Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 74 of 74
  1. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #71
    Quote Originally Posted by ATK
    I don't see how doping needs to be brought into that conversation of him getting faster now...
    Precisely because of your other comment:

    Quote Originally Posted by ATK
    Gatlin was away for 4 years, not competing and pounding his body at the highest level against top competition.
    Had he been off for 4 years with repeated injuries, training and racing to the max, getting injured, training/racing, getting injured etc., he would likely be in a different position now.

    Quote Originally Posted by scottmitchell74
    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.
    But Scott, a layoff isnít a layoff, that's the whole point. Injury layoffs are different to doping layoffs. Your question was "How much do you think Gatlin's forced break is helping him at an age when many sprinters are done or fading fast?". Would you have been asking that same question had he been off the scene for 4 years with repeated injuries, a broken leg, or torn Achilles? It is precisely because he has been serving a ban, and therefore didnít have the opportunity to race and compete, that meant he probably did not train as hard for that whole 4 years and is why his body his holding up now. So, his ban is a significant detail.

    There's no point in comparing his situation to athletes who were off due to injury (Blake) or illness (Edwards) or who started careers late (Jeter). Injury/illness/late careers are totally different scenarios to a doping ban in terms of the effect on the body. What happened to Gay on his 'year off' (BAN) is totally different to Blake, we should compare him to one of the many sprinters that has been banned for 12 months. Compare Gatlin to someone like Grit Breuer, another sprinter who had a 4 year ban or possibly Ben Johnson or Dwain Chambers (2 years)
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,253
    Or Gatlin could be an exception to a rule which hasn't been proved out.

    All said, he should be measured against others with long layoffs which have nothing to do with injury or illness as those things flavor the pool your measuring Gatlin against. My guess is due to the size of the pool this will be a study with inconclusive results.

    One other thing to remember is that money is an important motivator to some and combined wth a body that may be more bulletproof than others Gatlin may last a few more years at his level of excellence.
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella
    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.
    Again, in the context of this board, for many people use of the term forced has a stronger connotation than you apply, although everyone reading that phrase knew exactly what was meant, right?

    As for your personal views, unfortunately, those doping bans are only for those adjudicated to have run afoul of the PEDs regulations, including some that are adjudicated to not be guilty of doping. There are apparently many others who you seem to prefer that are doping but are getting away with it. I just hope that the degree of assistance for many of those is only modest, which I think is the case.
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Re: ∂Lausanne (non DL): m100óGatlin 9.80 (WL)
    #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriella
    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.
    Crap..
    Gatlin was originally given a lifetime, then an eight year ban...that was eventually reduced to four years. Who trains through that?
    He actually gave up track and tried out for several NFL teams.

    Unless the man fails another dope test I choose to give him the same benefit of doubt that others seem to get.
     

Posting Permissions

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