Bolt wants to run 9.4 and 19 seconds in olympics

TheRoadRunner

Looking forward to some of his early races to see if this will be a possibility. Not a massive sprint fan but there is no denying he is the man.

LINKY

Clearlier

I'd be more impressed with the 9:4x especially a low one. I think that his 200m time is soft compared to his 100m (can't believe I'm saying that Bolt has a soft time ) and that he could get into the 18:8x range before the end of his career.

Dan man

Is he still planning on attempting both relays in London? Would be quite something in itself if he were to do those 4 events, but I'm not sure Jamaica will be strong enough in the 4x400m to snatch gold from the U.S. team.

Pisco Sour

If I were him I'd stop talking sh1te and focus on winning the gold medal. There's a certain training partner of his who will be gunning for his blood. That same guy who if he had kept his ears open in Brussels last September, would now be holding the 200m WR.

Brianderunner

04072511 wrote: »

If I were him I'd stop talking sh1te and focus on winning the gold medal. There's a certain training partner of his who will be gunning for his blood. That same guy who if he had kept his ears open in Brussels last September, would now be holding the 200m WR.

+1 its gonna be tight. Blake's gonna be right on his ass the whole way. Wouldnt surprise me to see him take the gold. Only 22 years old he's bound to improve again in 2012.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

If I were him I'd stop talking sh1te and focus on winning the gold medal. There's a certain training partner of his who will be gunning for his blood. That same guy who if he had kept his ears open in Brussels last September, would now be holding the 200m WR.

Well, maybe it's not sh1te. Maybe he is capable, and feels it too. Who knows, with a push, and real chasers, he could well do it.

Pherekydes

Anyone seen the videos of Blake and Bolt from last w/e on youtube?

Barring injuries, I can't see anyone else winning the 100m, 200m or 400m relay.

I don't know about fast times in London, though. There could be adverse winds or heavy rain and even cool temps.

CoachDudie

It's amazing when you think about it. Any time in the 9.8's was amazing for a long time, even people doped out of their heads struggled to get it. Now we have someone who's record is 9.58 but is going for 9.4.
Bolt is outstanding, people have been lab experiments, filling themselves with all sorts for breakfast and they can't get near this freak of nature. Unbelievable!

shels4ever

Pherekydes wrote: »

Anyone seen the videos of Blake and Bolt from last w/e on youtube?Barring injuries, I can't see anyone else winning the 100m, 200m or 400m relay.

I don't know about fast times in London, though. There could be adverse winds or heavy rain and even cool temps.

yep it was mental some relay team

G-Money

Pherekydes wrote: »

Anyone seen the videos of Blake and Bolt from last w/e on youtube?

Link please or what we need to search for? I've not found anything yet.

BeepBeep67

G-Money wrote: »

Link please or what we need to search for? I've not found anything yet.

http://www.flotrack.org/speaker/1401-Usain-Bolt/video

Pherekydes

UTech Classic 2012. There's a few videos there, including the relay and Blake's 100m.

Their speed endurance looks very good.

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Well, maybe it's not sh1te. Maybe he is capable, and feels it too. Who knows, with a push, and real chasers, he could well do it.

He may be capable, but it is sh1tetalk, of which he does a lot. Focus on beating your competitors and the times take care of themselves.

myflipflops

04072511 wrote: »

He may be capable, but it is sh1tetalk, of which he does a lot. Focus on beating your competitors and the times take care of themselves.

"sh1tetalk"? Seriously??

Talking sh*te is what guys like Will Sharman do. Bolt talks a lot because people want to hear from him. He also does a lot of winning gold medals, breaking records, being a genuine sporting superstar, getting in the papers and generally being the best thing that has happened to track and field in decades.

The sport needs publicity desperately. Bolt gets it.

Dan man

myflipflops wrote: »

Bolt talks a lot because people want to hear from him. He also does a lot of winning gold medals, breaking records, being a genuine sporting superstar, getting in the papers and generally being the best thing that has happened to track and field in decades.

The sport needs publicity desperately. Bolt gets it.

Very true, Bolt is one hell of an athlete and it is this sort of pomp that makes him the great character that he is. He is doing wonders for the sport in terms of publicity. It would be much sadder for the sport if he wasn't grabbing the attention of the public.

Pisco Sour

myflipflops wrote: »

"sh1tetalk"? Seriously??

Talking sh*te is what guys like Will Sharman do. Bolt talks a lot because people want to hear from him. He also does a lot of winning gold medals, breaking records, being a genuine sporting superstar, getting in the papers and generally being the best thing that has happened to track and field in decades.

The sport needs publicity desperately. Bolt gets it.

He is fantastic for the sport. No denying that. He does talk a lot of sh1te though. At the press conference after his 200m win at last years Worlds, he was asked how fast did he think he would have run the 100m had he not been DQ'ed. I was amazed to hear his response that he thought he would have run high 9.6, but that by running he would have "dragged" Yohan along to a 9.80 instead of the 9.93 he ran to win the final. Seriously?! And no mention of the fact that there wasd a strong headwind. Of course most people bought his response. I'd like to see how he was going to run 9.6 into a headwind, with no real strong 100m form all season!

He talks crap, but he runs like hell. I'm a fan, but I take some of the things he says with a grain of salt.

corny

04072511 wrote: »

He is fantastic for the sport. No denying that. He does talk a lot of sh1te though. At the press conference after his 200m win at last years Worlds, he was asked how fast did he think he would have run the 100m had he not been DQ'ed. I was amazed to hear his response that he thought he would have run high 9.6, but that by running he would have "dragged" Yohan along to a 9.80 instead of the 9.93 he ran to win the final. Seriously?! And no mention of the fact that there wasd a strong headwind. Of course most people bought his response. I'd like to see how he was going to run 9.6 into a headwind, with no real strong 100m form all season!

He talks crap, but he runs like hell. I'm a fan, but I take some of the things he says with a grain of salt.

How is it crap? His PB is a full 2.* tenths faster than Blakes. Thats huge. Stating the blindingly obvious (ie i am the fastest) doesn't qualify as ****etalk. Its only ****etalk if he can't back it up.

Anyway I think he'll break the WC in London. Always get the feeling he has loads left in the tank. Even when he ran 9.58 he was looking across at the clock 20 metres before the line.

Pisco Sour

corny wrote: »

How is it crap? His PB is a full 2.* tenths faster than Blakes. Thats huge. Stating the blindingly obvious (ie i am the fastest) doesn't qualify as ****etalk. Its only ****etalk if he can't back it up.

Because he wasn't running well last season (by his ridiculously high standards). It had been reported that Blake was pushing him and beating him in training last season. Many people believe that Bolt was genuinely worried about losing to him, hence the false start, to try get out perfect and gain as big an advantage over Blake as possible. People dismissed Blake as winning by default, but IMO it was Blake who got inside Bolt's head, and Bolt paniced. 2 weeks later Blake ran 19.26 for 200m, with an appalling start of 0.26!! A half decent start and he'd have Bolt's WR now. Bolt ran 19.40 last season, lucky IMO that Blake didn't compete in the 200 in Daegu.

Given all of this I find it laughable that he could proudly claim that he "would have run" 9.6 when there was nothing that would indicate that he was going to run that time in Daegu (strong headwind, average form throughout the season and through the rounds in Daegu etc).

I wouldn't bet against him in London, but it's not going to be a walk in the park. Focus on beating Blake (and the rest) instead of contemplating potential greatness.

corny

04072511 wrote: »

Because he wasn't running well last season (by his ridiculously high standards). It had been reported that Blake was pushing him and beating him in training last season. Many people believe that Bolt was genuinely worried about losing to him, hence the false start, to try get out perfect and gain as big an advantage over Blake as possible. People dismissed Blake as winning by default, but IMO it was Blake who got inside Bolt's head, and Bolt paniced. 2 weeks later Blake ran 19.26 for 200m, with an appalling start of 0.26!! A half decent start and he'd have Bolt's WR now. Bolt ran 19.40 last season, lucky IMO that Blake didn't compete in the 200 in Daegu.

Given all of this I find it laughable that he could proudly claim that he "would have run" 9.6 when there was nothing that would indicate that he was going to run that time in Daegu (strong headwind, average form throughout the season and through the rounds in Daegu etc).

I wouldn't bet against him in London, but it's not going to be a walk in the park. Focus on beating Blake (and the rest) instead of contemplating potential greatness.

Fair enough but thats mainly conjecture.

Watch the little video in the link. That and "I'm working as hard as possible so I can go as fast as possible." says it all about Bolt and his questionable mindset.

thirtyfoot

A sprinter talking big, you'll get this at any track in Ireland on a Tues or Thurs night. We need this sh1te talk, it's great. After this if he runs the times it's big news, if he doesn't it's big news. 0407.. you say our sport doesn't get publicitly it deserves. That's because there isn't enough sh1te talk. A footballer saying at the start of year his team will win the CL, a rugby player saying his team can win HC, a Dub saying they can win All-Ireland hurling, a SRFC player saying they can get to group stages of CL, Paddy Barnes saying he wants Gold, Coghlan saying he'd run a sub 4 at 40. All sh1te talk you could say but also known as a news story and good publicity for a sport. I don't think Bolt needs to hear from anyone hear that he should knuckle down.

Pisco Sour

thirtyfoot wrote: »

A sprinter talking big, you'll get this at any track in Ireland on a Tues or Thurs night. We need this sh1te talk, it's great. After this if he runs the times it's big news, if he doesn't it's big news. 0407.. you say our sport doesn't get publicitly it deserves. That's because there isn't enough sh1te talk. A footballer saying at the start of year his team will win the CL, a rugby player saying his team can win HC, a Dub saying they can win All-Ireland hurling, a SRFC player saying they can get to group stages of CL, Paddy Barnes saying he wants Gold, Coghlan saying he'd run a sub 4 at 40. All sh1te talk you could say but also known as a news story and good publicity for a sport. I don't think Bolt needs to hear from anyone hear that he should knuckle down.

Just as long as we are clear that it IS sh1te talk.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

He may be capable, but it is sh1tetalk, of which he does a lot. Focus on beating your competitors and the times take care of themselves.

Like it's been said already. Bolt is a breath of fresh air to the sport. Enjoy the man while he's here. He's full of banter, fun and personality. What is so wrong with this. He's a good guy, likes to mess and clown around, big deal. He is what every sport needs. Remimds me a bit of the GOAT, Ali.

Anyone who cannot get enjoyment out of Bolt and his antics and performances is missing something. And, he can back it up too.

If he feels that a 9.4 is possible, why is that ****e talk?

BTW, I am aware that you believe he's good for the sport.

Can I ask, what do you think he's capable of in London? 9.5 and 19.10? Or, not capable of breaking his records?

Pisco Sour

walshb wrote: »

Like it's been said already. Bolt is a breath of fresh air to the sport. Enjoy the man while he's here. He's full of banter, fun and personality. What is so wrong with this. He's a good guy, likes to mess and clown around, big deal. He is what every sport needs. Remimds me a bit of the GOAT, Ali.

Anyone who cannot get enjoyment out of Bolt and his antics and performances is missing something. And, he can back it up too.

If he feels that a 9.4 is possible, why is that ****e talk?

BTW, I am aware that you believe he's good for the sport.

Ah yeh, a very fair point. Just don't believe every word that comes out of his mouth. That's all I'm saying.

CoachDudie

I suppose all sprinters are trying to learn from and copy Bolt. Even one's that would be described as more average. He's obviously a great runner but has he revealed his secret yet?
I wonder will we ever find out. His best was 10.03 for the 100m and 19.75 for the 200m in 2007. The next year at the Olympics he reduced it to 9.69 for the 100m and 19.30 for the 200m. He even had time to celebrate in the 100m, brilliant.
What technical change did he make or what different training did he do does anyone know? I'm sure everyone wants to know how you reduce times like this.

walshb

CoachDudie wrote: »

I suppose all sprinters are trying to learn from and copy Bolt. Even one's that would be described as more average. He's obviously a great runner but has he revealed his secret yet?
I wonder will we ever find out. His best was 10.03 for the 100m and 19.75 for the 200m in 2007. The next year at the Olympics he reduced it to 9.69 for the 100m and 19.30 for the 200m. He even had time to celebrate in the 100m, brilliant.
What technical change did he make or what different training did he do does anyone know? I'm sure everyone wants to know how you reduce times like this.

Well, I suppose he was a kid in 2007 really. That year, or a bit extra could see a real strength improvement, more mature, and naturally faster and stronger sprinter. He also looked to have polished up his technique. He developed and matured and trained, all three resulting in a finer sprinter.

shels4ever

CoachDudie wrote: »

I suppose all sprinters are trying to learn from and copy Bolt. Even one's that would be described as more average. He's obviously a great runner but has he revealed his secret yet?
I wonder will we ever find out. His best was 10.03 for the 100m and 19.75 for the 200m in 2007. The next year at the Olympics he reduced it to 9.69 for the 100m and 19.30 for the 200m. He even had time to celebrate in the 100m, brilliant.
What technical change did he make or what different training did he do does anyone know? I'm sure everyone wants to know how you reduce times like this.

hardwork and another 12 months training ? he was 21 in 2007 and people do progress around that time.

Pisco Sour

CoachDudie wrote: »

I suppose all sprinters are trying to learn from and copy Bolt. Even one's that would be described as more average. He's obviously a great runner but has he revealed his secret yet?
I wonder will we ever find out. His best was 10.03 for the 100m and 19.75 for the 200m in 2007. The next year at the Olympics he reduced it to 9.69 for the 100m and 19.30 for the 200m. He even had time to celebrate in the 100m, brilliant.
What technical change did he make or what different training did he do does anyone know? I'm sure everyone wants to know how you reduce times like this.

His pre-2008 100m PB is totally irrelevant as he never ran 100s before 2008. He was a 200/400 runner growing up.

CoachDudie

Yes but wasn't he 6'5 since he was 15? He definitely got stronger all right. Lets see if he can match that sort of training to get 9.4 this year.

CoachDudie

04072511 wrote: »

His pre-2008 100m PB is totally irrelevant as he never ran 100s before 2008. He was a 200/400 runner growing up.

Yes but his 200m time reduced by .45 of a second too. Maybe when he retires he'll reveal the new training regime he undertook in 2007/2008. He doesn't want to let it out now anyway and maybe not then either.

SeanKenny

For those who believe Bolt can break 9.4 I would suggest a trip to your local bookies!! I reckon the odds would be attractive.

fiddy3

Maybe it was getting a grip on the injuries and scoliosis that plagued him from 2004 to 2007. Makes sense if he was a freak and much much faster than anyone in history at 15 that, with a clean bill of health, he could do the same in his 20s. You may as well just say what you want to say Dudie.

CoachDudie

fiddy3 wrote: »

Maybe it was getting a grip on the injuries and scoliosis that plagued him from 2004 to 2007. Makes sense if he was a freak and much much faster than anyone in history at 15 that, with a clean bill of health, he could do the same in his 20s. You may as well just say what you want to say Dudie.

What you on about? I didn't say anything like we haven't seen improvements in one year like this since Ben Johnston or anything.
No, the improvements in times from 2007 to 2008 are simply down to, increased training and effort, getting stronger and.........being a freak of nature.

RandyMann

CoachDudie wrote: »

What you on about? I didn't say anything like we haven't seen improvements in one year like this since Ben Johnston or anything.
No, the improvements in times from 2007 to 2008 are simply down to, increased training and effort, getting stronger and.........being a freak of nature.

A .34 second improvement over a year for 100m is not a freak of nature, I'm sure loads of athletes do that and better.
On the other hand his 9.58WR is special of course.

Pisco Sour

RandyMann wrote: »

A .34 second improvement over a year for 100m is not a freak of nature, I'm sure loads of athletes do that and better.
On the other hand his 9.58WR is special of course.

Ah at the elite level that is huge! But he didnt really run 100s before 2008 so the progression is irrelevant.

RandyMann

04072511 wrote: »

Ah at the elite level that is huge! But he didnt really run 100s before 2008 so the progression is irrelevant.

True at elite level but not really huge if his potential is actually 9.4 and I agree, his progression is irrelevant.

CoachDudie

Why are ye ignoring the 200m improvement?

Pisco Sour

CoachDudie wrote: »

Why are ye ignoring the 200m improvement?

0.45 improvement over 200m is significant but not nearly as large as the 0.4 improvement previously discussed over 100m (which is irrelevant given his lack of 100s before 2008). Bolt ran sub 20 aged 17, won the World Juniors aged 15. The 200 was always his best event. It's no great surprise that he made a jump like that when fully healthy, in his early 20s.

What exactly are you trying to get at?

(I know what you are trying to suggest)

walshb

Whatever he's trying to get at is nothing that many others are not thinking.

BTW, Jamaica are not on the same playing field with many other countries as regards drugs testing. This will always lead to suspicion, and rightly/obviously so.

I "believe" Bolt to be legit. I really hope he is. But, nothing in sport surprises me.

walshb

04072511 wrote: »

Ah at the elite level that is huge! But he didnt really run 100s before 2008 so the progression is irrelevant.

I agree. When at elite level, close to your physical peak, that kind of improvement is huge.

.34 over two years if you are developing and maturing is not huge.

Sacksian

CoachDudie wrote: »

Why are ye ignoring the 200m improvement?

Regardless of whether or not your suspicions are accurate or not, is it really surprising that that someone who was, at one time, the youngest ever World Junior gold-medalist, and considered to have the potential to be Jamaica's greatest ever sprinter might turn out to be a bit special? Might a 200m runner get faster once he starts looking at the 100m??

It's not like he came out of nowhere.

Also take into account that, even after turning professional, it was regularly all over the news how awful a trainer he was, if you also want to ignore his injuries.

walshb

There has been dozens and dozens of top class athletes who have used drugs. Gave them that extra 2-3 metres etc. Bolt is a naturally magnificent athlete, as were many otheres who were found to be using. Facts are that people will query these amazing times, and even when someone can explain or make a case that it's natural, the other side can counter that with valid arguments. I think both sides agree that he is a naturally great sprinter. That is not the question or suspicion.

CoachDudie

04072511 wrote: »

0.45 improvement over 200m is significant but not nearly as large as the 0.4 improvement previously discussed over 100m (which is irrelevant given his lack of 100s before 2008). Bolt ran sub 20 aged 17, won the World Juniors aged 15. The 200 was always his best event. It's no great surprise that he made a jump like that when fully healthy, in his early 20s.

What exactly are you trying to get at?

(I know what you are trying to suggest)

I can see where the 100m progression can be explained. Certainly there would be improvements with more focus on the event but .4 is still a big jump.
As we all know, young athletes showing loads of potential doesn't automatically mean it will follow through, in fact it often never does.
I know he had injuries but he is notoriously lazy, he hates training but loves being a star. This would lead me to believe he would accept an easier option if offered.
It could be that he is just one in a billion, like was said before he's a freak and we'll never see the like again but in a sport like athletics(especially sprinting), given what we know that happened in the past and also knowing that recent athletes have been on all sorts of stuff and couldn't get near Bolt's times, well then you have to have some suspicions surely?
Saying all this I hope I'm wrong, he's obviously good for the sport if he's for real but it just doesn't add up for me, especially when you include the suspicions over the country he's running for.

