[Other Sport] Usain Bolt Drug Cheat??

[jonnyrovers]

Jonathan Edwards is the biggest drug cheat ever then ?

Nah he was carried by angels.

 

[Stat Brother]

I continue to love Lance Armstrong for the way he blew my mind watching him race. Knowing a bit more about him now I can understand his motives. And let's face it most of the time he was racing against fellow cheats.

No he didn't cheat because everyone else was cheating.

He cheated because he had always cheated.
He cheated because he was king of the cheats.
He cheated by creating one of the world's most elaborate cheating regimes that's currently known of in sport.
He cheated for so many years he no longer had any concept of cheating.


Everyone else cheating was doing so because of history, legacy, coaching, peer pressure but also because of Armstrong, not with or despite, but because of him.

 

[Baldseagull]

Not what I said, but you'd have to be the most naive of naive fools to look at all of the evidence around the sport, the event, his rivals, his coaches and his colleagues and say 'well at least Bolt is clean'.

Just because we all love the story and want it to be true doesn't mean people should blindly accept that it is, that race has already been run!

And just because he was phenomenal, doesn't mean we should suspect he cheated.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

...

Armstrong was ultimately caught, albeit my recollection is there were plenty of accusations around him for years before that point.

Even if there's a conspiracy around Bolt to shield him from the testers, beyond the rest of his team and all the other people in athletics who have been caught in the meantime, the amount of money that would be available for anybody who could come out with any substantial claims means we're bound to find out one day if he really was cheating.

 

[Yoda]

No he didn't cheat because everyone else was cheating.

He cheated because he had always cheated.
He cheated because he was king of the cheats.
He cheated by creating one of the world's most elaborate cheating regimes that's currently known of in sport.
He cheated for so many years he no longer had any concept of cheating.


Everyone else cheating was doing so because of history, legacy, coaching, peer pressure but also because of Armstrong, not with or despite, but because of him.

Does that include Ben Johnson who was cheating well before Lance Armstrong?

Lets not brush all the drug cheat under the carpet before Lance came along shall we.

 

[Stat Brother]

And just because he was phenomenal, doesn't mean we should suspect he cheated.

I don't suspect him of cheating, I've never accused him of cheating.

But if someone else says 'I think Bolt cheated' I'll not argue against them because of all the reasons I've already stated.

 

[dsr-burnley]

What that article amounts to is that Bolt was the best in the world, therefore he must have cheated. Having postulated that, it doesn't accept any evidence to the contrary.

 

[Stat Brother]

Does that include Ben Johnson who was cheating well before Lance Armstrong?

Lets not brush all the drug cheat under the carpet before Lance came along shall we.

Ben Johnson's cheating regime for a Men's 100m Olympic final, where all 8 competitors have a record of PED use, was nothing compared to what Lance was doing.


Johnson was just one of hundreds (possibly thousands) of athletes who tried to cheat to win.

Armstrong was working on East Germany/Russia/China levels of institutionalized cheating - a completely different race. (wanted to say ball game! )

 

[Baldseagull]

Yeah I get that. Greene aside, the other two were both unsuccessful at tribunal and did not get their bans overturned. Powell had his reduced by 6 months. There's no disputing the Americans' guilt.

I'm not trying to convince anyone either way here. I found the article interesting and felt it raised some valid questions. I continue to love Lance Armstrong for the way he blew my mind watching him race. Knowing a bit more about him now I can understand his motives. And let's face it most of the time he was racing against fellow cheats. There are endurance athletes out there who like Armstrong don't seem to produce lactate at the rate other athletes do. Ultra Runner Dean Karnazes stands out despite being past his prime a bit now. He has not suffered the same scrutiny. It suited the narrative for years to protect Armstrong's role model status because the world needed that. I think it's reasonable to ask if the same is happening with Bolt. My internal dialogue argues he's clean every time.

If he wanted to shave tenths off his times, he would have been better off not slowing down or turning round to see how far back the competition was, and working on his start. In fact he did work on his start, and got out of the blocks well for his 9.58 world record.

 

[Baldseagull]

I don't suspect him of cheating, I've never accused him of cheating.

But if someone else says 'I think Bolt cheated' I'll not argue against them because of all the reasons I've already stated.

Of course it is possible, Michael Phelps, Steve Redgrave, Carl Lewis too.

 

[NooBHA]

Who Cares ?

