Some things are just too obvious!!!

First topic message reminder :

Olympics shot put: Nadzeya Ostapchuk stripped of gold medal


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/19242736
Somethings were just too obvious! Was to me - as I'm sure it was to the many millions more around the world

She could've at least made an effort on the day to look her best and make it appear less obvious.

You got to laugh at Brett Morse's comments

And the fact that he had to apologise - only for us all to find that he was bang on! [ Though he might've been more diplomatic ].

Finally, sad that Valerie Adams had to win her Gold like that - but at least Ostapchuk got caught, and the right person gets to be called the Olympic champion

Ah, ok. You just didn't know what split meant. Fair enough.

Does calling people 'sonny boy' and 'son' (amongst other things) get you off? It's a sign you're getting rattled, you resort to being as condescending as possible.

azania wrote:Speed endurance. Personally I could never run the 200 and keep my form. But some guys have faster 200m splits than 100m.

When MJ broke the world record, he also dragged Fredericks to 19.66. Other followed shortly after. If a sprinter sets the bar high, others will follow.

Having done athletics not particularly well and many moons ago I can honestly say that the 200m is more of a swine than the 400m. In the 400 you have to pace yourself to some extent. That's why the world record is 43.something and noy 38.something. The human body can't cope with flat out sprinting for 4 sets of 100m.

The 200m however is another matter altogether. How to go as fast as you can on the bend and then pull into the straight with still enough energy to go flat out in that part is beyond me. The 100m is hard enough to go flat out and not fade towards the end let alone doing it over twice the length. This is why I can't quite believe the times these guys are posting for fun now. MJ was a ridiculous runner and Fredricks was also very talented but I aint necessarily saying they were clean but these days the 200m being done close to 19 seconds and often seems ridiculous and suspicious.

djlovesyou wrote:Ah, ok. You just didn't know what split meant. Fair enough.

Does calling people 'sonny boy' and 'son' (amongst other things) get you off? It's a sign you're getting rattled, you resort to being as condescending as possible.

Answer my questions please.

Tell me what they were again. I can't be bothered to scroll back through the pages, and I don't really read most of what you write.

Super D Boon wrote:

azania wrote:Speed endurance. Personally I could never run the 200 and keep my form. But some guys have faster 200m splits than 100m.

When MJ broke the world record, he also dragged Fredericks to 19.66. Other followed shortly after. If a sprinter sets the bar high, others will follow.

Having done athletics not particularly well and many moons ago I can honestly say that the 200m is more of a swine than the 400m. In the 400 you have to pace yourself to some extent. That's why the world record is 43.something and noy 38.something. The human body can't cope with flat out sprinting for 4 sets of 100m.

The 200m however is another matter altogether. How to go as fast as you can on the bend and then pull into the straight with still enough energy to go flat out in that part is beyond me. The 100m is hard enough to go flat out and not fade towards the end let alone doing it over twice the length. This is why I can't quite believe the times these guys are posting for fun now. MJ was a ridiculous runner and Fredricks was also very talented but I aint necessarily saying they were clean but these days the 200m being done close to 19 seconds and often seems ridiculous and suspicious.

Look at it this way. Running 43.something means you are running 10.8 every 100m. That is shifting. Many people run faster between 150-200 than 0.100. They have terrific endurance.

Look at Gay and Bolt for example. Not the best starters and usually after 40m they make inroads with the leader and win. I can see Bolt winning under 19s in a year. His record run in Berlin was full of errors especially coming off the bend. His transition was bad and he tied up at the end.

djlovesyou wrote:Tell me what they were again. I can't be bothered to scroll back through the pages, and I don't really read most of what you write.

Nevermind. Too scared to answer.

You dont read my stuff but have no problem responding. I now know why ou make such outrageous claims. You dont read so some hombre in a pub tells you x and z are juicing.

You got me, terrified to answer your questions.

You must have noticed that I'm not really one for putting my opinion forward, particularly if it disagrees with the person I'm discussing with.

Who are you debating with. Surely not me as you don't read my posts.

Anyway, the questions?

If these questions are that good, why not just ask me them again?

djlovesyou wrote:What gave it away for the Jamaicans was guys like Nesta Carter and Michael Frater making these huge jumps late in their careers. Along with other athletes like Melaine Walker coming from nowhere in Beijing.

They were well trained and completely exposed over a period of perhaps 10 years, and then bam they start busting 9.8x.

