Usain Bolt And Ben Johnson

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Events
Posted on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:11:04 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Mike Lupica writes:

There was a time, because this is still a country of running and jumping, when the Olympics didn't really start until track and field did. . . . There was a time when the men's 100 was the glamour event of the Summer Olympics the way the men's downhill is the glamour men's event in winter. But that all changed 20 years ago when we all came to the stadium the first weekend in Seoul, the place crawling with security, lousy with security, as many guards awatching the stands that year as there were watching the track, where Carl Lewis would go up against Ben Johnson of Canada.

Lupica argues that the Ghost of Ben Johnson hangs over the phenomenal freak of nature Usain Bolt, who won the 100 meter dash in Beijing in otherworldly fashion. I hope not. I have no idea if "Lightning" Bolt is juiced but I have never seen an athlete I would suspect less. More . . .

Usain Bolt's physique and special sprinting skills seem natural. First, he is 6' 5", giving him an incredible stride. Second, Bolt's performance as a junior sprinter are such that his performances do not seem out of line with the natural progression of a phenom. He ran sub-20 second 200 meter dashes while in high school in Jamaica. That was not the result of steroids. Third, just watching him run, and I know this is not empirical, he just does not look juiced. He just doesn't to me.

But I really hate that the question is there. It is not an unfair question unfortunately. But it so mars our enjoyment of maybe a once in a lifetime athlete. I am going to try and put these thoughts out of my head as I watch to see how low he can go in the 200 meters.

< Would Republican Voters Embrace a Pro-Choice VP? | Warren Forum Transcripts and Follow Up >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Usain Bolt And Ben Johnson | 50 comments (50 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Bolt's performance was amazing (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:20:34 PM EST

What is the point of all this testing if we cannot be freed of suspicion?

I think Phelps has a lot more laying on the line with drug issues, esp. since his record relies upon at least 5 other swimmers not doping (the relay members).

Those suits sorta bother me (none / 0) (#41)
by samtaylor2 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:44:10 PM EST

They didn't let the guy without legs run because his prosthesis could potentially give him an advantage (the reasonsing sounded better when they explained it). What is the difference here?

[ Parent ]

I think the difference is that.... (none / 0) (#43)
by Maria Garcia on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:45:10 PM EST

...anyone can use the suits if they so choose.

[ Parent ]

Wasn't that an issue (none / 0) (#48)
by samtaylor2 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:49:54 PM EST

Some athletes didn't have access to the suit due to sponsorship issues?

[ Parent ]

: That I don't know. (none / 0) (#50)
by Maria Garcia on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:53:49 PM EST

I just heard one of the commentators say that anyone could wear them but they are frequently wrong about stuff so you may be right.

[ Parent ]

I agree BTD..... (5.00 / 0) (#5)
by Maria Garcia on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:36:39 PM EST

...He doesn't seem doped at all. My son ran track in high school though it wasn't his primary sport. He did it mainly to keep in shape for basketball. I was always struck by how short most of the sprinters were. I thought that if a really tall guy came along that had the same technique as the shorter runners he could easily beat them. Bolt seems to be that guy. I think that would never happen in our country because a kid that tall who could run like that would be diverted at an early age to basketball or football and probably never run track at all.

: Power to mass ratio n/t (none / 0) (#28)
by Fabian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:05:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Since this is a sports question.... (5.00 / 2) (#12)
by Maria Garcia on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:47:08 PM EST

...can I ask a dumb question about volleyball, which I don't follow at all. Why does one player on each team wear a different uniform?

Libero (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by CoralGables on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:10:02 PM EST

The Libero

[ Parent ]

: Thanks.... (5.00 / 1) (#42)
by Maria Garcia on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:44:17 PM EST

...those are some complicated rules.

[ Parent ]

When I played football in college ... (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:01:36 PM EST

... back in the early '80s, steroid use or "juicing" was not only far more common than most former players would ever admit today, it was also unofficially encouraged by both peer pressure and more than a few coaches all across the country.

My own head coach, Dick Tomey (now at San Jose State), strongly discouraged the practice when I asked him about it personally. He told me forthrightly that the then-unknown but still potentially substantive long-term health risks far outweighed whatever fleeting competitive advantages and transitory benefits I might enjoy.

I've always been thankful for having followed Coach Tomey's sage advice and resisted the temptation. A former teammate and still good friend did not, and today suffers from serious circulatory problems in his legs and arms, which he blames on his own steroid use. His physicians don't discourage such conjecture.

Blood Doping (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by CoralGables on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:20:26 PM EST

There is also a non-drug related doping that is involved in many sports and checked only in some sports. Blood doping has been around for years whereby blood is removed from from the body and reinserted prior to competition to increase the red blood cells. The high class version now being erythropoietin straight from the lab.

This would be more common in swimming, cycling, and 400 meters and longer on the track where oxygen debt is a factor... Not very useful at the 100 and 200 for the Lightning Bolt.

that was the most amazing 100 (5.00 / 2) (#39)
by Turkana on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:04:13 PM EST

i have ever seen. he quit at 80 meters. if he sticks with it, he will set world records that people won't match for a generation or more. i have no doubt that he's clean. he doesn't have the muscle mass that juicers have.

i also must point out- i still haven't found a video, but eddie hart left valery borzov in his dust, in the 4 x 100...

: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:48:57 PM EST

I was hoping you would weigh in on Bolt.
I am glad you agree with me that the guy is a natural once in a lifetime freak.

[ Parent ]

one thing i noticed, but (5.00 / 1) (#40)
by cpinva on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:31:13 PM EST

wasn't commented on, was the complete lack of wind at the track & field venue. it was measured at 0.0 mph. bolt is a horse, with strides 1.5 times longer than the average sprinter. eliminate almost all wind resistance (there will always be some), and it's a prime position for him to be in.

if he hadn't started celebrating a tad early, the time would have been even lower!

much as i enjoyed watching michael phelps' run in swimming, track & field is the olympics for me!

I'm honestly a little skeptical (none / 0) (#3)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:33:51 PM EST

of restrictions on doping. I understand the arguments, but I still have a problem telling people what they may and may not do to their own bodies.

As far as Sports are concerned (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Edgar08 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:44:27 PM EST

No one's forcing anyone to compete.

And if one wanted to have a "juiced" baseball/football/basketball/any sport league. And even a "juiced" Olympics, then I don't see why not.

I just don't know who would be interested in watching that sort of thing.

So I think the people who organize competitive sports have every right to set down rules by which one must comply to be considered a valid participant.

[ Parent ]

Sure, they can set any rules they want (none / 0) (#10)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:46:05 PM EST

I just think the rules are strange.

Should they be setting rules about what food I can eat during raining? How about how long I practice, and where?

[ Parent ]

If they wanted to they could (none / 0) (#20)
by Edgar08 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:54:46 PM EST

But the fans make a distinction between that stuff and drugs.

[ Parent ]

Then honestly, the fans just aren't thinking (none / 0) (#22)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:55:40 PM EST

[ Parent ]

That's not a very good (none / 0) (#25)
by Edgar08 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:02:30 PM EST

marketing strategy.

And i'm also one of the poor sots who not only makes such a distinction, but I also think I'm thinking.

[ Parent ]

May be they should have doping vs. clean (none / 0) (#44)
by samtaylor2 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:48:12 PM EST

Leagues, like in weightlifting. No one watches the clean league though.

[ Parent ]

I meant body building (none / 0) (#45)
by samtaylor2 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:48:36 PM EST

: I would be very dissappointed in society (none / 0) (#49)
by Edgar08 on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:53:36 PM EST

If doping leagues became more profitable than clean leagues.
Of course society has dissappointed me before.
But I do believe that one of the reasons why the NFL has become far more profitable than the MLB is because they dealt with this issue pro-actively.
That and the more visceral quality of the game itself.

[ Parent ]

Spinach salads (none / 0) (#27)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:05:03 PM EST

and erythropoietin do different things to the body.

[ Parent ]

: Yup. (none / 0) (#30)
by Fabian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:06:30 PM EST

And thanks for that word, I was trying to remember what it was.

[ Parent ]

But even if you say (none / 0) (#32)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:12:54 PM EST

fine, everyone can take steroids, it's your choice, it still seems to me there are ethical issues. For instance, can a still developing 15 year old Phelps dope and keep up with the competition in Sydney? Can the 16 year old vaulter dope, or just the 33 year old?

