Christian Coleman facing a possible suspension for 3 missed tests

blackloud wrote:

ex-runner wrote:

Kim Collins did actually get done for doping. Probably helped explain his longevity along with Gatlin.

Personally I think Bolt is clean, I never look to fast times as the only way to determine one is doping. He ran 20.5 as a skinny 15 year old to be come the youngest world junior champion ever, that kind of talent is once in a 100 years. Then he ran 19.9 at 17. Just insane.

Plenty of slow athletes get done for doping and also fast ones. It's an even mix. Times don't tell you who the dopers are.

Coleman is 100% doping though. With his arrogance he felt he can't get caught but fortunately that is not the case.

If the sport is serious about continuing it needs to come down hard on cheats. Otherwise it will be another bad example to the young athletes trying to make it. We are telling them; dope up and use that as a shortcut to getting fast quickly, make loads of money as a cheat, if you get caught you will be at the top the sport will protect you.

On the subject of Bolt, correct me if I'm wrong;

The only way to have a clean Bolt, but a dirty everyone else, is to assume that the entirety of humanity runs basically 9.9x basic on no juice, but Bolt runs 9.6x on no juice. To me, that's absurd, but I could see one taking that stance, I guess.

How reasonable is that kind of argument? Like, to be capable of running a basic 9.9x -juice or no juice- takes a kind of genetic freakness that is extraordinarily rare. Then, to extrapolate that to someone who can cut off .3 from that already rarified air, and to do it clean as a whistle? How realistic is that? I remember thinking wind legal high-to-mid 9.6s were pipe dreams, and Bolt ended up running a high 9.5; talk about paradigm shifting. The level of revolution that his performances represent, if he's clean and everyone else is dirty....mind boggling. And, to me, doesn't hold water if you really do that math.

Like, I have a hard time discerning what reality is, so maybe I'm just not seeing it right. I could be missing the logic, but that seems like such a HUGE leap that it can't be reasonable, UNLESS some of the guys that we love to harp on as dopers now, like a Mo Greene or a few guys like that, weren't doped to the gills. Then a clean Bolt seems like a logical possibility. But...if we keep pretty much stamping all the mid-to-low 9.8 guys as users....then I don't understand how one could do the mental gymnastics of arguing that Bolt was clean.

matt_london_413 wrote:

blackloud wrote:

On the subject of Bolt, correct me if I'm wrong;

The only way to have a clean Bolt, but a dirty everyone else, is to assume that the entirety of humanity runs basically 9.9x basic on no juice, but Bolt runs 9.6x on no juice. To me, that's absurd, but I could see one taking that stance, I guess.

How reasonable is that kind of argument? Like, to be capable of running a basic 9.9x -juice or no juice- takes a kind of genetic freakness that is extraordinarily rare. Then, to extrapolate that to someone who can cut off .3 from that already rarified air, and to do it clean as a whistle? How realistic is that? I remember thinking wind legal high-to-mid 9.6s were pipe dreams, and Bolt ended up running a high 9.5; talk about paradigm shifting. The level of revolution that his performances represent, if he's clean and everyone else is dirty....mind boggling. And, to me, doesn't hold water if you really do that math.

Like, I have a hard time discerning what reality is, so maybe I'm just not seeing it right. I could be missing the logic, but that seems like such a HUGE leap that it can't be reasonable, UNLESS some of the guys that we love to harp on as dopers now, like a Mo Greene or a few guys like that, weren't doped to the gills. Then a clean Bolt seems like a logical possibility. But...if we keep pretty much stamping all the mid-to-low 9.8 guys as users....then I don't understand how one could do the mental gymnastics of arguing that Bolt was clean.

It's simple.

It's like college darts. Nobody does it.

Same thing with track.

Nobody really does it compared to other sports.

So Bolt is just someone that was good at doing it. That's all.

It's not even a potential WR because there's always someone out there in the history of the planet that had potential to do better than Bolt.

So it's a weak WR right now.

Unless we had everyone on the planet run track and field and do the 100 meters I don't see how you can call this a WR.

It's just a WR out of the 20 people that signed up for college darts. That's all.

And yes Bolt is natural.

He more than likely has the myostatin deficiency disorder which enables him to grow at exponential rates without even trying.

