how fast a human being can actually move. It's just other-worldly. Unless drugs have a super concentrated effect on Bolt himself, and not all the other athletes that have doped before him, he has some kind of unfathomable talent.

Actually, the debate about Lance Armstrong turns on similar logical constructs. One man stands out above his competitors who one by one by one fall prey to positive tests. This man may be white and a cancer survivor or may be of African descent and competes for Jamaica unsullied by undergraduate years spent in the Southeast Conference.

iamsbee wrote:

You are seeking an intelligent discussion on letsrun.com? This site is absolutely the worst to try to have such talks.

Better you take this discussion to bbc sports where an agenda is not present.

If USA is beaten by anyone they must be on drugs. Tried and sentenced, once the Americans say so judgment has been served.

Guilty by association. wrote:

Oh wait. I just had another idea. We can keep the sport legal and just ignore those naysaying penis-envying tools who think everybody cheats. On second thought, let's go with that.

Oh, and you are so obviously the same person as SI or SQ or whatever. Pathetic.

right here, most intelligent post on the thread thus far.

Steventm98 wrote:

Actually, the debate about Lance Armstrong turns on similar logical constructs. One man stands out above his competitors who one by one by one fall prey to positive tests. This man may be white and a cancer survivor or may be of African descent and competes for Jamaica unsullied by undergraduate years spent in the Southeast Conference.

Agreed. People seem incapable of accepting that, every once-in-a-while, a true superhuman will be born. At least, incapable of accepting it in a sport where performance is measured concretely. But have you watched Michael Jordan dunk? He won SIX NBA titles with the Bulls. That's freakish. Michael Jordan, in his peak, was much, much better than any basketball player had ever been. So was he a doper? Most would say no. But when we look at a concrete, numerical sport like ours, it is so hard to accept a truly earthshaking performance when it comes around, simply because the black-and-white truth about it is nearly unbearable.

My position is as follows:

1) Usain Bolt is incredibly talented. If you haven't seen the video of him at World Juniors, you really ought to. Based on this, we know that he is either a) a true freak OR b) has been doped to the gills since he was in his early teens.

2) If Bolt's performances were mostly attributed to doping, we would expect to see many other sprinters making huge jumps in performance. There is no way that Bolt has access to drugs that NOBODY else can get. But really, we haven't. Tyson Gay? He ran 9.68 (wind aided) last year. Don't tell me you didn't see 9.71 wind-legal coming at some point in the future. Again, Tyson is extremely talented. 10.46 in high school, 10.06 one year out of HS.

3) If "everybody" is doping, and Bolt is also doping, he is STILL clearly far superior to anybody else in the world. If Bolt was using "plain old" PEDs, we would expect to see times comparable to his in the past. But we haven't.

4) Bolt may not really be that special in 10 years or so. Let's not forget Jeff Demps--10.02 (IIRC) in high school. Do you think HE'S doping? Guys like him, if their career pans out well, will have a good shot at 9.5x.

There's a difference between Bolt and Armstrong, though. Armstong actually tested positive but the results were not admitted. Also, Armstrong was riding for a team where almost every other top performer has been busted.

But hey, he was also on chemo, and we all know how good that is for you. It's the legal PED.

I just came on and did not read the entire thread, but let me ask...has it been an "intelligent discussion" so far?

Clowns of the Purple Sage wrote:

I just came on and did not read the entire thread, but let me ask...has it been an "intelligent discussion" so far?

I withdraw the question. I realize I was not adding to the intelligence of the discussion.

Guilty by association. wrote:

So basically by being a sprinter and being fast, Bolt is automatically cheating. You and toady can talk around it all you want but this is the essence of your argument. There's no other basis for the claim than that.

If tomorrow somebody enters a meet and runs 7.58 for 100m, would you think he was clean? Lets say he even has run 10.00 when he was 15, 9.9 when he was 18. And then he makes this huge jump to 7.58. Would that, or would that not, cause you to doubt what he has done?

Well that is basically what Usain Bolt has done. He has had great progression early throughout his career, but the JUMP he has made in just one year is completely other-worldly. Him running 9.58 and 19.19 is the same to me as if he broke 8sec and 18 sec for the 1 and 2. They are both ludicrous times.

