You can't accuse Bolt and not Phelps, can you?

BEIJING -– Eleven years ago, at the world track and field championships in Athens, British sports journalist David Walsh asked me if I was writing about doping in every story.

Walsh's fixation on the subject was unusual among journalists only in its relentlessness. He later would become Lance Armstrong's nemesis, presenting evidence in two books that strongly suggested if did not prove that the seven-time Tour de France champion was a doper.

My answer to David back then was the same as it would be now, after Jamaica's Usain Bolt defied credulity with Saturday's world-record run while winning the Olympic 100 meters.

I have suspicions every time someone does something remarkable in track and field, but I do not mention it every time, out of what may be a wrongheaded occasional devotion to the idea of innocent until proved guilty.

I brought up the subject in print after Bolt set a world record of 9.72 at a May 31 meet in New York. It seemed hard to believe that someone who had run the 100 meters only five times at that point could already have been so fast.

I did not include it in my story after Bolt lowered the world record in Saturday's final to 9.69, a time that might have been ridiculously faster had the Jamaican 21-year-old not hammed it up in the final 20 meters of a race he won with ease.

Too much ease to run that fast, many would say, especially in a sport where three of the last six Olympic 100 champions have tested positive at some time in their careers, and a fourth has been implicated in doping by a witness in the Trevor Graham trial.

As a journalist, I find that this is one of those damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situations.

I was among the hundreds of writers who made Marion Jones the focus of pre-Olympic coverage in 2000, even if I began to have doubts about her remarkable performances when she returned to track and field full time in 1997.

Was it wrong to build her up before Sydney? No more than the hyperbolic, see-no-evil coverage by the baseball media of the home-run chase by Mark McGwire, who admitted taking a steroid not banned by the sport. No more than the breathless coverage of college and pro football day after day, even if any rational person would wonder how its behemoths built their bodies.

Not long after Michael Johnson obliterated the world record in the 200 meters at the 1996 Olympics, I wrote about how sad it seemed that the immediate reaction among media had to be "How?" rather than "Wow!"

Did my latest Bolt story need a reference to doping? Perhaps, but only because his countryman Asafa Powell, the former world record holder, expressed his discontent that the Jamaicans seemed doping control targets since arriving here. That targeting apparently was in answer to questions about the lack of unannounced, out-of-competition testing on the island. I brought all that up in the preview of the race that appeared in Thursday's editions of The Times and the Chicago Tribune.

Is it possible Bolt is just an extraordinary athlete? When I asked Jon Drummond, Tyson Gay's coach, what made Bolt remarkable, he said, "He is 6-foot-5."

Never before has there been a 100-meter Olympic champion so tall. It seemed impossible that a man that big could uncoil his body from the blocks quickly enough to avoid falling too far behind before his enormous strides and stride turnover could come into play.

If we doubt Bolt, why shouldn't we doubt Michael Phelps and his four individual world records in these Olympics?

The argument that swimming should get more benefit of the doubt because it has avoided the doping scandals of track is specious. We all know that athletes in many sports have found sophisticated methods to beat doping control for years.

Track was chastened into wider testing, including all medalists, after Ben Johnson tested positive after he won the 1988 Olympic 100 meters. Swimming never tested all Olympic medal winners until 1996 and until recently has lagged behind track in number of out-of-competition tests.

So, even as Phelps said Sunday that he had been tested about 40 times in the last six weeks, that is not proof positive he is clean.

But couldn't Phelps be the exception, because it already was clear after last year's world championships that he is one of a kind in the history of swimming? Couldn't Bolt be as well?

Imagine what athletes must feel about this. Many dirty ones have beaten the system, so the clean ones (yes, there are some) can't give complete assurances of their righteousness.

One of the joys of writing about sport is the chance to be witness and chronicler of the extraordinary. One of the worst things is wondering whether you can believe what you see -– and that you may eventually look like a fool for not having mentioned that possibility every time the extraordinary happens.

-- Philip Hersh

Photo: Jamaica's Usain Bolt heads to the finish line with his arms spread wide and still set a world record. Credit: Kay Nietfeld / EPA

Comments

[EmmaGoodEgg]

This is a great Usain Bolt post-100m Finals story.

[antarctica]

I really want Bolt to be clean- his performance was remarkable and if was tainted it will be crushing to track and field, if track hasn't had enough blows already.

Excluding Bolt, 5 of the last 6 men's 100m winners have either tested positive for banned substances in their careers or have been linked to banned substances. Donovan Bailey, the 1996 winner, is the only one who has never tested positive or been linked to banned substances.

Ben Johnson (1988), Linford Christie (1992), and Justin Gatlin (2004) have all tested positive in their careers and received suspensions. According to several reports, Carl Lewis (1984, 1988) tested positive several times before the 1988 Olympics; he was originally banned from the 1988 Olympics but his sentence was overturned and he was allowed to run. Maurice Greene (2000) has been linked to discus thrower Angel Heredia, a notorious dealer of drugs to track and field stars. Greene admitted he paid Heredia for "stuff" but says he never took illegal drugs.

Add to that the numerous track and field stars who have been banned or served suspended sentences for doping - only cycling has as many dopers running around. That is why Bolt is being questioned more than Phelps. I'm not saying Phelps shouldn't be questioned, but track and field has a dark history of many of its athletes being dopers. Name me the last big-name swimmer to get caught doping. Either the swimmers are smarter about their doping or else they're not dirty.

[Balance]

I don't have a comment about doping or Usain only that this article is one very good piece of journalism. Strangely the best I've read in a while that exchanges excitement for substance [and substances :)]

[abby]

I would like to comment on the coverage by NBC on Boltz performance and what they have been saying about him today. Unfortunately I listened to their coverage today and was so upset about what they said I looked on the internet for a way to make my comments and there is no forum on their own website for that. 1st disappointment.
What frustrated me was their comments to day about Boltz historical and awesome run in the 100. I was watching it in the middle of the night when they were broadcasting and the two speakers were saying great things. Such as”He is awesome check him slapping his chest and letting up before the end” everyone was on a high. Now that a couple of days have gone by these people have the balls to say that he was celebrating to early and that it is disrespectful. Have you seen how some of the past american olympians have celebrated during and after races. This guy has just done something incredible and he has every right to rejoice. If he was an american I guarantee these comments would not be coming. It bothered me so much I will not watch NBC from now on. So dissapointing to hear them trash an athelete that has done such an incredible job!!

[notfooled]

With Usain Bolt, there are too many signs of doping.

In college when I was in the weight club - I'd be significantly stronger then nearly everyone in my weight class (about 165 pounds with good genetics and monstrous 4 hour workouts). We’d come back from summer break and amazingly some of the guys were benching another 75 pounds or squatting another 100 pounds! Going up by a sustained 5 lbs a month is very good once you’re close to your upper potential. I’d just shake my head and ask them what they’re taking. The angry red-faced reply was predictable - “Nothing man. Just ‘cauz I’m better then you now you accuse me of cheating.”. [Yeah, why does your anger flair up so quickly and why do you have such big zits on your back?] Then I’d watch them do their same old loafer workout while still outpacing my strength gains. Eventually, I caught most of them discussing their concoctions with their “buds” in the corner of locker room or somewhere at a party.

Sure signs of doping:

1) When someone comes “out of nowhere” to take a position at the top of the competitive heap - that’s the first big whiff of smoke.
2) When someone suddenly is superman, breaking their personal best from just a short time ago by a very wide margin (not a couple hundredths of a second) - that’s the flames becoming visible.
3) When someone makes it look too easy against the best in the world, current competitors and former champions (e.g. Ben Johnson vs. Carl Lewis), that’s when it’s a serious fire.

There is so much sophistication in doping to change the chemical footprints to avoid detection, it impossible for testing to keep up. It’s like the fight in software between malicious hackers/crackers and antivirus software scientists trying to keep up (but in reality, the anti-doping scientists have a much harder job).

Michael Phelps doping? Maybe. But I don’t see the really obvious doping patterns (e.g. coming out of nowhere to take the top spot). Still - check him out. Usain Bolt doping? I’d give it a 99.999% chance he is. The only thing left to do is track down the fuel that enabled this fire.

[eric j henderson]

Glad for this piece. I err on the side of innocent, and having experienced the culture of sprinting in Jamaica firsthand on the campus of the University of Technology in Kingston and around town, I simply believe - on the grounds of culture, human possibility, and yes, recent history.

