Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jamaican newspaper unleashes blistering attack on Carl Lewis

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jamaican newspaper unleashes blistering attack on Carl Lewis

    Calls Lewis a liar for remarks about Jamaican dope testing:

    http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation ... bserv.html

  • #2
    Time will tell, one way or the other.

    Comment


    • #3
      Bolt was tested much more often (especially out-of-competition) than Carl was tested in the 1980's.

      Comment


      • #4
        Bolt is much easier to like than Carl Lewis and has a chance of eclipsing him as an all-time great if he stays healthy and motivated for the next eight yeras.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sprintblox
          Bolt was tested much more often (especially out-of-competition) than Carl was tested in the 1980's.
          err...

          that applies to ANY athlete who competed before '90

          OOC didn't exist before then

          Comment


          • #6
            At the risk of life and limb, I will defend Carl. He didn't say Bolt is dirty. He said,

            "So when people ask me about Bolt, I say he could be the greatest athlete of all-time. But for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool."

            Is that accusing Bolt or pointing out that our sport has had 3 of its last 4 world record holders in the 100m turn out to be dirty? If I am Bolt I am not offended by this statement.

            I coach an athlete who is physically phenomenal. Many international coaches and fans have speculated about her using drugs. I am not offended by this because in today's environment all successful athletes are under scrutiny. And because I know she is clean.

            Comment


            • #7
              We should have a healthy skepticism when it comes to athletics these days but Queen Carl needs to educate himself about specific athletes, training regimens and testing programs before offering misguided opinions. :roll:

              Perhaps he can stick to state of affairs in his backyard such as the debacle that is BALCO and US track and Field.

              Once Lewis helps solve those problems and triumphantly declares US Track and Field clean as a whistle, I'll be more than happy to entertain any thoughts or educated comments he may have. Until then, Zip it...

              Comment


              • #8
                9.69 - clean - OK, I'm with you . . .

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bad hammy
                  9.69 - clean - OK, I'm with you . . .
                  Meaning? you are skeptical (that's fine) or you can't believe a 6'5" 200 m runner only 22 years of age (not a day older) ran 9.69 into a slight headwind and did it while coasting over the last 15 meters.

                  On 2nd thought does sound rather incredible doesn't it ...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by lexvid
                    On 2nd thought does sound rather incredible doesn't it ...
                    We are in total agreement . . .

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bad hammy
                      Originally posted by lexvid
                      On 2nd thought does sound rather incredible doesn't it ...
                      We are in total agreement . . .
                      I'm not naive but I will celebrate his rise to the top of the sport with joy and not skepticism.

                      The scary thing is he clearly could have gone faster - already discussed ad nauseum on these message boards.

                      Do you think he fits the profile of a cheat. If so tell me why?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Lexvid wrote:

                        We should have a healthy skepticism when it comes to athletics these days but Queen Carl needs to educate himself about specific athletes, training regimens and testing programs before offering misguided opinions.

                        Perhaps he can stick to state of affairs in his backyard such as the debacle that is BALCO and US track and Field.

                        Once Lewis helps solve those problems and triumphantly declares US Track and Field clean as a whistle, I'll be more than happy to entertain any thoughts or educated comments he may have. Until then, Zip it...
                        I second that thought.

                        I"m sick of hearing these stupid comments from sister carl. Bottom line, he thinks Bolt are on drugs. I don't know why he doesn't come out and just say it. US has a drugs issue not Jam, just rewind to the last ten years and the proof is there. This suspicions of Jamaica is just jealousy and sore loosers cry. He didn't even access Bol't performance as you would expect an athlete to do. He went right into his skeptism as only envy causes people to do. Lewis is just not an ambassador of the sport, and therefore her comments are not important to me. He seems helbent on taking away the glow of some outstanding performances by a man whom I project to be more accomplished than Lewis when his career is over. He talks about don't live by a different rule and expect the same kind of respect. Someone needs to tell him that Jams don't need his approval to be respected, last time I checked, they outperformed US in the glomor events, that alone should be enough to be respected as they are.


                        One Love!
                        One Love!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by sprintblox
                          Bolt was tested much more often (especially out-of-competition) than Carl was tested in the 1980's.
                          For the record every elite sprinter from the late 80s through the 90s to the present including Bolt has been tested more than Charlie Paddock, Percy Williams, Ed Tolan, Jesse Owens, Harrison Dillard, Bobby Morrow, .etc. etc.
                          ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            King's error is taking that 10.03 at face value

                            realistically, with equally strong 100/200 guys, time shoud be 1/2 of 200 time, so bolt with 19.75 last year shouda been considered more like a high-9.8 guy in disguise, lessening the move into the 9.6s

                            this has got me thinking :

                            mj ran 19.32 & hadn't run a 100 in 2y before, so no "form"

                            now he was a far stronger 200 guy than 100 one, so 1/2 ratio doesn't apply, but likely something near it

                            use wally as an example - 9.96/19.65 & most woud agree that he is along the lines of mj as being a 200 guy with weaker 100

                            apply wally's ratio to mj

                            19.32 * ( 9.96/19.65 ) = 9.79 !

                            x-man similarly, 200 favored over 100, has 10.00/19.63

                            19.32 * ( 10.00/19.63 ) = 9.84

                            you'd have to think mj was capable of somewhere close to 9.8 when he ran 19.32 & likely wr ( neck-'n'-neck with bailey ) & that wouda set the paradigm for exceptional 200m wr holders dropping down to 100 challenging the 100 wr, meaning bolt's achievements had a predecessor & casting less doubt on it being accomplishable

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Here I think that you are a bit over-optimistic: Had MJ had that 100m ability
                              he would taken the opportunity to demonstrate it. The trick is that he had
                              400m WR speed endurance, which Wally does not have. (It also seems plausible
                              that MJ was a better curve runner; however, I have made no direct
                              comparison.) It is instructive to compare MJ's 100/200m splits in 19.32 to
                              e.g. Fredricks' in the same race and Bolt's 19.30-splits.

                              (That 10.09 is a wastly misleading PB is obvious, though.)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X