I can't speak for the world WADA, but I know the U.S. USADA wants to catch cheaters because they are concerned with the USA brand. The U.S.'s top tier athletes are tested on average about 10 times a year.
I can't speak for the world WADA, but I know the U.S. USADA wants to catch cheaters because they are concerned with the USA brand. The U.S.'s top tier athletes are tested on average about 10 times a year.
You keep ignoring the fact there was no out of competition testing in Jamaica during most of the period of Bolt's dominance. Why do you keep ignoring this?
According to this recent analysis, Bayesian analysis of the evidence finds it 80% likely that Bolt hasn't used PEDs.
Source:
https://www.rootclaim.com/claims/did-usain-bolt-use-performance-enhancing-drugs-14420
Richard wrote:
According to this recent analysis, Bayesian analysis of the evidence finds it 80% likely that Bolt hasn't used PEDs.
Source:
https://www.rootclaim.com/claims/did-usain-bolt-use-performance-enhancing-drugs-14420
Good...I was starting to lose sleep over this. Bolt is my idol! He da Man! ðŸ‘
he is clean
galen rupp look like an elf wrote:
he is clean
Always was & always will be?
No "Smooth Daddy" what is stupid is your rationale.
Do you know the limits of the "genetic outlier" with respect to sprinting speed? Also what is the definition or characteristic of a "genetic freak" let alone a "freak among freak"?
The OP argument is fact. It is a FACT that the athletes pointed out have been implicated in and/or served doping bans. It is a FACT that the improvement in the mens 100m is considerably out of proportion with the improvement in other events.
For you to roll in and just play the "genetic freak card" is pure comedy because the FACT is, you don't know SH$T about genetics let alone Usain Bolts genetics.
Your argument is on the same level of people that when they can't explain something or make sense of something with elements of factual or anecdotal, qualitative or quantitative evidence simply revert to the creationist theory of "it just is because it is".
Usain Bolt is just so good because he is a "genetic freak among genetic freaks".
Yeah his physique is different - what does this mean? So was Francis Obikwelus physique. So was Ben Johnsons and so is Christian Colemans.
Its got nothing to do with his actual physique is but what his physique does.
Many people find it odd that at one point in his career Bolt had to compromise between his above average height vs turnover for a long time in his career (why he was a poor 100m runner) and then all of a sudden in the course of one off season found a solution to that compromise.So then what is that limit? Why don't we see 7ft tall guys with even larger stride lengths than Usain Bolt out there ripping off sub 10 100 meters? I would be shocked if there was a 7ft tall man on the face of this planet that could even run under 13 seconds for 100m
"His stride is longer" And? Ben Johnson had a better turnover. What is your point.
No not all athletes are equal - congratulations for your startling revelation. But your end of story conclusion that Bolt is simply a genetic freak with absolutely zero evidence of this or even any set of parameters that pertain to being a "genetic freak" is next level f%$king stupidity
I'll say this igflr3 is amazing. Seen a guy go from 11. 2 to 10 flat on that stuff Lmaooo. Can't imagine someone with talent taking it they would be unstoppable. Probably why bolt destroyed people lol
"The 2 Greek sprinters from the early 2000s"
Are you referring to Kostas Kenteris and Thanou?
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Look, at this point, nobody (not even Jamaican fanboys) have any doubt that he has used.
But that's not the point.
The old line was "so what, everyone is using". And it was correct. Bolt was still the best of the best. He squarely beat all the other fastest dopers in history--in order, Blake, Gay, Powell, and Gatlin.
The new line is that nobody really cares. People have moved on psychologically, to a "whatever" mentality, and either enjoy the races and times of even former dopers who return to competition, or alternatively, who just lose their interest in sprints altogether. You find both types.
Maybe unfortunately, many people fall into the second category. No wonder, when so many convicted dopers are competing now.
except drewseph
Richard wrote:
According to this recent analysis, Bayesian analysis of the evidence finds it 80% likely that Bolt hasn't used PEDs.
Source:
https://www.rootclaim.com/claims/did-usain-bolt-use-performance-enhancing-drugs-14420
So the 80% figure is attributable to him being Jamaican. Ok, that's really profoundly well researched evidence you got there, congratulations.
There was another doping thread on Gudaf Tsegay that was just deleted by the mods. Why is Gudaf Tsegay protected but this thread stays up?
Bolt has beaten times from elites of the elite like Ben Johnson from 1988 Olympics (9.79) banned for stanazolol, Tim Montogomerey 9.78 (involved in BALCO doping scandal and admitted to using testosterone and other steroids such as the “clear”),directly beaten other elites in races banned for doping: Asafa Powell (9.74 and 9.77 two times , banned 1 year for using a stimulant), beaten Tyson Gay head to head 9.71 (banned for testosterone cream in 2013) and Gay’s pB is 9.69, beaten Yohan Blake head to head (Blake was banned for 6 months in 2009 for using a strong stimulant , dmaa), beaten Justin Gatlin head to head numerous times (pB 9.75 after his doping ban!) (Gatlin was banned for being caught using exogenous testosterone , with first warning being for an unofficial therapeutic exemption for adderall, a strong stimulant, and beaten a few others less know like Nesta Carter (9.78) (banned in 2008 for using dmaa and made Bolt lose his 4x100 medal). Was Bolt running clean and dominating talented but dirty runners for many years? Wonder why he didn’t just say “I wonder” for an untested meet and run 9.1 or something ?
No way. At this point 8n his career why the heck would he bother?