Ben Johnson says he is the best sprinter ever, better than Usian Bolt

Discussion in 'Odds & Ends' started by granddog29, Sep 5, 2013.

  1. granddog29

    granddog29 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    839
    I got a good laugh out of this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/23896954
    http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/eh...reatest-ever-better-usain-bolt-170132272.html

     
    #1
  2. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,818
    Location:
    Brave New World
    Ben Johnson could have been stupid. Really stupid to get caught. He could have retired after breaking the WR in Rome in 1987. (Like one lady who was never caught but ran some staggering times and then promptly retired.)

    He used something called stanazolol (winstrol) that was used to bulk up cattle, acco to the news I read. At that time there were other alternatives that were hard to detect that were being used by others.

    He was also never discreet about his usage. He used to joke a lot in the locker rooms about his sex drive due to the steroids.
     
    #2
  3. tennismonkey

    tennismonkey Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2010
    Messages:
    735
    lol. that's funny stuff.

    but no, ben. just go away.
     
    #3
  4. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    I have no problem with Johnson making a claim like that. Sprinting at that level is so much about an insane "confidence" in yourself. His 9.79 was staggering for 1988.

    Also, the drugs being used as well as the extreme sophistication in knowing how to use them now as compared to Johnson's time is also a big difference.

    I'm not saying that what Johnson says is true by the way, but I have no problem with him making the claim nonetheless.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/columns/story?id=4394250
     
    #4
  5. TennisLovaLova

    TennisLovaLova Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,048
    Too bad he was canadian then

    even Carl Lewis was on the juice but he was covered by his federation... everyone knows about this.
    so eventually they did what they usually do in Murrica: the good hero (lewis) vs the bad and ugly monster (Johnson)
     
    #5
  6. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,143
    Ben Johnson, with today's technology, 9.30? Better chemistry?
     
    #6
  7. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    Tim montgomery and gatlin actually tested positive for steroids as well. They were barely faster than Johnson. Witht the improvements of science and triaining.

    I got no problem with what he is saying.

    He was 27 when he ran that 9.79 so had a couple years left in his prime. Other guys broke WRs at 29 and 30 years old. And he is talking 100m specifically and I believe he is more powerful than Bolt.

    Now if Ben was talking about 60m then no. Maurice Green is GOAT of 60m.
     
    #7
  8. chmee

    chmee Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    Germany
    Why would Bolt beat the times of Johnson/Lewis without doping?
     
    #8
  9. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,143
    It is 25 yrs, a generation later. Stronger, Bigger, Faster?
     
    #9
  10. stringertom

    stringertom G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,991
    Location:
    In a sureshsian vortex
    Barry Bonds claims to be the home run king...imagine how many HRs Henry Aaron would have hit with a watermelon-size head???
     
    #10
  11. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    14,143
    Did A-Rod's head grow?
     
    #11
  12. stringertom

    stringertom G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,991
    Location:
    In a sureshsian vortex
    Dunno...ask Kate Hudson or Cameron Diaz or Madonna!
     
    #12
  13. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    How many fewer homers would Aaron hit if he didn't take greenies for that extra boost for games
     
    #13
  14. granddog29

    granddog29 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    839
    I believe Ben got a raw deal in 88. Carl Lewis, one of the all time jerks in all sport, was drugged up as much as he was, but since he was an American it was brushed aside (even a failed doping test was pushed aside) and he kept out all his medals, while Ben became a disgrace.

    However on this particular claim Ben is an idiot. Even if Bolt is using drugs (which there is absolutely no proof or obvious reason to believe, other than likelihood alot of top sprinters use drugs) he runs times WAY faster than Johnson ever ran at any distance. Johnson pumped up with a bunch of horse steroids in his body managed 9.79 as his best. Bolt at his peak managed 9.55 and didnt even run all out. Even if he is doped he blows Johnson at his doped up best away. What is this new technology crap about, some magic shoes. Sorry this is track, not tennis. I hope Ben chooses to tell someday what those magic shoes which would allow him to improve his one time PB by half a second today.

    That plus Bolt is an insane 200 metre runner, the best ever in that distance too along with maybe Michael Johnson, while Johnson would have been hopeless at anything longer than 100 metres even at his doped up best.

    Johnson was screwed in 88, but Bolt is still in another league from him.
     
    #14
  15. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    Did you not even read what you quoted. Ben says bolt is better all around. Ben says he is best 100m sprinter.

    Science allows better drugs and a better understanding of those drugs. As well as a better understanding of biomechanics and training techniques. It's not that far off to say the fastest man in 88 would be .2 faster 25 years later.
     
    #15
  16. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    Better drugs and a better knowledge on how to use them.

    I'm not saying that I agree with Johnson. Bolt seems clearly better to me. But, Johnson would have finished 3rd in the 2012 Olympics with his 1988 time. And if you look at the times in the 1992-2102 Olympics, there aren't too many faster than 9.79. There is good reason to believe that if he had been raised on the same drugs as Bolt (oh I forgot, no proof) and been allowed to compete longer (I think he was 27 when he was banned), he would have run faster than 9.79. I'm not sure if 9.30 is realistic (its not), but he probably would have "challenged" Bolt.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2013
    #16
  17. stringertom

    stringertom G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Messages:
    11,991
    Location:
    In a sureshsian vortex
    Proof???