His shoulders looked like he could have shoulder pressed over 405 LBS for 1. And powerlifting isn't even his focus.

blackloud wrote:

khorrps wrote:

thanks, but no, I just say it as I see it. caucasians haven't nearly caught up, and that's despite being in power positions in the 'antidoping' thing and politically, being able to dope as they wish but still slower

as to jim hines being the same as bob beamon... in what universe? simply nobody jumps like that, 9.95 is not even comparable. also, there was a guy in the clean times running relay in 8.5s, faster even than usain

You're right, not even Beamon jumps like Beamon:

10/18/68--Mexico City: 8.90A (+2.0)

06/20/68--Sacramento: 8.33 (+1.3)

09/14/68--Echo Summit: 8.25A (NWI)

06/28/69--Miami: 8.20 +0.6

And, last I checked...Powell did a pretty good Beamon impression, but in Tokyo and with less wind and a little further. So....props to Beamon. Iconic, to say the least. Hell, your right, he's still even got the "#2" spot. But sometimes mythology can take over a story a little bit.

"there was a guy in the clean times".....what is this, Rick and Morty doing a parody of Mad Max? Before the boom-boom times? We're really gonna cite 4x1 relay times? And, come one "there was a guy", just say his damn name, dude: BOB HAYES.

I did a bit of a deep dive, and here is your top 20 wind legal "non-doped" 100m Dash list (with corresponding basic conversions):

01=9.58 [+0.9] 2009 —9.62 basic— Usain Bolt

*02=9.71 [+0.9] 2009 —9.75 basic— Tyson Gay: Banned

*03=9.69 [ -0.1] 2012. —9.70 basic— Yohan Blake: Banned

04=9.72 [+0.2] 2008 —9.75 basic— Asafa Powell: Banned

05=9.74 [+0.9] 2015 —9.78 basic— Justin Gatlin: Banned

06=9.76 [+0.6] 2019 —9.79 basic— Christian Coleman: Impending Ban?

07=9.78 [+0.9] 2010 —9.83 basic— Nesta Carter: Banned

08=9.79 [+0.1] 1999 —9.79 basic— Maurice Greene: Implicated but never banned

09=9.80 [+1.3] 2011 —9.86 basic— Steve Mullings: Banned

10=9.82 [ +1.7] 2014 —9.90 basic— Richard Thompson

11=9.84 [ +0.7] 1996 —9.88 basic— Donovan Bailey

12=9.84 [ +0.2] 1999 —9.83 basic— Bruny Surin

13=9.84 [ +1.3] 2015 —9.90 basic— Trayvon Bromell

14=9.85 [ +1.2] 1994 —9.92 basic— Leroy Burrell

15=9.85 [ +1.7] 2006 —9.93 basic— Adekotunbo Olusoji Fasuba: Jesus, what is the deal with this one???

16=9.85 [ +1.3] 2011 .—9.91 basic— Mike Rodgers: Banned

17=9.86 [ +1.2] 1991 .—9.92 basic— Carl Lewis: Implicated but never banned

18=9.86 [ -0.4] 1996 —9.85 basic— Frank Fredricks

19=9.86 [ -0.4] 1998 —9.84 basic— Ato Boldon: Actually got popped toward end of career, right?

20=9.86 [+0.6] 2004 —9.89 basic— Francis Obikwelu

So, let's recap, 8 of the top 10 results are from guys who spent time banned for using something on the illegal list. The guy who is in that top 10 who wasn't ever banned (other than Bolt), Thompson, has a time that doesn't even break 9.90 on the basic conversion. And for those keeping score at home, that's 11 out of the top 20 results are from guys who tested positive, got banned, or have been seriously implicated with doping at one time. And that's of what we know of. Also note the surprising amount of 9.90 basic results you can see on this list: it takes a LOT to break 9.90 basic; six of these top 20 don't even compute out under that barrier. Keep that in mind when comparing them to Bolt's story.

Additionally; of the guys not named Bolt, the best basic result is Blakes 9.70 conversion from his 9.69 (-0.1) from late in 2012. Blakes next best converted basic time is 9.79 -as far as I could see- (barely breaking the 9.80 basic barrier), and in the year that he was capable of that 9.70 basic he got his doors blown off in the London Final by .12 seconds by...Bolt, of course. He wasn't really ever in Bolt's area, and he's about as close as anyone can say they arguably ever were to Bolt (Gay and Powell notwithstanding).

The best basic ANYONE could muster, other than Blake's anomalous 9.69/9.70-basic, is 9.75, which both Powell and Gay did. Why do I bring this up?

