Announcement

**tandfman** · 04-19-2003, 02:36 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

>
I thought this list was going to be
topical, but there's nothing about Carl Lewis and
his failed drugs test.<

Maybe that's because the people on this Message Board think that the topic is track and field, not fifteen-year old doping allegations.

**Brutal** · 04-19-2003, 02:47 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

Nobody is a bigger track freak than myself and I believe ya can't just stick your head in the sand concerning the drug sitution that is todays track and field world.

I'm also not saying it needs to be on the forefront either. I most definately prefer to talk about the action.

I doubt very seriously Carl Lewis wasn't going to be the amazing trasckster regardless of whatever his drug status was. Lewis was a stud from day ine!

**Conway** · 04-19-2003, 03:06 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

15 years old or 5 years old, teh "allegations" are beginning to come to light as reality ... And that should be big news ... More and more the drug issue keeps comign to the fore in this sport and it needs to be dealth with ... It is a sore spot for the sport and as names such as Lewis' become linked to the issue so goes the sports credibility ...

The powers that be should be huddled as we speak with the goal of trying to define a policy that is going to work ... OR abandon the attenmpt altogether ...

As for the Lewis issue, it is a big deal on several fronts as the dominoe effect on the history of the sport is immense ... His place in the sport ... The place of those such as Calvin Smith (quite possibly the only clean finalist in 88) ... Edwin MOses place in history ...

And I won't even get started on what this does to the credibility of the UNited States and its track and field program ... Especially on the heels of the past year or more's allegations of coverups via USATF !!!!

To put heads in teh sand on this one is merely to prolong the agony ...

gh · 04-19-2003, 03:15 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

Randall old buddy old pal... welcome to GH's shit list! You and Wilmar Kortleever are the charter members. Interesting that you're both European sportswriters.

While I appreciate (and applaud) your journalistic bent, another poster just up the board there probably got it right when he said perhaps people would rather talk about actual track & field; to talk about GOOD things in the sport (you remember those, right?).

Wilmar felt quite aggrieved yesterday at "name calling" after his drug post; wondered when the list moderators would take action. Sorry for the inaction--I'm still trying to figure out what kind of medal to pin on the name caller, actually.

And for a moment there yesterday when somebody suggested the 11th Commandment of the board should be no-drugs, I considered it.

I'm very much of the mind that incessant drug talk is what turned Darkwing's t-and-f list from a thing of glory into the low-traffic site it has become today. I don't want that to happen here. So my personal choice is not to contribute to this line of thought

But, it is real news, to be sure. And if people want to talk about it fine (and it certainly will be covered in the next issue of T&FN), I'll not censor it. Just don't expect me to participate.

At a time when I can't pick up a newspaper or turn on the telly without being bombarbed by the unremittingly bleak, allow me to stick my head in the sand--if that's how one wants to view it --and come to this board to revel in the beauty of the sport. I'll leave the warts to others.

gh
(garry hill/Editor, T&FN)

**Guest** · 04-19-2003, 03:31 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

what's a **** list?

Does that mean you can't even say
s
h
i
t

on this board?

**tafnut** · 04-19-2003, 04:11 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

What I think should be rules here!

A. No profanity, please. If you can't get your point across without resorting to 12-year old scatolological references (gh is an exception, cuz his are actually kinda funny) then get into virtually every other board on the net, which thinks mf is the only adjective in existence.

B. Drug talk is pointless. Until we institute blood tests, assume everyone is dirty and there's your level playing field. You can pop positive for talking cold medicine, for crissakes.

**Guest** · 04-19-2003, 04:11 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

Drugs are bad, m'kay?

**Guest** · 04-19-2003, 06:21 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

>>
I thought this list was going to be
topical,
>but there's nothing about Carl Lewis and
his
>failed drugs test.<

Maybe that's because the
>people on this Message Board think that the topic
>is track and field, not fifteen-year old doping
>allegations.

and yet, fifteen-year old doping allegations - rather, recent confirmation of those allegations - indicate the systemic hypocrisy coming out of the governing bodies. improvement cannot come about if the problems are not brought to light. if they are going to bother devoting any of their budget to doping controls, then give them teeth. smoke-screens are not a useful expenditure of funds, and there are indeed legitimate reasons to maintain genuine doping controls.

1. for the health of the athletes.
2. for the integrity, image, and accountability of the sport and its sanctioning bodies.
3. (most importantly) to send the right message to the youth.

**Randall Northam** · 04-19-2003, 07:58 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

While I appreciate (and
>applaud) your journalistic bent, another poster
>just up the board there probably got it right
>when he said perhaps people would rather talk
>about actual track & field; to talk about GOOD
>things in the sport (you remember those,
>right?).

I agree with you Garry. We ought to remember the GOOD things. One of the good things I remember was Carl Lewis looking at Ben Johnson when talking to Jim Rosenthal of ITV about drugs at the 1987 Rome World Championships. He as good as said Johnson was on drugs and we all applauded him for coming out on the side of the right and the good.
Yet when he got caught the next year we didn't hear about it for 15 years! Us sportswriters in Europe have long had suspicions of the USA's attitude to drugs in track and field, while trying to name and shame other nations. We knew about stuff about USA athletes we couldn't (just as we knew stuff about East German and Soviet athletes,although we did voice our suspicions in this case because they weren't as likely to sue), and still can't, print because of the arcane libel laws on this side of the pond. And I think it's self defeating to pretend they aren't important.
I also agree with you about darkwing... but there people were accusing people of taking drugs without proof and without much sense.
Any way it's not so much that Lewis got caught (although that's significant enough) it's that the IOC let him off and covered it up.
Randall

**Guest** · 04-19-2003, 07:58 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

Yeah, the Carl thing is news, but it's OLD news that has no relevance to today's testing system in the U.S. and internationally. The stimulants found in Lewis's sample were and are banned, but do you really think they gave him an advantage 2 months later in Seoul? He would have won at the Trials with or without them in his system, if you ask me. Those substances are not steroids. There is a difference, and people need to recognize that, particularly since the net now is tighter and the athletes know it.

**Arnie** · 04-19-2003, 08:34 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

The only thing that would make the fact that Lewis took drugs important if in fact he did, would be that he went around pointing the finger at a lot of people not just Ben Johnson.

**Guest** · 04-20-2003, 01:46 AM

Re: Carl Lewis

>The only thing that would make the fact that
>Lewis took drugs important if in fact he did,
>would be that he went around pointing the finger
>at a lot of people not just Ben Johnson.>

This is really the only relevant point regarding Lewis.

Any talk of drugs amongst the non elite is worthless since the powers at be seem fairly unwilling to make a realistic attempt, if that is at all possible, to clean up the sport.

**Guest** · 04-20-2003, 02:45 AM

Re: Carl Lewis

this is none issue? marita koch is alltime great no question. flo jo had plus 5 wind. and we are suddenly debating carl had a cold in indianapolis? huh??????

**Guest** · 04-23-2003, 01:50 PM

Re: Carl Lewis

>Yeah, the Carl thing is news, but it's OLD news
>that has no relevance to today's testing system
>in the U.S. and internationally. The stimulants
>found in Lewis's sample were and are banned, but
>do you really think they gave him an advantage 2
>months later in Seoul? He would have won at the
>Trials with or without them in his system, if you
>ask me. Those substances are not steroids. There
>is a difference, and people need to recognize
>that, particularly since the net now is tighter
>and the athletes know it.

"Those substances are not steroids"...but those substances can be used to MASK steroid use, and therein lies the BIG story.

Announcement

Carl Lewis

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Carl Lewis

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment