[SawbasyWrab]

Nothing?

Besides the obvious, "How can someone be that much better than than the best American"... see the Chinese swimmer.

[mralabama]

Totally bogus. They didn't run on the same tracks. The rubber tracks of today are way, way faster than the dirt in the past. Not to mention shoes or training methods. And very possibly the 'better living through chemistry' thing.

This too. Though so far I will say there is nothing that points to the Jamaican program ever being involved in doping of any kind, but in today's world unfortunately there will always be ? of this sort. The timing methods today are also far superior and more accurate than the past.

[zzarratusstra]

I don't think he's even the fastest sprinter of all time. That honor would go to Bob Hayes.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...?smid=fb-share

[cajonnmu]

Correct. By itself, that is zero evidence.

If you have other stuff, that could be added for a case of circumstantial evidence.

I have a bridge I'd love to sell to you.

[actifadepette]

Misty May and Kerry Walsh were not playing well recently until the Olympics. Dopers!

Hell, Kim Rhode (nor anyone else) had never hit 99 of 100 skeets. Friggin' doper.

[Kt-viagra]

Personally, I think calling out suspicion based on time improvements has no validity... that's bullshit.

Carl Lewis' perspective: "Who cares I failed drug test?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2003...s.duncanmackay

Improvements of that magnitude for already world class athletes in such a short period of time shouldn't even be questioned? You cannot be serious.

[Nurfzerne]

The point remains that even though he holds the WR, he could have done better if he was not such a Hot Dog During the Races. Who knows how good he really is or the records he could have been setting that would stand for a long time. That would make him a "legend" in my mind.

[CatLuvkaLover]

Exactly why I love the guy so much

I don't think he's even the fastest sprinter of all time. That honor would go to Bob Hayes.

[M_Marked]

You can question it to yourself but don't publicly bring up doping accusations with zero evidence... that's total bullshit.

So a half second improvement for an already world class athlete in a 10 second event is zero evidence?

[15Praxanant]

But I never said anything about rapid, unreal personal best improvements only applying to non-US athletes.

True, you're just being typical American sheeple.

Please notice it's Americans who are calling out any impressive non-US athlete... the rest of the world isn't calling out our athletes as we're kicking their tails in.

[ONLINEPHARMACYCHEAPILLS]

So Lezak is obviously as guilty as Bolt and the Chinese swimmer, right?
It can't be other variables when someone does much better than their personal best... doping is your conclusion... or does that only apply to non-US athletes?

I don't even know who Lezak is and really don't care. But I never said anything about rapid, unreal personal best improvements only applying to non-US athletes.

[fenter1]

But he does have the perspective of what goes on in that sport. And his point about an improvement at that level in such a short time definitely points to a valid question. As much as the Chinese swimmer's situation.

Personally, I think calling out suspicion based on time improvements has no validity... that's bullshit.

Carl Lewis' perspective: "Who cares I failed drug test?" http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2003...s.duncanmackay
An admitted doper raising suspicion of someone doping with zero evidence is bullshit.