Bolt 9.64 OR!!!!

It's like the EPO era for the distance guys, or the era before steroids were banned.

Things have improved somewhat. On the whole, we don't see women turned into men like we did in East Germany (with the possible exception of China). We also don't see guys literally dying on the track, in the field, or in the weight room from cardiomegaly and other steroid-related effects.

Whatever the best are using these days seems to be OK, so far. Only the chumps who can't get access to it, or who are slow in the head, still dose with the old stuff on the banned list.

We might see an era when times rise again, with additions to the banned list and the implementation of new tests--or, we might not, it depends on how good the tests are, how expensive and cumbersome they are, etc.. I still think that Bolt will survive unscathed. He IS t&f, and in large measure, he IS the Olympics.

The integrity of his image is worth potentially BILLIONS of dollars to many interested, powerful parties, and he will only get bigger.

Wait until he switches to the 400 and maybe LJ. The legacy will continue.

first off, bolt's run had a legal wind. go through the list and i'm sure other performances were wind-aided. so let's ignore that red herring. not to mention how much he let off the gas. imagine if he had run through the line. that's an even more telling fact, in my humble opinion.You have to consider progression in the context of era. as i mentioned, progressions in technology, drug use, etc. the rate of progression was very slow and methodical. and then there wss bolt. you choose to believe "he's from the future." i choose to believe he's from the future because he's got a great designer cocktail program going. we can agree on the fact that he's an outlier. we just disagree abut why.

fsdfsfd wrote:

first off, bolt's run had a legal wind. go through the list and i'm sure other performances were wind-aided. so let's ignore that red herring. not to mention how much he let off the gas. imagine if he had run through the line. that's an even more telling fact, in my humble opinion.

You have to consider progression in the context of era. as i mentioned, progressions in technology, drug use, etc. the rate of progression was very slow and methodical. and then there wss bolt. you choose to believe "he's from the future." i choose to believe he's from the future because he's got a great designer cocktail program going. we can agree on the fact that he's an outlier. we just disagree abut why.

I don't know what you're talking about.

1. Take away all of the wind-aided performances, and Bolt's does not stand out. So, it's not a "red herring".

2. I never said Bolt was "from the future". I have no idea why you said that or what that even is supposed to mean

how do you determine who is clean? I bet if the majority of runners were running around 11 seconds and a few started running in the 10s, you would say they are doping. So, does that mean that all the gold, silver and bronze swimmers are doping? how about the gymnists or kyakers. How about the entire soccer team that win gold? You might as well suspect everyone who makes it to the olympic as possibly doping. Are any kind of expert or are you the type of person that puts limit on what you thinks is possible so when someone surpasses your expecated limit, he/she is doping?

i can tell i'm dealing with the cream of the letsrun trolling crop. obfuscate with meaningless drivel and claim victory. woohoo! bolt's world record was legal wind. and he jogged through the line. how is that not an extreme outlier? moving on. we agree to disagree.

welcome to the reality of modern-day sports. confucius says, power of human spirit great. designer drug program make it greater. How do I differentiate? Based on context and common sense. I remember how much I was derided for my belief that Barry Bonds was using. Except that in the end, I was right. Believe what you want to believe. Just don't be too surprised when some of your heros prove later to have used the juice. This is letsrun for you. Apparently the drug problem in sport has magically disappeared! that's what we're arguing. crazy.

darkmatter wrote:

how do you determine who is clean? I bet if the majority of runners were running around 11 seconds and a few started running in the 10s, you would say they are doping. So, does that mean that all the gold, silver and bronze swimmers are doping? how about the gymnists or kyakers. How about the entire soccer team that win gold? You might as well suspect everyone who makes it to the olympic as possibly doping. Are any kind of expert or are you the type of person that puts limit on what you thinks is possible so when someone surpasses your expecated limit, he/she is doping?

There is no meaningless drivel. I provided exact numbers going all the way back to the early 1900s. If you even bothered that look at that data, then you would see that Bolt's progression is NOT out of the ordinary.a Bolt has occurred about every 10 years for the last 100 years.

fsdfsfd wrote:

i can tell i'm dealing with the cream of the letsrun trolling crop. obfuscate with meaningless drivel and claim victory. woohoo! bolt's world record was legal wind. and he jogged through the line. how is that not an extreme outlier? moving on. we agree to disagree.

sure no wrote:

I don't know what you're talking about.

1. Take away all of the wind-aided performances, and Bolt's does not stand out. So, it's not a "red herring".

2. I never said Bolt was "from the future". I have no idea why you said that or what that even is supposed to mean

I wish everyone would admit that bolt is doping. Everyone in his camp got busted, he had a tremendous performance spike from 2007 to 2008. Hes always been fast which means its harder for him to drop that amount of time that quickly, hes always been tall so stop saying hes fast because hes tall, hes running faster than ben johnson,carl lewis, maurice green, tim montgomery, etc and they were all busted on roids. If you look at the progressions of all of the top 100 meter runners men and women, they all had a substantial performance spike at some point. Heck shelly ann frasier dropped half a second between 07 and 08, jeter dropped half a second also. On top of the fact that bolt ran 9.68 while shutting down with 15 meters left and ran 19.19 with second place being 19.7. So hes really an 9.4 100 runner and 18 second 200 runner. Track is like baseball in the 90s and early 2000s

Clearly dopers, not questions asked. Sad that the 100m has been so fraudulent this decade and even back to the 80's. No clean person runs 9.84 or under.