    Please enlighten me!
     
    #17
  18. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,818
    Location:
    Brave New World
    Marion Balco Jones and Flo-Jo say hello :D
     
    #18
  19. Gizo

    Gizo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,689
    Calvin Smith was the true 100 champion at Seoul in 1988.
     
    #19
  20. granddog29

    granddog29 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    839
    Johnson had practically a false start when he ran his 9.79 in Seoul. So the part about being able to run faster had he been allowed to continue was never going to happen. He had the best start humanly possible in his Seoul race, and the rest of his race besides the start was never anything remarkable.

    As for drugs today being better, whether Bolt uses drugs or not, I am sure Johnson still used heavier types. Just look at their builds, no comparision. Bolt is just a way more talented runner. Johnson only had a better start and unless he got a good 6 metres on Bolt off the start he would lose everytime as the rest of Bolt's race was far better, and his last 40 metres would destroy Johnson's.
     
    #20
  21. Say Chi Sin Lo

    Say Chi Sin Lo Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    9,087
    Meanwhile, Usian Bolt says he holds the world record, and then he points to it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
    #21
  22. volleygirl

    volleygirl Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    404


    Come on Hollywood. That's an extremely weak response. Greenies only helped guys play in more games instead of resting so that a 40 HR hitter could hit his 40 HRs. Nothing like the stuff that Bonds, Arod, Sosa and others used to where it turned 30-40 HR hitters into 60 and 70+ HR hitters.
     
    #22
  23. chmee

    chmee Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    Germany
    Better medics. There is nothing significantly different introduced in their sport imo. Of course, the evidence by stats is tiny. However, it's annoying to see sportmans beating records of doped predecessors by a country mile without getting caught.
     
    #23
  24. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    But they used illegal drugs to gain an advantage. They just didn't have the science and the good stuff.

    Say those guys using amphetamines hit an extra 6-8 homers a year because they could play extra day games (more common then) that's a bunch over along career.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
    #24
  25. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    Johnson ran a 9.79 in 1988 against the 7 best 100 meter sprinters in the world that were just as drugged up as he was. The next best time was Lewis with a 9.92. And you may not remember, but once Johnson was stripped of his title, Lewis' 9.92 not only won gold, but was the World Record. Think about it. Johnson was crushing his competition by as much as Bolt is now crushing his competition.

    And don't forget, Johnson had just set the World Record in his previous meet at 9.83. You want to argue that the only reason he was improving is because he was getting phenomenal starts? And this accounts for his absolute annihilation of his competition. And that he had reached the peak of his potential? Well, I guess we all have our opinions. I think Johnson would have bettered his 9.79 mark in the years to come. In fact, I don't think a 9.69 was out of the question for Johnson (and by the way, do you know what Bolt's winning time was in the 2008 Olympics that made him famous. I'll let you look that up). Anyway, how on earth did Johnson get hold of better drugs in 1988 than Bolt can get hold of in 2013? Did our knowledge regress?

    To imagine that Johnson was using better drugs than Bolt is.....I guess another place where we have a difference of opinion. I really can't see how that's possible myself (what does "just look at their builds" and "Johnson used heavier types" mean? They aren't using these drugs to bulk up like bodybuilders. Sprinters don't use cheap $100 horse steroids. They use $100,000 sprinter steroids).

    You also have to take into account that the sport moves forward. Coaches have figured out better ways to train. Better ways to run the event, etc. Bolt is the beneficiary of 25 years of additional knowledge. Obviously, the entire field has improved since 1988 (which is of course quite normal).

    Now, with all that being said, I do think Bolt is the better 100 meter runner (even taking into account how hard it is to compare across eras). But I think the margin is a lot closer than people believe. As I said above, Johnson was kicking the living **** out of his competition by .13.....much like Bolt is doing to his competition now.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
    #25
  26. volleygirl

    volleygirl Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    404



    And he wasn't even a contender for any medal whatsoever until he started cheating, so it shows you just what cheating can do for some athletes. If he hadn't cheated, you would've never even heard his name.
     
    #26
  27. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,287
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    Exactly. You don't want heavier, you want leaner. Bulk up too much and you lose flexibility and increase weight, slowing you down.
     
    #27
  28. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    You realize that the entire field was doping, right?

    That the entire field is doping now? That the entire field has been doping for many years?

    So yes, an athlete that isn't doping will not be a contender for any medal whatsoever.

    http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f13/angel-heredia-interview-sports-doping-1927491/
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
    #28
  29. Sentinel

    Sentinel Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    28,818
    Location:
    Brave New World
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1988_Summer_Olympics_–_Men's_100_metres

    Calvin was the only of the top 5 never to have failed a drug test in his entire career.

    http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2003/apr/18/athletics.comment

    Acco to Roger Kingdom (110m hurdler from USA), Carl Lewis should never have gone to Seoul after failing a test.

    The only question I have (and had way back then) is what benefit does a sprinter have from taking a stimulant such as pseudoephedrine ?
     
    #29
  30. volleygirl

    volleygirl Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    404

    Oh yea, I realize that most if not all of them had been doping as well but Johnson wasn't even looked at by any of the sprinters as any threat whatsoever and then all the sudden hes the fastest human to ever step foot on earth? I have said forever that I want all the cheaters banned for life so not making it look like all the other guys were clean as whistles, I am just saying no one should give Johnson credit for being some freak on the track.
     
    #30
  31. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    ^^ Boy, that is so hard to say who would have done what if doping really wasn't a factor. There just isn't anyway to know. But I agree with what others have said above in that Calvin Smith's times are probably the best way to gauge what was possible without drugs.

    Fact is, in the environment Johnson (and everyone else) competed in, he was becoming the dominant force in 100m sprinting.
     
    #31
  32. granddog29

    granddog29 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    839
    Ben was not as far ahead of his competition as Bolt is now. Ben lost atleast 7 races during his peak years of 86-88 alone. Bolt has lost about 3 100 metre races (and I think only 1 200 race) since 2008, now over about 6 seasons.

    Bolt also often wins majors meets by much bigger margins than 0.13, especialy at his true peak in 2008-2009.


    Yes I would say that, especialy the bolded part. I followed sprinting closely at the time, and whenever Johnson didnt get a great start and have a big lead out of the blocks he lost. He only won those times he had a great start (which was often), but Seoul was literally the perfect start. Probably the best start you will ever see. So yes based on that I do believe Seoul was the peak of his potential. You cant improve on that start and that is all Johnson's times were based upon. His start out out of the blocks is way better than Bolt's, i will agree with that. However the rest of his race doesnt even compare to Bolt's, even considering the time frame.

    A relay for instance is where you have a running start so your starting ability is now irrelevant. It is just about pure speed. Johnson getting the baton hand in hand with say Carl Lewis on a relay would get destroyed (and I say that as someone who hates Lewis). Most likely would be by Christie, Smith, Deloach, and others as well. Bolt on a relay leg would probably be able to take the baton 5 metres down and pass him. Not that this should be what indicates Ben's abilities as a 100 metre runner, it should be predominantly his individual 100 races. Ben's amazing starting ability is the biggest part of what makes him so great and there is nothing wrong with that. However against Bolt it still wouldnt be enough.
     
    #32
  33. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    ^^I'll defer to you, as my interest isn't and wasn't in sprinting (I was watching 5K, 10K type races closely).

    Still, I find it hard to believe that his decimation of the field by .13 can be fully explained by his amazing starting ability, especially if you say that he isn't as fast as Lewis (and others). What I'm getting at is that he was just starting to realize his "drugged up" potential. Something that Lewis (and many others) had already realized. This is just a guess on my part.

    And to Johnson's point, I do believe that he would be running faster with today's "technology" (meaning better drugs, drug regimens, and increased knowledge in sprint training, technique, and strategy). Meaning today, I think it is realistic to believe that Johnson could have increased his time by .1, or have ran a 9.69. And if this is true, Johnson would actually be running faster times than Bolt's competition. But I do agree (as I've said many times), I don't think he could run as fast as Bolt.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2013
    #33
  34. maleyoyo

    maleyoyo Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    333
    Ben was a nobody before the juice, so the difference-maker is the juice, not the athlete then the juice should get the medal, not Ben.

    We are having the wrong conversation. We should be talking about the juice, not the juicers.
     
    #34
  35. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    but they are all juicers. And 25 years laters there is simply better juice.
     
    #35
  36. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,287
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    Because almost everybody else was juicing, so he couldn't compete.
     
    #36
  37. TERRASTAR18

    TERRASTAR18 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,672
    you don't put or twice- it should be kh,cd or madonna.

    your welcome.
     
    #37
  38. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    ^^^^

    Eff this guy
     
    #38
  39. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,953
    Assuming this is intentional, its a nice touch.
     
    #39
  40. dominikk1985

    dominikk1985 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,362
    why is roger federer hitting harder than ivan lendl?

    of course technology is a bigger factor in tennis but also in running tracks got a lot faster (harder and more elastic tracks for shorter contact times and more rebound) and training got more advanced.

    swimmers also got faster by a mile and they don't have technology. the training and diagnostics just improved a lot. we don't know how fast lewis and johnson would have been now.
     
    #40
  41. hollywood9826

    hollywood9826 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    509
    Location:
    Havre de Grace, MD
    ^^^

    I understand where yuo are coming from. But they had to ban certain swimsuits becuase they displaced water around the body and made them faster. Technology plays a part in everything.

    They have processes to dry wood out better making baseball bats weigh less which lets the companies use denser wood like maple and oak to make bats. Maple Bats have way more pop than the standard ash bats that were used 20 years ago.

    More than likely Lewis and Johnson would have been right with the guys that are the best now. They both had thework ethic to take advantage of the tech.
     
    #41

Share This Page