Christian Coleman my face suspension over missed drug test

Ceepo

Doesnt look good, obviously more information will come out over the next few days/weeks
It will have serious implications for the World championships 100m 200m and relays and possible Tokyo Olympics..


https://www.flotrack.org/articles/6555048-report-christian-coleman-may-face-suspension-after-missed-drug-tests

Fusitive

Delighted, it'll get brushed over as missing tests rather than a positive test but it's just as good as, it's literally his job and if he's missing tests regularly, something is up, you never see him missing a race once in 12 months but he can miss 3 rests?. 11 sprinters in history have run sub-9.80. Only Bolt is untainted by PED's. It's about time that the major meets start implementing clauses into contracts that makes the athletes liable for all prize money earned in the event of these things.

As for the World Champs, If Gaitlin wins or medals, that's a wrap for me and international athletics. Something is up again in the Pro circuit with all the ridicoulous performances over the last 18 months.

walshb

Ridiculous performances...😅

average_runner

Fusitive wrote: »

Delighted, it'll get brushed over as missing tests rather than a positive test but it's just as good as, it's literally his job and if he's missing tests regularly, something is up, you never see him missing a race once in 12 months but he can miss 3 rests?. 11 sprinters in history have run sub-9.80. Only Bolt is untainted by PED's. It's about time that the major meets start implementing clauses into contracts that makes the athletes liable for all prize money earned in the event of these things.

As for the World Champs, If Gaitlin wins or medals, that's a wrap for me and international athletics. Something is up again in the Pro circuit with all the ridicoulous performances over the last 18 months.

Cant see Gaitlin not getting a medal. Atheltics is broken

NIMAN

Its been broken for several decades or more.

I truly believe that not one single 100m sprint record in the last 40 years has been by a totally clean athlete.

They are all dirty, just that some were never caught.

average_runner

NIMAN wrote: »

Its been broken for several decades or more.

I truly believe that not one single 100m sprint record in the last 40 years has been by a totally clean athlete.

They are all dirty, just that some were never caught.

I agree. I don't think many races won at the worlds or olympics these days are clean. The worst thing about all of this, the people at the top don't want to make the changes to make it better

Turnrew

The scandal with Ukad, and Mo Farah and Paula Radcliffes antics the last while have been depressing.

At this stage when an athlete is challenging a wr you pretty much know they're doing something they shouldn't

Itziger

average_runner wrote: »

I agree. I don't think many races won at the worlds or olympics these days are clean. The worst thing about all of this, the people at the top don't want to make the changes to make it better

Thing about this is, even those who come in and say they want to change the doping culture in a sport (be it Athletics, Cycling, Baseball..... or the sports that don't have any problems with drugs such as Rugby, GAA and football), even those people get corrupted by the money in the end.

Power, they say, corrupts and I wouldn't disagree but money must be up there too. The whole world saw what it took to bring Lance A to 'justice'. Sometimes the appetite is there for these big fights and sometimes it's not.

And yes, I was being facetious about the sports that don't have a drug problem!!

walshb

Turnrew wrote: »

At this stage when an athlete is challenging a wr you pretty much know they're doing something they shouldn't

Well, the sport has no credibility if this is in any way a pervasive attitude...

It's a ridiculously lame, ignorant and lazy attitude really.

As if WRs cannot be touched, challenged or broken.

Do you have any criteria for what humans should and should not be able to achieve in athletics without PEDs?

Mike9832

NIMAN wrote: »

Its been broken for several decades or more.

I truly believe that not one single 100m sprint record in the last 40 years has been by a totally clean athlete.

They are all dirty, just that some were never caught.

They might as well turn a blind eye like in worlds stongest man now, do a medical to see if heart etc is ok and they won't die on stage

As Conte said anything under 10.00 is not clean, a bit like how a 1000+ pound deadlift is not clean, human body can only be pushed so far

Lyles is looking very suspicious too, his 200 times and sheer power past 50m improvements over the last 2 years has been phenomenal

The difference drugs make, even at small doses is incredible in terms of power and strength, it's almost impossible to resist.Very very few people could resist them, I know I couldn't if I had talent like them.

walshb

Mike9832 wrote: »

As Conte said anything under 10.00 is not clean,

.

Do you actually believe this?

I can run 100 metres in 13 seconds, and I'm an old fart....

Seriously, some of the nonsense I read on people's views of what pro athletes should and should not be achieving....

average_runner

Itziger wrote: »

Thing about this is, even those who come in and say they want to change the doping culture in a sport (be it Athletics, Cycling, Baseball..... or the sports that don't have any problems with drugs such as Rugby, GAA and football), even those people get corrupted by the money in the end.

