Was Ben Johnson the 100 G.O.A.T.?

There's a great book about Johnson and Carl Lewis -- THE DIRTIEST RACE IN HISTORY -- which details not only Johnson's PED use, but also how dirty and corrupt the whole sport was at the time. It's very in-depth, goes into the personalities of Johnson and Lewis. Surprisingly, Johnson, despite his PED use, comes out as a more sympathetic human being than the arrogant, preening, self-centered Lewis who was convinced that he could leverage his great athletic talent into becoming a household-name entertainer and failed completely.

https://www.amazon.com/Dirtiest-Race-History-Johnson-2013-09-26/dp/B01FGPADEG

Bolt is far and away the GOAT. Triple 100/200 Olympic gold, World record holder in 2 events.

donkey doug wrote:

Bolt is far and away the GOAT. Triple 100/200 Olympic gold, World record holder in 2 events.

This. It's not even close. I don't believe Johnson's 9.79 even breaks the 9.8 BASIC barrier, whereas Bolt (doped or not....but prolly doped) has a 9.62 BASIC barrier with his 9.58 (he actually dipped into the 9.5s, people...and he never even altitude chased!!!). Bolt even did his best (and more dramatically, to boot) Johnson-Seoul impression and ran a 9.69 with NO WIND in Beijing, so there isn't much of an argument there, either.

You can talk "eras" all you want, but we aren't talking cinders vs. Synthetic here. Bolt is far and away the superior one by every measure. And frankly, I'm not a Bolt fan, per se. It's just the fact of the matter.

powell=better

gay=better

blake=better

gatlin=better

coleman=better

greene=better

many will hate, but I believe de grasse and lyles have more potential than ben had, too. yes, in the 100

yeah someone ran 0,21sec faster than him but sure he is the goat...

If we only judge GOAT by times - obviously B. Johnson was not.

I also think that Bolt has too strong an argument to that title for it to go to anyone else.

One thing to consider, though, is that no one else on the list was forced to retire at his peak. Bolt ran his 9.58wr the year after running his 9.69wr. Assuming everyone is doped (probably a safer assumption than the contrary one)...then that would make BJ's ban unfair and if we play "what if" and assume he kept running, an argument can be made that Johnson would've gone faster later that year or the next. He went from 9.83 to 9.79 from '87 to '88 - if we assume he keeps getting faster and runs 9.74/5 at WC the next year - or give him the Bolt progression and take .11 off his oly time to go 9.68 - so that would give BJ a much better argument (wr's/oly+wc golds...).

A lot of what if's.

I think in the case of Bolt, it's safer to assume he was clean.i can't imagine an athlete who would have been more rigorously tested. He won too many titles and broke too many records to not be tested a lot, both in and out of competition. If he was doping then he must have had an operation of the calibre of the CIA co wrong it up. This isn't the 70s or 80s when doping control was awful and the technology so poor that a bunch of East Europeans could dope their way to gold

Any ‘Ben bashing’ will not be tolerated.

This is not only extremely ignorant, but also totally embarrassing.

You show your naivety and complete lack of insight into the sport of track and field.

You have been brainwashed by the media and believe that everyone is clean, except those who tested positive.

Nonsense!

They are ALL on the juice.

Ben Johnson was, and still is the greatest sprinter in Canadian history. His 9.79 from 1988 has, to date, not been beaten by any Canadian sprinter. Despite the fact they all of them who rose to the national ranks were on stimulants, anabolic steroids, and some were also on HGH and epogen products.

Usain Bolt is juiced up to his eyeballs and he has been given 'protected status' by the IAAF since 2007. Please read:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150905165210/http://www.muscleweek.com/is-usain-bolt-on-steroids

(this article was taken off the internet! but I found it on archive.org)

Anything Johnson accomplished is like an Armstrong TDF win; it doesn't exist.

How was Ben greater than Bolt at the 100m?

So why was Usain Bolt protected by the IAAF (supposedly), but not Ben Johnson? Personality differences? I don't buy conspiracy theories honestly, not without good proof. Bolt is innocent until proven guilty.

seasoned ranker wrote:

How was Ben greater than Bolt at the 100m?

He wasn't. And it's not close, frankly. Bolt was dominant for a much longer time.

Except that it does.

In the 100, BJ was Dolt’s equal in terms of eras. We have 100m eras: prehistory, modern, BJ, Dolt.