So even a "juiced" league would likely have rules that make no sense.

I know those Olympic kids push their bodies to the limit to begin with. I think it is important to sport to keep doping out.

[ Parent ]

Really? (none / 0) (#4)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:36:16 PM EST

I think there are so many people involved in the making of an Olympian that it is hardly an individual choice.

Take for instance the Eastern European countries that drugged their athletes into superpeople:

Athlete says sports steroids changed him from woman to man

[ Parent ]

If I had said that I thought (none / 0) (#7)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:40:10 PM EST

it was ok for a government to trick its athletes into taking dangerous levels of untested drugs, your comment would be a response to me.

[ Parent ]

The more general point of my comment (none / 0) (#9)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:45:38 PM EST

is that there are a lot of people involved in the process of making decisions with and for the athletes involved. So I think my choice to enjoy drugs as a form of leisure is different than allowing competitive racing to embrace drugs as a factor, and likely a necessary factor, in achieving success.

[ Parent ]

Don't you think that some non-drug related (none / 0) (#11)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:46:57 PM EST

components of Olympic training are potentially dangerous? Why just prohibit the drugs?

[ Parent ]

Like what? (none / 0) (#15)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:50:24 PM EST

Without drugs setting the heart and glands out of natural rhythms, Olympic athletes are at the peak of health more or less.

[ Parent ]

Are you seriously saying that athletes don't (none / 0) (#18)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:53:24 PM EST

open themselves to injury during training? Why do you think sports medicine is so big?

[ Parent ]

: Well, in part (none / 0) (#26)
by lilburro on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:02:37 PM EST

due to the popularity of sports nationwide.
I think that pulled groins and rotator cuff surgeries, are different from heart failure and blood clots to the brain (problems directly linked to steroids). Doping makes sports substantially more dangerous. It changes the blood.

[ Parent ]

It does point out (none / 0) (#16)
by Fabian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:52:40 PM EST

the reality of putting untested drugs out into an unregulated marketplace, libertarian style. Without any way of knowing if the substance you bought was the same as the label, if it was pure or contaminated, or even the source of the substance (laboratory or human cadavers?) - who would buy or use those drugs? Add in a few middlemen and you would have no way of knowing what is in a bottle.

Hormones and hormone analogs are some of the most dangerous things you can mess with since the damage is often permanent and gradual. I do feel very sorry with the female athletes who were victimized by their government.

[ Parent ]

Absolutely (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by andgarden on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:54:55 PM EST

and I don't object to a solid regulatory regime for drugs. I think the market of untested "herbal" supplements in America it ridiculous, and people who promote them and take them are fools.

[ Parent ]

: I take supplements (none / 0) (#33)
by Fabian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:13:50 PM EST

but I know what I am taking, at least as much as I can.
What's scary are "herbal supplements" that have 2-3 different natural stimulants in them. Sure, the doses and precautions are listed on the labels, but I wonder how many users actually read them. ODing on a natural stimulant will mess you up just as badly as ODing on a pharmeceutical. There's still people who think "natural" means it can't hurt you.

[ Parent ]

It's a valid question (none / 0) (#6)
by Faust on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:38:08 PM EST

but one I ignore. I just enjoy the athletes for what they do and let the huge enforcement apparatus do its job in the background. It's not like I am in the slightest position to know how to go about catching a juicer.

I am, however, in a position to enjoy the phenomenal athleticism displayed in this years games.

Swimming has been awesome as well. I can't believe Torres missed gold by 1/100th of a second. I was so bummed.

Unfortunately, the thought immediately (none / 0) (#14)
by indy in sc on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:50:23 PM EST

entered my mind about whether drugs were involved. You're right that his physique doesn't fit the mold of a person on steroids or HGH. I sincerely hope he's clean (in this day and age of heightened scruitiny and testing, an athlete/trainer would be really dumb to dope). Every time a world record is beaten in track--I can't help but think--I hope s/he is clean.

The way he blew past the field, eased up, and still broke the record--wow. I wish he hadn't eased up though so we could know what time he would have had.

I never thought Floyd Landis, the Tour de France (none / 0) (#19)
by jawbone on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 01:53:35 PM EST

winner disqualified for doping, would actually have been juiced.

I'm still so disppointed that that happened....

So, I guess I can imagine that any athlete has possible doped. Alas.

The most amazing thing about Bolt... (none / 0) (#37)
by Dadler on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:49:54 PM EST

...is the effortless look of his stride. He looks almost like he's speed skating, so still and controlled. Simply astounding and a joy to watch. Beautiful to watch.

That's what i liked too (none / 0) (#54)
by ruffian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 05:51:31 PM EST

He doesn't look like he is even moving that fast, he is so loose and and relaxed.

I have put all thoughts of doping out of my mind. I hadn't even considered it until BTD brought it up. I am putting it back in the 'thar be dragons' compartment where it belongs.

[ Parent ]

: I guess my loose and relaxed (none / 0) (#55)
by ruffian on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 05:52:19 PM EST

is your still and controlled. I'll have to watch it again!

[ Parent ]

Bolt (none / 0) (#38)
by JThomas on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 02:56:57 PM EST

looked like a new-age uber-species out there.
Being 6'5'' in a sport dominated by shorter more powerful guys and staying with them out of the blocks is simple mind-blowing.
As I saw it I thought of Bob Beamon's incredible long jump in Mexico City that broke the record by almost two feet. A once in a lifetime jump. And maybe a once in a lifetime race by Bolt. But he might have just wanted to take down the record incrementally instead of blowing it away last nite. Smart move.

: I thought of Beamon too (none / 0) (#47)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:49:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]

That was unbelievable (none / 0) (#51)
by Steve M on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 03:54:54 PM EST

I have watched that race a dozen times and I still can't comprehend it.

If that was juice, Bolt should just retire right now and start selling whatever it is he was taking. Every athlete on earth will want some.

Exquisite Mechanics: Every stride a perfect 10 (none / 0) (#52)
by Ellie on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 04:26:53 PM EST

Flawless placement of hands and knees to make the most of every stride. Speed is a dynamic blend of beauty and intelligence. This is what I imagine when I hear the phrase "poetry in motion".

Awesome to see it so perfectly realized in a few fleeting seconds. (isn't it great to have the blur-free tech to see it frame by gorgeous frame?)

Why are we obsessed with the drugs? (none / 0) (#53)
by dianem on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 04:42:24 PM EST

Yes, it's an abuse to use performance enhancing drugs in sport. No question. But we seem to focus on the question of whether people are using these drugs to the exclusion of all else. Every time we see a great performance, instead of appreciating the performance we question their ethics. Those who use these drugs are wrong - but even the ones who do did not get their scores simply by taking a pill. They worked their butts off day after day in a way that is admirable. A lot of the controversy over enhancement isn't even about drugs, it's often about non-dangerous techniques like getting blood transfusions to increase oxygen carrying capacity. As long as the athlete is using their own blood, there is little to no risk from this, but it's treated as seriously as steroid use, which is extremely dangerous.

Yes, there are ethical issues related to performance enhancement, but I think we've let this particular issue overshadow other issues in sports, both positive and negative. The "War on Drugs" has diminished the enjoyment of sports for everybody. People who spend years getting up at 5 in the morning to practice have their careers destroyed because they made a bad decision or even simply a mistaken one a decade ago. That's not right. I wish we could focus on how hard they work and how much they sacrifice. I think of a recent case where an athelete passed two tests and failed one in the middle and had her career threatened. That's not right. She swears she didn't use any drugs, and all of her tests came out negative except that one. Drug tests are not 100% reliable. It's tragic.

Walter Dix (none / 0) (#56)
by john horse on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 06:23:06 PM EST

How about giving some credit to the bronze medalist in the men's 100, Walter Dix.

He wasn't expected to win a medal. He wasn't even considered the best American runner in the event. All he did was exceed expectations.

What more can you ask?

Oh, and did I mention that he attended FSU.

: The Bronze (none / 0) (#57)
by CoralGables on Sun Aug 17, 2008 at 06:34:14 PM EST

If he came from 90 miles east on I-10 and another 50 south on I-75 I would have mentioned where he matriculated.

[ Parent ]