Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
100 metres - Gatlin wins/UK crowd boos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bruce_ma gooshvili" data-source="post: 869200" data-attributes="member: 74121"><p>Yes, probably. I'd prefer a big drop off like we saw from Johan Blake (who was pretty anonymous) when comparing a doped performance vs a non-doped performance. And I think we can be confident that only a very small fraction of doping is detected through tests due to masking agents, missed spot checks etc. </p><p></p><p>But overall I was really impressed by how believable some of the sprint times were for both men and women. Considerably slower than times even 20 years ago (with the exception of a men's 400m first round). It may be that it is a slow track for sprinting, but I'd imagine even a comparison to the times at the same track at the London Olympics would show things were slower this time around. </p><p></p><p>The UK 4x100m men's relay time by some fairly average athletes (executing to perfection) was the third fastest time ever, so it can't be that slow a track. </p><p></p><p>Maybe the wholesale banning of Russia has spooked folk, maybe the biological passport thing is having the impact it had in cycling in the early years in reducing the severity of doping. </p><p></p><p>Anyway, long may men's 200ms being won in 20.17 continue! The disappearance of Kenyan dominance in long distance running after their recent doping scandals was also a "positive" development. </p><p></p><p>I might tune in to track and field a bit more of it stays a bit more credible like this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bruce_ma gooshvili, post: 869200, member: 74121"] Yes, probably. I'd prefer a big drop off like we saw from Johan Blake (who was pretty anonymous) when comparing a doped performance vs a non-doped performance. And I think we can be confident that only a very small fraction of doping is detected through tests due to masking agents, missed spot checks etc. But overall I was really impressed by how believable some of the sprint times were for both men and women. Considerably slower than times even 20 years ago (with the exception of a men's 400m first round). It may be that it is a slow track for sprinting, but I'd imagine even a comparison to the times at the same track at the London Olympics would show things were slower this time around. The UK 4x100m men's relay time by some fairly average athletes (executing to perfection) was the third fastest time ever, so it can't be that slow a track. Maybe the wholesale banning of Russia has spooked folk, maybe the biological passport thing is having the impact it had in cycling in the early years in reducing the severity of doping. Anyway, long may men's 200ms being won in 20.17 continue! The disappearance of Kenyan dominance in long distance running after their recent doping scandals was also a "positive" development. I might tune in to track and field a bit more of it stays a bit more credible like this. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
100 metres - Gatlin wins/UK crowd boos
Top