Astonishing article by Francis

[Guest]

http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/180ana.html

read it and weep at the cynicism, but also at a loss of innocence going WAY back; and implicating, not by specific name, many great names in track's history.

[Guest]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

For better or worse, this is must reading. It makes it pretty clear that this is not a "new" problem. The desire to gain a competitive edge is as old as sport itself. However, we should be careful about applying our current morality retroactively. No one using these substances when they were LEGAL should be tarred with the same brush we apply to Ben Johnson et al.

[MJD]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

Been around for a while and I think was one of the reasons they hung him when he became associated with MJ and TM.

http://www.t-mag.com/nation_previous/03.html

[MJD]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

From that link:

Issue 180 October 26, 2001
Look Out, Baby, MAG-10's Here! by Tim Patterson and Bill Roberts
Atomic Dog — Oh, the Inanity! by TC Luoma
Reader Mail
Pressing Power by Dave Tate
Appetite For Construction by John M. Berardi
Anabolic Athletics by Charlie Francis
F.A.Q. by The Editors
Supplement Roundup

[Guest]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

If this is true, and from my experience I don't see any reason it isn't, it's nice to know that I spent a decade wasting my time just training.

[RMc]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

Francis claimed in 1988 that everyone was doing it and that was his justification for why Johnson doped up. One always has to take any of his statements with a very large grain of salt as he is the chief apologist for Johnson. Note also that his article is in a magazine that I suspect promotes, or at least condones, steroid use in sport given the title.

I note too that one of his premise statements is flat out wrong:

"How then have performances continued to improve — even beyond East German standards — since the fall of Communism, if sport has been cleaned up?"

The facts are that the events dominated by the East Europeans - women's long sprints, jumps and throws, and the men's throws, have in fact stagnated. Most of the top 50 performances in each of these events occurred prior to 1990, i.e., the fall of the Communist governments. So in fact performances have NOT improved beyond the East German standards in the events where the Germans (and Soviets) were most successful.

Note that Francis is quite specific in who he names through 1968 worldwide, and in East Europe through 1984 or so, but he's very vague about who he names in the US after 1968. Why doesn't say specifically who was using drugs in 1984? He lives in Canada so he's beyond the US libel laws (plus he's got another individual to back up his claim) and the indicated athletes obviously are no longer competing and are beyond the IAAF statute of limitations. I just see a very clever weaving of facts with his own creations to give the impression of authority. When he actually comes forward with information that we can examine and is presented with more substantiation than simply "trust me", then I'll listen.

[Guest]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

<http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/180ana.html
read it and weep at the cynicism, but also at a loss of innocence going WAY back; and implicating, not by specific name, many great names in track's history. >

Though lots of innuendo and little hard evidence, the original article is extremely disturbing. A lot of it, unfortunately, fits in with a preconceived notions many of us have.

Another reply states that the East European records of the 1970s and 1980s in sprints /throws/ jumps have not been improved in almost all cases. And therein lies the rub. If the earlier records were really tainted (as most suspect), then any and all improvements on them in the last 20 years or so, must be looked at with grave suspicion. Either that or we are looking at "bionic" men and women.

[RMc]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

Another
>reply states that the East European records of
>the 1970s and 1980s in sprints /throws/ jumps
>have not been improved in almost all cases. And
>therein lies the rub. If the earlier records were
>really tainted (as most suspect), then any and
>all improvements on them in the last 20 years or
>so, must be looked at with grave suspicion.
>Either that or we are looking at "bionic" men
>and women.

That's my point: Except for FloJo and the Chinese women, none of the records from this era for womens have been improved upon, and this is true for the men's throws as well. In some cases women athletes are only now starting to approach the performances recorded almost 2 decades ago. The men's throws have yet to really recover if you look at the top 10 performances.

[ZZrunZZ]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

With all the recent press concerning steroids, etc. I decided to track down a copy of a book that Charlie Francis wrote shortly after the Ben Johnson bust in Seoul in 1988.

The name of the book is "Speed Play - A track coach's explosive account of how the world's greatest athletes win-with drugs". It was written by Charlie Francis with Jeff Coplon (ISBN 0-312-04877-7). The US edition was published by St. Martin's Press in 1990. You can probably find a copy of it at your local library.