Bolt's the most obvious doper that hasn't been caught yet. Running sideways through the finish arms extended in a world record in 08 was the biggest tip off. His teammates (taking the same stuff) now have caught up and he can't run sideways anymore but still fast.

Sprinters are now like weight lifting competitions. Just chalked full of users. Sad that it's come to this, makes the 100m only fun to the same idiots that love the 2000's style NBA.

darkmatter wrote:

how do you determine who is clean? I bet if the majority of runners were running around 11 seconds and a few started running in the 10s, you would say they are doping. So, does that mean that all the gold, silver and bronze swimmers are doping? how about the gymnists or kyakers. How about the entire soccer team that win gold? You might as well suspect everyone who makes it to the olympic as possibly doping. Are any kind of expert or are you the type of person that puts limit on what you thinks is possible so when someone surpasses your expecated limit, he/she is doping?

Here's a good test, when the majority of runners sub 9.84 have been busted for cheating...it's a good indication of the level at which cheaters are separated from non-cheaters. When someone goes another .2 faster than that and is blowing away the competition that's a good indication.

If it smells fishy...it's fish.

No one in his camp got busted you idiot...

He DID NOT have a performance spike,m he just switched distances...

maurice was never busted for roids...

you can't be serious? you are a letsrun moron/troll par exemplar. well done, trollie mcsockpuppet!

It took 31 years--1960 to 1991--for the record to drop from 10.0 to 9.90. 31 years for a tenth of a second, give or take, given hand timing, etc.

then from 1990 to 1996 it dropped another .06.

And then we have some craziness with the Mo Greene/APowell era, but it all pales in comparison with Bolt, who goes fing bonkers, so much so that's he's almost off the chart. where you get this there was a bolt every decade business is beyond me.

wait, i know how you came up with it: You're a trolling exemplar, a master moron, a letsrun douche.

Something that is always missed in these discussions is the provision of plausible reasons for the improvement we have seen, other than pharma.

Improved training, diet, equipment, and facilities can be discounted. They were all just as good 10-15 years ago.

IMO the ONLY POSSIBLE explanations are 1) selection, and 2) pharma.

Sprinting has been big in both the USA and in Jamaica for many years. I don't see any significant selection effect.

One thing I do see is that the best prospects from places like Jamaica are only recently getting ACCESS to better training and facilities (as well as pharma). Take away the known dopers, certain dopers, and questionable times, and the recent progression amounts to only Powell, Gay, Bolt, and Blake. Gatlin is still the same as Fredericks, Surin, Bailey, Boldon. Blake is only slightly ahead of those guys, he would represent a smaller 100m progression.

So the advancement at the top amounts to only 3 guys--Bolt, Powell, and Gay. Has there been general advancement in the field? I don't know. Maybe not, considering that Kim Collins would still have made the final this year, in the same time as he made it 12 years ago.

General advancement? I will leave that up to some statistician to try to determine. Specific advancement by a select few individuals? Certainly, which rules out training, nutrition, equipment effects, that have generally been available for a decade. Are these individuals the result of enhanced selection? I have yet to see any good evidence supporting that suggestion.

Totally agree. Very high likelihood he's doped, esp evidenced by the emergence of the current generation of jamaican men. 5 of the 7 fastest men ever are jamaican. It's his dramatic drops in times in 2008 that make him suspicious.

The whole nonsense that because he's 6.5 is nonsense. By that same logic, Shelley Ann Fraser should never win a 100m paired with the gigantic Blessing Okabare. It was the same thing with marion, she looked the part of a dominant runner/jumper, she was a teen phenom, she passed 166 drug tests, and it was ultimately criminal investigations that brought down Balco.

Bolt IS TF's savior, no chance he will test positive or it will be covered up.

Jamaica seems to have followed the saying, if you can't beat'em join'em. Prior to 2008, they were NOWHERE in the short sprints.

angeltodemon wrote:

Prior to 2008, they were NOWHERE in the short sprints.

O c'mon thats not true. They had VCB, Powell, Bolt was #2 in the world at the 200, ect...

Yow Koneko that is an irresponsible accusation.Blake once tested positive for a stimulant that was in a supplement given to him and other teammates by an AMERICAN friend.This got him a 3 months ban,as this stimulant was light in comparison to those used by the real dopers.Mr. Bolt has never tested positive for anything.Mr. Bolt does not need drugs trust me .Go do your research Bolt ran 19.93 seconds for 200m at the tender age of 17yrs. What you are witnessing right now Mr. Koneko is the type of gifted athlete that comes around every 40yrs or so. Take heart Mr. Koneko this is real.

Here man

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2008-04-12-athletes-steroids_N.htm

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/24/us-doping-athletics-jamaica-idUSTRE56N46420090724

http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/country=JAM/athcode=184599/index.html

Blake ran 20.6 in 2009, 19.7 in 2010 and 19.2 in 2011. We call those tremendous performance spikes. You guys can act blind,deaf and dumb if you want but its right in front of your face. Bolt 19.7 in 2007, 19.3 in 2008 and 19.1 in 2009

misewell b wrote:

Here's a good test, when the majority of runners sub 9.84 have been busted for cheating...it's a good indication of the level at which cheaters are separated from non-cheaters. When someone goes another .2 faster than that and is blowing away the competition that's a good indication.

If it smells fishy...it's fish.

Could be vagina