OT: The Scandal and the Glory--the Men's 100-Meter Dash Today
It's here. A singular event in sports, the central moment of every Olympic Games. Eight men. 100 meters. Fastest one wins. The prize? Fame, a medal, and the title of "World's Fastest Man."
There is something elegant, simple, and beautiful about the event. A must-watch every four years. It has produced some of the greatest stars in sport. Owens. Lewis. Bolt. Legends.
But there is a dark side to it, also. For it has produced some of the greatest scandals the sport has ever witnessed. Ben Johnson's steroid suspension was the defining moment in doping scandals and remained that way until the fall of Lance Armstrong. The 9.79 time he recorded that day in Seoul (I still remember watching it in my living room) was worlds faster than anything seen, and would not be equalled for over a decade.
Yet it has been equalled. In fact, it has been destroyed.
And that brings us to Sunday.
Someone will win the 100-meter dash today. They will raise their arms in triumph. The crowd will roar. Our jaws will drop in awe.
Will they be clean?
Many believe the final will come down to a race between Usain Bolt and Justin Gatlin. It is a fascinating match; Gatlin has been steadily improving since his return in 2010, while Bolt is an enigma who always seems to peak at the right moment. Bolt, of course, electrified the world in 2008, 2009, and 2012. But Gatlin is there.
"Return," you say? Oh, yes. See, Gatlin won this race before, in 2004. Ages ago. But then he was suspended for four years for doping. And now he is back, and running faster than he has ever run.
This raises some serious questions. (Worth a read).
If he wins, what does that mean?
If Bolt beats him, what does that mean?
I'm pulling for Bolt, because he's exciting and because I enjoy greatness. If he wins the 100 and the 200 again this year, it cements him as far and away the best sprinter in history. And, well, Gatlin just brings too many questions. Except, let's be honest: So does everybody else in that field. Do I think Bolt is clean?
No, probably not.
It may be corrupt. It may be tainted. But it will be exciting. Bolt running for glory? Gatlin running to become the most complex, mercurial winner ever? A young runner pulling an upset? All we know is that it will be fascinating.
Are you interested in the race? Do you care about the possibility of cheating? Do you prefer a winner?
It's not football season yet, but at least we have a sport to discuss.
August 14th, 2016 at 12:41 PM ^
Replying up here to help inform people easier...
Semifinals are at: 8pm, 8:07pm, 8:14pm. Final is 9:25pm.
August 14th, 2016 at 2:21 AM ^
I'm gonna be rooting for Gatlin to end Bolt's historic run. It would be an epic comeback for him, screw the doping questions.
August 14th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^
There aren't just "questions" about Gatlin's doping - he's been caught and suspended.
August 14th, 2016 at 3:46 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 9:39 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 2:34 AM ^
Since then I wondered what an any-substance-is-allowed Olympics would produce. Like if you mix the craziest set of chemicals scientists can create with the perfect athlete and the perfect training, how fast can a person possibly run? Then I end up concluding that this is what we're already doing and that's why the times continue to get faster.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 14th, 2016 at 3:28 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 14th, 2016 at 7:47 AM ^
Reportedly the frour minute mile was considered to be humanly impossible - complete with scientifc proofs. Now high schoolers break it.
August 14th, 2016 at 10:43 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 7:56 AM ^
Runner's World may have had an article summarizing this one a few years ago. As I recall, I think the main thrust of what one researcher was saying was that the reduction in ground contact time - which for runners of Bolt's caliber would be around 80 milliseconds - could be reduced even by about 10 ms then you could theoretically shave about 0.3 off the current record pace. I think they also took a look at quadricep contractions and some other muscular reactions which could be improved too.
August 14th, 2016 at 11:30 AM ^
The experts continue to break down each event to find that milisecond that can be shaved by science. I'm just waiting for the runners to stop wearing jewelry and watches. If swimmers think shaving their bodies help, then why wouldn't runners have the same advantage?
August 14th, 2016 at 9:14 PM ^
That's because the friction from liquid is much higher than air such that the mental side of wearinga lucky jewelry out-weight its resistance in air.
August 14th, 2016 at 9:29 AM ^
I say let the juicers juice it up and compete in some ghetto like competitions and see how fast they can get. If they want to use the legal stuff by law then let them compete against one another somewhere else like in Kentucky or Mississippi hickville. Just keep them out of the real competions. LMAO kidding!!
August 14th, 2016 at 3:40 PM ^
ghetto like competitions? Caught you.
August 14th, 2016 at 9:14 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 12:07 PM ^
I watched that 30 for 30 on Ben Johnson. They opened by talking about all of the athletes who had to have braces because the roids make their heads bigger. They then showed a picture of Carl Lewis with braces. He was on just as much dope as Johnson.
August 14th, 2016 at 1:30 PM ^
case in point, former NFL'er kevin greene who played for the panthers. in particular his brow and his mandible were noticeably larger as time went on.
August 14th, 2016 at 2:43 AM ^
Is this actually serious writing or should we give the benefit of the doubt and assume it's supposed to be a satire of a random 9th grade English class paper by some kid who just read Hemingway
But seriously, if anyone thinks that Bolt is clean, and the "hero" to Gatlin's villain, then you have no idea what's going on in track (or Jamaican drug testing, or lack thereof). Track right now is cycling 10 years ago, you'd have to go 10-15 deep in any event to find the best clean athlete.
August 14th, 2016 at 2:52 AM ^
Track has been where cycling was since before cycling was there. 10 years ago was... Justin Gatlin's ban for doping. And don't forget that he succeeded Tim Montgomery.
Perhaps you aren't well versed in reading 9th grade English class papers, but the skepticism on cleanliness is pretty thick in the OP. And I have written, on this blog, diaries basically suggesting that every sport that gains any benefit from doping is probably way dirty, since significant numbers of athletes are not caught. People don't like the idea that their basketball or football heroes are cheaters, though, so the concept gets less traction than obvious examples like cycling (which I am a fan of and fully recognize that doping was and is still a major issue) and track.
August 14th, 2016 at 3:11 AM ^
about 9th grade writing is nothing to do with the content of the piece, it's the absolutely ridiculous way in which it's written. The short sentences, commas, periods, rehtorical questions, which serve no purpose other than to seem impactful. But hey, I know people get defensive about their writing, there are few things more personal, even if you're trying to be constructive in a critique. I get it, I see it all the time.
By the way, your logic is way off: If I say track is where cycling was 10 years ago, it is clearly not the same as saying that track 10 years ago is different than it is today. It implies nothing about the change of track doping over time (track has been doped since way before Gatlin, look at Carl Lewis' braces, Flo Jo...), and implies everything about current public willingness to overlook crazier and crazier performances (yesterday's women's 10K, every 100M event, Russian/Chinese athletes setting records in every disclipline from 110Hs to the 10K).
August 14th, 2016 at 3:25 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 6:28 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 6:38 AM ^
They wear small gloves?
August 14th, 2016 at 8:53 AM ^
only mgoblog could be so esoteric.
what's next, apostrophes v. semi-colons in a cage match?
August 14th, 2016 at 9:18 AM ^
No, dangling participles!!! Soon, people the MGoEnglish majors here will criticize posts if they are not written in iambic pentameter.
August 14th, 2016 at 11:24 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 10:07 AM ^
I'd prefer fewer commas.
August 14th, 2016 at 3:26 AM ^
You're apparently more sensitive about your critique than I am about the board post, which was, let's face it, a post about a niche sport pounded out in a few minutes late on a Saturday night. Though your attack on commas and periods winds up looking unintentionally hilarious.
Your point about public willingness to overlook might be fair, I guess--I don't know how much is really being overlooked. But, yeah, in 2006 people certainly were willing to overlook the obvious to a greater extent than today.
August 14th, 2016 at 6:50 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 7:34 AM ^
While you may not care for the style, the OP wrote a post that included actual facts and an honest questioining of the current situatioin. You wrote a very strong (and might I add "douchey" if it is a word) post alleging something and provided zero evidence to back it up.
August 14th, 2016 at 9:23 AM ^
I for one always like Stephen's posts as I find them thoughtful and well written.
Too early in the morning for this type of mudslinging people - save it for the politicians.
August 14th, 2016 at 7:42 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 9:24 AM ^
....and without the "until we beat MSU and OSU" line - which I still find funny.
August 14th, 2016 at 9:55 AM ^
And yet here you are with "rehtorical questions."
Pro tip: if you're going to make snide, pompous criticisms of somebody else's writing, you might want to do what 9th graders generally don't do: proof your own damn copy before publishing.
August 14th, 2016 at 10:53 PM ^
I hate this joke but we should use less commas till we beat Michigan State and OSU.
August 14th, 2016 at 7:34 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 7:59 AM ^
There was a string of years in which there was exactly one guy in the group of riders who finished in the top 3 of the Tour de France who hadn't gotten dinged for doping. It's simply amazing.
If you want to get really sanctimonious about a sport and doping, it isn't track--it's cycling.
August 14th, 2016 at 1:34 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 3:20 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 9:40 AM ^
While the author can be long winded at times...and he's not the only one...throwing rocks at his writing style is childish. He conveyed his meaning well and with a bit of flair. At least give him points for trying whether or not you agree with his premise.
August 14th, 2016 at 9:27 AM ^
I kinda view people who think a blog post is a college thesis as pathetic. Do we need to slam people and act high and mighty to make ourselves feel good? I was entertained by the original content, which is the entire point of this blog.
August 14th, 2016 at 11:36 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 2:37 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 3:27 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 6:08 PM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 4:20 AM ^
August 14th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^