Because observe Bolt, who crossed the the 9.80 basic threshold EIGHT TIMES:

9.58 [+0.9] —9.62 basic— Berlin 2009

9.69 [+0.0] —9.69 basic— Beijing 2008

9.77 [ -1.3] —9.69 basic— Bruxelles 2008

9.63 [+1.5] —9.70 basic— London 2012

9.76 [ -0.1] —9.75 basic— Roma 2012

9.79 [ -0.5] —9.76 basic— Beijing 2015

9.77 [ -0.3] —9.76 basic— Moska 2013

9.79 [ -0.2] —9.77 basic— Saint Denis 2009

So, the rest of humanity essentially squeezes out 9.75 (and arguably only got there in chasing Bolt), and Bolt runs 9.62 the one time he maybe felt like he had a little pressure from Gay. It takes 28 years for humanity's best in 1968 (Jim Hines and his 9.95 at altitude with +0.3 which converts to a 10.03 basic) to drop .15 seconds to humanity's best in 1996 (Bailey's 9.84 in Atlanta converts to 9.88), but Bolt can maintain, essentially, a .13 cushion (I generally toss the idea of Blake's 9.70 basic because it's so anomalous, like Fasuba in the top 20 list) between himself and the worlds best of his OWN GENERATION?

Bob Hayes was more than likely cited in the "8.5 relay split" comment Kjjorps made. Hayes enjoyed a similar dominance to Bolt on the world stage, and he famously ran a 10.06 100m dash on a cinder track in lane one after the lane had already been chewed up from the meets other events. If I remember correctly the guys who took second in that race in Tokyo (I think they tied) ran somewhere in the vicinity of the low 10.2s FAT in that race. So Hayes had essentially a Bolt like win (plus he got a lot of hype from that come-from-behind 8.5 split relay anchor leg). And Hayes WAS legit....but he also did get beat from time to time and within four years Hines was matching/surpassing what Hayes did, at least numerically (the whole cinder track, altitude thing complicates an apples to apples comparison).

My point being, Hayes was Bolt before Bolt, but even in his own era of dominance, I don't think you would have seen a .13 difference between his best basic results to his contemporaries. And I say this because I find Bolt's gap anomalous, on some level; they tell a larger story than just "Bolt was that good". Not because it's just straight IMPOSSIBLE for a man to be .15ish ahead of the rest of the world in such a talent mined/stripped event like the 100m Dash (though I'd argue it's incredibly unlikely), but because he was supposedly doing it while clean against other guys who not only are "arguably" users, but were also OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED and punished for being "dopers".

Theoretically, if you want to argue that all the other 9.7x guys of Bolts era were users, and he wasn't, then what you're really saying is he wasn't just .12/.15 ahead of the rest of the world, but he was actually .20 or more ahead of the world if everyone just competed clean "like he did".

This isn't a regional high school meet. This isn't NCAA DIII. This is the world. I.....just don't think a man can go to the Olympics and beat the rest of the world by .25 in the 100m Dash outside of the Olympics of the Colonial/amateur era. That's not how it works at that level. Does anyone really think it can work like that at that level, in this kind of era?

You know, if we all just admitted what's likely true: that they are all likely users on some level (including Bolt -and of courser Coleman, the supposed topic of this thread-), then the fact that Bolt was able to beat Gay, Powell, and Blake by .12 doesn't really lose it's shine. That's still impressive and in line with the greats of all time based on each era. It would just be more honest about what's going on.

And I don't know what your deal is with the whole white/black thing in sprints kkhorps. You got some issues, man.

matt_london_413 wrote:

blackloud wrote:

You're right, not even Beamon jumps like Beamon:

10/18/68--Mexico City: 8.90A (+2.0)

06/20/68--Sacramento: 8.33 (+1.3)

09/14/68--Echo Summit: 8.25A (NWI)

06/28/69--Miami: 8.20 +0.6

And, last I checked...Powell did a pretty good Beamon impression, but in Tokyo and with less wind and a little further. So....props to Beamon. Iconic, to say the least. Hell, your right, he's still even got the "#2" spot. But sometimes mythology can take over a story a little bit.

"there was a guy in the clean times".....what is this, Rick and Morty doing a parody of Mad Max? Before the boom-boom times? We're really gonna cite 4x1 relay times? And, come one "there was a guy", just say his damn name, dude: BOB HAYES.

I did a bit of a deep dive, and here is your top 20 wind legal "non-doped" 100m Dash list (with corresponding basic conversions):

01=9.58 [+0.9] 2009 —9.62 basic— Usain Bolt

*02=9.71 [+0.9] 2009 —9.75 basic— Tyson Gay: Banned

*03=9.69 [ -0.1] 2012. —9.70 basic— Yohan Blake: Banned

04=9.72 [+0.2] 2008 —9.75 basic— Asafa Powell: Banned

05=9.74 [+0.9] 2015 —9.78 basic— Justin Gatlin: Banned

06=9.76 [+0.6] 2019 —9.79 basic— Christian Coleman: Impending Ban?

