lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
I think the original question was, "Didn't MJ run/junp her PRs before she got dirty?" The answer to that is, we simply don't know...yet. But the consensus here is that, since 6 years of performances, going back to Sydney 2000 and ending in August, 2006 (the last time she ran) were wiped from the books, it is highly probable that she was dirty in 1998, when she set those PRs. Like so many from the GDR, the USSR and China, there is no individual evidence (that is, evidence pertaining to any specific athlete), unless I missed a documentary regarding Communist-bloc athletics. As a result, like Koch's 47.60 and Kratochvílová's 1:53.28 (both of which are suspicious to many), MJ's marks before Sydney stay in the record books.
Last edited by CookyMonzta on Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
fez wrote:Is it really true that she hired Johnnie Cochran to defend her against a doping charge when she was 16? I've read it in various different places.
I think it was because she was supposed to take a drug test after one of those races and she missed it. Anyone care to expand on that?
I'm already pretty sure the missed test is true. I want to know if the Johnnie Cochran part is true?
mrbowie wrote:I will never forget when I saw Marion Jones long jumping at the NCAA championship (I think it was Fresno or Sacramento). I couldn't believe my eyes, because she looked so downright tubby.
I saw her coach leaning against a chain-link fence, so I walked up, introduced myself as a fan that had seen her in action since she was an early teenager in California. I told him what I saw and asked what kind of shape she was in.
He said she was in basketball but not track shape.
When she reappeared, it was hard to believe that she was the same person.
If I had not seen all this with my own eyes I wouldn't believe it if somebody just told it to me.
One other thing: what kind of sick mind does it take to do what she did and flash that exuberant smile that captivated a nation? She should have been hanging her head in shame.
To hell with Marion Jones and her ilk. Our sport is a all the better for having gotten rid of them.
What year was this? I don't think she ran on the elite level at all in the years 1994-96. Now, 1997 is probably a different story. As I remember it, she went straight to the pros in track after basketball season was over.
Well, she long jumped, I don't think she ran. I would almost swear the meet was either in San Jose or Fresno and that it was a college meet, because she wore the baby blue singlet of North Carolina and I spoke with her college coach.
fez wrote:Is it really true that she hired Johnnie Cochran to defend her against a doping charge when she was 16? I've read it in various different places.
I think it was because she was supposed to take a drug test after one of those races and she missed it. Anyone care to expand on that?
I'm already pretty sure the missed test is true. I want to know if the Johnnie Cochran part is true?
fez wrote:Is it really true that she hired Johnnie Cochran to defend her against a doping charge when she was 16? I've read it in various different places.
I think it was because she was supposed to take a drug test after one of those races and she missed it. Anyone care to expand on that?
The missed test was not after a race; it was an out-of-competition test. IIRC, her defense was based on her not having received notice of the test.
CookyMonzta wrote:Didn't Ben confess? I thought I heard either him or Charlie Francis confessing to having put him on a drug program that went as far back as 1981. Certainly, the effects kicked in at around 1985, when he ran 9.98.
i've never heard of steroids taking 4y to work !?
how about he got an advantage within weeks of taking them - evidence being in '92 when he started taking them again & started running real quick in short period of time
lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
I think she could have been.
She was already world class in high school. She ran 11.17 and 22.86 as a 15-year-old. One of the great sprint prodigies of all-time. (And no, I don't believe for a minute she was doping then and continued on for a dozen years at it.)
Yeah, I saw her run when she was a 9th grader at Rio Mesa HS and we all knew she was something very special at first glance. I doubt she had the sophistication or the access to be using in high school. Still, as GH said, the question of when she started is unknowable. My impression is that she never really tested positive in formal tests, isn't that right? That presents a sort of dismal impression of the effectiveness of testing at that time. What a waste of time and money!
gh wrote:She was already world class in high school. She ran 11.17 and 22.86 as a 15-year-old. One of the great sprint prodigies of all-time. (And no, I don't believe for a minute she was doping then and continued on for a dozen years at it.)
unfortunately, big guy, you are pissing in the wind here - a handful believe it
if Tiger ever tested +ve for drugs ( e g steroids ), then you will get the yahoos around here stating, seriously, that Earl had him on 'roids when he was 2y ole on the mike douglas show
We can speculate all we want but the bottom line is, only Marion knows when she started doping and she ain't telling. Even her suppliers only know when they started supplying. As in other matters, they cannot know with absolute certainty that they were "the first"
I don't know. It's really not nice to think about the possibility of a 15 year old doping is it? But then, I'm sure there have been cases of 14 and 15 year olds doping in other sports - i.e. gymnastics and swimming, so why not athletics?
Although in the case of gymnastics and swimming, people are competitive at the world level much earlier than in athletics.
If you're starting weights and training in a gym out of school here it wouldn't be hard to come across pro-steroid bodybuilders and gain access to drugs.
Like gh, I personally doubt MJ was doping in HS. After that I wouldn't care to say.
lonewolf wrote:We can speculate all we want but the bottom line is, only Marion knows when she started doping and she ain't telling.
We don't need her to tell. Common sense tells all anyone needs to know in this case. PUH-LEEEEZE!! What is truly shocking is that there are still people around naive and bored enough to speculate whether Marion's nonsense about being clean in 97 is not bullshit.
she was working her way upto ~ og level 'ball in 4y
if you seriously believe that is "couch potatoing", & not having a building effect on the cardiovascular & musculoskeletal systems from an 11.14 base, it's about time to put down the smoked-herring bong
after you've done that, i'd like to hear why you were so conspicous in your absence on commenting on
going from 11.3 to high-10.7 in 1y as an adult ???
lonewolf wrote:We can speculate all we want but the bottom line is, only Marion knows when she started doping and she ain't telling.
We don't need her to tell. Common sense tells all anyone needs to know in this case. PUH-LEEEEZE!! What is truly shocking is that there are still people around naive and bored enough to speculate whether Marion's nonsense about being clean in 97 is not bullshit.
I doubt she was, but after seeing what she was capable of as a high schooler, I think the door remains open to a (slim) chance that she was indeed still legal in '97. She was that impressive. I can think of few other high schoolers (in any event) that looked to have as much upside potential as she did.
EPelle wrote:There was NOTHING in between those five years... not even hot air.
Not exactly true. She didn't do much sprinting (11.28/11.21w in '93, 11.40 in '94, 23.96w in '95) but jumped 22-½ (22-1¾w) in '93, PRed at 22-1¾ in '94 when she was NCAA runner-up, and did 21-9½ in '95 when she was NCAA runner-up.
This I know (I listed it out on the drug board in 2006), and I was being more figurative than literal. She had no top-25 times in the 100m/200m following high school up to 1997.
Solid points, but a rapid-fire acceleration into the pro ranks following a sustained absence from techincal races which require specific training - not just talent - can't be explained away by stating that Jones was once a superb talent; that talent well dried up some between her final year at Thousand Oaks and her time at NC.
No times of note during a period where she concentrated on basketboll following a prep campaign where she was also a two-sport star. Granted, NCAA comp required more from her in terms of strength, musclur build and schedule. Then she sustained a broken foot. Then a re-break four months later. From her final season to the track, it took only 13 weeks of dedication (?!) to not just break a long-standing PB, but to run three rounds at USA Champs under 11 seconds, nonetheless.
She displayed her natural abilities the year she waddled a 55 second 400.
lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
Feel free to step in between eldy and Epelle before we have a hundred back-and-forths here . . .
? My only responses on this page have been directly to gh.
That's how I read Epelle's responses too. He very admirably hasn't engaged the troll who's arse-achingly, heroin-junkie desperate to drag him into a pointless debate so as to get a fix from the adrenaline rush of trying to prove his is biggest. In fact, the poster in question will even get a perverse thrill from me describing said poster like this.
Said poster is becoming more and more desperate and I'm worried he'll implode for lack of a fix and to be honest, it's sucking the enjoyment and life out of too many threads at the moment.
gh wrote:And she concentrated more on basketball than track and broke her foot twice, so a lack of track progress not entirely surprising.
The broken foot is also very significant though because injuries can be a big factor in turning to PEDs and a way of justifying it to oneself.
I agree with you gh that it is unlikely that she was doping as a teenager.
Some of these cases seem to support my biased opinion which is that the PEDs help but not all that much (Chambers, Jones) and that their performance enhancing effects probably have more to do with injury prevention and recovery then anything else. They help you train hard but not smart.
lovetorun wrote:This thread is going all over the place (which is typical) but I'd really like to know if anyone else thinks Marion could have been world class without PED's.
I think she could have been.
She was already world class in high school. She ran 11.17 and 22.86 as a 15-year-old. One of the great sprint prodigies of all-time. (And no, I don't believe for a minute she was doping then and continued on for a dozen years at it.)
I believe both Daisy and gh....and feel that the whole Marion Jones saga is tragic since she could have been really good with no PED abuse.
CookyMonzta wrote:Didn't Ben confess? I thought I heard either him or Charlie Francis confessing to having put him on a drug program that went as far back as 1981. Certainly, the effects kicked in at around 1985, when he ran 9.98.
i've never heard of steroids taking 4y to work !?
how about he got an advantage within weeks of taking them - evidence being in '92 when he started taking them again & started running real quick in short period of time
There's more than one kind of drug, and Charlie was undoubtedly using more than one kind of drug on Ben. My guess is that the drugs he was using in 1981-84 didn't produce the desired effect; so in '85 he most likely put him on something more efficient, or more potent. I imagine stanozolol is more powerful than mere artificial testosterone, yes? He didn't break 10.00 until 1985. In fact, he was having trouble breaking 10.10. He had to have been using something stronger in '85 than what he was using in '81-84.
lonewolf wrote:We can speculate all we want but the bottom line is, only Marion knows when she started doping and she ain't telling.
We don't need her to tell. Common sense tells all anyone needs to know in this case. PUH-LEEEEZE!! What is truly shocking is that there are still people around naive and bored enough to speculate whether Marion's nonsense about being clean in 97 is not bullshit.
Given the lively discussion we have been having here, one must conclude that the issue here is far more complex than to simply paint it with a broad brush, as you are attempting to do. But then again since you are a newbie here I wouldn't expect you to understand right away.
No doubt many of us here are suspicious of her 1997-99 seasons, but we just don't have a smoking gun related to those years. We only have Sydney 2000, Conte's charts and his statement that she joined his cadre in mid-August, 2000, and her EPO A-test in 2006, for which the last 6 years of her career (starting with Sydney) were scrubbed from the record books.
CookyMonzta wrote:I imagine stanozolol is more powerful than mere artificial testosterone, yes? He didn't break 10.00 until 1985. In fact, he was having trouble breaking 10.10. He had to have been using something stronger in '85 than what he was using in '81-84.
no
testo is a full agonist like stanozolol - little difference in efficacy or potency
all that is likely is a dose increase, which is likely when you see the way he got run over after leading the '84 race to 60m - his dosing regime was only keeping him strong for 60m, not 100m, so increased dose or frequency is likely
& back then, there wasn't the vast cocktail available today - 4 or 5 steroids were about it, little else