Carter ran 9"78 in september 2010 in Rieti and turned 25 one month after, he has never improved since, so I don't know if we can consider it like a jump "late" in his career as being barely 25 isn't really that old for a sprinter. Furthermore, Carter isn't running 9"7 consistently and as far as I remember during that race the 6 first guys all broke their PB/SB despite the event being during a late season meet. It was basically a fluke during a freak race in the very fast track.

The most suspicious in your list is indeed Melaine Walker, even though she didn't really came out of nowhere (she medalled at World junior championships twice in the 400mH, WYC once in the 200m, twice NCAA champion). I had quite a wrong feeling about her.

djlovesyou wrote:If these questions are that good, why not just ask me them again?

Don't worry. I knew you wouldn't answer.

Move along.

As the Jamaicans would say, ya watless bwoy.

Babario wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:What gave it away for the Jamaicans was guys like Nesta Carter and Michael Frater making these huge jumps late in their careers. Along with other athletes like Melaine Walker coming from nowhere in Beijing.

They were well trained and completely exposed over a period of perhaps 10 years, and then bam they start busting 9.8x.

Carter ran 9"78 in september 2010 in Rieti and turned 25 one month after, he has never improved since, so I don't know if we can consider it like a jump "late" in his career as being barely 25 isn't really that old for a sprinter. Furthermore, Carter isn't running 9"7 consistently and as far as I remember during that race the 6 first guys all broke their PB/SB despite the event being during a late season meet. It was basically a fluke during a freak race in the very fast track.

The most suspicious in your list is indeed Melaine Walker, even though she didn't really came out of nowhere (she medalled at World junior championships twice in the 400mH, WYC once in the 200m, twice NCAA champion). I had quite a wrong feeling about her.

Thats American. Juicing.

azania wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:

azania wrote:Speed endurance. Personally I could never run the 200 and keep my form. But some guys have faster 200m splits than 100m.

When MJ broke the world record, he also dragged Fredericks to 19.66. Other followed shortly after. If a sprinter sets the bar high, others will follow.

Having done athletics not particularly well and many moons ago I can honestly say that the 200m is more of a swine than the 400m. In the 400 you have to pace yourself to some extent. That's why the world record is 43.something and noy 38.something. The human body can't cope with flat out sprinting for 4 sets of 100m.

The 200m however is another matter altogether. How to go as fast as you can on the bend and then pull into the straight with still enough energy to go flat out in that part is beyond me. The 100m is hard enough to go flat out and not fade towards the end let alone doing it over twice the length. This is why I can't quite believe the times these guys are posting for fun now. MJ was a ridiculous runner and Fredricks was also very talented but I aint necessarily saying they were clean but these days the 200m being done close to 19 seconds and often seems ridiculous and suspicious.

Look at it this way. Running 43.something means you are running 10.8 every 100m. That is shifting. Many people run faster between 150-200 than 0.100. They have terrific endurance.

Look at Gay and Bolt for example. Not the best starters and usually after 40m they make inroads with the leader and win. I can see Bolt winning under 19s in a year. His record run in Berlin was full of errors especially coming off the bend. His transition was bad and he tied up at the end.

Yes but 10.8 is not that fast for a single 100m. to run 19.2 seconds over 200m means a time of 9.6 per 100m which I find staggering and frankly unbelieable given that it's being done for fun these days.

As always with you debates go around in circles and never get resolved as you're completely rigid and are unable to understand an alternative viewpoint.

If there was evidence of wrongdoing the guys would be banned now wouldn't they? There is no evidence, there never is any evidence that's why everyone is suspecting cheating but there will never be evidence whilst the dopers are light years ahead of the testers.

As for evidence, there is none on FloJo is there? All circumstantial and heresay which does not count. Yet you've been more than happy to dish the dirt on her. Tyson Gay - where's the evidence? You and I agree on him yet no evidence. There's never any evidence that's the problem.

I don't think so. Take Menea for example. He never broke 10s but ran 19.73 (altitude). Also look at the splits for the 4x100. Some run very low 9s. From a running start chunks can be sectioned of a pb.

John Regis never broke 10s yet has run 19.87 (or close enough).

FloJos evidence is purely circumstantial. So is Kratochvilova. But please don't tell me she wasn't juicing. She denies to this day that she juiced. But FloJo. The changes in muscle definition. A total change not just more muscle. The whole structure of her body changed. The complete change in her voice to one very masculine. Plus she quit as soon as random testing was introduced. She probably say what happened to Ben and decided to call it a day.

