Usain the freak Bolt vs. Craig Pickering

[ToughJ.Riggins]

Let's face it. Craig Pickering is not going to beat an injury free Usain Bolt in London in 2012 whether Bolt's on PEDs like I am very confident he is right now or not by next Olympics.

Bolt is absolutely the most naturally talented sprinter of all time. His stride is very open and effortless and his long legs help him cover tons of ground. They said Bolt hit a speed of around 30 MPH (the average speed for a Grizzly Bear) on that WR run. No other human being had ever even quite hit 29 MPH. He ran a 9.69, even after letting up to pound his chest in the last 15 meters. He probably would have run a 9.55-9.6 flat if he hadn't let up. Plus Bolt is one of the best starters, despite his height. This guy could outrun your average Grizzly Bear. Everyone else when charged by a Grizzly bear should play dead like they say, but if you are Bolt, than get on your horse and run!

But if you look at the second and third guys times in the 100 meter finals this year, I think Pickering would be capable if he ran the best he's ever run to grab maybe a bronze medal in 2012. Some Bahamian guy ran a 9.89 (he's probably another Caribbean juicer). Walter Dix got the bronze in 9.91. So I figure in 2012 if all goes right with Pilot type programs being implemented for all nations that Bolt will win a second gold (barring injury or disqualification for PEDs) and the Bahamian guy will no longer be cheating or will be older.

Walter Dix and Tyson Gay are not cheating at this point with the Pilot program IMO. Gay ran a PB 9.84 last year (a little suspiciously fast) I believe, but his 9.69 this year was ridiculously wind-aided and said to be in the mid to high 9.8s wind legal. Gay didn't make the final this year, which shows how vulnerable clean sprinters can be.

So best case scenario in London, Bolt wins the Gold with a 9.8 flat or so (PED free hopefully), Dix or Gay will win Silver with a similar time to this years bronze of 9.91 or so and Pickering runs the race of his life and grabs a Bronze with a 9.95 or so. I think it is truly possible, but he needs a perfect race with a great jump at the start.

Call me crazy, but I am predicting a Bronze medal for Pickering if the field is clean on his home-turf in London with a time in the mid 9.9s. And by that point I think Craig will already have run a sub 10. So a 9.95 won't be a huge shock, but a bronze medal definitely will. A bronze for Craig would be even slightly more of a shock than Kenteris's 200 meter gold in Sydney. I'm predicting it now, so there is a lot of time in between to see what happens, but I'm still having fun with this.

 

[white is right]

He has to be able to put together a fast start and close strong, then he will final at a World/Olympic level. It seems like he can do one but not the other. I hope your right.....

 

[GiovaniMarcon]

When I compare Craig Pickering to a prime Matthew Shirvington, honestly I've got to say that Shirvo circa 1998 (when he was about the same age as Craig) seems the superior runner, at least right now. Shirvington ran a lot smoother than Craig did in his last race, and he just seems so much more powerful. Having said that, I do feel that both Shirvington and Pickering have a somewhat choppy, stompy running pattern that could be worked upon. Shirvington should have gone under 10 seconds in his career, and so should Craig.

Also, I agree that Bolt is a tremendous natural talent but I think he might be on drugs. It's not like he's Tiger Woods who was impressing adults even when he was a little boy. Bolt sort of came from nowhere and is making a joke of sprinters who've plied their trade for years trying to make it to the top tier. I'm not saying it's impossible he's clean, but his sudden ascendancy and casual demolition of top flight talent seems a bit iffy.

And about Kenteris -- what are the odds that he was juicing in 2000? Like, 50/50? I'm not excusing him, but if he was juicing at the time, so too were a lot of other men in that final. If he is convicted I hope they strip his medal just like Marion Jones'.Edited by: GiovaniMarcon

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I am also honest when I say I think the American's may be clean at this point. The U.S is cracking down hard on PEDs and the shame from Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery and Gatlin is incredible. I am even starting to believe that Gay's PB wind legal 9.84 last season before the Pilot program was implemented was clean. And Bolt is just a freak. He is the only guy I have ever seen that I think could beat an entirely juiced final's field clean 2 out of 3 times. He is a monster.

But I am sick of the lambasting guys like you do McBride of talented white sprinters. I honestly feel Pickering will break 10 flat 2 maybe 3 times in his career wind legal. And he could be capable of a surprise bronze in London and I would be perfectly happy with that. It would be quite an anti-stereotyping statement just for him to make the finals let alone grab a bronze. I strongly believe Pickering is clean. He is a huge campaigner against roids has a more natural build than some and England has long had the strictest anti PED rules in track. I also am very confident that Wallace Spearmon is clean, he is a health freak, seems like a nice guy and has a very natural build.

I just hope that the entire field is clean. My theory that roids work better on blacks than whites only goes for the blacks and whites that use them. I now believe Gay and Dix (and have always believed Spearmon in the 200 meter) are clean. Good luck to all the clean sprinters, but especially Pickering to debunk some stereotypes by at least finaling in London!

 

[white is right]

When I compare Craig Pickering to a prime Matthew Shirvington, honestly I've got to say that Shirvo circa 1998 (when he was about the same age as Craig) seems the superior runner, at least right now. Shirvington ran a lot smoother than Craig did in his last race, and he just seems so much more powerful. Having said that, I do feel that both Shirvington and Pickering have a somewhat choppy, stompy running pattern that could be worked upon. Shirvington should have gone under 10 seconds in his career, and so should Craig.

Also, I agree that Bolt is a tremendous natural talent but I think he might be on drugs. It's not like he's Tiger Woods who was impressing adults even when he was a little boy. Bolt sort of came from nowhere and is making a joke of sprinters who've plied their trade for years trying to make it to the top tier. I'm not saying it's impossible he's clean, but his sudden ascendancy and casual demolition of top flight talent seems a bit iffy.

And about Kenteris -- what are the odds that he was juicing in 2000? Like, 50/50? I'm not excusing him, but if he was juicing at the time, so too were a lot of other men in that final. If he is convicted I hope they strip his medal just like Marion Jones'.

More like 99.9 to .1 percent against. He has links to Balco through his coach. He wasn't on the list because as a foreign national the US government had no legal authority to force his coach or him to testify before a grand jury. Conte even said he had clients from the Caribbean, hence the miraculous emergence of the Bahamas.

 

[guest301]

LOL- no contest

Somebody ban this boring bottom of the barrel troll.

 

[johnnyboy]

I am also honest when I say I think the American's may be clean at this point. The U.S is cracking down hard on PEDs and the shame from Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery and Gatlin is incredible. I am even starting to believe that Gay's PB wind legal 9.84 last season before the Pilot program was implemented was clean. And Bolt is just a freak. He is the only guy I have ever seen that I think could beat an entirely juiced final's field clean 2 out of 3 times. He is a monster.

But I am sick of the lambasting guys like you do McBride of talented white sprinters. I honestly feel Pickering will break 10 flat 2 maybe 3 times in his career wind legal. And he could be capable of a surprise bronze in London and I would be perfectly happy with that. It would be quite an anti-stereotyping statement just for him to make the finals let alone grab a bronze. I strongly believe Pickering is clean. He is a huge campaigner against roids has a more natural build than some and England has long had the strictest anti PED rules in track. I also am very confident that Wallace Spearmon is clean, he is a health freak, seems like a nice guy and has a very natural build.

I just hope that the entire field is clean. My theory that roids work better on blacks than whites only goes for the blacks and whites that use them. I now believe Gay and Dix (and have always believed Spearmon in the 200 meter) are clean. Good luck to all the clean sprinters, but especially Pickering to debunk some stereotypes by at least finaling in London!

every top flight sprinter has used PED's at one point or another, in their careers. the sport will never be 100 percent clean because there will always be an arms race if you will, between the testers and the "balcos" of the world. black and white sprinters both juice. some sprinters just have access to better drugs/masking techniques. there are steroids available right now that boast they can be completely detection free in the half the time of regular steroids. its never going to change.

as far as Pickering goes, i think he's used PED's, and if he hasn't he should probably get himself a better coach. such is the state of affairs in sprinting.

 

[Observer]

...And Bolt is just a freak. He is the only guy I have ever seen that I think could beat an entirely juiced final's field clean 2 out of 3 times. He is a monster...

TJR, I agree with pretty much all your posts, but I mildly disagree on this one. I am not a huge track expert, but it seemed to me that Bolt's career was at a stalemate or even going backward until last year when he decided to get "serious". There was a period about 3-4 years ago when he had some injuries, but even when he came back from the injuries, he was not improving. The improvement started last year, and now this.