07=9.78 [+0.9] 2010 —9.83 basic— Nesta Carter: Banned

08=9.79 [+0.1] 1999 —9.79 basic— Maurice Greene: Implicated but never banned

09=9.80 [+1.3] 2011 —9.86 basic— Steve Mullings: Banned

10=9.82 [ +1.7] 2014 —9.90 basic— Richard Thompson

11=9.84 [ +0.7] 1996 —9.88 basic— Donovan Bailey

12=9.84 [ +0.2] 1999 —9.83 basic— Bruny Surin

13=9.84 [ +1.3] 2015 —9.90 basic— Trayvon Bromell

14=9.85 [ +1.2] 1994 —9.92 basic— Leroy Burrell

15=9.85 [ +1.7] 2006 —9.93 basic— Adekotunbo Olusoji Fasuba: Jesus, what is the deal with this one???

16=9.85 [ +1.3] 2011 .—9.91 basic— Mike Rodgers: Banned

17=9.86 [ +1.2] 1991 .—9.92 basic— Carl Lewis: Implicated but never banned

18=9.86 [ -0.4] 1996 —9.85 basic— Frank Fredricks

19=9.86 [ -0.4] 1998 —9.84 basic— Ato Boldon: Actually got popped toward end of career, right?

20=9.86 [+0.6] 2004 —9.89 basic— Francis Obikwelu

So, let's recap, 8 of the top 10 results are from guys who spent time banned for using something on the illegal list. The guy who is in that top 10 who wasn't ever banned (other than Bolt), Thompson, has a time that doesn't even break 9.90 on the basic conversion. And for those keeping score at home, that's 11 out of the top 20 results are from guys who tested positive, got banned, or have been seriously implicated with doping at one time. And that's of what we know of. Also note the surprising amount of 9.90 basic results you can see on this list: it takes a LOT to break 9.90 basic; six of these top 20 don't even compute out under that barrier. Keep that in mind when comparing them to Bolt's story.

Additionally; of the guys not named Bolt, the best basic result is Blakes 9.70 conversion from his 9.69 (-0.1) from late in 2012. Blakes next best converted basic time is 9.79 -as far as I could see- (barely breaking the 9.80 basic barrier), and in the year that he was capable of that 9.70 basic he got his doors blown off in the London Final by .12 seconds by...Bolt, of course. He wasn't really ever in Bolt's area, and he's about as close as anyone can say they arguably ever were to Bolt (Gay and Powell notwithstanding).

The best basic ANYONE could muster, other than Blake's anomalous 9.69/9.70-basic, is 9.75, which both Powell and Gay did. Why do I bring this up?

Because observe Bolt, who crossed the the 9.80 basic threshold EIGHT TIMES:

9.58 [+0.9] —9.62 basic— Berlin 2009

9.69 [+0.0] —9.69 basic— Beijing 2008

9.77 [ -1.3] —9.69 basic— Bruxelles 2008

9.63 [+1.5] —9.70 basic— London 2012

9.76 [ -0.1] —9.75 basic— Roma 2012

9.79 [ -0.5] —9.76 basic— Beijing 2015

9.77 [ -0.3] —9.76 basic— Moska 2013

9.79 [ -0.2] —9.77 basic— Saint Denis 2009

So, the rest of humanity essentially squeezes out 9.75 (and arguably only got there in chasing Bolt), and Bolt runs 9.62 the one time he maybe felt like he had a little pressure from Gay. It takes 28 years for humanity's best in 1968 (Jim Hines and his 9.95 at altitude with +0.3 which converts to a 10.03 basic) to drop .15 seconds to humanity's best in 1996 (Bailey's 9.84 in Atlanta converts to 9.88), but Bolt can maintain, essentially, a .13 cushion (I generally toss the idea of Blake's 9.70 basic because it's so anomalous, like Fasuba in the top 20 list) between himself and the worlds best of his OWN GENERATION?

Bob Hayes was more than likely cited in the "8.5 relay split" comment Kjjorps made. Hayes enjoyed a similar dominance to Bolt on the world stage, and he famously ran a 10.06 100m dash on a cinder track in lane one after the lane had already been chewed up from the meets other events. If I remember correctly the guys who took second in that race in Tokyo (I think they tied) ran somewhere in the vicinity of the low 10.2s FAT in that race. So Hayes had essentially a Bolt like win (plus he got a lot of hype from that come-from-behind 8.5 split relay anchor leg). And Hayes WAS legit....but he also did get beat from time to time and within four years Hines was matching/surpassing what Hayes did, at least numerically (the whole cinder track, altitude thing complicates an apples to apples comparison).

My point being, Hayes was Bolt before Bolt, but even in his own era of dominance, I don't think you would have seen a .13 difference between his best basic results to his contemporaries. And I say this because I find Bolt's gap anomalous, on some level; they tell a larger story than just "Bolt was that good". Not because it's just straight IMPOSSIBLE for a man to be .15ish ahead of the rest of the world in such a talent mined/stripped event like the 100m Dash (though I'd argue it's incredibly unlikely), but because he was supposedly doing it while clean against other guys who not only are "arguably" users, but were also OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED and punished for being "dopers".

Theoretically, if you want to argue that all the other 9.7x guys of Bolts era were users, and he wasn't, then what you're really saying is he wasn't just .12/.15 ahead of the rest of the world, but he was actually .20 or more ahead of the world if everyone just competed clean "like he did".

This isn't a regional high school meet. This isn't NCAA DIII. This is the world. I.....just don't think a man can go to the Olympics and beat the rest of the world by .25 in the 100m Dash outside of the Olympics of the Colonial/amateur era. That's not how it works at that level. Does anyone really think it can work like that at that level, in this kind of era?

You know, if we all just admitted what's likely true: that they are all likely users on some level (including Bolt -and of courser Coleman, the supposed topic of this thread-), then the fact that Bolt was able to beat Gay, Powell, and Blake by .12 doesn't really lose it's shine. That's still impressive and in line with the greats of all time based on each era. It would just be more honest about what's going on.

And I don't know what your deal is with the whole white/black thing in sprints kkhorps. You got some issues, man.

So I read this whole thing.

And i'm going to try and be as nice as possible here.

I just don't see what the moral of your story is.

And i'm really trying hard to see it.

You claim that you just don't see how someone can beat someone by .25 on major stages such as the Olympics.

And so on.

But why can't you see that?

Why is that confusing for you?

Bolt is just better than everyone else in the 100 and 60.

It's really simple.

Has nothing to do with your doping suggestions or anything.

He literally just ran 9.58. That's all.

And if he wasn't doing that huge back swing with the arms and doing the 1920s out dated 90 degree arm angle and using my advanced but simple technique of keeping the hands as close to the face as possible to glide through the medium of air with as least wind resistance as possible then I think he could have ran 9.43 or so.

What i'm saying is there's always room for improvement.

What are you saying?

khorrps wrote:

gay and powell were tested all the time and only got got when they started getting older. meaning, their other times are legal.

powell ran 9.74 slowing down, and it was his second race that day (buy all tested and legal) so he may have been a little closer to bolt than blake was, to me he's the 2nd biggest talent

blake's suspension was as a junior and not for anything really serious. also, his 19.26 was a faster run (excluding reaction times) than bolt- 18.99 vs 19.02 iirc

gay had his best runs years before the ban

in terms of believing stuff... yeah, it can be done. first of all, I believe doping isn't as widespread as you do. guys that get popped more likely take it when they feel they're slipping or just a little bit from the top but can't get that bit naturally. running imo isn't in a completely tapped out potential situation, so who knows what the limits are. there are theories about 8.99, 9.29, 9.4 etc. also, if someone took drugs at one point doesn't mean their whole carreer wasn't natty

what 'thing' do you think I have with black sprinters? just looking at the lists and accepting as they are. I'm not the one writing novels to discredit them and say lemaitre is the best. you have issues

khorrps wrote:

gay and powell were tested all the time and only got got when they started getting older. meaning, their other times are legal.

powell ran 9.74 slowing down, and it was his second race that day (buy all tested and legal) so he may have been a little closer to bolt than blake was, to me he's the 2nd biggest talent

blake's suspension was as a junior and not for anything really serious. also, his 19.26 was a faster run (excluding reaction times) than bolt- 18.99 vs 19.02 iirc

gay had his best runs years before the ban

in terms of believing stuff... yeah, it can be done. first of all, I believe doping isn't as widespread as you do. guys that get popped more likely take it when they feel they're slipping or just a little bit from the top but can't get that bit naturally. running imo isn't in a completely tapped out potential situation, so who knows what the limits are. there are theories about 8.99, 9.29, 9.4 etc. also, if someone took drugs at one point doesn't mean their whole carreer wasn't natty

what 'thing' do you think I have with black sprinters? just looking at the lists and accepting as they are. I'm not the one writing novels to discredit them and say lemaitre is the best. you have issues