Out of the top 11 fastest men in history 10 of them are dirty, why should we believe Bolt was clean?

Ivdhdi wrote:

Absolute garbage. MJ had better SE. Witherspoon was 6’5”. 200m athletes train for 200m but aren’t exceptional at 100m.

Moran.

Actovegin + other = Bolt

Actovegin is not banned.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Lagat No Mas wrote:

I used to be a big fan of Bernie Lagat. I loved him, defended him, and thoroughly enjoyed his story: African comes to Amarica for a betterlife, becomes citizen, gives back to his new country.

After reading the above quote, NO MAS. This has duped uas all. A sample fail, B sample clean. What a dope I was...

Heredia is referring to an enzyme that will neutralize all EPO in a sample. During Heredia's heyday, there were elite cyclists who were giving urine samples that showed no EPO of any kind, as if they had serious kidney disfunction.

That's not what happened with Lagat, whose B sample showed natural EPO within the expected ranges.

I don't care what the A sample said. The fact that the B sample came back negative is all I need to know, in light of the Heredia quote from my last post. Lagat took a pill to decieve the testers with his B sample. 'Nuff said.

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Lagat No Mas wrote:

I used to be a big fan of Bernie Lagat. I loved him, defended him, and thoroughly enjoyed his story: African comes to Amarica for a betterlife, becomes citizen, gives back to his new country.

After reading the above quote, NO MAS. This has duped uas all. A sample fail, B sample clean. What a dope I was...

Heredia is referring to an enzyme that will neutralize all EPO in a sample. During Heredia's heyday, there were elite cyclists who were giving urine samples that showed no EPO of any kind, as if they had serious kidney disfunction.

That's not what happened with Lagat, whose B sample showed natural EPO within the expected ranges.

And I think you didn't read the Heredia quote right. The pill is taken day of or day before competition. Just get the enzyme into your urine for the sample. It doesn't completley neutralize epo in the A sample, but works long term on tbe B sample to give a discrepency, thus calling the positive A into question. That's exactly what happened with Lagat.

Bold bolt wrote:

Everyone but Bolt comes up dirty or is caught deflecting tests and Bolt was faster than all of them and yet we are supposed to believe he was clean ??? What makes Bolt so good that all of the dirty competition wasn’t even as quick? Will he ever get busted?

Maybe a lot of rumors like Lewis after about /0 years but never a smoking gun. Hate it for Coleman. I hope he wins his appeal. I couldn't careless what these athletes take.

Lagat No Mas wrote:

And I think you didn't read the Heredia quote right. The pill is taken day of or day before competition. Just get the enzyme into your urine for the sample. It doesn't completley neutralize epo in the A sample, but works long term on tbe B sample to give a discrepency, thus calling the positive A into question. That's exactly what happened with Lagat.

It isn't exactly what happened with Lagat since his was an out of competition test. Do you know how the results of an EPO test are read?

Bolt was a huge talent and physically different from the rest. But the fact that he ran 45.3 and sub 20 young doesn't mean that it is totally reasonable that he would later run 9.58/19.19 clean. American youth run 45 and never do anything later.

Coleman was a very fast 60m guy, bulked up in his upper body and has now run 9.79. He's missed three drug tests. Bolt was obviously much, much more suited to the 100m, not fighting himself to get through it, but who is to say that when all of his compatriots were going down for minor supplement bans and when none of the men are anywhere close to the level prior to that, that he was clean. You want to believe it but there is very little reason to believe it, unfortunately.

15 45.27 Christopher Taylor JAM 1 Oct 99 Cali 17 Jul 15

16 45.14 Obea Moore USA 10 Jan 79 Santiago de Chile 2 Sep 95

17 44.84A Justin Robinson USA 30 Mar 02 Albuquerque NM 8 Jun 19

Whatley sounds like the Armstrong fanboys that defended him with the same logic...until he came on National TV and admitted it. No amount of logic is going to convince fanboys.

As I keep saying: How do you identify dopers? By the fact they are professional athletes.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Whatley wrote:

If you are naive enought to think a guy with superior speed endurance a superior stride, can't be on another level than the rest then you know little about sports. This guy could run a 45.3 as a kid, he trained as a 200m sprinter for years before running a 100, if you can't get the guy was different you aren't wanting to.

