How can you compare athletes from countries with an ADP, versus those with out. Don't be naïve about the Canadians sprinters from the 90s without doing some research. Also, notwithstanding the fact that he indeed failed a drug test, but it might help to read up on the circumstances.
TrackCoach wrote:
How can you compare athletes from countries with an ADP, versus those with out. Don't be naïve about the Canadians sprinters from the 90s without doing some research. Also, notwithstanding the fact that he indeed failed a drug test, but it might help to read up on the circumstances.
Don't waste your time the guy is a jerk.
I wouldn't think that Simbine should be on this list, because the explosion in top times from a region where the doping lab just lost its accreditation (SA) and where there is limited top quality sprinting history but a doping history makes them all suspect, Makwala, Simbine, WVN, and on and on.
what about Javelin Olympic champion from Rio?
Ever see any African javelin thrower at all? Or in some other throwing events in first 10 on OG or WC?
Now guy claiming that he learnt how to throw on youtube won Olympic gold medal.
SAR now is heaven for dopers.
Why only African lab lost it accreditation? No official explanation.
So right now no WADA lab in Africa, couple that with widespread corruption and we what have - SUPERHUMANS or genetically superior athletes, I mean dopers.
BTW 100m times now in London were even slower than in Rio.
When OOC testing will be introduced in whole world on the same basis (testers from WADA not local ones) and frequencies things will be more clear but for now...
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Sprints Insider wrote:I started to not even justify this garbage with a comment. You have your mind set on certain people and as one who knows for certain who has gone dirty and those who for certain are or were clean and then those that people are not certain of but are questionable.
You can't tag everyone with a certain coach as dirty first of all. Ato Boldon was clean and not once in all the Balco BS did his name come up.
Next you can't stick your head in the sand over athletes like Donovan Bailey and pretend they are clean. You had similar feelings for Gay and Powell and look where we are now.
You disqualify a guy like Ryan Bailey despite piles of evidence that he has always been clean. Not one thing has pointed to his being dirty like his Canadian namesake or Bruny Surin.
I just wish before you go hurting the events you love by posting complete BS about some very honest and legit people that you would take a minute before slandering some of our sports best who have no evidence against them.
Mo Greene plent of evidence. Gone! Carl, lots of evidence. Gone! Tyson, Gatlin and others who have a positive test. Gone! But until you have something more than BS or idle speculation please refrain from mislabeling some of our sports best.
BECAUSE I NEVER FORGET:
http://www.flotrack.org/article/59825-ryan-bailey-served-a-backdated-six-month-doping-ban#.WYOUxtQrLGhHey "Sprints Insider", you absolute steaming pile of crap, what do you have to say for yourself now? Must be pretty hard to say anything with your head shoved so far up your azz. You ignorant, arrogant, POS moran.
WTF do you know? Nothing. Your comments are absolute garbage.
Ryan Bailey is OFF. And YOU are a piece of crap, with your sanctimonious b.s.. Come out and take your beating like a man.
Welcome back geezer! Ignore the haters, they are probably second tier sprinters that you have already labeled as suspect.
I doubt we'll hear back from sprints insider.
I still don't understand why doping is against the rules. Anyone who is anybody dopes, so why not change our standards? Kind of like "if you think everyone is evil, you're the one with the problem"? So in this case it would be like "If you know everyone is a doper, than why punish and drive the PR of the sport further into the ground"?
Joe Binks wrote:
Bob Hayes�s 10.06 on the churned up inside lane of a cinder track, way back in 1964.
Fastest non-altitude Olympic time as well until Carl Lewis 20 years later, all of them subsequently running on synthetic.
+1. IMO all top performances 1968 and after are 'tainted'.
ESPN Analyst wrote:
Sprintgeezer wrote:BECAUSE I NEVER FORGET:
http://www.flotrack.org/article/59825-ryan-bailey-served-a-backdated-six-month-doping-ban#.WYOUxtQrLGhHey "Sprints Insider", you absolute steaming pile of crap, what do you have to say for yourself now? Must be pretty hard to say anything with your head shoved so far up your azz. You ignorant, arrogant, POS moran.
WTF do you know? Nothing. Your comments are absolute garbage.
Ryan Bailey is OFF. And YOU are a piece of crap, with your sanctimonious b.s.. Come out and take your beating like a man.
Welcome back geezer! Ignore the haters, they are probably second tier sprinters that you have already labeled as suspect.
I doubt we'll hear back from sprints insider.
Anyone who gets as into the PED problem to the extent this Sprintjerk does, needs help.
What about Bolt? Holy cow are you saying he cheated?
Bolt's clean ceiling is 9.77/19.66.
Pretty sure all the neg trolls on this thread are the same person posting under different names.
Good thread, hey geez can you update based on 2018 performances lile Coleman?
D2 hack wrote:
Pretty sure all the neg trolls on this thread are the same person posting under different names.
Good thread, hey geez can you update based on 2018 performances lile Coleman?
I might update the list in a bit, since it’s been a while. Thoughts:
Coleman is OFF.
Lyles will be ON.
Many others to consider.
