Jimmy T wrote:
So awesome. Murphy >> Brazier
Careful
Jimmy T wrote:
So awesome. Murphy >> Brazier
Careful
Of course he's not on PEDS. He's a white American!
1. Learn to use paragraphs.
2. All of this describes how he has raced well, not how he improved by 10% in two years, equivalent to a woman going from 33 to 30 in the 10k.
Bonkers wrote:
Also, in defense of the Americans like Murphy and Huddle who ran such insane times. In both those races the runners up front were almost certainly dopers.
This is just precious^
FACT: Clayton Murphy has been tested by USADA twice IN HIS LIFE.
Is this the famous out-of-competition testing that allows us to "know" Americans are clean, but the rest of the world is dirty?
Twice.
Ever.
trufflebutter wrote:
Well, since we're just going to talk about entire countries, I find it much more suspicious that a country that has been largely irrelevant in recent times (as measured by medal hauls at major championships) would all of a sudden produce a medallist - especially one who was running high school times just two years ago and who made the team in the 'wrong' event. What I don't find surprising is that an East African runner would produce a dominant result in an event which for many years now has been dominated by East Africans - both in terms of quality and quantity. Last time you checked, were the coaches of all the Americans busted for doping over the years found with syringes in their possession?
Remember the threads a few months about how "unknown" South Africa was suddenly producing 400 elites? (Even though they have had medal talents for years.)
And here we have the U.S., historical LOSER NATION in the 800, suddenly with an guy going from 1:45 to 1:42 in one year, and a 10% improvement in two years. But it's because he has, um, "nasty talent" and, well, you know, "he's from Ohio."
The contradictions are incredible.