No Jamaican Men in 200m final! What's happened

If one nation dominates, it is proof that that nation is doping. If no nation dominates it's proof that all nations are doping.

All He Does Is Win wrote:

Sausages, plants, goldfish wrote:

It's not just Jamaica, although their drop in results has been most noticeable (perhaps because their doping programme was the most obvious)

I think Athletics is on its arse and the plan is to spread the heroes of the sport across many nations, those with less of a tradition in the sport. That way, more countries are watching and rooting for their athlete without questioning and criticising the performances. Anyone turning on an athlete from Norway, Bahrain, Belgium, France etc will be seen as just a sour graper unable to cope with the fact that their home nation is no longer dominant.

These Bahraini athletes are a complete plastic joke.

HardLoper wrote:

My contest predictions have really taken a hit. Wish I knew they were gonna pull the plug on the doping program for this meet!

I'm at #103 but I have Blake for 1st. I didn't think to un-pick him after the egg he laid in the 100. I still should get at least one point from Makwala.

dgavoor wrote:

In the absence of PEDs after WADA cracked down on the Jamaican (non) drug-testing program, it seems that Yohan Blake has been reduced from "The Beast" to pretty darn close to "The Least." High school sprinters in the US ran faster times this year than Blake did in the 200M at the WCs. Bye, bye; nice to have known ya!

Also probably why Bolt got third. Now to start testing the athletes from the African continent.

now if only our Lord and Savior of all things track and field Sir Retardo Canova would chime in, and his pupil vent/calculo we could all be educated!

PEDs work and it all depends on how the athlete responds to the drugs. some athletes will make very very small gains like say carl lewis, whereas blake responded HUGE, a 10.2 guy to 9.69, 20.5-19.26....but this is interesting when you actually look at it

ben johnson 10.4, juiced to a 9.79 = .61 improvement

maurice green 10.2-9.79 = .41 improvement

blake (prob a 10.2ish guy)-9.69 = .51 improvement

bolt 10.09 - 9.58 = .51 improvement

so if you take all this into consideration .4 - .5 improvement when a sprinter gets on them juice for a 100m

carl lewis best was 9.86, so he was naturally a 10.27 to 10.37. basically just as fast as jesse owens

go ahead and try adding .41-.51 to tyson gays times, powell, christie etc linford christie and you will see, then you can see when they started juicing.

i havent bothered to check what it is for women, cause some chicks improve from 11.4s to 10.7's.....

tyson gay 10.46 senior year, yes thats right just a 10.46 guy at 18yrs old

he then meets lance brauman, and well what would you know?

10.46-.41/51 = what is that? well lets take a look....10.05/9.95....and what did tyson run that year with brauman at barton county commuity college? 10.08 wind and 10.27 legal wind.

so only a .20 improvement first year on them juice, but did run a .4 improvement with ample wind. next year he ran a legal 10.01 so there was his .4 improvement. whats insane is he was able to do another .33 improvement on top of that and get down to 9.68.

with this info gay seems to be one of the best responders to the juice doing an improvement of .78, you see this big of improvements in the womens 100.

so lets say .78 is the maximum improvement one can get on the juice lets crunch some numbers

bolt 9.58 is now 10.36 (same as jesse owens)

blake 9.69 is now 10.47

greene 9.79 is now 10.57 (10.43 high school PR)

powell 9.72 is now 10.5 (PR at 17yrs old was only 11.45!!!!!!)

carl lewis 9.86 is now 10.64 (oh and his PR from high school? 10.67!)

basically 10.2-3 is about the best people can run before juice comes in look at these improvements!

I guess the claim about Jamaica being the last stop on the slave trade which deposited the strongest people and thus produced the best genetics is a farce?

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-bolt-supremacy-inside-jamaicas-sprint-factory-by-richard-moore-book-review-how-a-caribbean-10380400.html

Or maybe the genetics have a 10 year shelf life?

Thanks for the last paragraph.

I have heard this before. The cleanest 100m record for men is on the 10.3s. You break 10 secs you are doping.

I wonder where Calvin Smith's argument factor in this?????

well there is this amazing tool called the internet where you can search for answers.

calvin smith hs PR all i can find is a 9.5 100yds, being converted to 10.2 handheld, so basically a 10.45 FAT

the next year 1980 Pan Am he ran a 10.51

so yeah tell me again that im off base how?

This thread has summarised it perfectly.

No more special juice for the Jamaicans. Just the same old regular juice the rest of the world is on.

Spencer i think you're onto something....

jasonkiddnba wrote:

NOW does every one believe that the Jamaicans were all juiced to the max?

Sheesh. It is so obvious.

First of all they all tested positive in the past decade, Yohan Blake, Nesta Carter, Asafa Powell (essentially their entire relay team).

I am 100% certain the Bolt tested positive in 2011. But the IAAF quietly dealt with it and punished him by telling him that he must false start in the 100m final. That would be his 'disqualification'. It was the most obvious false start I have ever seen:

https://youtu.be/cgVJP0RmR-Y

Same thing happened with the US 4*400 .Everyone tested positive except MJ.