Power, they say, corrupts and I wouldn't disagree but money must be up there too. The whole world saw what it took to bring Lance A to 'justice'. Sometimes the appetite is there for these big fights and sometimes it's not.

And yes, I was being facetious about the sports that don't have a drug problem!!

You could say money is power.

average_runner

walshb wrote: »

Well, the sport has no credibility if this is in any way a pervasive attitude...

It's a ridiculously lame, ignorant and lazy attitude really.

As if WRs cannot be touched, challenged or broken.

Do you have any criteria for what humans should and should not be able to achieve in athletics without PEDs?

The sport has no credibility because the people at the top are not addressing the issues. We need drug users to get life bans for start.

Can you honestly put your house on any WR is now clean?

adrian522

Remember when it was against the rules here to throw unsubstantiated doping allegations at athletes?

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

Do you actually believe this?

I can run 100 metres in 13 seconds, and I'm an old fart....

Seriously, some of the nonsense I read on people's views of what pro athletes should and should not be achieving....

Under 9.90-10.00 is probably possible, anything under 9.75, not a chance

Every single one of them were on peds that made those times

Have you taken peds?

Have you experience the difference they make?

Mike9832

adrian522 wrote: »

Remember when it was against the rules here to throw unsubstantiated doping allegations at athletes?

Didn't know

You can edit that part out, just my opinion

average_runner

adrian522 wrote: »

Remember when it was against the rules here to throw unsubstantiated doping allegations at athletes?

Don't think anyone has name a specific athlete ?

Colman missing three tests is a fact.

walshb

Mike9832 wrote: »

Under 9.90-10.00 is probably possible, anything under 9.75, not a chance

Every single one of them were on peds that made those times

Have you taken peds?

Have you experience the difference they make?

Have I taken PEDs?.......no

Difference they make......I am not saying they don't make a difference...

Do you think ALL athletes who are and were in the 9.9 or lower bracket are and were dishonest?

Not possible that those few hundredths below 9.9 is achievable via hard work, natural talent and sheer will and desire?

Why would anyone be so certain, like you appear to be, that there are no humans out there who can run 9.8 and lower by hard work, natural talent and sheer will.

Usain Bolt is clean. He ran 9.58, in what I believe the most perfect sprint run in history.

Turnrew

walshb wrote: »

Have I taken PEDs?.......no

Difference they make......I am not saying they don't make a difference...

Do you think ALL athletes who are and were in the 9.9 or lower bracket are and were dishonest?

Not possible that those few hundredths below 9.9 is achievable via hard work, natural talent and sheer will and desire?

Why would anyone be so certain, like you appear to be, that there are no humans out there who can run 9.8 and lower by hard work, natural talent and sheer will.

Usain Bolt is clean. He ran 9.58, in what I believe the most perfect sprint run in history.

Don't think we can say that

It emerged that testing in Jamaica was non existent

walshb

Turnrew wrote: »

Don't think we can say that

It emerged that testing in Jamaica was non existent

Well, to be precise we can never truly know. But why ponder on this?

You may as well just switch off from life if that is the case....

All we have is testing and passes and fails....

Bringing in the whole "just because you pass and pass and pass doesn't mean you are clean," is ridiculous, albeit true.

Personally I believe that Bolt is and was clean. I also believe that about some other fantastic athletes in all sports, who win, succeed and set the bar at the highest through honesty and raw talent and hard work...

There are many many athletes out there who are and were number 1, and who were besting cheaters......to some, this notion is illogical. To me, their belief that it's illogical, is illogical.

The biggest nonsense is the whole "if you're not cheating you're not trying."

Or you cannot get to elite, or higher if clean and honest....utter lazy ass, ignorant horsesh!t.

Pherekydes

average_runner wrote: »

Don't think anyone has name a specific athlete ?

Yes, every sub 10 runner in history. Read the post. That includes Jim Hines in 1968.

Colman missing three tests is a fact.

Nope. Still speculation, all emanating from a report in the Daily mail.

walshb

Turnrew wrote: »

Don't think we can say that

It emerged that testing in Jamaica was non existent

BTW, what do you think is the bar/criteria for clean athletes....

100?
200?
400? Johnson and Van Niedkerk couldn't have done what they did clean? Is 43 or below not humanly possible clean?
800?. Rudisha/Coe/Kipketer couldn't have done what they did clean? Is 1.40.x not humanly possible clean?
Mile...Morecelli/Cram/Hicham couldn't have done what they did clean? Is 3.26/3.43 not humanly possible clean?

