Fastest historic untainted 100m times

Some take-away's for me:

1) since Lemaitre is only 20th on the unadjusted list, and he took a max +2.0 wind to get there, any white guy penetrating the top 20 should probably receive extra scrutiny

2) anybody going under 9.85 basic needs to be looked at very seriously, as any such time would represent a new all-time historic best, especially if that new basic time is not 9.84 or 9.83

3) the most promising current guys are Carter*, Dasaolu, Ashmeade, and Vicaut, but especially VICAUT, because Carter is questionable IMO, and Vicaut has a couple of years on Dasaolu, and Vicaut is improving every year, has obvious deficiencies in his drive phase, and just looks absolutely solid; Locke is also very promising at 9.96 basic.

Also, another take-away for me is that the top guys by BASIC times are essentially the same guys who delivered the top UNADJUSTED performances, so given a long enough career, athletes will at some point probably avail themselves of the opportunity to put up their best time possible.

The "no justifiable clout of suspicion" kinda makes it hard for me.

Unless I missed something, the "justifiable cloud of suspicion" for Bolt's time is that he's really really fast, so it's essentially the "fastest time that isn't, like, TOO ridiculously fast."

Notably absent, of course, is Bolt. If even his 9.76 (-0.1) in Rome on May 31, 2012 is to be believed to have been clean, it adjusts to 9.75

Not a chance. I repeat, not a chance. Bolt is OFF the list.

yeah, and mark off Hemingway, Einstein, Churchill, Hannibal and Picasso too, because no way anyone could be that much better than everyone else. No way. Not a chance.

Olusoji Fasuba?

A couple of weeks ago Tyson Gay would be on this list.

How is Leroy Burrell on the untainted list but carl Lewis is left off? They were training partners separated by .01 seconds yet you think Burrell must have been more talented somehow while Lewis needed help.

No Bolden but Obikwleu is fine.

This list is just some fabrication of your gut feelings on these runners based on what you consider "justifiable cloud of suspicion."

You forgot to get rid of any athlete whose coach has drug connections

Bailey and Surin's coach was Dan Pfaff who just happened to coach a couple of drug cheats. He also used to work with Charlie Francis.

Burrell trained with Lewis. Same with Marsh. If you are going to take Lewis out a a doper they have to go on the list also.

killarney wrote:

The "no justifiable clout of suspicion" kinda makes it hard for me.

Unless I missed something, the "justifiable cloud of suspicion" for Bolt's time is that he's really really fast, so it's essentially the "fastest time that isn't, like, TOO ridiculously fast."

Apparently, you have missed something.

A lot, in fact.

asdfaafdafasd--

Yes, you are correct, and the coaching situation applies to a bunch of guys on the list, not just Surin and Bailey.

But that isn't specifically related to the athlete in particular, so I let it slide--especially in the case of Surin and Bailey, who were subject to a very high level of scrutiny in Canada and internationally.

And yes, Burrell and Marsh trained with Lewis, but to my knowledge never returned positive tests for anything as did Lewis, so they are on, unless you have something more concrete relating to them personally.

*

No, Gay wouldn't have been on my list, and neither would Powell. Their times are not credible, as I have said many, many times.

Burrell and Lewis--Burrell has always seemed to have skated. Lewis I believe was absolutely capable of his 9.86 performance cleanly, but there will always be that taint of the positive test results he returned, which was never the case with Burrell--so Burrell is on, Lewis is off, regardless of the fact that they were training partners, and that I believe Lewis to have been cleanly capable of 9.86

Boldon returned positive test results for stimulants in something like 2001, for which he was sanctioned with a warning. He is forever tainted.

Can you give me a good reason to throw off Obikwelu? If so, I will throw him off in no time at all.

And it's not just a subjective "justifiable cloud of suspicion", as I detailed. "No positive test results" was one of the criteria.

Both Boldon and Lewis returned positive test results, and are OFF.

Burrell was doped up and so is more than half of that list. If you have ever trained with elite sprinters you would know that going under 10.1/10.2 clean is a feat and very hard in itself. Impossible to run 9.8 clean. 9.95+ with a tailwind yes its possible with someone very talented. Ive only known maybe one or two guys that ran 10.2 clean and ran 10.0/10.1 with a tailwind every other sprinter under 10.3 was doped up. Drugs take you from the 10.2s to the 9.8/9.9s. Like ive said plenty times Ive seen 11.2 clean trained sprinters turn to dope and run 10.0. The MAX time he would have ran clean would have been 10.8+

Bob Hayes’s 10.06 on the churned up inside lane of a cinder track, way back in 1964.

Fastest non-altitude Olympic time as well until Carl Lewis 20 years later, all of them subsequently running on synthetic.

Fasuba, 9.85, Doha.

fever?

wind reading?

100m times the rest of the year nowhere near?

never sub-10 before or since?

Not only are the time and wind reading suspect, he was sick and not training properly, and then he drops this time, after hitting only 10.11 at CWG a few weeks before?

Too many anomalies. Fasuba and his 9.85 are OFF.

They are most certainly not objectively measurably better than anybody else:

Einstein/Newton

Hannibal/Alexander

Picasso/Soutine

Churchill and Hemingway? HEMINGWAY? Have you ever read his shxt?

Unless you mean Margaux Hemingway

Margaux Hemingway/Grace Kelly (no contest)

BOLT IS OFF THE LIST.

I know, I love Hayes. Maybe the absolute best, ever, or at least equal to them.

But as much as I love him, there is no legitimate way to convert his time accurately.

blackcard--

I have trained with the elite of the elite, and I know what sub-10.2 means, although I never quite got there.

9.85 looks possible, but note that the guys who did it, did it only once.

A clean sub-10 is definitely achievable.

As for how far doping gets you, what time do you think I would have run doped, at 10.49 clean, if you think that dope alone can get a guy from 11.2 to 10-flat?

Plus, there aren't "plenty" of guys, anywhere in particular, who run 10.0 at any one time. I doubt your experience.

So you think the SMTC only gave the good stuff to Lewis? Or that a coach only chooses to give one of his athletes drugs? I stick by the birds of a feather flock together theory. And yeah I don't know everyones coach off the top of my head so I am sure more guys can fall into that tainted by association group.I am fine leaving them on the list, but it is a bit of a double standard to take bolt off given his only offenses are a) running really fast and B) having a lot of doping countryman.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

asdfaafdafasd--

Yes, you are correct, and the coaching situation applies to a bunch of guys on the list, not just Surin and Bailey.

But that isn't specifically related to the athlete in particular, so I let it slide--especially in the case of Surin and Bailey, who were subject to a very high level of scrutiny in Canada and internationally.

And yes, Burrell and Marsh trained with Lewis, but to my knowledge never returned positive tests for anything as did Lewis, so they are on, unless you have something more concrete relating to them personally.

Jesus sprintgeezer, these are some of your worst posts ever.

How on earth are Bailey and Surin not under heavy scrutiny? Bailey is probably one of the most doped to ever partake in an Oly 100m final.

Half the guys you listed train(ed) with known doping coaches. Ashmeade, Bledman, Kimmons, etc.

Outside of the Europeans like Jason Gardener, Lemaitre, and guys like Kim Collins, I think you will have a hard time finding any with clean PRs.

Out of curiosity Sprintgeezer, you say 9.85 basic is the best a human has done in the 100m. What do you think is the best a human has done in the 200m and 400m?