disqualified
disqualified
Nice abs.
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahaha!
Why-you-don't-bet-on-sports 101
OMFG is all I can say.
What were the odds on this race? I was actually wondering yesterday whether Vegas sufficiently accounts for the possibility of a false start. Would have been a good opportunity to bet on the field if they didn't.
Yes, now we can all thank the IAAF for helping destroy track and field.
We all knew something like this would happen.
The question was when.
I think I saw Blake at 15/1 a few days back. Top choice behind Bolt.
Not to worry. 2012 is where Gay and Bolt will run the "REAL" race. World Championships are just practice compared to the Olympics.
GUH wrote:
Yes, now we can all thank the IAAF for helping destroy track and field.
Because endless delays caused by Drummond or Christie weren't doing their part?
I suspect this was done on purpose to avoid a drug test.
first false start should go to the field. Its too easy to false start the sprints.
Um, yeah wrote:
GUH wrote:Yes, now we can all thank the IAAF for helping destroy track and field.
Because endless delays caused by Drummond or Christie weren't doing their part?
LOL...Nice point. That's when the 100 would take almost as long as the 5,000m to finish after all of 6 to 8 false starts.
on purpose wrote:
I suspect this was done on purpose to avoid a drug test.
Please keep stupid comments to your self.
The mustard fell off the hot dog.
To avoid a drug test? You think he's gonna do this in the 200, too?
ALH359 wrote:
on purpose wrote:I suspect this was done on purpose to avoid a drug test.
Please keep stupid comments to your self.
I think you mean yourself.
Think about it, it makes sense though ... Bolt mysteriously dodges most of the drug tests, Gay and Powell go missing.. hmmmm....
They were all tested upon arrival, including Powell who still wants to run the relay.
Gay had surgery for god's sake.
L. Rawson: "Bolt is DQ'd, but he did show a good turnover getting out of the blocks. Go down to your local high school track and try to run that fast for even one stride, let alone a full 100-meter race. Or a full 10 meters in this case."
Nappy Roots wrote:
Um, yeah wrote:Because endless delays caused by Drummond or Christie weren't doing their part?
LOL...Nice point. That's when the 100 would take almost as long as the 5,000m to finish after all of 6 to 8 false starts.
I like the one false start. Nothing is worse than watching a 100m with 6-8 false starts. Why should IAAF change the rules? Just because Bolt can't follow them?
I don't understand why the guys on Eurosport are doing two things.
1) Assuming Bolt would have easily won had he raced.
I mean Blake was very good and won by a ton - .16. That is more than what Bolt won by in 2009 when he ran 9.58. Blake ran fast into the wind. It equates to a 9.83 without the wind which is pretty good. He also was way faster than Bolt in the semis.
I would have loved to have seen Bolt-Blake for the first time this year and hope to see it soon in Europe.
2) Saying that Bolt needs to change his pre-race antics. Give me a break. They want him to be more serious before the start so he's more likely to fale-start.
Two other thoughts:
1) Maurice Greene looks like a genius. I ridiculed him when he said Blake would beat Bolt:
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sports/Greene-backs-Blake-to-upset-Bolt_9538833
2) Great medal by Collins.