Mo Farah's coach
Users viewing topic: & 1 Guest
| Steve |  | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 07:20 |
nothing to hide, please follow my life on webcam Member 255, 3732 posts | Post Edited: 22.08.2015 @ 07:38 AM by Steve HUGE_GUY said: Gemili? He ran 10.05 with 0.1 wind as a junior, now 9.97 2.0 wind. Gatlin ran 10.08 as a teen. Gemili hasn't improved much, i believe it's because he is clean and he is on the upper limits naturally. Victor Conte estimates 0.2 improvement for men and 0.4 for women who dope. That would take Gemili up there with the likes of Gatlin, Gay, Blake. But still not Bolt. We also have a very talented young female sprinter who just ran 10.99. 0.4 would take her up there with the likes of Shelly anne Frazer, Flo-Jo and Carmelita Jetter, who all have very suspicious improvements. As an athlete what would you say was the reason for the big improvements in running times if 0.2 is a correct estimate by Conte? After all it's not just Moscow where 10.2 was still a good time. In LA 10.2 (10.19 for second & 10.24 for third) was good enough to medal at the Olympics. In 1988 in the infamous 100 final the times were still nothing like we see today. Christie, a known cheat, eventually came second in a time of 9.97. That might suggest, given Contes estimate of 0.2 that he was around a 10.2 runner naturally. Even by 2000 Dwain Chambers was managing 4th in the Olympics in a seasons best of 10.08, again suggesting his natural time might have been nearer 10.2. Steroid use was certainly very widespread in many sports at that stage and much easier to get away with. Have tracks and training really improved that much that we should believe that sub 10 second times are now possible naturally? | ||
| Cuddles |  | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 08:15 |
 Eat.Cycle.Sleep.Win Member 2, 12511 posts SQ 190, BP 150, DL 280620.0 kgs @ 99kgs UnEq Administrator | Rick said: I found this a surprising number, so I did a little reading. The English schools championship record, which has stood for 35 years, is 10.40. It's a soft record Rick. Some of the fastest 17 and 18 year olds aren't at school, and the ones that have shown genuine weld class potential often have bigger fish to try and don't run. The point I am making, is that the sports chequered past, drugs wise, shouldn't encourage people to be as suspicious about all times, especially, when in the grand scheme of things theyre not that fast. (6.5% outside of the world record). Sprinting is a sport where natural, untrained talent, can achieve seemingly quite remarkable things. Ive seen it in 13 and 14 year olds too, relative to age group records that have stood for decades, are we to assume they are doping too? When you get to the top of the sport, you are watching a collection of those natural freaks, from all over the world, who have then had years of training to improve their time (and of course many with the use of PEDS). But it doesn't mean all have, and it doesn't mean they weren't stupid fast (ie 10-10.2) without them. Is it really beyond he realms of possibility that a couple of those freaks manage to improve from their 10.1 or 10.2 to 9.9 without the drugs? Wrt Gemili, he wasn't a runner, he played football. He only started to get proper sprint training 9 months before the Olympics and was described by Michael Johnson as 'almost technically perfect'. When he did county and divisional champs he'd be the shortest by a mile, often a foot shorter than the tallest, he'd be the only non black runner, and people would look at him with a 'what the f**k are you doing here?' look. He'd win the race before the 40m mark a la Bolt. And this is in a very competitive division. I guess working in the environment that I do, and seeing some real freaky natural talent, allows me to believe a little more than most. And note, at no point have I said that top 100m runners are clean. I think quite the opposite. I just think the barometer that people use to guess is often way off the mark. | ||
| Cuddles | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 08:20 |
Eat.Cycle.Sleep.Win Member 2, 12511 posts SQ 190, BP 150, DL 280620.0 kgs @ 99kgs UnEq Administrator | Steve - I think the track issue is an interesting one. I wonder if anyone has done any analysis of track speeds because it's common knowledge that there are 'fast' tracks. I wonder if all tracks are now faster than they were? Not a suggestion, as I have no idea. | ||
| HUGE_GUY | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 08:42 |
| Avatar not found I might destroy the planet Member 2745, 803 posts | Steve said: As an athlete what would you say was the reason for the big improvements in running times if 0.2 is a correct estimate by Conte? After all it's not just Moscow where 10.2 was still a good time. In LA 10.2 (10.19 for second & 10.24 for third) was good enough to medal at the Olympics. In 1988 in the infamous 100 final the times were still nothing like we see today. Christie, a known cheat, eventually came second in a time of 9.97. That might suggest, given Contes estimate of 0.2 that he was around a 10.2 runner naturally. Even by 2000 Dwain Chambers was managing 4th in the Olympics in a seasons best of 10.08, again suggesting his natural time might have been nearer 10.2. Steroid use was certainly very widespread in many sports at that stage and much easier to get away with. Have tracks and training really improved that much that we should believe that sub 10 second times are now possible naturally? I THINK (just my opinion) the biggest difference now is EPO, not just steroids. Gatlin, Blake, Bolt and gay all run 100-200 very comfortably. Gay has even run a one off race under 45 seconds for 400m! Meanwhile our clean sprinters get gassed while doing a few 60s. Apart from Gemili, our 100m guys cant run 200s. The top guys can go to champs and run 3x100m and 3x200m and still run PBs. It's not normal for guys who can generate so much force to have that sort of speed endurance. Carl Lewis vs Ben Johnson for example. Carl had a better top speed and speed maintenance, but was always left for the first 60 and his best 200 is far better than Bens. Now the top guys have best of both. Power to get out super quick, crazy top speeds of 12.2mps, and somehow maintaining it much better. Dwain said in his book that the drugs he took made him cramp up constantly in big races so he never got any benefit. But his bench went from 140-160 in a few weeks! Then again, he did run a 9.87 in an unimportant race while his Balco buddy ran 9.78 to break the WR. The 0.2 is obviously an estimate, Linford only ran 10.6 as a junior so i would guess he benefits more. But, drugs or not. If i thought every top sprinter was on something, and anyone under 9.8 i believe has taken something. I still think Bolt could dip under that time without anything. I know of one Russian who takes all sorts and runs 10.65. | ||
| HUGE_GUY | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 08:51 |
| Avatar not found I might destroy the planet Member 2745, 803 posts | Cuddles said:Steve - I think the track issue is an interesting one. I wonder if anyone has done any analysis of track speeds because it's common knowledge that there are 'fast' tracks. I wonder if all tracks are now faster than they were? Not a suggestion, as I have no idea. Some tracks are faster, but i don't get this as there is a limit to how hard a track is allowed to be. They say Tokyo and Atlanta where a lot of records were set were illegal tracks (harder than allowed) but were taken up very quickly after. Some places like Faux de fords..or something like that, always gives fast times. So fast that uk athletics do not accept times from this competition as qualifiers (meet organizers fake times?). There are rumors that some USA meets fix the times a little or fake wind readings (flo-jo). The only source i have is a bobsled athlete training at a meet there and he said they moved the timing gate to 99m. If Bolt chased times in 2009, he could have run a 9.4 on one of these tracks for sure. If it's legit is another story. The Trinidad national championships always has very fast times that cant be reproduced. Maybe the sport is corrupt on more than one level. | ||
| jt | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 09:21 |
 old age traveller Member 332, 7867 posts | kirkynick said: Not really JT. Wells was ranked 2nd on time that year, and he beat the Americans who weren't at the Olympics in the weeks following the Olympics. It wasn't his fault the Americans boycotted the Games. EDIT: Would have been better if they had been there though, of course. not for the whipper  | ||
| deleted2_20210523 | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 13:44 |
Member 2606, 11453 posts SQ 170, BP 117.5, DL 215502.5 kgs @ 91.6kgs UnEq | deleted | ||
| Steve | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 14:33 |
nothing to hide, please follow my life on webcam Member 255, 3732 posts | kirkynick said:So is Mo going to win? Yes, he is. And he did just that. Wow! Greatest ever British runner? | ||
| deleted2_20210523 | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 14:43 |
Member 2606, 11453 posts SQ 170, BP 117.5, DL 215502.5 kgs @ 91.6kgs UnEq | deleted | ||
| ChrisMcCarthy | | ... | 22-08-2015 @ 15:32 |
Lost his pen, then found his pen. #phew Member 4899, 2956 posts | It was good to see the Kenyans try to make it hard this time. I would like to see Farah at least have a crack at Bekele's records but I can't see that happening in the short term. | ||
| unit94 | | ... | 23-08-2015 @ 23:30 |
 what is everyone's fran time? Member 3986, 10449 posts SQ 340, BP 200, DL 400940.0 kgs @ 129kgs Eq | I dont like how the 100m times keep getting slower | ||
| jt | | ... | 23-08-2015 @ 23:35 |
old age traveller Member 332, 7867 posts | unit94 said:I dont like how the 100m times keep getting slower When I was first getting into athletics I would not of believed 9.79 was possible let alone classed as slower!!! some guy did 9.79 in 88 and the world stood still  | ||
| unit94 | | ... | 24-08-2015 @ 00:33 |
what is everyone's fran time? Member 3986, 10449 posts SQ 340, BP 200, DL 400940.0 kgs @ 129kgs Eq | jt said: When I was first getting into athletics I would not of believed 9.79 was possible let alone classed as slower!!! some guy did 9.79 in 88 and the world stood still I know we're spoiled by Bolt running 9.5 but 9.78 really isnt that fast anymore. I am aware it was pretty special when Johnson ran it though! | ||
| deleted2_20210523 | | ... | 24-08-2015 @ 07:08 |
Member 2606, 11453 posts SQ 170, BP 117.5, DL 215502.5 kgs @ 91.6kgs UnEq | deleted | ||
| Wayne_Cowdrey | | ... | 24-08-2015 @ 13:27 |
 Still got a little bit of strength Member 400, 22057 posts | I ran the 100m in 20 seconds when I was at school, drug free I'm sure this gave me a solid basis for my future strongman antics  | ||