Now, I'm not saying that world records are impossible to do clean, and that every "fast" person should be thought of as cheating, but the simple fact remains that YOU CAN PASS EVERY SINGLE DRUG TEST THROUGHOUT YOUR CAREER, AND STILL BE DOPING. Negative tests is not proof enough that he is not doping. As we've seen time and time again with many athletes.

And just to repeat, everybody who runs under 9.80 sec, in my view, has a heavy shadow of doubt over them. Every single athlete that has done it (except for Gay, Bolt, Powell), has either been busted for doping, or had receipts and bank statements connecting them with drugs. That is a fact.

So you are telling me, that those times by athletes who BARELY get under 9.8, who were talented from a very young age, great training, great coaching, and great DRUGS, are now being SHATTERED by clean, PED-Free men?

I'm not saying that it is impossible, but I am saying that it is HIGHLY unlikely, and that Bolt (or any of those three for that matter) should be held to a higher level of testing, or that he himself should come forward and to truly say he is clean, get tested/analyzed by a 3rd party lab.

Right there with you wrote:

Him running 9.58 and 19.19 is the same to me as if he broke 8sec and 18 sec for the 1 and 2. They are both ludicrous times.

Can't fault most of your post, but this doesn't help your credibility. You can't just arbitrarily make Bolt's times more unbelievable. 9.58 is exactly 1.58 seconds less ludicrous than 8.00.

That is true, but I was just trying to make the point that if 9.58 doesn't garner some speculation, then what the heck does?! To me, that is a video game time.

I chuckle as I read the content of this and other threads. Many are so convinced Bolt and the Jamaicans are doping that they think he has the burden of proof. Well I have a suggestion, walk over to a mirror and take a good look. That person starting back at you, his/her opinion does not matter and Bolt/Jams have no burden other than the multiple medals weighing down their necks.

The real burden of proof is on the embarrassed Americans, who almost destroyed track and field and left in question their decades of "dominance." Imagine that! For decades the Olympics, Iaaf championships etc., were a farce due to cheating. It is hard to watch any old replays and get excited knowing what we now know. Few can deny that Bolt has brought back that excitement.

I would like to thank the Jamaicans propelling T&F back to the world stage with their stellar performances. Those who do not give credit, again, you simply do not matter. As long as things stay clean (and with Bolt, even if USA dopes, they still can't win) it appears that they will be dominating for a long time win.

Welcome to the new world order, wether you like it or not. Come with some better athletes next time around.

A Jamaican.

The Jamaicans may be better partly because they are doping and

it has become more difficult to cheat in the US.

Let's get real here folks. Who do you think you are fooling.

Bolt is doping. People are afraid to say it because he is black and they don't want to be thought of as racist. He's taking something.

yyy wrote:

The Jamaicans may be better partly because they are doping and

it has become more difficult to cheat in the US.

Let's get real here folks. Who do you think you are fooling.

I thought this was an intelligent discussion? Okay, I'll say this in an unintelligent way....

The dopers lost their chemical advantage and right after that, they started getting the shit kicked out of them. Simple as that. I understand that your athletes have lost your trust and that you are traumatized, however, we don't have that problem here.

Let the parties begin!!! (again)

Bolt would still probably have the World record in the 100m and 200m possibly even without drugs (assuming he was on it of course!).

Right there with you wrote:

Blah blah blah...

OK, we get it. You think everybody is doping. You think running 9.75 is just as incredible as running 6.50 or 3.90 or whatever the fu\ck. Blah blah blah. Jesus, how many times (and under how many different names) are you going to repeat the same tired shit?

You still have zero "evidence". Right there, that's all we're talking about. Because without evidence NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU THINK! Do you understand that, loser? You're just a delusional moron on a soapbox. Now tell us when the world is going to end.

I thought this one deserved a repost. This is "Right there with you" a.k.a. "Scientific Inquiry" complementing himself on his excellent points. >LOL< What a dumbass.

Yo, HypnoLoad:

You do understand that the more you post with your poorly written commentary, the smarter SI/SQ looks.

He is no reposting under other names, so you look stupid saying it.

And, you look doubly stupid because you clearly do not contain the ability to logically understand what he wrote and accept with class that the two of you simply have different opinions.