Home › Forums › General Sports › Champions and Cheats
- This topic has 23 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
clivex.
- AuthorPosts
- August 8, 2008 at 13:59 #8587
There will be loads of both over the next few weeks.
Trouble is that the former will be indistinguishable from the latter.
August 8, 2008 at 19:59 #176452Are Celtic worth laying at 1.79? Just scraped the title by skin of their teeth last season. May get bogged down with Champions League – which Rangers don’t have to worry about now. Is Strachan a talented manager or just jammy?
May be worth laying and buying back should they slip-up a bit early doors if they drift to evens. What do the tartan clan on the forum think?August 8, 2008 at 20:38 #176457Judging by the two matches with K, Rangers haven’t a prayer of winning the SPL, and with reduced income prospects they won’t be able to strengthen their team.
August 9, 2008 at 10:14 #176504Lay the mighty Celtic at your peril.

Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
August 9, 2008 at 21:43 #176574Er, I meant the Olympics!
August 10, 2008 at 10:40 #176606
You mean not everyone is obsessed with footy?August 16, 2008 at 21:50 #177163Woman’s heptathlon-
Cheat back from serving ban finishes in Silver.
Fellow countrywoman whose PB was set back in 2004 miraculously recovers form to win Gold.
August 17, 2008 at 08:40 #177189What do you reckon on Usain Bolt – clean or not?
My borther follows athletics fairly closly and he reckons he’s just unbelievably talented – def not on drugs.
August 17, 2008 at 15:27 #177216Bolt hasn’t got the muscle mass of some of the other sprinters, nor has his form come completely out of the blue (precocious junior who spent too much time in the 200m clearly), so the notion that he’s clean on that basis is plausible. However if you consider Tim Montgomery could only manage 9.77 whilst cheating, it would be surprising if a man could come along within five years who could beat him by 0.08 in a hack canter and still be clean.
August 17, 2008 at 16:45 #177225Isn’t it possible that with Bolt being such an unusual build for a sprinter (very tall and lean) he may be a ‘freak’, for want of a better word: an exceptional and unusually gifted meso-ectomorphic athlete who can overcome the inherent mechanical disadvantage and cycle those long legs as fast as the shorter legs of the more typical stocky meso-endomorphic sprinter; hence his natural longer stride places him at a considerable advantage.
August 17, 2008 at 20:47 #177241I’d vote ‘clean’ on Bolt but wouldn’t be betting my mortgage on it or owt like that.
And once I find out what ‘meso-endomorphic’ means I’ll know if I agree with Drone or not!
August 17, 2008 at 21:34 #177250…..an exceptional and unusually gifted meso-ectomorphic athlete who can overcome the inherent mechanical disadvantage and cycle those long legs as fast as the shorter legs of the more typical stocky meso-endomorphic sprinter…………..
That’s exactly what I was thinking, Drone. Good man.
August 18, 2008 at 10:00 #177271And once I find out what ‘meso-endomorphic’ means I’ll know if I agree with Drone or not!
See:
http://www.muscleandstrength.com/articl … morph.html
I got it wrong anyway
Bolt is probably better described as an ecto-mesomorph and yer ‘typical’ sprinter as a straightforward mesomorphBTW I share your cynicism regarding the drug-soaking of ‘professional’ athletes, just attempting a ‘lateral’ alternative to explain away an exceptional run.
And are you/I/us in danger of being carried away by the terrific performances of the Home athletes by assuming it’s only dirty Johnny Foreigner who succumbs to temptation and all in the British camp is tickety-boo?
August 18, 2008 at 11:28 #177281Nah, Usain isn’t a cheat – with his golden spikes he is clearly a Bolt from the shoe

Mike
August 18, 2008 at 20:31 #177324And are you/I/us in danger of being carried away by the terrific performances of the Home athletes by assuming it’s only dirty Johnny Foreigner who succumbs to temptation and all in the British camp is tickety-boo?
Quite. Had Dwayne Chambers’ previous indiscretions gone completely untraced to the present day, and he was therefore able to compete at Beijing on the assumption of being as clean as the next athlete, what’s to say he actually might – only might – well have performed there under the influence of something illegal (be that under the immediate influence or else the legacy of many training sessions / trials under the influence)?
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
August 18, 2008 at 22:14 #177350And we do have that 400 metre runner who unfortunately missed all those dates with the urine sample bottle and still managed to make it to the Olympics.
August 18, 2008 at 22:20 #177351What about the Scottish cyclists?
It’s easy to throw mud!
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.