Sprintgeezer wrote:
Apologize, LMAO. For what, hurting his feelings by pointing out that he’s an idiot?
NOBODY is more notorious here than I am, for pointing fingers at suspicious sprinters. The difference here is that I didn’t see any good reason to believe the 10.62 without confirmation—and I still don’t. She hasn’t come close to it.
And I would use it only as a cornerstone. Note that I haven’t really said much about Bromell—he’s strongly on the radar, but only that, because of that 9.80 and the suspect 9.77. Right on the line, because of the possibility of the new Eugene track being abnormally fast. More would need to be indicated for it to be a slam dunk.
But for the facile and shallow, like Armstrong, lack of depth is no barrier to blurting bullshlt.
Despite my "lack of depth" I was right about Okagbare. You weren't. Your "depth" wasn't much help to you there.