What about Bannister in the 50s.........on PEDs?

And so on?

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

Have I taken PEDs?.......no

Difference they make......I am not saying they don't make a difference...

Do you think ALL athletes who are and were in the 9.9 or lower bracket are and were dishonest?

Not possible that those few hundredths below 9.9 is achievable via hard work, natural talent and sheer will and desire?

Why would anyone be so certain, like you appear to be, that there are no humans out there who can run 9.8 and lower by hard work, natural talent and sheer will.

Usain Bolt is clean. He ran 9.58, in what I believe the most perfect sprint run in history.

It's possible, but I don't think anyone has done it

No one has persevered long enough without peds to do it.

Takes some will power to slog away for 10-15 years to get that time, when you can do it a year or 2 on peds.

They are all one injury away from career being over, couldn't blame them for taking a shortcut

Especially when you read stuff like below

Of the 11 men in history to run 9.80 or faster, all but Usain Bolt have been banned or linked to an anti-doping infraction.

9.58 Usain Bolt
9.69 Tyson Gay — banned for one year for steroids in 2013
9.69 Yohan Blake — banned for three months for stimulant in 2009
9.72 Asafa Powell — banned for six months for stimulant in 2013
9.74 Justin Gatlin — banned for amphetamines in 2001 (one year), testosterone in 2006 (four years)
9.78 Nesta Carter — failed test for stimulant at 2008 Olympics, banned for three months
9.78 Tim Montgomery — banned for two years in 2005 for involvement in BALCO scandal; later admitted to taking testosterone and HGH
9.79 Christian Coleman — facing potential 1-2 year ban for 3 whereabouts failure in 2019
9.79 Maurice Greene — allegedly paid for steroids in 2003 and 2004 (Greene denied the allegations)
9.79 Ben Johnson – banned for two years after testing positive for Stanozolol at 1988 Olympics (Johnson’s time was invalidated).
9.80 Steve Mullings — banned for testosterone in 200 (two years), banned for life for masking agent in 2011

"hard work, natural talent and sheer will" is irrelevant, they are all doing that the elite level

Is it possible

walshb

Mike9832 wrote: »

"hard work, natural talent and sheer will" is irrelevant, they are all doing that the elite level

Sorry, but it is very relevant when you blanket dismiss any possibility that elite human athletes cannot run these times without PEDs

Throw in outliers. Once in a million type athletes...

This is where we will see WRs being broken. Humans now are pretty much at their peak as regards the ability to keep getting faster via training improvements and diet and technology.

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but it is very relevant when you blanket dismiss any possibility that elite human athletes cannot run these times without PEDs

Throw in outliers. Once in a million type athletes...

This is where we will see WRs being broken. Humans now are pretty much at their peak as regards the ability to keep getting faster via training improvements and diet and technology.

Its possible

But so is going to Mars

Is it worth the time, investment when other avenues are available eg send a probe/take peds

walshb

Mike9832 wrote: »

Its possible

But so is going to Mars

Is it worth the time, investment when other avenues are available eg send a probe/take peds

I get that 9.8 and below are phenomenal times, and those doing this, likely increases the chances that "some" are juicing....

But Conte and his 10 seconds nonsense is just ludicrous.

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

I get that 9.8 and below are phenomenal times, and those doing this, likely increases the chances that "some" are juicing....

But Conte and his 10 seconds nonsense is just ludicrous.

Yeah he was just being controversial

Turnrew

Wasn't conte only a snake oil salesman, don't think his opinion carries a lot of weight

The athletes using his stuff didnt improve much if I recall

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but it is very relevant when you blanket dismiss any possibility that elite human athletes cannot run these times without PEDs

Throw in outliers. Once in a million type athletes...

This is very true, freaks are out there

Example

Doesn't matter what white athletes do, they simply don't have the size or power to do that sub 9.80 even with peds

Mike9832

walshb wrote: »

Usain Bolt is clean. He ran 9.58, in what I believe the most perfect sprint run in history.

I can't believe this to be true, it seems ridiculous

Out of the top 11 fastest ever, 10 of them are on peds, except Bolt

Would be like going into a gym and picking the 10 biggest mofos juiced to the gills on roids and the strongest is the lanky dude on nothing but chicken and rice, who doesn't even train as hard as them

That only happens in Disney movies

average_runner

I think most have accepted that drugs are just part of the sport now, it doesn't mean we can't sit back and enjoy athletics.

How many finals in the world champs will have convicted drug cheats?