Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 74
  1. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #61
    Quote Originally Posted by scottmitchell74
    How much do you think Gatlin's forced break is helping him at an age when many sprinters are done or fading fast?

    What other sprinters have benefited from mid-career layoffs?
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Another factor of an extended layoff may be a greater 'hunger' that would otherwise have dissipated.
    Forced break? Mid-career layoff? Extended layoff? I think the words you guys are looking for are 'doping ban'. Surely we are allowed to state facts?

    2014 has been a bit of a paradox for the blue riband event (blue ribbon for our North American hosts :P ). On the one hand it's been good for the sport, in the long term, because there is no Bolt. It's never healthy when the sport 'is' one superstar, or when that person transcends the sport. As gh says, just wait till Bolt retires (although we may get lucky and some amazing talent will come through)The paradox is that unfortunately the two men that the focus has moved onto have both served doping bans, thus Lausanne became 'the doping 100' in much of the mainstream media. So we take one step forward and two backs back again.

    The 100 will always be the blue riband/ribbon event, so the IAAF needs to come up with some clever marketing that doesn't focus solely on Bolt (or anyone else for that matter). This is difficult because the sport is about superstars, but there has to be a way of doing it, maybe focussing on up and coming stars who perhaps have interesting stories or something. I don't know, but we need something different.

    At this point Gatlin is clearly number 1. However, we still have a number of Diamond League events to come (Monaco, Stockholm, Birmingham, Zurich, Brussels) as well as World Challenge events (Madrid, Belem, Berlin, Zagreb, Rieti) so depending on who runs where, and who runs what time, Gay could in theory steal the crown. 2015 we start from scratch again.
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,128
    Forced break is not a euphemism, and my comment is meant to be a general case as it just followed a comment on Edwards and not Gatlin's case per se, so get off your high horse.

    In terms of 2014 rankings, Gatlin has a lead but not the honor yet. And to add a ped-related comment, if it were a toss up between him and, say, Carter or Blake I would go against Gatlin.
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #63
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Forced break is not a euphemism, and my comment is meant to be a general case as it just followed a comment on Edwards and not Gatlin's case per se, so get off your high horse.
    No high horse, just frustration. If you were not explicitly referring to Gatlin yourself, then apologies. Phrases like 'forced break' in particular, suggest no culpability, which we know is incorrect.

    "you may not want to call a spade a spade. You may prefer to call it a spatulous device for abrading the surface of the soil. Better, however, to stick to the old familiar, simple name that your grandfather called it."

    Returning from a ban and returning from an injury are totally different, but even so, I was pretty shocked at the difference in form between Gay and Blake. One looking totally like themself,the other, a shadow of themself.
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,128
    A bit of US/UK language difference here, I think (two countries divided by a common language comes to mind). Forced break has the implication of 'go sit in the corner', not just injury, especially in the context of a four-year period for Gatlin. And, yes, my comment was in the context of general cases and followed someone making the case of Edwards taking some extended downtime (and not for injury, I think, in 95 and/or 96).
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,253
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    A bit of US/UK language difference here, I think (two countries divided by a common language comes to mind). Forced break has the implication of 'go sit in the corner', not just injury, especially in the context of a four-year period for Gatlin. And, yes, my comment was in the context of general cases and followed someone making the case of Edwards taking some extended downtime (and not for injury, I think, in 95 and/or 96).
    Not to get into semantics too deep, but "forced break" made me think that he was unduly punished. I know you know he wasn't but "forced" makes it sound as if the break was made at gunpoint. Back to the discussion.
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Right there.
    Posts
    2,771
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    A bit of US/UK language difference here, I think (two countries divided by a common language comes to mind). Forced break has the implication of 'go sit in the corner', not just injury, especially in the context of a four-year period for Gatlin. And, yes, my comment was in the context of general cases and followed someone making the case of Edwards taking some extended downtime (and not for injury, I think, in 95 and/or 96).
    Yes, not for injury but due to illness-still a health related issue. Carl Johnson and others referred to it as an "enforced layoff" for Edwards.
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella
    Quote Originally Posted by scottmitchell74
    How much do you think Gatlin's forced break is helping him at an age when many sprinters are done or fading fast?

    What other sprinters have benefited from mid-career layoffs?
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Another factor of an extended layoff may be a greater 'hunger' that would otherwise have dissipated.
    Forced break? Mid-career layoff? Extended layoff? I think the words you guys are looking for are 'doping ban'. Surely we are allowed to state facts?

    ....
    It depends, are we discussing the reason for the absence or the fact that it occurred and the impact on the athletes? Since it is the later, then "mid-career layoff" or "extended layoff" allows some of us to focus on the discussion at hand. That is to say Mr. Gatlin's ability to run at the world class level after being gone for 4 years or Mr. Gay's after being gone for a year.
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #68
    If we're discussing returning athletes we should differentiate between injury and doping bans. Using terms like "forced break" could be either and, believe it or not, some fans may not be aware why an athlete has gone absent. Regardless of my personal views (we all know I take a harsh line with those having chosen to cheat) it's important to differentiate because 1 year off with injury is very different to one year off with a doping ban. You can train through a doping ban; you cannot train through a torn achilles.
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #69
    Gatlin was away for 4 years, not competing and pounding his body at the highest level against top competition. While most sprinters seem to head downward at 32, he seems to still be going up and getting faster.

    I don't see how doping needs to be brought into that conversation of him getting faster now...
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    2,016
    It doesn't. That's why I chose the words I did. A layoff for any reason is a layoff. Whether a ban or a contract dispute (Riggins) or some sort of sabbatical, I was just asking the board what they thought about such layoffs and then the renewed/lengthened careers that follow.

    Ricky Williams comes to mind as well. He had his pot/mental health/"it's not fun anymore" break from the NFL, and then comes back to be very productive deep(er) into his 30's than almost any other Running Back save those already mentioned.
    You there, on the motorbike! Sell me one of your melons!
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •