Laverne Jones-Ferrette - a bone to pick with WEJO/ROJO

you are talking drivel about laverne

an elderly sprinter with no sustained injury years & full-time pro for years could run nothing better than a fringe time of 11.13 & she turns that next year into 6.97 ( wouda been 6.95 with usual, expected RT of 0.13 )

this stinks to high heaven !

My friend "hooked up" with Laverne during the European season. He said she was all woman, although her @lit was larger than his dong.

FastEG wrote:

My friend "hooked up" with Laverne during the European season. He said she was all woman, although her @lit was larger than his dong.

By itself, that says nothing about Laverne's genitalia.

I assure you, it says a lot. My friend http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/kiyone/grandeur.jpg

So, who's going to apologize when she gets caught and Wejo and Rojo are right?

Yeah, if you are that fast and fall under these circumstances, you are d-i-r-t-y!!

I read the comment Letsrun made regarding Laverne Jones-Ferrette and thought it was extremely unfair. I have no connection to the lady. I'd never heard her name till yesterday. But what sparked my interest and reason to comment was the selectivity when it comes to Letsrun making comments regarding athletes using drugs.

Many athletes have made great progressions for example Willard (25) and Vessey (28) dropped 4-5 seconds in the 800m last year. I don't think these athletes were drugs but they had some things that changed in there training/life that lead to an improve performance.

Dropping 0.2 seconds in the 60m is no more amazing than dropping 4 seconds in an 800m. But how come Letsrun did not make comments regarding the credibility of Willard’s/Vessey’s performances....I think when it comes to US, Caucasian athletes making significant improvements you will never hear Letsrun making insinuations regarding the credibility of their performance.

Jones-Ferrette's yearly progression for 60/100/200...

2003 (age 21): 7.30 / 11.37 / 23.26

2004 (age 22): 7.24 / 11.25 / 22.81

2005 (age 23): none / 11.45 / 23.17

2006 (age 24): 7.22 / 11.30 / 22.92

2007 (age 25): 7.16 / 11.32 / 22.52

2008 (age 26): 7.23 / 11.24 / 22.62

2009 (age 27): none / 11.13 / 22.46

2010 (age 28): 6.97 / ? / ?

This year she's also run 7.09 and 7.11 twice. Something is seriously out of the norm here.

She has PRed in the 100 and 200 the last two years. She may have been getting some more consistent training and technique in. Last year was clearly her best and she did not run indoors, or we would possibly have seen a 7.0x. Also, progression indoors can be very inconsistent because some years an athlete may be peaking while others it might be done at a lower level and may be only a meet or two.

she ran 11.13 (+0.1) last year - worth about 7.06 - 7.07

6.97 ( 0.157 ) is 6.94 - 6.95 with ~ 0.13s RT

that's 10.88 - 10.90 basic ( & into 10.7s with max wind )

she's entitled to this because her 200 time is consistent with her 100 time ( about double ), so she can be expected to run last 40 almost as well as her initial 60

this is a ludicrous improvement in 1 season considering she had no outstanding reason to underperform in previous years

I see we have a lot of people with happy fingers, please read my post. re" "I am not saying Laverne is or isn't on drugs"

It is a cat and mouse game between cheaters and WADA and if you are a cheater, you have to be a very good mouse. It is not quite rocket science, but successful doping is beyond the capabilities of an individual athlete and coach. Anti doping has advanced by leaps and bounds, helped in part by former dopers. It requires a team and you need to have on that team need some strong sports science (physiology, pharmacology, medical, laboratory science) knowledge with the complete support of the athlete and coach. You need know WADA testing procedures/protocols and be very risk adverse and someone has to finance it. (Doping is not free!) This is a lot to invest in a 2nd tier athlete in a non-Olympic/WC year to succeed at low pay out indoor meets.

Future doping will almost have to be state sponsored.

That is the problem with track these days, you are preserved to be guilty before it is even proven because of past athletes abusing the system. She very well could be clean, but considering the stigma with improving as an elite sprinter, most will be skeptical of her times regardless of how many tests she passes. Heck, even I am a bit skeptical because it almost seems like 8 out of 10 sprinters are somehow linked to using performance enhancers.

What I find strange is how distance runners rarely fall under any scrutiny by the public after big drops. Ritzenhein bettered his PR by 20 seconds to run 12:56, an American Record. That is a pretty big drop if you think about it, but yet not one person questions that he did it without drugs. Considering how doped up biking has become, an endurance sport, to not have doping be as prevalent in the elite distance running seems a bit odd. I mean are we truly to believe that elite distance runners hold themselves to a higher standard than all other sports and athletes. Isn’t it odd that we have had 15 of the top 20 best marathon times ran in 2007 to 2009 ( 1- 2007, 6-2008, & 8-2009)? Is distance running improving this much and young talent taking a stab at the marathon sooner really producing more and more runners that can break 2:06 or is there something else going on. Food for thought.

Mind you I think Ritz and our other elite distance guys representing America are clean, even our distance world record holders Geb and Bekele, but I hope that it isn’t just because I have my distance runner blinders on.

Cheaters wrote:What I find strange is how distance runners rarely fall under any scrutiny by the public after big drops. Ritzenhein bettered his PR by 20 seconds to run 12:56, an American Record. That is a pretty big drop if you think about it, but yet not one person questions that he did it without drugs.

The marathon records are dropping because the greatest runner of all time started running marathons

I don't disagree with you, I was just using him as an example to how WE as distance runners scrutinize other athletes and tend to let observations slide in our sport.

You are stating that because he ran faster in HS than the guy whose record he broke, he should be able to run faster years down the road. This is not always the case. We see young phenoms come along every year that we think will tear up the college scene and they don't get much better or guys run great in college too and never be able to take it to the next level.

We don't know what goes on or the specific history of athletes in other countries, but yet for the most part we do not scrutinize the distance runner athletes nearly as much as sprinters. We think because a runner that is putting up stellar times when they are 16 or 17 that years down the road when they are 23 and winning the Olympics that they are clean. What if a young Kenyan used performance enhancers at ages 16 to 17 year old age? We would be none the wiser based on your logic. Heck, distance running is their ticket out, why wouldn't coaches and athletes try to find a way to cheat their way to a big pay check at a young age?

Distance runners use the "I recently started training like a Kenyan, running three times a day, 205 kilometers a week, and started eating healthy" and don't really take much heat after big improvements. They may get a casual question here or there, but no real serious heat from the public. Imagine if a biker tried to use that logic after he destroyed the field at the Tour after never placing in the top 10.

Track Athlete wrote:

Dropping 0.2 seconds in the 60m is no more amazing than dropping 4 seconds in an 800m. But how come Letsrun did not make comments regarding the credibility of Willard’s/Vessey’s performances....I think when it comes to US, Caucasian athletes making significant improvements you will never hear Letsrun making insinuations regarding the credibility of their performance.

I did. Well, Vessey anyway. That one was obvious along with Wurth-Thomas.

Are you kidding me? Look at her body, and tell me that women can look like that naturally.