Flo'da boy, are you following Rome's High Jump?

I most certainly was!

Even though Kynard and Ukhov went out relatively early, Barshim and Bondarenko really made it a great one. Barshim was so close--he might be the most talented of the lot (of course I say that with reservations, as the whole crop minus Ukhov are still very young). Some people might not like the games high jumpers play, passing heights and gambling, but personally I loved Bondarenko's move today, it was gutsy and he got close.

Fantastic Asian record by Barshim, and fantastic attempt at 2.43. I really can't wait for the next meeting

Some other interesting results;

(1) Tori Bowie, who surprised everybody in the 200 at Pre, now with the DL lead in the 100m...and the "clean" Fraser-Pryce isn't looking so fast any more;

(2) Dawn Harper now breathing down Rollins' neck;

(3) Lemaitre looking pretty fast in the 200;

(4) Merritt still (almost) unbeatable.

Flo'da boy wrote:

I most certainly was!

Even though Kynard and Ukhov went out relatively early, Barshim and Bondarenko really made it a great one. Barshim was so close--he might be the most talented of the lot (of course I say that with reservations, as the whole crop minus Ukhov are still very young). Some people might not like the games high jumpers play, passing heights and gambling, but personally I loved Bondarenko's move today, it was gutsy and he got close.

Fantastic Asian record by Barshim, and fantastic attempt at 2.43. I really can't wait for the next meeting

Barshim in my opinion has more spring than anyone by a wide margin. He just seems really raw. If he can improve his form he could go for the record I believe.

Flo'da boy wrote:

Fantastic Asian record by Barshim, and fantastic attempt at 2.43. I really can't wait for the next meeting

He looked so good at 2.43!!!!

Greased Lightning wrote:

Barshim in my opinion has more spring than anyone by a wide margin. He just seems really raw. If he can improve his form he could go for the record I believe.

Yes, Barshim looked like the most likely to get 2.43 but Bondarenko looked great too.

I agree, I say Barshim has the most room to improve, just looking at his jumps. He has plenty of bounce but seems to fail when it comes to body control, which given his susceptibility to injury (particularly his back) makes sense. I think Bondarenko has the most untapped potential next to Barshim, though. Maybe that's just a feeling though, but I do recall some of his WR attempts being pretty good.

Oh and

G-G-GEMILIIIIII

(I know he didn't win but still a great result from a great individual. I hope he breaks through)

oh IGF-1 LR3 is a wonderful thing !!!1

poor ukhov as crashed on it .

reached his peak weeks ago now only way is down

more severe for high jumpers in terms of result.

give it a rest and peak for europeans .

and the other two high jumpers just reaching peak

cant believe nothing in athletics

look at 1500m performances as example also

Just. Shut. Up. "Just sayin," "Bernie," whoever you are (Ventolin? Someone had to do it?), stop posting your crap on threads where doping isn't mentioned and has no need to be mentioned in your stupid style of broken-English half-formed thoughts that lack any punctuation.

aduck2022 wrote:

oh IGF-1 LR3 is a wonderful thing !!!1

poor ukhov as crashed on it .

reached his peak weeks ago now only way is down

more severe for high jumpers in terms of result.

give it a rest and peak for europeans .

and the other two high jumpers just reaching peak

cant believe nothing in athletics

look at 1500m performances as example also

Seriously, aduck2022 is one of the most irritating trolls on here

so annoying , and being lied and deceived to is also .

these results in high jump direct result of igf-1

simples .as are sprints .

ignore if want ,but no pretending when so obvious .

keep ignoring if choose ,fanboys

before this had to mainly do with with 2.30,s jumps

as norm for years .

aduck2022 wrote:

so annoying , and being lied and deceived to is also .

these results in high jump direct result of igf-1

simples .as are sprints .

ignore if want ,but no pretending when so obvious .

keep ignoring if choose ,fanboys

before this had to mainly do with with 2.30,s jumps

as norm for years .

To Flo'da boy and Emil Landy: sorry if this is hijacking your thread a bit. The high jump was one of the most exciting events I watched (and that's the first time I ever said that).