Bolt as a pre-junior kid showed huge promise because of his fast times, and also because of his combination of height, coordination, and good bones and tendons. However, like many tall skinny guys, he simply wasn't putting on much muscle as he got older. Guys like that have to work like crazy and finally show some results in about ten years. He managed to leap-frog the process and now he is a big strong man. The spring in his strides is tremendous now, but not so long ago he would have had little chance against a good group of 100m men.

As I read more about this PED stuff, I wonder if maybe Ben Johnson and Jose Canseco are right: if you're going to train for 6 hours a day, you better have some medical assistance in recovering from it; it would be unhealthy to do otherwise. All that hard training burns all the free testosterone out of the blood stream, and it must be supplemented if the training pace is to be maintained. I don't know whether or not the Bolt is on PED's. If he isn't, he probably should be if he hopes to maintain the pace of a professional athlete.

Serious sport is unhealthy and I have begun to despise it.

Forget about poor self-esteem as a cause of drug abuse --- sports is the gateway to drugs (maybe that's why the drug rate among blacks is so high, because of the importance of sport). Painkillers, amphetamines, and a bunch of other stimulants. The pharmaceutical recovery agents are as necessary as the pain killers if the level of sport is at a serious level. I'm not saying that it should be that way, but if the public demands monsters and gladiators, what other outcome can be expected?

As for holding hope that the vials of blood will detect something in years to come, I doubt it. Whether it's broccoli or steroids, the stuff clears your system after a certain period of time, or fades to such a small level that it would be impossible to distinguish from random environmental toxins absorbed into the blood stream. If chemicals didn't clear the system, we'd all weigh 50,000 pounds. When the heavy training loads decrease and taper, the pharmeceutical recover agents are unnecessary --- and have cleared the system by the time of the big meet.

Rant complete.Edited by: Observer

 

[albinosprint]

observer, great post!

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

Some of your post has some definite truths Observer, but let me explain where I disagree. The Pilot Program has joined England as one of the strictest athlete testing programs the world has ever known. Now look at how the American times have not been as good this year as in the shameful era of Gatlin, Montgomery and Maurice Greene.

If we really can't get it to the point where almost every sprinter is clean, then maybe we should just allow steroids. But IMO Steroids aid people of West African decent in their training, muscle building and recovery better than other groups, so this will not help whites, or East Asians or anybody else in the 100 meter, 110 hurdles, 200 meter and long jump.

I think the route we should take is force an even stricter version of the Pilot Program with testing from an international governing body to test every sprinter that runs world qualifying times. It would take tons of money and time to implement, but it has to be done to save the sport. I honestly believe most of the Americans are clean this Olympics because of the shame and the brilliant Pilot Program and the "underachieving" in times.

This is my idea of the kind of testing methods that should be used in every nation that competes sprinters with world qualifying times to the professional international meets.

A mandatory pre-scheduled weekly test for drugs will be done during the track seasons.

Once a month there will be random drug tests where you will be notified the night before and again the next day when you will have to report for the drug test. There could of course be occasional valid excuses, vacation out of the country, doctors note for sickness etc. If there are too many excuses an investigation would be launched and the country would have to disqualify the athlete from competition for the the season until it is resolved.

This would kind of be like being on call for a very important job. After the blood and urine samples will be taken from the athlete once a month, they will bring it to each countries state of the arts lab for meticulous testing. After the test is done even if the athlete passes, the vials of blood and urine will be brought to a storage center for retesting of the entire collection of vials when new information becomes available about testing for previously undetectable drugs.

The penalties for a 1st failed test for drugs purely for performance enhancing purpose would be disqualification for 4 years from international competition which can be appealed. A 2nd failed test would be a life time ban. Any sprinter who openly admits that they did in fact take a drug knowingly even once on a list of drugs that are known to be used solely for athletic advantage will be banned for life from Olympic competition, not other types of meets.

Also if years later when retesting the vials of urine and blood, they find that a sprinter used a PED he will still face the same penalty years later. In addition they will have all their times, records, medals striped for the entire track season where the violation took place.

I honestly think if we truly put this much money and effort into this (it would have to be internationally and nationally funded by countries) that they would catch so many cheats who would see all they worked for vanquished from them that we could see an entirely clean field.

The question is will we do this or should we just say F it and let em cheat? If we can't see to it that sprinters are confident they can win without cheating because the field is clean, then what is the point anyway?Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins