Anyone want to speculate?

The coverage from the BBC was somewhat reticent when it came to the history of the 100m sprint competitors, and I am also aware of some speculation regarding the efficacy of the Jamaican out of competition testing and their refusal to join the Caribbean’s Regional Anti-Doping Organisation.

Justin Gatlin, a four year ban…
Yohan Blake, 3 month ban…

Asafa Powell pulled out of 2011 Daegu World Championships where doping was strict…

Or is it too early to start bursting that Olympic bubble?

If we mention Powell then Christine Ohuruogu missing a number of non routine tests must be considered often wondered if the BOA would have rolled over if she wasn’t a medal prospect.

Seen the first EPO test with the walker?

My natural sense of cynicism is gradually restoring itself, and i wonder about some of the performances i’ve seen…

If there aren’t tests available today, how far into the future should we keep samples so that we can do future tests?

It’s 8 years I think, there was a piece on the BBC about the retrospective testing at the start of the games, can’t remember for sure the length of time quoted. It’s kind of irrelevant if they are training off season on the drugs then cleaning up in season when they will definitely be tested, the stored samples will still be clean. Which is why the home nation needs to have an effective test regime.

I want to believe that Bolt is clean, I really do he is a proper character and good for sport, but the domination of sprint events by Jamaica just beggars belief. Which I guess by the same logic would also point the finger of suspicion at the British cycling achievements, although I think they are statistically much more possible.

Haven’t the French already been questioning the unbelievable, incredible achievements of the British cycling team?

One of the Belarus athletes was pulled for a test he had done in 2004…

I think it was mainly political in that the Belarus team didn’t want to be banned, but it shows some thought about the testing regime.

The more I look, the more I think cycling is way ahead of the game in terms of the biological passport.

not sure about the above, but was impressed by michael johnson a few years ago handing back what he discribed as a ‘tainted medal’ as one of his former relay team mates admitted to doping

mrs aa has read something saying the french are chuntering suggesting team gb are using illegal wheels, in that they’re not mavic but some commercially unavailable carbon wizardry.

i too have wondered about bolts. i’m a keen armstrong sceptic. applying the same logic that a performance so superior to ones contemporaries is naturally unlikely (theres scientific evidence out there that proposes that the degree that champion athletes beat other equivalently skilled/talented atheletes is very small degrees, not complete dominance) if it looks like a turd, smells like a turd……..

i feel sorry for people like denis menchov, 3 grand tours but only ‘won’ one. the other two were by people being chucked off months later.

the answers’ not to allow doping, nor to rescind the medal if there’s a retrospective positive. it’s to SHOOT THEM if there’s a retrospective positive. 😉

There’d be a lot of very dead sprinters from the 80s and 90s then.

Cycling has a horrendous reputation but the testing regime is far better than most other sports – it would be naive to think doping no longer exists but it is probably now on a much smaller scale and not at a transformative level capable of turning good/competitive athletes into dominant ones.