[eric j henderson]

Glad for this piece. I err on the side of innocent, and having experienced the culture of sprinting in Jamaica firsthand on the campus of the University of Technology in Kingston and around town, I simply believe - on the grounds of culture, human possibility, and yes, recent history.

[Sports fan]

I like this article, it is well balance. Some of the comments I have read about Usain is so absurd. Anyone who is an avid track fan or who follows track and field around the world, not just in one country, would know who Usain Bolt is and what he has been achieveing since he was a junior. Usain did not come out of nowhere, to be running records, Usain was an excellent 400m runner as a junior that he did along with the 200m and breaking records. The 100m is a part of his 200m training, so he was running 100m, just not competitively. He decided to try it, because he's good at it. So he's not some new guy out of nowhere. A lot of the athletes at this years games are youngsters who are comming up from juniors and continue to do well.

[Grinner]

The bottom line: this guy was not the world's best... then suddenly out of nowhere he is leaving everyone in his dust--and seemlingly effortlessly. Unless, Dorthy and the Wiz suddenly sprinkled fairy dust on him, the Olympic committee needs to do some serious drug testing on Bolt.

[notfooled]

Some info - do the math (some snipits from other conversations):

"It's all particularly remarkable when you consider that Bolt - from the same yam-farming Trelawny parish in his Caribbean nation that was home to Ben Johnson - only began competing in the (100m) dash 13 months ago."

"Bolt's 0.20-second margin of victory matched the largest in an Olympic 100 final over the last 40 years."

15 years old: 200m in 20.61
16 years old: 200m in 20.40
16 years old: 400m in 45.35
18 years old: 200m in 19.93
20 years old: 200m in 19.86
21 years old: 200m in 19.75

'I want to believe Usain Bolt's 9.69 is legit, history tells me otherwise. In all the time's posted of Usain Bolt's 200m from 18 to 21 in 3 years he has improved .30 seconds. In a shorter distance 100m in less than 5 races he has improved .30 sec which is impossible if you know anything about sprinting... thanks for the info that proves Usain has more steriods in him then Ben Johnson and an entire Kentucky Derby horse race combined."

"In the history of the 100m dash not even 1 second has been shaven off of the world record 10.6 sec set in 1912, almost 100 years. Usain Bolt shaved off .5 seconds in 5 races... maybe it would have been more but he got caught up in celebration before his race even finished. Fact is in the history of the 100m dash nobody has run sub 10 seconds until the steriod era."

"Bolt's sudden emergence truly began May 5 (2008) in Jamaica, when he ran 9.76 seconds, just shy of countryman Asafa Powell's then-record 9.74. This was someone to watch. Then, on May 31 in New York City, Bolt broke Powell's mark by finishing in 9.72"

"July 22, 2008, 4:24 pm, POWELL BEATS BOLT In a showdown of the world’s fastest sprinters, Jamaican Asafa Powell edged out countryman Usain Bolt by one one-hundredth of a second in a 100-meter dash at an IAAF meet in Stockholm on Tuesday. Powell, the former world record holder, ran the sprint in 9.88 seconds, pipping Bolt, the current world record holder, at the wire."

"Anyone who runs faster then Ben Johnson's sauced up 9.79 is either half horse or has used steriods period. There's just no way to make so much improvement without using steriods. They made undetectable designer steriods, they have the whizzinator to fake clean urine tests"

"Hey, it has nothing to do with American or not. Hell, our American sprinters are the case study for juiced up / drugged runners. The facts are these: the kid destroyed the World Record in a sport that is the most doped in the world, he destroyed the field (that was probably also juiced) and he stopped running with 20m to go."

"Ben Johnson didn't test positive until the olympics. A test only works if they know what they are looking for... i.e. Marion Jones and the designer steriods THG... undetectable until a coach handed in the syringe containing the drug! I'm Canadian... this has nothing to do with nationality."

"Johnson made headlines when he ran a 9.79 but his urine test had traces of Stanozolol, an anabolic steroid. Johnson was disqualified and later admitted he was using steroids when he set other records. His coach, Charlie Francis, said Johnson had been using the performance enhancing drug since 1981. It was essentially the end of the Jamaican-born runner."

