Also, where does the human limit of 10.08 in the 100 meter come from? I have never read anything like that before where science has proven that this is the limit. Every human body is different and this would be impossible to say IMHO.

 

.

 

I agree plus the training methods used now are improved from 15-20 years ago.

 

Keep in mind ... there is a reason why there isn't one live track and field event on in the Olympics (if you don't believe me ... look it up--none of it is live). It is much easier for NBC to control the spin in this manner. All of the "real" running messagesboards/websites are buzzing with talk about how doped up the Olympics are ... which isn't new. It was the same in Athens.

 

 

Why aren't the track & field events on live?

 

What benefit would be bestowed upon NBC by not showing it live?

 

 

What is NBC hiding? And why?

Stride Length + Stride Frequency = Speed ... to the common person ... that means very little ... or means something other than what you seem to believe. Just because this guy is tall ... it doesn't mean that it makes him faster. His stride isn't any longer than any other sprinter who is world class level.

Just watched ABC News and they did a special on Bolt.

 

It seems he took only 41 strides, to an average of 47 for his opponents, so I guess my point about his stride is accurate and thus, why he is faster. Being 6'-5" or whatever he is, certainly affords a longer stride and he takes full advantage of it.

 

Now, whether he has/hasn't taken anything, is not the point but to assume he has because of his accomplishments, is not justifiable.

I think Bolt is clean but I don't think it's a coincidence that the U.S. sprinters are having a tough time in the first Olympic games since the BALCO scandal.

Why aren't the track & field events on live?

 

What benefit would be bestowed upon NBC by not showing it live?

 

 

What is NBC hiding? And why?

 

They want it in prime time, not in the morning. For the back half of the games, it's the main nightly event...

I think Bolt is clean but I don't think it's a coincidence that the U.S. sprinters are having a tough time in the first Olympic games since the BALCO scandal.

 

I'm in the group that believes that most of everyone including the Americans and Jamaicans are doping.

Do we have a reason? Seriously? How about pulling up 10 meters before the end of the 100 ... when the world record is still set. That should be enough right there.

 

And when it comes to track ... you SHOULD ASSUME that the winners are guilty until proven innocent. That is the the way that all the drug testing programs are set up.

 

Stride Length + Stride Frequency = Speed ... to the common person ... that means very little ... or means something other than what you seem to believe. Just because this guy is tall ... it doesn't mean that it makes him faster. His stride isn't any longer than any other sprinter who is world class level. Look at his record over the past few years. That should say it all (but again--the common person isn't going to make that realization).

 

No offense to you Strike ... but the American viewing public actually watches/pays attention to track and field once every four years at the Olympics. Track doesn't stop in between. But when people live and die with the Olympics (which is what it definitely sounds like) they see things through very narrow eyes. The reality is ... most of the "heros" that we are seeing in all the endurance sports right now are doped to the gills.

 

Remember when people thought that Mark McGuire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds were clean? Same thing.

 

Well ... science has proven (time and time again) that the physical limits of the human body in the 100 meter dash is approximately 10.08. Even with advances in training (which really don't apply to track as much as they do with other sports) ... it would not amount to anything close to the improvement that Bolt has shown in such a short period of time at such a young age.

 

It is commonly known in track/field circles that the overwhelming majority of runners are doped to the gills.

 

Remember Marion Jones ... everyone said the same thing ... "she isn't taking anything" ... "she is just talented" ... blah, blah, blah. Next thing you know ... she is admits that she was juiced up throughout her career--and is currently spending 6 months in prison.

 

 

The part that scares me is that people don't realize that the dopers are WAY AHEAD of testing/rules right now. (And they have been for a while). There is very little chance that so humans are able to perform at such high level (which is proven to be outside the windown of human performance).

 

In today's day/age ... it is WORTH the risk of being caught for these guys/women. The money, fame, glory, etc.

 

Keep in mind ... there is a reason why there isn't one live track and field event on in the Olympics (if you don't believe me ... look it up--none of it is live). It is much easier for NBC to control the spin in this manner. All of the "real" running messagesboards/websites are buzzing with talk about how doped up the Olympics are ... which isn't new. It was the same in Athens.

 

If you don't believe me ... all anyone needs to do is look at the Olympic results from back into the 80's up to now ... and see how many medals/records have been vacated or given to someone else ... because the original winners were found to have doped at one time in their career.

 

It just seems to me that you may be right. I don't know about the numbers you're giving. I just think it's too much to make up. If you have enough time to make these stories up find something more constructive to do.

They want it in prime time, not in the morning. For the back half of the games, it's the main nightly event...

 

The time difference is bad for them. I refuse to watch events where I already know the outcome if there are other things to watch. I'm watching a little league game and a preseason football game until beach volleyball goes live.

I'm watching a little league game and a preseason football game until beach volleyball goes live.

The U.S. won the gold

:lol:

The U.S. won the gold

 

:fire: :lol:

:thumb:

What I think is being overlooked is that this kid was considered a phenom as a 15 year old. Holds age world records at 15-16, 17-18. The knock on him is that in the past, prior to training period for these Olympics, he was lazy and didn't train hard. He appears to have actually worked to capitalize on his natural talents. What he did was phenomenal.

 

I, for one, hope they test him to prove whether or not this performance was enhanced. I will go on the innocent until proven guilty side and just admire this performance until proven otherwise.

 

I really question the '90% of all' track athletes are doping assumption. Where do these numbers come from? Also, where does the human limit of 10.08 in the 100 meter come from? I have never read anything like that before where science has proven that this is the limit. Every human body is different and this would be impossible to say IMHO.

 

I also remember competitors just ripping on Carl Lewis when he was dominating the track and field world and setting records stating that he 'had to be juicing'. Here were are, 24 years after his best Olympic year and he still has his name in the books.

 

:thumb:

Just watched ABC News and they did a special on Bolt.

 

It seems he took only 41 strides, to an average of 47 for his opponents, so I guess my point about his stride is accurate and thus, why he is faster. Being 6'-5" or whatever he is, certainly affords a longer stride and he takes full advantage of it.

 

Now, whether he has/hasn't taken anything, is not the point but to assume he has because of his accomplishments, is not justifiable.

 

Excellent points.

For the record, I'm a "common person."

The U.S. won the gold

 

In Men's? Darn. I guess I'll wait until the indoor game at 12:30. Unless that's over too.