Female Jamaican Olympic medallist tests positive

Didn't SAFP dip out of a race a few weeks back then run well the following week?

* wrote:

How in the world do you assume Tyson Gay is clean?

People have been so sick of American cheaters for years.

Definitely the biggest druggies in the world.

This is true. In the history of the sport The United States of America has been the biggest cheaters. Bigger than the East German program. At least that program only lasted a decade at the most. The US athletes have always been cheating. From the 80's to the present.

Flojo?

Gwen Torrence?

Kelli White?

Marion Jones?

Justin Gatlin?

you really thing names like Carmelita Jeter, Tyson Gay or Aries Merrit are clean? What a joke.

I meant Lashawn Merritt who has a positive.

Jeter has questionable associations and I might agree with you on her.

Aries Merritt has been fast for a long time he just hasn't gotten it right and now he has which could explain his success. Also, hurdlers peak later and Merritt is 27.

But Tyson Gay is clean. He's always looked clean. His speed comes from where it should come from in a natural sprinter, the hip flexors and Glutes, he just has natural talent in those muscle groups most other sprinters don't have and he displayed it at a young age.

I don't doubt Gatlin, or obviously Marion or anyone else on your list as they are questionable.

doubt very much anyone at the top end of sprinting is clean

there's too much $$$$$$$$$ at play

[quote]So sick of this wrote:

Tyson Gay is clean. I would say he's the most gifted natural sprinter thats ever lived.

He's been hurt a lot, which makes sense for someone that isn't getting an HGH boost every training session. He has high natural turnover which he exhibited in highschool and his early years of college when it was very unlikely he'd be using something.

Tyson is clean and always has been. He's over 30 now and still running well, the hallmark of a NATURALLY gifted sprinter.

I like the way you first arrive at a conclusion and then fix the facts to support that pre-ordained conclusion.

For example, his being hurt a lot means he is not using drugs. I am pretty sure there is zero value to this comment. In fact, I suspect an analysis of data would support the opposite conclusion -- that those athletes using performance enhancers are hurting their health and are more often injured. We would need to conduct such studies and make them public to know -- but we surely know enough to recognize that what you present as fact is only conjecture and highly dubious conjecture at that.

He has high natural turnover which he exhibited in high school. Does this mean he is fast and was fast in his youth? I suspect there is not a world class sprinter on the history of the planet for whom this is not true. Do not see any connection of this statement to whether or not he is clean.

Over 30 and running well is the hallmark of someone not using drugs. Now this one we know to be false. Look at Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Linford Christie and so many more to see that drug use can allow older athletes to actually improve when by nature they should be slowing down.

So sick of this wrote:

Notice how Bolt said he's done after 30. WONDER WHY? Guess all those hard years of training will be just too much to continue on.

Do you really think Tyson would still be at it if he'd ever won an Olympic gold?

how would tyson gay be up there competing against and beating dopers

highly unlikely imo

if you wana get to the top you gotta rock and roll baby!

Somehow, I think my post ended up on another thread.

Remember Bolt pulling out of the JAM invite at the last minute, and then running Cayman 3 days later?

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5171418

"Do not ask Bolt why he dropped out of the Jamaica Invitational"

agip wrote:

the heck is wrong with you conspiracy theorists?

So let me get this straight, you think that if someone like Bolt or Bekele tests positive that they will publicly reveal the test results and suspend them?

The sacrificial lambing that sprintgeezer is referring to has been going on for years and will continue to. The sport would be dead without it. He hit the nail right on the head with the "equilibrium" comment. Let's face it, the system works. Bust a bunch of no names to convince the public that they are conducting drug free events while the superstars can shine without any negative consequences.

Do you know if there was testing or no testing at the Caymans invitational? Testers do not Telegraph their schedule. Not defending Bolt or anyone, but Geezer you are be than the Garden variety speculative troll on these boards

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Somehow, I think my post ended up on another thread.

Remember Bolt pulling out of the JAM invite at the last minute, and then running Cayman 3 days later?

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5171418

"Do not ask Bolt why he dropped out of the Jamaica Invitational"

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Here comes the sacrifice that is designed to permit the rest of them to continue to close ranks.

Like Gatlin?

Thanks for the praise, but I suspect that this won't be a "no-name", but somebody of a decently large profile--but your basic understanding is the same as mine, I think.

Look at Bolt this week--he runs in Rome, and loses to Gatlin. Immediately, it is in the press, with photos, all over the world. That kind of publicity attaches to ONLY Bolt, and it is actually better for the IAAF that he lost, and in such a high-profile race, in an international city.

But Bolt wasn't done carrying t&f on his back--he then appeared at the men's final of the French Open, presenting the trophies to the winner and runner-up. T&F cannot buy that kind of exposure. Is there any other track athlete who would have been invited to do this? Blanka Vlasic is probably the only one, and Bolt is even greater than she is, at least in terms of athletic heroism.