I should have posted this here; sorry I didn't see it earlier:
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Some take-away's for me:
1) since Lemaitre is only 20th on the unadjusted list, and he took a max +2.0 wind to get there, any white guy penetrating the top 20 should probably receive extra scrutiny
Maybe you're right, but I'm curious to know - why is that logic sound, but not the following logic :
Virtually every tainted elite sprinter was black, therefore any elite black sprinter should probably receive extra scrutiny.
I mean, you're surely not suggesting that the 'tainted' sprinters (and Bolt) are the only dopers? Would be reasonable to believe that most of the top sprinters are doping, and the worse/clumsiest offenders are getting caught.
And before anybody cries 'racist' - sprintgeezer has brought race into it, and I'm just wondering why a white guy making a list of top 20 'untainted' sprinters is suspect when every tainted sprinter above him is black?
Christoph LeMaitre didn't even make sprinting the chief focus in his life. He surely could have gone faster if he had. And for the reason he didn't see track as 100% his career, I can believe that he was/is likely to be clean.
Valid question.
First, “virtually every tainted elite athlete was black. IDK what your definition of elite is, but there have been plenty of very fast whites, very near 10-flat, who have been busted. Greece, Italy, and Hungary come to mind.
If you want to define elite by my arbitrary cutoff of 9.95, yes all busted elites have been black—but also, all non-busted elites except for CL are black. The point is that no white has ever before demonstrated the ability to be in the top-20 untainted, and so would be breaking new ground—a different situation than a black doing it, because there is precedent.
Of course if you believe that all blacks on the untainted list are actually tainted, then my argument has no merit...but it is then up to you to show that they are all tainted. I personally believe that many of them are actually tainted but that taint remains undiscovered—but I have decided to keep this thread within the realm of what is reasonably believable, if not definitive proof.
CL receives only normal scrutiny because he isn’t even 10-flat basic, not even the fastest basic white. At that, he is squeaky clean. Su Bingtian will receive increased scrutiny because his basic time is down there, and because he is from China. Like CC before him, Lyles will receive extra scrutiny because his raw time is so fast.
Also, every athlete who has gone wind-legal 9.80 or better has been tainted, and that therefore strongly suggests taint to me. CC is the latest member of that club—he was under suspicion because of his 9.79, which suspicion increased hugely with his indoor doper-crushing WR, and which was pushed way over the top with his history of missed tests.
Yes, this is all my judgment. All I have done is to eliminate some of the more obvious athletes from the all-time list. The list is therefore far from perfect, of course.
Obviously Kimmons also needs to go, maybe I have written that already.
I should really update that list, to make it clear. I will also make a separate list of the squeaky-clean, of course I will entertain any and all information regarding why they should be included or not.
Is Donovan Bailey still at the top of this list or is he off?
Considering the fact that Bailey could have easily run under 9.80 at the Atlanta Olympics seems reason enough to remove him based on the rules laid out. Bailey's reaction time in Atlanta was .174 seconds, the slowest in the entire field, and his official time was 9.835 seconds. Remember Atlanta had a bunch of false starts including the DQ of Linford Christy that resulted in a delay due to Christy laying on the track and refusing to leave. By the time they finally got a clean start Bailey was left in the blocks. In the '97 WC finals for example, Bailey had a much more reasonable (for a world class sprinter) .14 second reaction time. With that kind of reaction time in '96 Bailey would have run right at 9.80 seconds, which is dang close to your cutoff Sprintgeezer. Bailey's time without reaction time is 9.66 seconds which is the same exact time Ben Johnson ran without reaction time in the '88 Olympic finals! Bailey still has one the fastest 10m splits ever recorded, only surpassed by Bolt. Bailey should be off the list.
I don’t remember if he is on or off, but I will look this week. You are right about everything, I also wrote the same observations years ago. Also his association with Galea is problematic.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
D2 hack wrote:
Pretty sure all the neg trolls on this thread are the same person posting under different names.
Good thread, hey geez can you update based on 2018 performances lile Coleman?
I might update the list in a bit, since it’s been a while. Thoughts:
Coleman is OFF.
Lyles will be ON.
Many others to consider.
Whenever u feel the need for a little attention you're welcome back
killarney wrote:
The "no justifiable clout of suspicion" kinda makes it hard for me.
Unless I missed something, the "justifiable cloud of suspicion" for Bolt's time is that he's really really fast, so it's essentially the "fastest time that isn't, like, TOO ridiculously fast."
No its the lack of out of competition testing in Jamaica at that time.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
Thread should be named "fastest times by runners that Sprintgeezer likes."
Seriously, no consistency, no verifiable criteria, just one man's blatherings.
Same guy argued on a thread a few weeks ago that Lewis was clean and here throws his times out.
Rubbish.
I like Lewis very much, yet he is off. Why? Because this is not a definitive clean vs dirty list, it is a list of “untainted” 100m performances.
In addition to everything else about Bolt, now we have admissions by Diack that add to the taint.
Bolt is OFF.
Still waiting for more on Galea and Pfaff wrt Bailey. I think he is still ON.
I will re-construct the list soon, and maybe dig back into it.