Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 53 comments are related to the topic:
What would the IAAF do if Usian Bolt returned a positive drugs test?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 53
By:
Torquemada
When: 28 Aug 15 19:33
I thought 200m runners got up to a quicker pace????
By:
Darlo Bantam
When: 28 Aug 15 19:36

Aug 28, 2015 -- 6:41PM, rogerthebutler wrote:


Reduced to maths, speed = distance covered over time taken and clearly Bolt is, measurably, the worlds fastest over 100m.But 100m is an arbitrary distance in the above equation when it comes to measuring the quickest man alive.Some fast starter like Aleksandr Kornelyuk (who would have been in the lead at the 40 metre mark in Borzov's Olympic win in 1972) or today, Richard Kielty might have an absolute top speed greater than Bolts - it's just Bolt can sustain his speed better over the classic sprint distance of 100m.


Correct. I believe the 200m is theoretically faster than the 100m because of the time taken to get to top speed.

By:
Torquemada
When: 28 Aug 15 19:38
I wonder how fast Bolt could run 200m in a straight liine?
By:
jed.davison
When: 28 Aug 15 19:53
Damned fast.
By:
rob_dylan
When: 28 Aug 15 20:03
Bolt's top speed is equivalent to 100m in 8s then.
By:
Darlo Bantam
When: 28 Aug 15 20:06
Wow. That really puts it into context.
By:
FredRescue
When: 28 Aug 15 20:08
Tyson Gay recorded the fastest speed run by a human in his PB Time of 9.69 (10m split)
By:
kincsem
When: 28 Aug 15 20:31
Back to the question "What would the IAAF do"

1/2 Lose the test results
2/1 Ignore the test results
10/1 Suspend the athlete
20/1 Ask the UCI for advice
By:
egner
When: 28 Aug 15 20:35
Lose the results.....

....would be Lance Armstrong multiplied by.......well lots......

...though Bolt does come across as a good egg......so hopefully will be theoretical.

...but never underestimate the human ego and its need for world domination in any discipline.
By:
Darlo Bantam
When: 28 Aug 15 20:42

Aug 28, 2015 -- 8:31PM, kincsem wrote:


Back to the question "What would the IAAF do"1/2 Lose the test results2/1 Ignore the test results10/1 Suspend the athlete20/1 Ask the UCI for advice


I'll have that 20/1.

They'll just hide their heads in the sand exactly like the UCI did with Armstrong and his failed test for years and years.

By:
Darlo Bantam
When: 28 Aug 15 20:46
Totally agree. Question is largely rhetorical since it ain't ever going to happen.
By:
egner
When: 28 Aug 15 20:47
Yes...long legs....freakishly fast turnover of legs.....

....unbeatable....until someone with a more freakish combination comes along.
By:
lewisham ranger
When: 28 Aug 15 20:50
Athletics is more about entertainment than worrying about catching the dopers.You get very few big names dragged through the mud. It's more likely to be some obscure Kenyan athletes who noone has ever heard of, yet the evidence seems to suggest that the sport is as rife with drugs as it ever has been.

Take the womens 200 meters today, the winner has a very muscular upper build and also seems acne-ridden (a tell-tale sign of testosterone use) and runs the fourth fastest 200 in history (only famous dopers are ahead of her) and the second placed runner also did a fabulous time, having improved her personal best by a second and a half in the space of a year.

Of course if they did get a positive test for Bolt and had a choice about it, they'd likely turn a blind eye. Bolt is a great cash cow for them and a positive result would be a massive blow to a sport already very short on credibility. So it's easier to let the media run this ridiculous sub-plot where Usain is the "savior of the sport" against the bad-guy Gatlin, when the likelihood is they are both drugged up to the eyeballs.

My guess is if they kicked all the dopers out the best time would be something like 10.2 for 100 meters and the spectators would be leaving in droves.
By:
Darlo Bantam
When: 28 Aug 15 20:54
That's why I'd have an international independent drugs agency which carries out all testing, all penalties, everything. The relevant bodies have too much of a vested interest not to be totally above board or totally transparent about drugs (or other for that matter) problems.
Page 2 of 2  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com