Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Interesting data.
Certainly suspicious.
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Crazy that someone would peak for the Olympics.
josh1988 wrote:
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Crazy that someone would peak for the Olympics.
Obviously that makes sense. But it's still strange to see a 2sec+ improvement in SB at his level.
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
= typical LRC suspicious narrative.
lard sandwich wrote:
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
Are you suggesting that Coevett is trolling?
lard sandwich wrote:
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
OP is well known for being unable to refrain from lying. His word is mud.
spade detector wrote:
[quote]lard sandwich wrote:
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
OP is well known for being unable to refrain from lying. His word is mud.
lard sandwich wrote:
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
It is actually a fair summation of the article, it just shouldn't be enclosed in direct quotes.
lard sandwich wrote:
josh1988 wrote:
Crazy that someone would peak for the Olympics.
Obviously that makes sense. But it's still strange to see a 2sec+ improvement in SB at his level.
What a ridiculous analysis. 48.6, 47.9, and 48.3 are all very close even in the 400 hurdles.
YMMV wrote:
lard sandwich wrote:
And by the way, the OP is misleading with the thread title. Nowhere in the article does the athlete say that.
It is actually a fair summation of the article, it just shouldn't be enclosed in direct quotes.
Summation, interpretation, OK. But he shouldn't have written as a quote.
faa wrote:
lard sandwich wrote:
Obviously that makes sense. But it's still strange to see a 2sec+ improvement in SB at his level.
What a ridiculous analysis. 48.6, 47.9, and 48.3 are all very close even in the 400 hurdles.
2 seconds + as a SB.
Your bias is ridiculous.
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Ridiculous comment, Thomas Barr has been cribbled by injuries for majority of career. And you think its suspicious that he Pb in an Olympic final??
And do some research, Irish athletics are notorious for drug testing all year round.
Earlyboy wrote:
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Ridiculous comment, Thomas Barr has been cribbled by injuries for majority of career. And you think its suspicious that he Pb in an Olympic final??
And do some research, Irish athletics are notorious for drug testing all year round.
I don't think that what the other poster listed out should cause a presumption that he's doping, but there are many among the website that would characterize others "cribbled by injuries" as a sign of hiding for doping, and would point to Irishmen Lombard and Fagan for proof of historic issues in Ireland. But those typically using these tactics will give Barr a pass.
lard sandwich wrote:
faa wrote:
What a ridiculous analysis. 48.6, 47.9, and 48.3 are all very close even in the 400 hurdles.
2 seconds + as a SB.
Your bias is ridiculous.
I have no bias. I don't care a bit about Thomas Barr. But I am a runner and understand that getting back to a PB is much easier than getting there the first time. So while a big improvement in SB is slightly interesting, if you're just getting back to a PB it all makes sense. So don't measure from the SB to the new PB. Measure from old PB to new PB. Do you run?
lard sandwich wrote:
obvious the obvious wrote:
Thomas Barr PB before Rio: 48.65
Thomas Barr SB before Rio: 50.09
Thomas Barr PB after Rio: 47.97
Thomas Barr best time 2017-2019: 48.31
^^Considering those times I think it's quite obvious why it doesn't bother him, because if someone was on some good stuff in the hurdles final it was obviously him
Interesting data.
Certainly suspicious.
Not at all.
At that level that sort of range is miniscule. A missed step, a clipped hurdle, a clean run.
All looks fine.
Given the high profile busts of the likes of Cathal Lombard, Martin Fagan, Steven Colbert, Marie Davenport, Geraldine Hendricken, Paul Quirke, etc., not to mention the rich history of Irish doping culture in boxing, football (soccer), rugby, horse-racing and jumping, swimming, and cycling, combined with the dismal doping detection rate (0.4%) of an estimated 10-18% by Irish anti-doping, plus the unexplained world class domination of the likes of Sonia O'Sullivan and Catherina McKiernan, in the heyday of the uncontrolled EPO-era, I can understand why Barr would not want to cast any stones and ripple the waters.
rekrunner wrote:
Given the high profile busts of the likes of Cathal Lombard, Martin Fagan, Steven Colbert, Marie Davenport, Geraldine Hendricken, Paul Quirke, etc., not to mention the rich history of Irish doping culture in boxing, football (soccer), rugby, horse-racing and jumping, swimming, and cycling, combined with the dismal doping detection rate (0.4%) of an estimated 10-18% by Irish anti-doping, plus the unexplained world class domination of the likes of Sonia O'Sullivan and Catherina McKiernan, in the heyday of the uncontrolled EPO-era, I can understand why Barr would not want to cast any stones and ripple the waters.
The fact that you can name all the busted dopers in a sentence, v. doing the same for all the busted Kenyans, which would take at minimum an entire page, speaks volumes for how minimal the doping problem is in Ireland.