nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off Topic Thread too point uh

RuggieBear

\0/

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

dregin

stephen_n wrote: »

Anyone else getting a 503 error while trying to view threads or post replies?

Only way I can use boards is through https://touch.boards.ie at the minute.

thomond2006

Jarryd Hayne has impressed in his first two games for the 49ers. I wonder if he will make the final roster....

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000515090/article/jarryd-hayne-continues-to-impress-as-return-specialist

.ak

thomond2006 wrote: »

Jarryd Hayne has impressed in his first two games for the 49ers. I wonder if he will make the final roster....

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000515090/article/jarryd-hayne-continues-to-impress-as-return-specialist

I don't know why but I love seeing guys switching sports and then being successful at the highest level. Fair play to him.

dregin

Tell ya what's face melting - American colleagues asking me all about this top "rugby" player that's just switched to NFL... I'd never heard of him before this.

.ak

dregin wrote: »

Tell ya what's face melting - American colleagues asking me all about this top "rugby" player that's just switched to NFL... I'd never heard of him before this.

Well, I presume that's because you don't follow NRL?

thomond2006

.ak wrote: »

I don't know why but I love seeing guys switching sports and then being successful at the highest level. Fair play to him.

Well he's got to make the roster first. In those preseason matches he could be running against players who won't be making a roster. The 49ers haven't had the best off season ( coach change, retirements, players with criminal charges) and Hayne is very positive press for them. If he can be their number 1 punt/kick returner then that might be his best shot, his offensive position (running back) has got a lot of competition.

Hopefully he is successful (he turned down millions in Oz) but we certainly don't want the NFL taking a big interest in rugby players!

dregin

.ak wrote: »

Well, I presume that's because you don't follow NRL?

No, I follow rugby

Clearlier

Buer wrote: »

It's possible and I'd like to believe it. However, the improvements he made in his career, the people he has worked with....serious question marks for me. You don't go from being 21 years old and never having broken the 10 second barrier to breaking the world record at 22, in my mind.

He wasn't regularly running the 100m at that point which would explain a big improvement but at one point his PB went from 10.03s to 9.76s (the second fastest time in history) under a coach who had multiple sprinters caught in the past for doping. That's simply not feasible to my mind.

Damn tablet deleted my post. Quick summary. Bolt was a huge junior prodigy. 20.58 for 200m at 15 years of age and he made steady progress from there until he set the world record. 10.03 time was for his first ever 100m competition. Everyone considered him too tall for the event as it hinders getting out of the blocks. His actual progression in the 100 is not surprising considering where he started from.

I'm a big athletics fan so I'm biased but I saw what happened to cycling fans so I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong but I do believe in Bolt largely because the progression of his times do make sense - there's no point at which he makes a dramatic inexplicable improvement.

I hope for the sake of the sport that he's clean but also that if he's doping that he'll be caught.

Stheno

Anyone know when Cech moved from Chelsea to Arsenal?

Only noticed tonight when the Arsenal match was on in the pub I was out in

edit googled, twas only in June so I'm not so far behind

Stheno

Clearlier wrote: »

Damn tablet deleted my post. Quick summary. Bolt was a huge junior prodigy. 20.58 for 200m at 15 years of age and he made steady progress from there until he set the world record. 10.03 time was for his first ever 100m competition. Everyone considered him too tall for the event as it hinders getting out of the blocks. His actual progression in the 100 is not surprising considering where he started from.

I'm a big athletics fan so I'm biased but I saw what happened to cycling fans so I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong but I do believe in Bolt largely because the progression of his times do make sense - there's no point at which he makes a dramatic inexplicable improvement.

I hope for the sake of the sport that he's clean but also that if he's doping that he'll be caught.

I'd be the same I read a very detailed article about Bolt documenting his progress a few years ago, and it was pretty much what you were saying.

That and the fact so many Jamaicans have been caught doping would make me surprised if he is.

Sorted our tickets for the game Saturday tonight

Lads for any of ye in the West, would you read the link below? Man found dead last Sept in Galway, still unidentified, god love him

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/can-you-identify-this-man-found-dead-in-galway-31473881.html

Buer

Clearlier wrote: »

Damn tablet deleted my post. Quick summary. Bolt was a huge junior prodigy. 20.58 for 200m at 15 years of age and he made steady progress from there until he set the world record. 10.03 time was for his first ever 100m competition. Everyone considered him too tall for the event as it hinders getting out of the blocks. His actual progression in the 100 is not surprising considering where he started from.

I'm a big athletics fan so I'm biased but I saw what happened to cycling fans so I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong but I do believe in Bolt largely because the progression of his times do make sense - there's no point at which he makes a dramatic inexplicable improvement.

I hope for the sake of the sport that he's clean but also that if he's doping that he'll be caught.

I'd love to believe it all and I think he is a naturally phenomenal athlete but I would certainly see dropping from 10.03s in 2007 and then breaking your PB to run the second fastest time in history is a ridiculous progression and one I'd say is a dramatic, inexplicable improvement. Regardless of his experience at the distance, you do not knock 0.34 seconds off your 100m PB from one year to the next. Later that season, he smashed the WR in the Olympic final.