In absolute terms, my head tells me that Dolt is superior. Although Dolt used essentially unrestricted, so did BJ for 9.79. Yes Dolt has newer stuff which helps neurology, and that may have been of benefit to BJ—but I think that may have gotten him to 9.69, like Flake.

The only particularly talented top guys in the 100 were Lewis, Bailey, and Gatlin. BJ, Gay, Greene, Carter, Monty, Mullings, Powell, CC—whatever. A bunch of 10.2/10.3 guys who used to 9.7/9.8. Gatlin, Lewis, and Bailey were faster.

Dolt was also better, but not sub-10. His weaknesses were perfectly overcome, chemically. Gatlin I think could have made it to 9.65 unrestricted—just watch that Doha 9.74, total control.

Best 100m all things considered, including pharma?

Dolt

Followed by Gatlin, Lewis, and Bailey.

Followed by BJ, Greene, Flake, CC, Gay, Powell, Hayes.

Followed by Boldon, Burrell, Surin, etc

The top 4 would all be equal, IMO, had they all been in Dolt’s position. Lemaitre would also be in that group, running the same times. Interestingly, they were all great 200m guys except for Bailey, who IMO was a pure 100m guy.

Big Ben

In the mid 1970’s a skinny 15 year old boy immigrated to Toronto, Canada with his mother. They came from the Caribbean island of Jamaica. They didn’t have much, but they had each other.

This boy, named Ben Johnson, quickly found out the sad reality of being one of the only black kids in his school. Teased for his skin colour and stutter, he decided to stand up to one of the bullies, by challenging him to a foot race. Ben won. The bully never bothered Ben again.

In the late 1970’s a coach (and former Canadian champion sprinter himself) Charlie Francis saw Ben at a high school track meet and recognized the potential in this lightning fast teenager. He set the Canadian high school record at OFSAA in 1980 with a time of 10.55.

In the 1980’s, Ben worked extremely hard, pushed his body to the limits. Wanted to quit many times, because the training was so difficult. But he kept on, for many years with very little money. He truly earned all the accolades he acquired.

Charlie Francis coached Ben from approx 1979 all the way until 1993. Together they accomplished what no other Canadian sprinter had ever done before - World Records (1987 and 1988), World Champion (1987) and Olympic Champion (1988).

Ben’s 9.79 from 1988, has to date, not been surpassed by any Canadian.

Ben tested positive for PEDs in September of 1988. Three days after he crossed the finished line first at the Seoul Olympics.

His PED regimen was 0.5 ml of Stanazolol, 3 times per week for 6 weeks. Then 6 weeks off from Stanazolol. Then repeat.

That was what Ben did. That is it.

Yet the IOC, IAAF and worst of all - the Canadian government - decided to make an example of him and give him a crucifixion comparable to Jesus of Nazareth.

Their goal was simple - put this black guy on the cross and the issue of PED use in track and field will be solved.

What a joke. PED use has sky rocketed since Ben. Every Olympic champion in track since Ben has been juiced up to his eyeballs. I am not just talking about the 100m. All the events.

If Ben Johnson was a white guy with Irish ancestry, I can f—-ing guarantee you, that the government of Canada would have handled the case much more differently.

Ben was and still is, the greatest sprinter in Canadian history. I have met him at the York university indoor training facility several times. He is a humble man, friendly, funny and a joy to talk to. I wish him nothing but the best in this cruel world.

He tells his story in detail and with complete honesty in this great documentary:

http://espn.go.com/30for30/film?page=9.79

You still haven't explained how he is supposedly better than Bolt.

I can't believe there are people that believe Bolt is clean. The top ten are all dirty except for the fastest guy? That's just stupid. The guy was getting trained by Memo Heredia, he's 100% dirty.

miss piggy wrote:Fact is that he ran 9.79 in 1988 and it took someone 11 years to match it, when Maurice Greene ran 9.79 in 1999.

You realize it has been 11 years since Bolt's 9.58 and no one has come within a tenth of a second of it, right?

It will last a lot longer than 11 years.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

I can't believe there are people that believe Bolt is clean. The top ten are all dirty except for the fastest guy? That's just stupid. The guy was getting trained by Memo Heredia, he's 100% dirty.

Not to mention Jamaica was doing zero testing at the time. Doping is easy if you know you will never be tested when in your home country.

Huh??? Was this question asked fifteen years ago? Then maybe. Since a guy named Bolt then hell no.