CoachDudie

walshb wrote: »

Whatever he's trying to get at is nothing that many others are not thinking.

BTW, Jamaica are not on the same playing field with many other countries as regards drugs testing. This will always lead to suspicion, and rightly/obviously so.

I "believe" Bolt to be legit. I really hope he is. But, nothing in sport surprises me.

I've heard that their team doctor is also in charge of drug testing.

CoachDudie

Sacksian wrote: »

Regardless of whether or not your suspicions are accurate or not, is it really surprising that that someone who was, at one time, the youngest ever World Junior gold-medalist, and considered to have the potential to be Jamaica's greatest ever sprinter might turn out to be a bit special? Might a 200m runner get faster once he starts looking at the 100m??

It's not like he came out of nowhere.

Also take into account that, even after turning professional, it was regularly all over the news how awful a trainer he was, if you also want to ignore his injuries.

Injuries can be given as a reason but when improvements weren't happening for a few years and times were not dropping maybe he found a way to help him.
He was 6'5 when he was 15, he has got stronger but he was big for his age. This usually means less of a scope for improvement as he gets older.
I'm not saying I know for certain but I have huge doubts.

RayCun

<mod>The charter is clear

No doping talk! Please no speculation on which athletes may be doping

change the subject or the thread will be closed </mod>

CoachDudie

walshb wrote: »

There has been dozens and dozens of top class athletes who have used drugs. Gave them that extra 2-3 metres etc. Bolt is a naturally magnificent athlete, as were many otheres who were found to be using. Facts are that people will query these amazing times, and even when someone can explain or make a case that it's natural, the other side can counter that with valid arguments. I think both sides agree that he is a naturally great sprinter. That is not the question or suspicion.

I suppose I could look at anyone who wins and view them with suspicion but usually times add up. Steady improvement and all that.
Then there are people running who you can't believe. For example there's a woman who will be one of the favorites in this Olympics to win sprint medals who nobody could say is clean if they look at her times and age.
It's unfortunate for the sport to have this but when you think people like Flo Jo were never caught then you can see why people will always be cynical.

CoachDudie

RayCun wrote: »

<mod>The charter is clear



change the subject or the thread will be closed </mod>

Sorry, just seen this now. No more talk about it, I hadn't read the charter before so wasn't sure so was careful not to say much. I can see now why some people who didn't want to hear this wanted me to spell out what i was saying.

Pisco Sour

CoachDudie wrote: »

<Snip> This is a theory which has not been proven

Well there's hundreds of other football examples I could have used: Marseilles 1993, Juventus 1996, AC Milan 1969 (a member of that team came out recently and spilled the beans). All European Champions with proven doping going on behind the scenes.

You could probably count on one hand the number of sports free from doping, yet people seem to always slate athletics in this regard.

EDIT: Whoops I seem to have messed up my original comment when I thought I was replying to a comment. Ah well, who cares.

CoachDudie

Not many sports are drug free, that's for sure. Some sports just have a higher level of doubt about them. Would you view cyclists with suspicion for example? I suppose the amount of high profile athletes that have been caught makes it worse for athletics and sports like that.
Look the majority of athletes at this years Olympics will be clean but no one can pretend that everyone will be.

Pisco Sour

CoachDudie wrote: »

Look the majority of athletes at this years Olympics will be clean but no one can pretend that everyone will be.

Yes, but not everybody at the 2010 World Cup was clean, you can be sure of that. The Rugby World Cup, Wimbledon etc etc. The vast majority are clean, but they certainly aren't all snow white. The dishonest people of the world don't all congregate in athletics.

RayCun

Moving from "which athlete is doping" to "which people in other sports are doping" doesn't help