Of course no evidence on Gay. Truth be told, I doubt if he was juicing regardless of his training partner being banned twice (Mullings). He said it after Beijing that he will have to work harder to compete with Bolt. That is what he did. The guy has a very strong work ethic.

azania wrote:I don't think so. Take Menea for example. He never broke 10s but ran 19.73 (altitude). Also look at the splits for the 4x100. Some run very low 9s. From a running start chunks can be sectioned of a pb.

John Regis never broke 10s yet has run 19.87 (or close enough).

FloJos evidence is purely circumstantial. So is Kratochvilova. But please don't tell me she wasn't juicing. She denies to this day that she juiced. But FloJo. The changes in muscle definition. A total change not just more muscle. The whole structure of her body changed. The complete change in her voice to one very masculine. Plus she quit as soon as random testing was introduced. She probably say what happened to Ben and decided to call it a day.

Yeah but you can run under twenety because the second hundred you're already motoring. It's extremely hard to do the first 100 of a 200 metre under 10 seconds by nature that it's a bend and therefore tougher to run fast through (I never got the habit of bends so maybe biased!) that means that if Bolt did the first 100 in 10 the second hundred in 9.2 without gassing?? I don't know the splits though.

But Bolt could only run 10s a year before Beijing and barely ran the 100m race. He then clocks 9.69 whilst barely trying at the end is a clear sign of doping.

Blake knocking off 0.47 off the 200m in less than a year is also a clear sign of doping add to the fact he looks like his muscles don't belong on his body and he looks very odd. With FloJo it's more obvious because she was a woman. I don't think she was juicing anymore than Blake is.

Super D Boon wrote:On a different point altogether.

I think Carl Lewis should be stripped of his two golds and one silver gained from the Seoul Olympics in 1988.

Who's with me?

Me!

Can't stand the guy [ insert; backhand slap emoticon ]

Super D Boon wrote:

azania wrote:I don't think so. Take Menea for example. He never broke 10s but ran 19.73 (altitude). Also look at the splits for the 4x100. Some run very low 9s. From a running start chunks can be sectioned of a pb.

John Regis never broke 10s yet has run 19.87 (or close enough).

FloJos evidence is purely circumstantial. So is Kratochvilova. But please don't tell me she wasn't juicing. She denies to this day that she juiced. But FloJo. The changes in muscle definition. A total change not just more muscle. The whole structure of her body changed. The complete change in her voice to one very masculine. Plus she quit as soon as random testing was introduced. She probably say what happened to Ben and decided to call it a day.

Yeah but you can run under twenety because the second hundred you're already motoring. It's extremely hard to do the first 100 of a 200 metre under 10 seconds by nature that it's a bend and therefore tougher to run fast through (I never got the habit of bends so maybe biased!) that means that if Bolt did the first 100 in 10 the second hundred in 9.2 without gassing?? I don't know the splits though.

But Bolt could only run 10s a year before Beijing and barely ran the 100m race. He then clocks 9.69 whilst barely trying at the end is a clear sign of doping.

Blake knocking off 0.47 off the 200m in less than a year is also a clear sign of doping add to the fact he looks like his muscles don't belong on his body and he looks very odd. With FloJo it's more obvious because she was a woman. I don't think she was juicing anymore than Blake is.

Why is it a clear sign of doping? Bolt has always been a phenominal talent running 19.93 at 17. He trained for 100m and blasted everyone away. Not a sign of doping but a sign of a great talent who we should all celebrate.

Blake ran 10.07 at 17. He has made the transition brilliantly unlike MLF who parties and saw himself as a big shot. Wasted talent if there ever was one.

Plus look at his style of running. For a short guy he has long legs and massive stride length. He eats up the ground. Great sprinter and future world record holder (providing Bolt doesn't take it out of sight). Cant stand him for his pre race growl though. Too contrived. But remarkable, clean talent. If he trained in EU or USA then I would question him.

Apparently Mullings has been ostracised by Jamaicans. Treated the same way as those cricketers who went to apartheid SA.

Nah Blake looks like he's roided sorry. His face is dilated and his musculature doesn;t look right for his frame. He's the male equivalent of FloJo.

He ran just under 10 in the world 100m and is now close to Bolt in 9.69, nearly 0.30 in one year and to the 0.47 in the 200m in less than a year it doesn;t quite add up.

Bolt I really hope is clean though. The sprints these days is a battle between the pharmacists not the sprinters. We're getting Alien Games not Olympic Games. After the Carl Lewis fiasco I can never take the sprints seriously anymore.

Oh yeah I got yam from Morrions recently. Quite like it, like sweet potato only it didn't make me run faster.

He was running 9.8s 2 years ago. If Gemili ran 9.8s in 2014 it wouldn't surprise me. As for 200m there is greater scope to smash PBs. No-one questions MJ for taking almost half a second off his PB when he smashed the world record.

Can't stand yams or sweet potatos. Don't like root veg in general. Mash pots are ok though with melted cheese.

azania wrote:

Apparently Mullings has been ostracised by Jamaicans. Treated the same way as those cricketers who went to apartheid SA.

It's interesting that the poster girl for SARMs hasn't been treated quite so badly. She costs Jamaica a medal at the 2010 World Indoors because she tested positive there, and how has she been rewarded? That's Bobby-Gaye Wilkins.

Oh, she's been welcomed straight back into the Racer's Track Club, to train alongside the squeaky clean Bolt and Blake.

She's a nobody trying to get somewhere. She failed. But everyone is entitled to a second chance.

Now my questions from yesterday? Still avoiding them or are you doing some selevtive reading Mr Bo Selecta?

Ask me the questions again and I'll answer them. I'm not trawling through pages of babbling and insults to find them.

Haha, 'doing some selective reading Mr Bo Selecta'. That one's really good. I'm off to buy some Aloe Vera because I just got burned.

Nah. Its near the bottom of the previous page in case you care to respond to it. Interest that I asked the same question twice and you all missed it. Wierd. You can get some Aloe juice from Holland and Barrett. Good for upset stomach. Find a Caribbean take away and buy some Manish Water, Irosh Moss and Hard Food.

Oh the British cycling team one?

I just ignored that as your basic "I'm in tears because you said negative things about black people, what about those evil white people then eh? eh?"

They're subject to UCI Bio-Passport testing and UK:Sport testing. Both of which are light years more extensive than anything a Jamaican sprinter would have to face. They're available for testing year round and have to be in a certain place for one hour every single day. This is not a worry for a Jamaican.

But they might not be clean, and you're entitled to your opinion. It really doesn't bother me, particularly as I know that you're even less clued up about cycling than you are about athletics and that's saying something.

There could be a cover up. I mean EO has stated openly that the IAAF and JA are colluding to hide things.

And cut out the race baiting unless you want 24 hours out.

Jamaicans are clean. Live with it. Any proof otherwise?

Oh and that was a minor question. The other question is ion the same page but slightly above.

Once again, cut out the race baiting. Its sad to see a grown man act in a childish manner.

Are you a mod now?

That's your problem really. My opinion is that something is going on dodgy in Jamaica, you disagree.

You react with tears and tantrums, I don't.

Are you not able to accept an opposing opinion without getting upset?

The majority of top sprinters are doping - is that what you wanted me to say?

Nope. But you were warned and djk got boxed. So cut it out. Just some friendly advice.

Now run along and answer the other question. There's a good boy.

So because I disagree with you, I have a problem. You believe that there is something dodgy going on in Jamaica but have provided less than nothing to back it up. All your evidence is based on gossip and innuendo. Nothing remotely concrete of near circumstantial.

Your argument is that they run fast and so must be doping. That's it. Oh and some guy knows a drug supplier who knows the Jamaicans. 2+2 doesn't equal anything other than 4.

As for getting upset, you seem to think your views are paramount and are a know it all. FYI I am not remotely upset. You seem to be getting wound with your continued race baiting and childish mannerisms.

I don't know if the majority of top sprinters are clean or not. What I am 100% confident about is that the top 3 Jamaican runners and their relay team are clean.

Can't say the same for Gemili though.

At this point I'm going to suggest that since the pair of you have been going around in circles rather childishly for the past day or more that you both agree to disagree and find something new to argue about.

I mean, there's only so many times I can be bothered reading
"answer my question"
"what question"
"answer my question"
"what question"
"answer my question"
"what question"
"answer my question"
"what question"
"answer my question"
"what question"

- it's the sort of argument I used to get in with my younger brother. When I was 9.

Agreed Pete. I almost felt like Jeremy Paxman in trying to get dj to answer a couple of simple questions I asked. One he attempted, but the other he ignored. Anyway, its done. The Jamaicans are clean.

Hope he can cut out the race baiting though. It is pretty childish.

azania wrote:Agreed Pete. I almost felt like Jeremy Paxman in trying to get dj to answer a couple of simple questions I asked. One he attempted, but the other he ignored. Anyway, its done. The Jamaicans are clean.

Hope he can cut out the race baiting though. It is pretty childish.

Sigh.

Az, I said "quit".

Not say "i agree" then trot out a repeat of the same tired argument. Again something I used to do when I was 9.