To "aduck2022": Are you capable of writing complete sentences with correct punctuation? If you're not a native English speaker, that's fine, but even if you speak Chinese or Swahili or Romanian for a first language, you should still have some idea of how to write down your thoughts. Perhaps we ignore you not because you're wrong but because you write:

lol ,Bernie cycling .

Igf-,1 new CERA dopin

Instead of writing a real sentence. Why don't you try writing a real sentence sometime, and keep your unfounded doping accusations to yourself unless they are used specifically on a doping thread.

Nobody cleared 8ft. Right?

no metric wrote:

Nobody cleared 8ft. Right?

no, but think of 2.40m as the metric 8 feet. 2.40m is actually 7' 10 1/2", but it's the big landmark for high jump. There are only 11 guys who've ever cleared 2.40m and 4 have done it this year. WR is 2.45m = 8' 1/2".

Easy way to do rough HJ conversions from metric to English: multiple centimeters by .4 to convert to inches, then subtract 1 1/2" [to compensate for the fact that an inch is 2.54cm rather than 2.5cm.]

e.g. 2.40m = 240cm x.4 = 96" - 1 1/2" = 94 1/2" = 7' 10 1/2"

btw, reversing the process to go from English to metric is pretty cumbersome, and any iaaf list you look at is only going to give metric for the jumps and throws, so it's a good idea to get comfortable with metric if you're interested in this stuff.

Igf-1, or insulin-like growth factor, seems to act similarly to human growth hormone, and seems to be associated with that deer antler stuff people were talking about a while back (Ray Lewis).

I agree with the statement above, this drug may be out there and even be prevalent but it is difficult to take seriously when you you make the vague and unfounded claim that every single sprinter and jumper uses.

off course it is IGF-1 LR3 .

and if lucky as much testosterone that

can get away with or jamaican previously the whole cabinet

Jamaican sprinting would be nothing without it .

CAN YOU EXPALIN TO ME THEN WHY 4 HIGH JUMPERS ARE

OVER 2.40 IN SAME YEAR EVER

AND HAVENT REACHED SUCH HEIGHTS SINCE STEROID USE BECAME

VERY DIFFICULT .

and usually get the odd big jump now and again

otherwise in the mid 2.30,s for every competition

for last 2 decades since steroid era.

NEVER said every sprinter on said ped but the obvious

cases definitely stand out .

like gatlin being able to reach heights of past

or old timer collins is beyond the most obvious case

non-east african origin sub tens and on et cetera

so what has suddenly changed in high jump

you tell me then .

obvious quality jumpers to start with but

should be jumping similarly and obvious ped would move

to all fields of athletics eventually if proved useful.

and how cycled can be seen also ,as stops to be as effective longer use and how

athlete approaches this by what events chooses ,etc.

The thing is, is igf-1 really new or something? I just checked the USADA banned list, and it is listed as one of the banned substances:

http://www.usada.org/igf1

Now, of course this doesn't mean it isn't out there being used, but it does seem to be something the testers are aware of, not some brand new, completely off the radar wonder drug (at last in Track and Field I think).

It is difficult to test for, as urine tests are not presently viable,but it does seem to be detectable through biological passport

More info:

http://www.drugfreesport.com/newsroom/insight.asp?VolID=68&TopicID=4

could test but dont want to,

as know what will happen in alot of events .

start to get used to alot of 10.00-10.20 100m

personally think high igf-1 levels naturally or not are a massive thing to do with intrinsic speed

and steroids increase there levels as seen before

but in some athletes more than others

as in europeans less so ,why steroids where never as effective for male sprinting ,where missing something

and obvious what that is now .

and the much more important lr3 version

where get constant levels for 24 hours helps

still not fairy dust ,need to still have it .

or start young with it.

if can mix strong steroids and it then watch out,

like jamiacans .

the lr3 version definitely could test for up to

afew days or week and interupt alot of cycle

so not as effective.

AGAIN personally cant look at modern sprinting and

certain events ,records without including it .

as so interlinked . pole vault recent record for example