Bolts nutritionist

Super D Boon wrote:Conte is still trying to find legitimacy.

He is hugely legitimate. He now (supposedly legitimately) works with various athletes including Andre Ward who I know you rate very highly. Nothing illegitimate in that.

Him and Pound have made claims without so much as evidence to show for it.

Maybe, but they both have enormous knowledge of doping and anti-doping so you'd have to give some credence to their claims given such a collective depth of knowledge.

[With FloJo there were loud whispers. Screams indeed with people saying they had seen her doping. Plus with USA being a lawyer mad country, no threat of legal action was made.

This is just your interpretation of events and cannot be passed off as facts. "Loud whispers" or "screams" of her doping do not constitute proof of doping.

Her physique altered and her voice changed to a more masculine one. If you ever heard a female bodybuilder talk you will notice the similarities. Plus as soon as random testing was introduced, she retired.

Her physique changed through hard work though? Blake looks like he has muscles on his muscles yet this is down to sheer hard work so why not Flo Jo? What's to say another factor, possibly a medical condition didn't constitute her change of voice? She retired having won multiple gold medals in the Seoul Olympics and may have felt she had nothing more to achieve. She went on to star in Japanese films and cash in on her huge popularity in Japan. It could be argued that her retirement prior to random testing was purely coincidental.

With the JA sprinters, its sources who will not identify themselves making assumptions and telling outright lies.

How do you know they are outright lies? Do you see the Jamaican sprinters day in day out? Do you know them personally? Do you have access to their training regimes and diets?

The Galveston Giant wrote:Too much oral.

azania wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:

azania wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:

azania wrote:I will saythat I am dubious about Mo. I mean this guy has no previous but is a world champ and double olympic champ. He was also an also ran. His training partner is also dodgy.

My source is the minutes from the Women's Institute AGM.

The Women's Institute do a lot of very good works for charity and shouldn't be besmirched in an article about doping. Besides, they're anti doping procedures are probably a lot more effective than the Jamaicans

What is wrong with JADCO? They are fully accredited with the IAAF. Unless you also believe the IAAF are in cahoots with JA to be permitted to drug their sprinters. Which is it?

You laugh at me yet you believe the JA team are juicing without so much as proof. Do you believe the moon landings were fake and 911 was organised by the US authorities as part of their Project for the New American Century?

JADCO are only recently accredited, prior to that didn't have a OOC testing system before Beijing and shortly after they put one in place they busted a few guys including Yohan Blake. You put a great deal of importance on the Jamaicans not failing drugs tests but when it's pointed out that Blake failed a test you write it off as unimportant as it was "over the counter stuff" so it therefore doesn't count so you change the goal posts to suit your argument. Besides, JADCO may now be "compliant" but are they effective? A system that's been in place for around four years that is all. I know from my line of work that being compliant means ticking boxes, it doesn't mean it's any good.

You see the other the problem with you is this obsession with proof. That's all well and good but then you've pretty much castigated Flo Jo with her "Barry White voice" as you put it yet there's no evidence or proof she ever juiced either. This shows you as having double standards.

How recent is recent in your opinion. Are you suggesting that prior to Beijing no JA sprinter was tested?

As for Blake, I have said all along that no JA trained sprinter has been banned for STEROIDS. You may as well call Alan Baxter a juicer for being caught with Sinex in his system. That comical error caused him his Olympic Bronze and yes you are correct, I don't place much emphasis on that or call Baxter a cheat despite him being banned and stripped of his medal. Would you?

JADCO are compliant and effective. They caught and banned Mullings.....one of their fastest sprinters. How more effective do you want them to be? In my line of work, being compliant means more than ticking boxes. It actually means being compliant. The consequences for non compliancy are severe.

The issue of FloJo is not so much that she failed drug tests, but that the circumstantial evidence of her doping are very clear. With the JA its gossip and figures without evidence. FloJo actually physically changed in appearance and her voice. Now if you see and hear female bodybuilders or juicers you will see and hear the similarities. Plus other athletes (Joachim Cruz for one) calling her out. Mel Latternay (spelling) also said the same about her and Lewis.

azania wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:

azania wrote:

Te difference is that you had people coming forward and naming him. Who has come forward naming any JA sprinter. Some obscure website claiming that Bolt knows a man who knows Hereda.

If you cannot see the difference between the Armstrong case and Jamaica then you are deliberately being dishonest with yourself.

I'm not talking about the Armstrong case now, I'm talking about the Armstrong case a number of years ago.

Before anyone came forward it was pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense. There are a lot of parallels.

I'm not talking about now either. Over the years many cyclists have been calling out Lance. In fact the French cycling body actually accused him of juicing over 5 years ago. They were accused of being jealous and anti American.

No parallels.

djlovesyou wrote:Didn't a German sprinter (Unger?) call out the Jamaicans a few years ago?

He was accused of being jealous, racist and anti-Jamaican.

english_osprey wrote:re Unger

He was vilified but of course nobody felt it necessary to sue him (just in case).

english_osprey wrote:Gentlemen, as yet another potentially interesting discussion peters out into circular arguement and abuse the question remains, why bother?

Why bother even attempting to discuss any rational point with an irrational man whose sole interest is to cause grief?
Why discuss points of view regarding track and field with a man whose total knowledge of the sport wouldn't fill the back of a postage stamp?
Why discuss with a man who's come with an agenda (jamaicans don't cheat) and cannot politically even consider altering his opinion.
Why discuss anything with a man who has made hundreds of posts but is too lazy to produce any reference or quotes from legitimate sources in them that might support his case?
Why bother with a man who is not even vaugely interested in the sport, merely provoking the posters on here?

If you met this man in a pub would you consider talking to him for more than 5 minutes?
So why bother here?