There seems to be a pattern that a select few escape punishment

Wouldn't surprise me if Nike was involved in some of it.

yes i think i am too. a .4-.78 improvement on juice, i think the people who are better responders get then .78, thats almost a full second improvement in a 100m.

lance wasnt the best but he was good, and he responded the BEST in his era for being on a bike.

they say epo gives a 4-7% boost in endurance races, which this spring i showed that the 1500 3:30ish, 5k WR should be around 13:00, and 10k 27:00, and marathon 2:06ish.

so what % is .4-.78 of a second?

calvin smith improved just as much as anyone else pretty much a 10.5 guy down to 9.93, a .57 improvement. this whole "he never tested positive" nonsense is so annoying. testing back then was a farce as it is in 3rd world countries today. governing bodies know exactly for the most part what athletes are taking and can and will discipline you if you dont play along. just like they did to gatlin when he kept dodging powell that season. ducked him for the 3rd time and boom, they expose him to the media as a PED user.

Speak my mind wrote:

Thanks for the last paragraph.

I have heard this before. The cleanest 100m record for men is on the 10.3s. You break 10 secs you are doping.

I wonder where Calvin Smith's argument factor in this?????

There is something to the idea of looking at the progressions of known dopers, but figuring out the exact improvement seems impossible. For example, proposing that there is no natural improvement possible from age 18 to 23 is pretty interesting. And for athletes returning after a ban, a lack of motivation, added stress from the hate, possible hormonal imbalances caused by the previous doping programs, and diminished support structures surely push their times down in addition to just the doping effect.

The whole idea that anyone running faster than a 22 year old Jesse Owens did on a cinder track off amateurish training must be doping just seems wrong.

So my non-expert thesis is that most of the one-season 9.8 sprinters were 10.0 runners who got to 9.8 with doping, that the improvement from a decent program is something like 0.2-0.3, and that it is sub-9.90 where the real dirty zone starts - meaning the possibility of being clean seems remote. This would somehow fit with a 9.6 Berlin Bolt / 9.9 Clean Bolt as well...

All your assumptions are basically ridiculous since it is based on the "fact" that athletes reach their peak in their late teens or at worse early 20.

So you are telling us that athletes who run 10"2 to 10"5 at 18/19 are basically at the end of their development curve and any further improvment is due to drugs ? (since according to you drugs brought down their time by 0.5 at their peak time).

Hey, you the barely out of HS Kid there ! Don't bother to train anymore, you're worth 10"3 at 19, you'll be worth 10"3 at 27. Some lunatic on a board said this.

Why do people even bother keeping with the sport into adulthood then...

Factors like exact coctail and dose makes a difference.

Everyone is prob on base of test derivative + hgh.

Add in epo like substances.

Nervous system stimulants and other specific action PEDs and that probably accounts for the different % uplifts.

Carl lewis prob didn't use EPO etc. don't think it was considered worthwhile in the 100m until modern times.

Then genetic difference probably plays one of the smallest effects but it's there nonetheless.

The biggest factor is usually PED dosage. And this is where the lack of testing really allows dopers to flourish and drop insane times. You can ramp up the dose without worrying about getting caught whereas everyone else has to dope up to the permitted line.

Very unfair!

Oh and i didn't mention the modern undetectable PEDs of all kinds......

its probably because theyre no longer on the hot sauce.or most of them arent,anyway.ive noticed an overall slip in the performances at these championships.

well if you look into it steroid use for the most part likely started in the early 1960's. the nazis had figured out injectable testosterone in 1935, and put most of their athletes of the 1936 olympics on testosterone injections. Paavo Nurmi was popping the oral steriod product called Rejuvin during the 1920's. then the russians with the nazi info in the 1952 olympics crushed by a state sponsored doping regiment. this started the athletic cold war, and american pride was at stake...so we got to work making something better than just testosterone. we created dianabol in 1955, the first synthetic man made steroid.

it has been pretty much well known that our 1968 team was on dianabol as part of the US system. to deny that is naive.

so to say that carl lewis and calvin smith were innocent children about steriods when they had been PART of the 1968 team as part of the athletic cold war against the soviets is ridiculous. they were born in that area and hit their 20's in 1980's. thats 20 years of american track and field athletes using juice. why do you think the best "sprint" coaches in that time were from the eastern block countries and they helped out Francis and john smith? being a smart coach and the connections to the juice and the 20 plus years of data on how much do inject or take orally during the diff phases of the year is what is needed. any moron can pop pills, but it takes knowledgeable people to have a program to follow, when to take this and that, how many mL's, what to eat what not to eat, how much water to be consuming, etc...and then you get smarter coaches with their docs and they know how to "stack" and make PED cocktails.

im telling you clean without juice FAT is 10.20 ish, and thats reality. most pros as you can see were 10;4-5 range and now somehow run 9.7-9.9

dont be naive

Interestingly, 1968 was the first time an official complaint about steroids was being heard. This complaint wasn't made by sports authorities, but by the World Health Organization. Apparently steroids were being dumped in some third world countries with a kickback volume incentive for doctors. The doctors became quite creative in finding reasons to prescribe steroids, citing everything from malnutrition to menstrual cramps. Coincidentally, the two main countries cited in the report were Kenya and Jamaica, countries that burst into prominence at the 1968 Olympics.