This....everybody MUST be dirty is comical.

He did run 45.3 at 16, he was also visiting the dirty doctor from the age of 16. Oh yeah teenagers don't do drugs, so that makes him clean.

45 sec 400m in high school doesn't mean you can run 9.58 in the 100m 10 years later. There's kids every year that run 45 sec 400m. Most of them never run much faster.

I don't believe Bolt was clean. Yes he was an anomaly but that doesn't justify a 9.58. Take Bolt out of the picture and the clean WR is like 9.81. What would a clean Bolt run? Probably something like 9.70.

Whatley wrote:

How many 6-5 sprinters run the 200m? And a 45.3 as a kid?

We know. By page two you have said that about 16 times already.

I stood there for five years and argued till I was blue in the face about how Lance Armstrong was clean as a whistle. "How many people would go through chemo and cancer, then subject themselves to more drugs?!" I argued that for a good two years alone.. nevermind the "Has never failed a test! Clean on over 500 tests!!" over and over. What a joke.

And really, as long as Bolt doesn't make a comeback or become all arrogant like Armstrong did, we will never know. Just like Miguel Indurain. It is what it is.. but you can look at history and see the pattern. When 99 of the top 100 are on drugs, but #1 has never been caught. Uh yeah, sure.. clean as a whistle, right?

And Lance came back from cancer the year before.

Oh Please wrote:

As I keep saying: How do you identify dopers? By the fact they are professional athletes.

That's what it's beginning to sound like with all this crazy doping going on.

And while the attention right now is on the U.S. sprinters, another top Moroccan distance runner was just popped for EPO. ?

Whatley wrote:

They test everybody it's not about who they think is dirty.

The guy never tested positive so he must be clean.

Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test. Not testing positive doesn’t automatically = clean.

Based on that flawed logic everyone is juicing.

Why is it so important that Bolt be dirty? And, if all of them are dirty then he was the fastest of the filth, right?

He talked about being clean and how you can win clean. Now add he did pass all his drug tests. He is a freak of nature physically, I see no reason to call him a liar, and think all those tests meant nothing.

I need some proof he cheated, where is that at, yep, there is none so to just.....HE'S DIRTY I TELL YA....based on absolutely nothing, I can't do it.

Flounder wrote:

Based on that flawed logic everyone is juicing.

Lol, that’s not what I said at all. I didn’t mean that everyone who tests negative is a doper, but, as we saw from Lance Armstrong, an athlete can never fail a doping test, and still be dirty.

This was a great read. At this point legalizing PEDs under Doctor supervision is probably the best option:

1. It ensures fairness.

2. Making it legal makes it safer as athletes are required (and have legal access) to be under doctor supervision instead of just randomly injecting stuff they think helps.

3. We don’t have to debate about who is clean or not anymore.

4. Some of the older people won’t like it, but once it becomes the norm, sports will be even more exciting with great performances.

5. In some cases, doping could even be healthy and protect athletes when done properly.. ex. testosterone for distance runners when chronic endurance training has messed up testosterone/cortisol ratios.

6. This “spirit of the sport” argument is ridiculous”. Athletes use special equipment, special shoes, hire dietitians, massage therapists, chiropractors, take vitamins/supplements/herbs, fly to train in different parts of the country/world, etc all to be able to train better and enhance performance. That IS the spirit of the sport now- not accepting your genetics limitations and doing whatever possible to get the most out of your body. PED’s would just be another factor in the equation (they already are)

7. Legalizing PED use isn’t ideal, but is better than the current alternative. *And there could still be some limitations and values that you have to stay within as defined by what’s healthy/dangerous for humans.

Marion Jones went to court on doping charges while she was in high school. Who cares what Bolt ran as a teen, he could definitely have been doping even then. But as other posters have said 45 seconds is not an otherworldly time especially as physically gifted as he is. You'd have to go back pretty far in the record books to find someone that is not suspicious. There is no way he ran that fast clean.

It’s more plausible that not everyone out of the other 10 were guilty of serious doping infractions in their primes.