After reading this book I have a very different option of Francis. This guy has been made out to be the devil in T&F circles, but in my opinion, at least this guy had/has the balls to tell the real story of how T&F athletes (namely sprinters and throwers) have been using steroids for DECADES! He does not make excuses for what he did and I find that to be refereshing. If nothing else, I now feel better informed about this mess than I ever was.

If you want to get some perspective on the drug problems that are being "uncovered" this year, go out and read this book. I have to warn you that may end up feeling worse about T&F rather than better.

Enjoy.

[Dred]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

>>That's my point: Except for FloJo and the Chinese women, none of the records from this era for womens have been improved upon, and this is true for the men's throws as well. In some cases women athletes are only now starting to approach the performances recorded almost 2 decades ago. The men's throws have yet to really recover if you look at the top 10 performances.

This is not a proof that athletes are not on drugs.Wake up!

[abinferno]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

>Another
>reply states that the East European
>records of
>the 1970s and 1980s in sprints
>/throws/ jumps
>have not been improved in almost
>all cases. And
>therein lies the rub. If the
>earlier records were
>really tainted (as most
>suspect), then any and
>all improvements on them
>in the last 20 years or
>so, must be looked at
>with grave suspicion.
>Either that or we are
>looking at "bionic" men
>and women.

That's
>my point: Except for FloJo and the Chinese
>women, none of the records from this era for
>womens have been improved upon, and this is true
>for the men's throws as well. In some cases
>women athletes are only now starting to approach
>the performances recorded almost 2 decades ago.
>The men's throws have yet to really recover if
>you look at the top 10 performances.

What are you talking about? The shot put and javelin records were both set in the 90's

[Guest]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

>This is
>not a proof that athletes are not on drugs.Wake
>up!

No no, see... Only the people who set records before the 90s were dirty. Clearly everyone else who reaches the same level now is clean. That only makes sense, because training methods and nutrition have come so far in less than 10 years... [facetious].

[Donley]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

>The shot put and javelin records were both set
>t in the 90's

The mens shot put record was set by someone who was latter banned for drug use. Anyway I think he is talking about broad trends. The only marks on the all time top 30 since 1989 (start of OOC testing) besides Barnes (later banned) are Toth (now possibly busted) and a single mark by Adam Nelson in 2002. I would say the broad trend for athletes not found (proven) to be using drugs is definitely down in the shot put since 1989.

[rmayes]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

Another point is Ben Johnson is one of the few admitted dopers of recent times. And it took nearly perfect conditions (perfect tail wind, near perfect "reaction" time) for someone to better his best time 14 years later. If modern athletes are as dirty as many are saying then where are the 9.7x 100m and the 9.6x we probably would have seen from Ben had he been allowed to continue his training and doping program...Ben Johnson was either the most talented sprinter the world has ever seen or maybe the sport isn't as dirty these days as it used to be.

[Guest]

Re: Astonishing article by Francis

<Another point is Ben Johnson is one of the few admitted dopers of recent times. And it took nearly perfect conditions (perfect tail wind, near perfect "reaction" time) for someone to better his best time 14 years later. If modern athletes are as dirty as many are saying then where are the 9.7x 100m and the 9.6x we probably would have seen from Ben had he been allowed to continue his training and doping program...Ben Johnson was either the most talented sprinter the world has ever seen or maybe the sport isn't as dirty these days as it used to be. >

Interesting idea, but I am not sure I totally agree.
(1) Maybe Ben Johnson's run at Seoul was his best "ever". I don't think it follows that continuing drug use (by the same athlete) will lead to better and better times/distances, ad infinitum.
(2) "Clean" 100 m records, do not seem to come down too fast. Hayes ran 10.05 in 1964, on cinders, chopped up inside line, with no one really near him. Lewis ran 9.92 in 1988 under much better conditions (track, shoes, training?, competition). Perhaps this improvement of 0.13 in 24 years is more "normal". Or then again, Hayes may have biased the whole thing, by being "the best ever", and being years ahead of his time.
(Note: 1968 Oly times left out - altitude).