No, they don't. Talent has always been in the sport and the difference between the best athletes is fractional. Outliers today are dopers.
All of humanity can be graded on a bell curve. To claim this is an impossibility is not logical.
A Bell curve is not a measure that will apply to everything. Not all forms of human activity or accomplishment follow a predictable pattern. The fact is that in highly competitive sports the differences between the athletes at the top now are very small. That is why a single tactical mistake or error in execution at that level can cost a race. But a 16 year-old running a sprint equal to the best in the world is simply too good to be true. When we see outliers in doped sports we are seeing doping.
All of humanity can be graded on a bell curve. To claim this is an impossibility is not logical.
A Bell curve is not a measure that will apply to everything. Not all forms of human activity or accomplishment follow a predictable pattern. The fact is that in highly competitive sports the differences between the athletes at the top now are very small. That is why a single tactical mistake or error in execution at that level can cost a race. But a 16 year-old running a sprint equal to the best in the world is simply too good to be true. When we see outliers in doped sports we are seeing doping.
If you really think this way..I do not know how you even watch the sport. I am being serious, not sniping. The notion that Lee Evans could run 43.86 even at altitude which helped at that distance , and it is 56 years later? Guys should have been running sub 44.00 with more frequency within 30 years of that certainly by 56 years.Athletes in every sport are exponentially better overall than even 20 years ago..only in T and F do we hear the cries of improvement smacks of drug use. Is there a bunch? Probably..as wide spread as you say? No way.. I have watched this sport since I was 15 that's 51 years plus, and honestly consider myself a pretty solid evaluator and objective critic of the sport...your level of cynicism? I think is way over stated.
A Bell curve is not a measure that will apply to everything. Not all forms of human activity or accomplishment follow a predictable pattern. The fact is that in highly competitive sports the differences between the athletes at the top now are very small. That is why a single tactical mistake or error in execution at that level can cost a race. But a 16 year-old running a sprint equal to the best in the world is simply too good to be true. When we see outliers in doped sports we are seeing doping.
If you really think this way..I do not know how you even watch the sport. I am being serious, not sniping. The notion that Lee Evans could run 43.86 even at altitude which helped at that distance , and it is 56 years later? Guys should have been running sub 44.00 with more frequency within 30 years of that certainly by 56 years.Athletes in every sport are exponentially better overall than even 20 years ago..only in T and F do we hear the cries of improvement smacks of drug use. Is there a bunch? Probably..as wide spread as you say? No way.. I have watched this sport since I was 15 that's 51 years plus, and honestly consider myself a pretty solid evaluator and objective critic of the sport...your level of cynicism? I think is way over stated.
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
If you really think this way..I do not know how you even watch the sport. I am being serious, not sniping. The notion that Lee Evans could run 43.86 even at altitude which helped at that distance , and it is 56 years later? Guys should have been running sub 44.00 with more frequency within 30 years of that certainly by 56 years.Athletes in every sport are exponentially better overall than even 20 years ago..only in T and F do we hear the cries of improvement smacks of drug use. Is there a bunch? Probably..as wide spread as you say? No way.. I have watched this sport since I was 15 that's 51 years plus, and honestly consider myself a pretty solid evaluator and objective critic of the sport...your level of cynicism? I think is way over stated.
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
I’m not sure why you guys are in an argument with Armstronglivs. He’s one, anonymous person on the internet. His opinion is inconsequential.
Proving it is the hard part. Just an accusation until you prove it.
Doping is known to be throughout the sport - surveys of athletes indicate possibly 1 in 2 athletes at championship level - yet only 2% of athletes are caught. Probability suggests therefore anyone at that level is doping and yet they are unlikely to be caught.
Where did you find these surveys? I googled and can find no evidence of such surveys. I would like to peruse the information for myself.
All of humanity can be graded on a bell curve. To claim this is an impossibility is not logical.
A Bell curve is not a measure that will apply to everything. Not all forms of human activity or accomplishment follow a predictable pattern. The fact is that in highly competitive sports the differences between the athletes at the top now are very small. That is why a single tactical mistake or error in execution at that level can cost a race. But a 16 year-old running a sprint equal to the best in the world is simply too good to be true. When we see outliers in doped sports we are seeing doping.
Sporting performance is definitely one of those areas which is eminently suitable for a bell curve.
If you really think this way..I do not know how you even watch the sport. I am being serious, not sniping. The notion that Lee Evans could run 43.86 even at altitude which helped at that distance , and it is 56 years later? Guys should have been running sub 44.00 with more frequency within 30 years of that certainly by 56 years.Athletes in every sport are exponentially better overall than even 20 years ago..only in T and F do we hear the cries of improvement smacks of drug use. Is there a bunch? Probably..as wide spread as you say? No way.. I have watched this sport since I was 15 that's 51 years plus, and honestly consider myself a pretty solid evaluator and objective critic of the sport...your level of cynicism? I think is way over stated.
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
Doping is known to be throughout the sport - surveys of athletes indicate possibly 1 in 2 athletes at championship level - yet only 2% of athletes are caught. Probability suggests therefore anyone at that level is doping and yet they are unlikely to be caught.
Where did you find these surveys? I googled and can find no evidence of such surveys. I would like to peruse the information for myself.
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
Who is Jones?
Please, don't confront this armguy with his nonsense. He obviously did a lot of research regarding "Jones".
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
I’m not sure why you guys are in an argument with Armstronglivs. He’s one, anonymous person on the internet. His opinion is inconsequential.
Doping is known to be throughout the sport - surveys of athletes indicate possibly 1 in 2 athletes at championship level - yet only 2% of athletes are caught. Probability suggests therefore anyone at that level is doping and yet they are unlikely to be caught.
Where did you find these surveys? I googled and can find no evidence of such surveys. I would like to peruse the information for myself.
They have featured in numerous threads in Letsrun for several years. Some were reported in the Guardian a few years back. You don't appear to read widely.
A Bell curve is not a measure that will apply to everything. Not all forms of human activity or accomplishment follow a predictable pattern. The fact is that in highly competitive sports the differences between the athletes at the top now are very small. That is why a single tactical mistake or error in execution at that level can cost a race. But a 16 year-old running a sprint equal to the best in the world is simply too good to be true. When we see outliers in doped sports we are seeing doping.
Sporting performance is definitely one of those areas which is eminently suitable for a bell curve.
If you wish to apply that model then those at the end of the curve for exceptional skills and achievements are all at the same level. In this sport, someone who leaps above others in "giftedness" is a either an absolute freak or doping. Doping is statistically more likely.
Lee Evans was in his 20's when he ran 43.8 and did so at altitude. If Jones was at altitude he likely could have done the same - at 16. It is ridiculous. You don't think the world's best, like Evans was, wasn't as well-trained as Jones - and had years more top-level training as well as experience? Next year we may see a 15 year-old run 44. And you guys will still put it down to "progress". In another thread I posted a link to WADA data that said athletics is only matched by cycling for doping violations, and is in much the same category as weightlifting and bodybuilding. That is the sport today.
Who is Jones?
Good question. I think the writer inadvertently referred to the name of the esteemed jazz musician, Quincy Jones. I don't think his doping would have been of the same nature.
This post was edited 47 seconds after it was posted.
I think Quincy is one of those situations that just are too good to be true. A 16 year old with the sh!ttiest form you could imagine, taking down trained professionals? Improving over a second within weeks?
I'd be pretty pissed if I were them. I get the vibe not many like him.
I think Quincy is one of those situations that just are too good to be true. A 16 year old with the sh!ttiest form you could imagine, taking down trained professionals? Improving over a second within weeks?
I'd be pretty pissed if I were them. I get the vibe not many like him.
But if this is true, and Quincy is on some crazy PEDs, surely some of his adult competitors could afford/have access to the same or even better PEDs too, right? Someone else would take that road, surely.
Could he be a freakish talent, on a similar PED (or non-PED) regime to the others, or does he somehow have access to something no one else does?
My naïve assumption would be that a HS kid would not have access to something better than the professional athletes, but maybe the professional US 400m athletes are all clean, and the HS kid is doping.