With all the testing and testing facilities available to the Authorities they should be able to catch him if he was cheating and if they cannot prove that he took performance enhancing drugs then I for one am willing to believe that he wasn't taking them.

And if he was it is still the fault of the Authorities for net being able to catch him. So either way I am not really bothered because you can't just accuse someone of something just because you have a suspicion.

 

[Stat Brother]

Of course it is possible, Michael Phelps, Steve Redgrave, Carl Lewis too.

Probably best if 33% of your examples weren't cheats.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2003/apr/24/athletics.duncanmackay

 

[GOM]

I don't suspect him of cheating, I've never accused him of cheating.

But if someone else says 'I think Bolt cheated' I'll not argue against them because of all the reasons I've already stated.

Sling enough mud and people will start to believe it, the usual technique to try and discredit someone without having anything to substantiate a genuine claim.

In this era of social media, start a rumour and then millions pick it up and all of a sudden it's true. As has been said, 'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing'.

If someone else says 'I think Bolt cheated' you should be asking for proof/evidence, not just sitting back thinking....well others have cheated so I'll not question the claim.
.
.
.
.
anyway how is that meth lab doing I heard you had in the garden shed. (I have no evidence of this and just made it up, or did I).

 

[Yoda]

It's this bit that casts doubt for me. The 40 fastest ever 100m times and he's the only athlete on the list with times that still stand.




View attachment 138076View attachment 138077

Sorry for going back to this post. Why have you stripped out all athletes times saying they no longer stand when they in fact do due to them not being at a time when they were banned or subsequently banned?

Yohan Blake, for example, was banned in 2009 so his times from 2012 should still stand. Tyson Gay, for another, was banned in 2013 dating back to July 2012, so his time's from 2009 are still officially legal and should still stand.

 

[Stat Brother]

Sling enough mud and people will start to believe it, the usual technique to try and discredit someone without having anything to substantiate a genuine claim.

In this era of social media, start a rumour and then millions pick it up and all of a sudden it's true.

If someone else says 'I think Bolt cheated' you should be asking for proof/evidence, not just sitting back thinking....well others have cheated so I'll not question the claim.
.
.
.
.
anyway how is that meth lab doing I heard you had in the garden shed. (I have no evidence of this and just made it up, or did I).

No I shouldn't, I don't have to ask of proof because I don't think he cheated.
Someone's opposite opinion won't change my mind.

I think that voice is wrong but I'll not be going toe to toe with them about it because I wouldn't be dumfounded if I were proved to be wrong.

 

[GOM]

No I shouldn't, I don't have to ask of proof because I don't think he cheated.
Someone's opposite opinion won't change my mind.

I think that voice is wrong but I'll not be going toe to toe with them about it because I wouldn't be dumfounded if I were proved to be wrong.

That's fair enough, so if someone says something you disagree with, you just back out and say nothing.

 

[Stat Brother]

That's fair enough, so if someone says something you disagree with, you just back out and say nothing.

Clearly not what I said, but as that's your take on my considered reply to your post, this clearly isn't worth the effort (and this is no effect)

 

[GOM]

Clearly not what I said, but as that's your take on my considered reply to your post, this clearly isn't worth the effort (and this is no effect)

But that is clearly what you said, perhaps your reply wasn't considered enough. You are at least now doing the ignore bit when you disagree.

 

[jonnyrovers]

Sorry for going back to this post. Why have you stripped out all athletes times saying they no longer stand when they in fact do due to them not being at a time when they were banned or subsequently banned?

Yohan Blake, for example, was banned in 2009 so his times from 2012 should still stand. Tyson Gay, for another, was banned in 2013 dating back to July 2012, so his time's from 2009 are still officially legal and should still stand.

Good point. I didn't strip anything out. I lifted the table directly from the article linked in my opening post. I appear to have misunderstood. What the table actually shows in red are times run by athletes known to have used PEDs.

 

[jonnyrovers]

No he didn't cheat because everyone else was cheating.

He cheated because he had always cheated.
He cheated because he was king of the cheats.
He cheated by creating one of the world's most elaborate cheating regimes that's currently known of in sport.
He cheated for so many years he no longer had any concept of cheating.


Everyone else cheating was doing so because of history, legacy, coaching, peer pressure but also because of Armstrong, not with or despite, but because of him.

I would soften this a bit by suggesting he had more in common with fellow cheats than you are allowing for. He was an outlier only by his innovation. He was as influenced by the culture of the sport as any of the others.