IAAF Set to Wipe all pre 2005 World Records from the Books

bmg wrote:

The women's 2:15 marathon is the most obvious one, right after the 800. It is also the most outstanding world record (running events, can't judge the others).

Dr. Detroit wrote:

This

Also, why problem solved? The men's 100, 200, and 400 are also obvious.

No they're not. Bolt was a freak at 15-16 and has followed a normal progression since then, and has a 5'10 guy's cadence and incredible speed endurance. WVN is also believable, given his 100-200 speed and his near perfect form.

I'm not saying either or both is clean, but they're believable. So is the 800.

In regards to South Africa, something is going on there with athletics at the moment. Look at rankings in various running events, esp U18 rankings. They are targeting certain events and posting fast times at altitude.

El Keniano wrote:

This will not pass. The Brits now own the IAAF (Lord help us if they ever get their hands on FIFA) and so far, the media is trumpeting the narrative about injustice to their clean, hardworking, unimpeachable heroes Jonathan Edwards (probably true) and Paula Radcliffe (dubious).

I dunno about Edwards. He was a very good TJer and about a 10.70 100 runner, then at age 28-29 he went away and trained for 6 months and came back a 10.40 runner and broke the WR for TJ.

I really do hope he is clean, son of a preacher man and all that.

Karma Police wrote:

bmg wrote:

The women's 2:15 marathon is the most obvious one, right after the 800. It is also the most outstanding world record (running events, can't judge the others).

Also, why problem solved? The men's 100, 200, and 400 are also obvious.

No they're not. Bolt was a freak at 15-16 and has followed a normal progression since then, and has a 5'10 guy's cadence and incredible speed endurance.

Bolt ran 21.73 a month before his 15th birthday, I know a white guy that ran 21.4 a couple days after his 15th birthday, while he did improve he obviously never went sub-20 or everyone here will know who he was. Bolt started visiting Wohlfarht "around" age 16 for regular dosages of actovegin, then he started running sub-20s. Teenagers never take drugs or do they?

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Karma Police wrote:

No they're not. Bolt was a freak at 15-16 and has followed a normal progression since then, and has a 5'10 guy's cadence and incredible speed endurance.

Bolt ran 21.73 a month before his 15th birthday, I know a white guy that ran 21.4 a couple days after his 15th birthday, while he did improve he obviously never went sub-20 or everyone here will know who he was. Bolt started visiting Wohlfarht "around" age 16 for regular dosages of actovegin, then he started running sub-20s. Teenagers never take drugs or do they?

Literally a pointless post

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Karma Police wrote:

No they're not. Bolt was a freak at 15-16 and has followed a normal progression since then, and has a 5'10 guy's cadence and incredible speed endurance.

Bolt ran 21.73 a month before his 15th birthday, I know a white guy that ran 21.4 a couple days after his 15th birthday, while he did improve he obviously never went sub-20 or everyone here will know who he was. Bolt started visiting Wohlfarht "around" age 16 for regular dosages of actovegin, then he started running sub-20s. Teenagers never take drugs or do they?

Which confirms my suspicion. The JA Govt is behind the doping scenario. The 2009 incident was an eye opener. Notice how many were busted, all from different clubs.

Bolt was Asafa's replacement. Sports needed a more powerful male figure. The Balco Case tainted the sport so the push was to find stars outside of America. Jamaica was one of a few countries with " reputable male" sprinters.

Last week's performance at Penns where both juniors and seniors dominated the majority to events points to a similar pattern of organized state doping system.

Look how they will dominate London 2017. IAAF is looking to $$$ on this event as it is Bolt's exit.

details details wrote:

Coach Crazy wrote

Also if you erase Flo Jo's doped 200 time the next time is busted doper Marion Jones. With this policy her times will also be thrown out because all those with at least one doping violation will no longer be eligible for world record ratification

The proposed policy calls for vacated records to be replaced by future performances, not the "next best valid" past performance. FloJo would lose WR recognition, but her times would stay on the past performance lists along with Jones and everyone else who has ever run the W200m. And no one on the past performance list would be elevated to WR status.

From the report: "When a record is removed, no immediate successor is ratified, rather a limit is then set for a new record to be established at a future date."

That's what I said. You didn't understand my post.

El Keniano wrote:

This will not pass. The Brits now own the IAAF (Lord help us if they ever get their hands on FIFA) and so far, the media is trumpeting the narrative about injustice to their clean, hardworking, unimpeachable heroes Jonathan Edwards (probably true) and Paula Radcliffe (dubious). All media coverage has focused just on these two as if they're the only ones that matter. Nauseating. The only good sign is that it's their fellow Europeans proposing the re calibration so Coe has no reason to back down.

It already passed by a unanimous vote. The IAAF voting body are already unanimous. Its just a formality. Gabriele Szabo even voted yes despite the fact that it will wipe out one of her own records.

Dr. Detroit wrote:

Bobby B wrote:

Dump women's 100, 200, 400, 800 as they are obvious... leave the rest. There, problem solved.

This

Fine only if they reset after three fully discrete organizations are formed for investigative, laboratory, judicial, defence, secure transport, vault storage.

I fail to see the point of this move.

As soon as a new world record is set, and that athlete is later caught doping, the whole thing is discredited all over again.

Coach Crazy wrote:

details details wrote:

The proposed policy calls for vacated records to be replaced by future performances, not the "next best valid" past performance. FloJo would lose WR recognition, but her times would stay on the past performance lists along with Jones and everyone else who has ever run the W200m. And no one on the past performance list would be elevated to WR status.

From the report: "When a record is removed, no immediate successor is ratified, rather a limit is then set for a new record to be established at a future date."

That's what I said. You didn't understand my post.

You said that Marion Jones, as the "next" performance after FloJo, would be excluded from WR consideration "because" of her doping violation. I'm pointing out that is entirely irrelevant under the proposal as stated. When a WR is vacated, no past performances are considered for ratification, regardless of the doping history of the performer at issue.

they need to do this as soon as possible... why?

ALAN WEBB IS YOUR 1 MILE WORLD RECORD HOLDER, THATS WHY!

white man king of the mile wrote:

they need to do this as soon as possible... why?

ALAN WEBB IS YOUR 1 MILE WORLD RECORD HOLDER, THATS WHY!

I was thinking about starting a thread about Olympic Records. If the IAAF scraps pre-2005 World Records we could have an absurd situation in Tokyo 2020 where the Olympic record is better than the World Record e.g.-

Men's Long Jump 8.90m (Bob Beamon)

Men's 400mh

Women's Heptathlon

Men's 4 x 400m relay (???)

Women's 4 x 400m relay

Unless they also scrap the pre-2005 Olympic Records.

We should wipe the records beginning from Aouita's 1500m 1985 run, as that was the likely start of the African doping era.

It would also be nice and tidy - 1985 - 2005 - 20 years.

Dr. Detroit wrote:

Bobby B wrote:

Dump women's 100, 200, 400, 800 as they are obvious... leave the rest. There, problem solved.

This

Wipe out all the records set by the Chinese women in the early 1990s.

Wang Junxia et al. I believe she admitted to doping