Let's say Bolt hit the stanozolol for a while...what could he run?
Johnson shaved off something like 0.4, didn't he?
That would give 9.18, assuming Bolt would be a high responder like Johnson was.
And what about the 200?
Imagine a 9.18
Let's say Bolt hit the stanozolol for a while...what could he run?
Johnson shaved off something like 0.4, didn't he?
That would give 9.18, assuming Bolt would be a high responder like Johnson was.
And what about the 200?
Imagine a 9.18
11.5
Assume Bolt is clean? LOL! That's like saying "assume bears don't shit in the woods."
You can look at Kelli White before and after Victor Conte. The difference was 2%. If you were going to accept that Bolt is clean, I'd guess 9.3X.
I don't accept that Bolt is clean, however. Nor do I accept anyone else connected with JAAA (which leaves out MVP/Steve Francis) as legitimate. Since there has been an active Jamaica Anti Doping Commission, notice that the Jamaica-based athletes have not been running the same kind of times (check out Jeter's margin of victory in the Pre Classic). And if you REALLY think everything's on the up-and-up down there, read this:
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20100703/lead/lead7.html
Personally, I'm watching to see if Bolt (and Powell) can run this summer the kind of times they ran in 2009 and earlier. If Bolt can't approach in Deagu the kind of times he ran in Beijing and Berlin, I'm going to know that Bolt's records are every bit as legitimate as the East German womens'.
8.99
Not too much faster. He faces some constraints that other did not - the level of physical forces on his muscles, tendons, ligaments, and tender back (scoliosis).
11.1 +5 wind
Of course that's a big assumption...
9.65 or slower
Assume Bolt was on SARMS ... he would run about 9.58, while acting like a jackass for the last 30 meters.
Sprint Geezer wrote:
Let's say Bolt hit the stanozolol for a while...what could he run?
Johnson shaved off something like 0.4, didn't he?
That would give 9.18, assuming Bolt would be a high responder like Johnson was.
And what about the 200?
Imagine a 9.18
I believe he could run somewhere around 9.3 on methamphetamine 10.3 on weed and most likely no faster than 11 flat on heroine. These are just educated guesses. I have no expeierience with these particular drugs myself.
As a generalization not Bolt specific You must be at 10.2 for the "extra help" to get you to 10 flat.
9:58
With the increase in muscle mass and training capabilities his 200 would certainty be below 19 seconds. But the 100 might not change very much. He already holds his speed so well. I predict a 9.4 at best.
You must realize that steroids just help you achieve your goals FASTER. They can't make you run faster than your body is capable of. If so then any normal white guy could run sub 10 with roids but we know thats not the case because of their genetic limitations.
Ben Johnson was fully capable of running 9.7 without drugs. That is a fact. But realistically he could not do the training required to reach that 9.7 before he regressed due to age. There's also the matter of peaking and off season.
You can't train hard for an entire year with no break or your body would crumble under the strain. Without steroids Ben would have to take an off season thus regressing slightly. You don't keep 100% of what you gained from the season to the next season as long as you take a break. But you'll lose even more if you DONT take a break.
perhaps the powers that be have found bolt to be on something and have asked him to cease...perhaps that's why he is running near pedestrian (for him, mind you) 9.91's? or perhaps they said to just make it look believable. track and field needs this showman, so i doubt he would ever get pinched. of course, he ran 19.86 in the rain in cold oslo recently as well....
master--
Isn't the point that roids actually CHANGE your body, thereby making your new body capable of running faster than your old body? You implicitly acknowledge this by suggesting that Bolt could run 9.4 on roids, faster than his current 9.58 PR.
I'm curious--what is your argument that Johnson was capable of 9.7x without drugs? Even Francis claimed that they gave a 0.10 improvement--are you saying that when he ran his 9.79 that he was actually capable of having run 9.69, because he was using at the time, and if so, what do you base that on?
Sprint Geezer wrote:
master--
Isn't the point that roids actually CHANGE your body, thereby making your new body capable of running faster than your old body? You implicitly acknowledge this by suggesting that Bolt could run 9.4 on roids, faster than his current 9.58 PR.
I'm curious--what is your argument that Johnson was capable of 9.7x without drugs? Even Francis claimed that they gave a 0.10 improvement--are you saying that when he ran his 9.79 that he was actually capable of having run 9.69, because he was using at the time, and if so, what do you base that on?
I believe any sprinter running 9.79 in the 80s could have run 9.6 something today. With the advancements in training, shoes, and tracks. I remember seeing a stat that showed the East region 100m final was faster than the 92 olympic final lol. Without a doubt I believe if BJ would have been doping with all these advancements he could have peaked at a 9.6. I don't think he could run it on a regular but if all these guys are running 9.8s and 9.7 I really believe he could do 9.6
body master wrote:
Ben Johnson was fully capable of running 9.7 without drugs. That is a fact. But realistically he could not do the training required to reach that 9.7 before he regressed due to age. There's also the matter of peaking and off season.
Swim me through this one please body masher
It is a fact that BJ was capable but realistically he was not capable because he could not reach it before he regressed
amidointrite
I'm really coming to believe that we're in a new era in sprinting, that there has been some fundamental change in sprinters or in the way they run. Maybe it is a selection effect, maybe training (especially childhood training) has really advanced, maybe scientific knowledge is now much better disseminated among all levels of coaching, I don't know.
The 92 final being slower than the 2011 east region is not a real surprise--the USA and the NCAA have historically been very deep in sprinting, especially now that the NCAA fields are international themselves.
There seems to be a new normal, at least at and near the top.
At what point will physics limit the 100m? I mean they cant run it in 4 seconds, so what is the human limit? 8.9? Any good guess?