As Carl Lewis (who I'd have doubts over too) said of him: “For someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don’t question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you’re a fool. Period.”

The nature of his times and when he runs them really strongly suggests to me that he's on a cycle to peak at optimum times. His best times invariably came in the Olympic or WC finals. His slowest seasons (2010 and 2014) are coincidentally in years where there was neither an Olympics or a World Championship.

Even in his 200m times, he saw a massive drop from the season before the Olympics to breaking the world record (19.75 in 2007 to 19.3 in 2008) which was another mind boggling advancement in times.

Angel Hereida (now Hernandez) was the doping chemist to the top athletes. He's the guy who arranged a deal with authorities and shipped Gatlin, Montgomery and Jones, showing payments from their representatives into his accounts.

Bolt hired him as his coach after his initial breakthrough and Olympic victories. Hereida did an amazing interview in Germany the week before the 2008 Olympic final where he said: "The winner will not be clean. Not even any of the contestants will be clean. There is no doubt about it, the difference between 10.0 and 9.7 seconds is the drugs.”

If he is doping, I think the only way he can get caught is if someone breaks and calls him out. Marion Jones passed over 160 drug tests in her career despite being juiced. If he's doping, I think he could realistically retire without ever being caught.

Wang King

The guy is tested on a regular basis in and out of competition, its bloody hard to fool the testers these days, tech has moved on since the days of Marion Jones and her hubby.
If I was to be given a million Euro and asked clean or no, I'd put it on clean...... (A fool and his money etc)
I genuinely believe he's clean, not even a hint of a failed test or anything abnormal, so hopefully he is the shining light athletics needs

Buer

Wang King wrote: »

The guy is tested on a regular basis in and out of competition, its bloody hard to fool the testers these days, tech has moved on since the days of Marion Jones and her hubby.
If I was to be given a million Euro and asked clean or no, I'd put it on clean...... (A fool and his money etc)
I genuinely believe he's clean, not even a hint of a failed test or anything abnormal, so hopefully he is the shining light athletics needs

I've little faith in testing. The former head of the IAAF said Jamaican athletes are particularly hard to nail down as they're so remote and can actually be hard to find at times!

We'd have been saying the same things about not being able to fool testers a decade ago when Jones was queen of the track. Testing improves but so does doping.

I really would love if he was clean but I'm too cynical and the sport has been too too damaged for me not to always query any impressive victory at this point.

Zzippy

Buer wrote: »

Even in his 200m times, he saw a massive drop from the season before the Olympics to breaking the world record (19.75 in 2007 to 19.3 in 2008) which was another mind boggling advancement in times.

Not unprecedented though, didn't Michael Johnson lower the WR from 19.72 to 19.32 in one go? 1996 I think...

Buer wrote: »

I've little faith in testing. The former head of the IAAF said Jamaican athletes are particularly hard to nail down as they're so remote and can actually be hard to find at times!

Have heard a few bad things about the Jamaican testing regime alright, out-of-competition testing is supposed to be almost non-existent. I'd imagine Bolt travels so much for PR stuff that he'd be tested out of Jamaica regularly, but maybe that's wishful thinking.

Buer

Zzippy wrote: »

Not unprecedented though, didn't Michael Johnson lower the WR from 19.72 to 19.32 in one go? 1996 I think...

19.66 to 19.32 and I'd have reservations about him too which is difficult because I was a kid watching that 200m in absolute awe of him. I always thought that was the greatest performance in history and the most amazing race I'd ever seen. The years since have made me cynical about him though which depresses me.

He set the 19.66 record a month before the Olympics....which raises queries about drug cycles again. He never ran as fast as those times again in his life. In 1997 and 1998 he didn't even break 20 seconds. While he wasn't competing regularly at 200m at that point, he did run it a number of times in Golden League events.

In fact, the only time he came close to those times was in 2000....ahead of the next Olympics at 33 years old! The top sprinters have an uncanny ability to be fully fit and in the best form of their lives for six weeks every 2 years and particularly every 4 years!

.ak

They should just make doping legal and then everyone is on the same level (if not already).

Buer

Zzippy wrote: »

Have heard a few bad things about the Jamaican testing regime alright, out-of-competition testing is supposed to be almost non-existent. I'd imagine Bolt travels so much for PR stuff that he'd be tested out of Jamaica regularly, but maybe that's wishful thinking.

There was one time 6 years ago where they managed to do a completely surprise test at Racers Track Club (Bolt's club in Jamaica) and 5 athletes were done on the basis of it including Bolt's training partner, Blake.

The problem is getting there, unannounced when the athletes are in training.

Buer

.ak wrote: »

They should just make doping legal and then everyone is on the same level (if not already).

There's a case for it!

The Onion did a great article years ago about the Tour de France:

http://www.theonion.com/article/non-doping-cyclists-finish-tour-de-france-2268

sullivlo

Wang King wrote: »

The guy is tested on a regular basis in and out of competition, its bloody hard to fool the testers these days, tech has moved on since the days of Marion Jones and her hubby.
If I was to be given a million Euro and asked clean or no, I'd put it on clean...... (A fool and his money etc)
I genuinely believe he's clean, not even a hint of a failed test or anything abnormal, so hopefully he is the shining light athletics needs

I watched a documentary about doping in cycling recently and you'd be surprised at how easy it is to cheat.

Long story short. There's a blood passport thingy that all athletes have. It basically provides baseline levels of many metabolites and blood markers for juicing. These levels would vary from athlete to athlete. The random testing is done and measured relative to the baseline levels of the metabolites, and spikes are monitored / flagged.

The guy who did the documentary was a doctor. He measured these levels in his blood under normal circumstances for 8 weeks and did some aerobic fitness tests (vo2 max, speed tests, endurance tests - running and cycling) and then he bought EPO / an equivalent online and self administered low doses for 8 weeks. He measured the metabolites in his blood again and then did the same fitness tests.

He saw an average increase of 7% in his abilities / speed / endurance, without causing ANY effect on his metabolic profile.

7% was MASSIVE for him but he made the point that for pro athletes even 1% could make a huge difference to their performances, and if he can dope at levels and not be caught, so can the athletes.

thomond2006

.ak wrote: »

They should just make doping legal and then everyone is on the same level (if not already).

Tommy Tiernan once advocated for the steroid Olympics. Every athlete would be sponsored by a pharmaceutical company.

Tox56

Buer wrote: »

I've little faith in testing. The former head of the IAAF said Jamaican athletes are particularly hard to nail down as they're so remote and can actually be hard to find at times!

We'd have been saying the same things about not being able to fool testers a decade ago when Jones was queen of the track. Testing improves but so does doping.

I really would love if he was clean but I'm too cynical and the sport has been too too damaged for me not to always query any impressive victory at this point.

But surely testing is better now, half the field from the London 2012 100m final have been given doping bans at some point in their career

.ak

Not sure why positive tests don't result in lifetime bans.

Buer

Tox56 wrote: »

But surely testing is better now, half the field from the London 2012 100m final have been given doping bans at some point in their career

I think about 6 of the finalists in 2004 were done for doping. The techniques are improving but that's not to suggest people aren't still getting away with it. If they didn't think they could get away with it, those lads who were caught in 2012 wouldn't have been doping.

In that race, of the "Big 5" (Powell, Gay, Bolt, Gatlin and Blake) only Bolt has never been caught and he's the one that goes faster than anyone yet people appear to have the least suspicion over.

Most damningly, Jamaica had a complete breakdown in their anti-doping programme from early 2012 until the Olympics. Essentially, no testing took place. From the 12 medals on offer in the men's and women's 100m and 200m races in the Olympics, Jamaica claimed 8!

Buer

.ak wrote: »

Not sure why positive tests don't result in lifetime bans.

At the very least, it should be two strikes and you're out. Gatlin being able to compete still is absurd.

Stheno

Tox56 wrote: »

But surely testing is better now, half the field from the London 2012 100m final have been given doping bans at some point in their career

Half the field in the final on Sunday had been given doping bans at some point in their career too!

Buer wrote: »

At the very least, it should be two strikes and you're out. Gatlin being able to compete still is absurd.

Coe said yesterday he's increasing the standard ban from 2-4 years as part of his plans for change

Tox56

Buer wrote: »

I think about 6 of the finalists in 2004 were done for doping. The techniques are improving but that's not to suggest people aren't still getting away with it. If they didn't think they could get away with it, those lads who were caught in 2012 wouldn't have been doping.

In that race, of the "Big 5" (Powell, Gay, Bolt, Gatlin and Blake) only Bolt has never been caught and he's the one that goes faster than anyone yet people appear to have the least suspicion over.

Most damningly, Jamaica had a complete breakdown in their anti-doping programme from early 2012 until the Olympics. Essentially, no testing took place. From the 12 medals on offer in the men's and women's 100m and 200m races in the Olympics, Jamaica claimed 8!

Well I mean people have less suspicion because hes the only one that has never actually been caught for anything. If he goes his entire career without any hint of a scandal I would be inclined to think hes OK. I dont think there would be a cover up, I really cant believe they'd be willing to bust every single big name except him, nor do I think they'd actually be able to keep a story that big under wraps, and I dont think hes going to be any better at hiding it than the other top sprinters have been

[Deleted User]

Lifetime ban is the only thing that makes sense. If you need drugs to compete at the top level - how are you going to do it clean?

You can't.

Ban for life.

Zzippy

Deleted User wrote: »

Lifetime ban is the only thing that makes sense. If you need drugs to compete at the top level - how are you going to do it clean?

You can't.

Ban for life.

Yep. There is evidence that the benefits from doping, particularly steroids, last for a long time - look at Gatlin! Guys are competing against "ex-dopers" who still retain benefit from when they are doping. It can't be a level playing field while that happens.

Wang King

Jesus I hope Celtic get hammered tonight!

Stheno

Wang King wrote: »

Jesus I hope Celtic get hammered tonight!

Don't they only need to draw to go through?

What would be so bad about them getting through?