I will say it again: Bolt IS track and field.

However, they seem to be getting careful. Apparently not every single person is on the same page, and they have to keep the outsiders out of the loop by ensuring that Bolt only appears and provides samples when it is perfectly safe to do so.

I've expressed the opinion that he is clean so far this year, but others have disagreed with me. They may be right, and my estimation of his ability may have been too optimistic. Maybe.

Edmund wrote:

agip wrote:

the heck is wrong with you conspiracy theorists?

So let me get this straight, you think that if someone like Bolt or Bekele tests positive that they will publicly reveal the test results and suspend them?

The sacrificial lambing that sprintgeezer is referring to has been going on for years and will continue to. The sport would be dead without it. He hit the nail right on the head with the "equilibrium" comment. Let's face it, the system works. Bust a bunch of no names to convince the public that they are conducting drug free events while the superstars can shine without any negative consequences.

__

If they are willing to DQ olympic gold medalists year after year, then yes, I think they will publicly reveal the test result. Yes.

Cripes, look at this list:

Just the Bs - famous people: Ato Boldon, Zhanna block, dieter baumann.

Cs: Dwain Chambers, linford christie

Then of course Ben Johnson - there was no bigger star in T/f and they took him down.

the only cases the conspiracy people have are that weird huge donation the russians made to wada and probably - not proven to my knowledge - that Lance had positives covered up.

In the end, there are only a few mega stars in athletics. just the law of chance suggests few of them will be caught.

Geezer,1)They said it is a female so I wonder how Bolt names comes into the discussion2) Even for the best, form varies, in normal life it is always ying and yang. They are days when I am off game, they are days when I swing with the best. Otherwise We could say our darlings Mo and Rupp are off meds because they lost and that Rupps indoor exploits earlier this year were on meds.3) I could say that Tyson Gay's injuries and amazing races when he came back were because of meds. Infact he faked injuries to concentrate on MedsFinally, Bolt or any athlete is not in control of how and when they provide samples. You know thatIndeed it wont be a noname, it is an olympic medalist. looking at the list from the invitational, we can give the odds to each of the athletes who took partAthletes like use cheat lie and stuff, but, I respect the online persona that you are and I apply better standards to you, and that is Evidence and waiting for results to come out, speculation is for trolls like me, I am willing to wait and see whom the Jamaicans name.It seems that a habit of our nation is to paint with one broad brush. But other nations have not called all Americans cheats because of LeShawn or Gatlin or Jones, or well the list goes on and on

Sprintgeezer wrote:

I've expressed the opinion that he is clean so far this year, but others have disagreed with me. They may be right, and my estimation of his ability may have been too optimistic. Maybe.

You have to differentiate between WADA and the national testing agencies. Would WADA cover up for a star? I don't know, particularly with someone like Bolt, but I'd say no. There's no evidence that they ever have, to my knowledge. That falls into the conspiracy theory angle -- totally unbacked speculation.

On the other hand, the national testing agencies? Absolutely they will and have covered up positives. USADA used to warn athletes when they were going to test positive. Maybe some agencies tell athletes they need to be "hurt" for a few weeks or bow out of the Olympics. National testing agencies have little incentive to do much else.

there seems to be disagreement between wada and the iaaf

wada says kenya is a haven for dopers.....

iaaf says everything is good in kenya russia etc.........

(links supplied upon request)

wada established and 50% funded by ioc of course..............

when it comes to testing I trust Wada, but when it says a country is a haven for cheats, and provides only data from second rate athletes (such as in Kenya) or from nations such as India who should be allowed to dope because it wont matter anyway. Then I take their sentences as publicity stunts that lack seriousness.

just sayin wrote:

there seems to be disagreement between wada and the iaaf

wada says kenya is a haven for dopers.....

iaaf says everything is good in kenya russia etc.........

(links supplied upon request)

wada established and 50% funded by ioc of course..............

Ho Hum wrote:

You have to differentiate between WADA and the national testing agencies. Would WADA cover up for a star? I don't know, particularly with someone like Bolt, but I'd say no. There's no evidence that they ever have, to my knowledge. That falls into the conspiracy theory angle -- totally unbacked speculation.

On the other hand, the national testing agencies? Absolutely they will and have covered up positives. USADA used to warn athletes when they were going to test positive. Maybe some agencies tell athletes they need to be "hurt" for a few weeks or bow out of the Olympics. National testing agencies have little incentive to do much else.

ok good point - I was not differentiating between wada and the national testing agencies.

just sayin wrote:

doubt very much anyone at the top end of sprinting is clean

there's too much $$$$$$$$$ at play

I think you're confusing track with football (take your pick).

Besides, cheaters wouldn't have voluntarily submitted to the biological passport before it became routine