"How low might Bolt be able to push that time? 9.65? 9.59?" ... "Anything is possible. The human body is changing, so you never know," Bolt said. "I aim just to win, but when I saw the replay, I was amazed."

[Mike]

Yes, you can. In the case of Phelps, several other individuals were also well below world record pace in addition to Phelps. Please remember that he won one of his races by 1 one-hundreds of a second. Also in multiple races, he was part of a relay which means several other people would need to be accused. This path leads you to rampant doping speculation in the swimming including, not only, the United States but France and many other countries. Bolt was alone in beating these records and no one else was close.

It's big-time apples and oranges!

[marikojp]

Bolt has been breaking records since he was 15 years old. so Abby and "sports fan" you should get your facts straight before making accusations. If Bolt was American he wouldn't be accused of cheating by most of you...

[novel]

Phelps IS DIRTY!!! ..one day he will lose his medals also..just wait and see, oh wait! i forgot...americans dont get tested the same way. they get "special treatment".

[sportjunkie]

To the skeptics,

Why can't you be happy for Bolt. He did something amazing, and until proven guilty - he should be recognised.

And another thing to the American media...Gold medals has always been the measure of success in previous games. Just because China's beating USA in the overall and official tally (set by the IOC) - the american media shouldn't (all of a sudden) change the way the leaderboard is measured.

[Grinner]

Sports Junkie: Get over the technicalities of how the medals are counted. Stop hating the US because it is easier, rather than seeing how China is the new Orwellian 1984 Big Brother who controls its athletics and manipulates the supposedly impartial Olympic contest. The measue of success is not GOLD (and jade). It is the individual who decides to represent their individual country--not be directed to represent by Big Brother--or else. I am sorry you resent the freedoms and successes of the US, which your own country can't replicate. We still have the overall GOLD, SILVER, and BRONZE historical record. Get with the program. Jealousy will get you nowhere...

[TalksTooMuch]

Far be it from me to assume that the United States can self-regulate better than any other country...so I will not. The proof of this, however, is as plain as the air in our country, the quality of our water, and the difference between helping everyone else out in the world, and sitting by idly pushing policy around.

We- the people of the Republic of the United States- ARE the most self-critical country in the world, and have been doing reality checks since before we began. Our industrial revolution was a mess: we realized the impact, made positive changes and rules to prevent it from re-occurring, and watched as our environment got cleaner and wildlife returned. We progressed.

Contrast this with immigrants who have no desire whatsoever to become citizens, yet feed off of our social network without cost; refusing to pay taxes, refusing, even, to learn to speak our language. While they are here, they live in company owned homes, ride in company owned vehicles, and take advantage of free internet access at every KMart across the nation. These "enlightened" non-Americans, with these simple acts and lack of ambition, live like we did in 1850- as Irish coal workers or Chinese railway crews. Yet we (mistakenly) allow them to continue doing so because of a very loud, (albeit highly uneducated in history,) American voice. All of this BEFORE non-Americans even comment.

Contrast this with food sent to countries who hardly have potable water- to watch it be stolen by the ruling dictatorships, or allowed to rot at the docks so our benevolence goes unnoticed, and unappreciated.

Contrast this with China themselves- a country who is selling their souls to greed and ambition- despite their own 4000-year-old and very wise philosophies.

Shall I go on?

This American wants to see Paris, Bankok, Egypt, the United Kingdom, Tibet and China, Japan... and when I get there, I don't want to see the "golden arches" of McDonald's. I don't want to hear my language, eat my food, or drink a Starbuck's coffee. I want to learn about YOU: your traditions. Your feelings. Your culture.

So don't sit here and bash Americans because you think it's the popular thing to do. Most of you enjoy the benefits of our presence in your borders- commercially and militarily. If you don't like it, save us some money and kick us out. Believe me, I'll be the first to understand. Just don't spew your hypocritical brick-brack or react with this type of resentful projection and commentary- you only look like fools when you do. You appear no better or different than a common racist.

For the love of TV, watch the race. If you still wonder why the heck people suspect him, watch again. Man- if he's clean, he's the greatest ever! But nothing in his history- distant or recent- supports what we saw in that race.

[Mühlmann]

Who is NOT accusing Phelps?

[Brad Kearns]

It is possible that Bolt, or Phelps, or any one or every one of the gold medalists was juiced. However, if that were the case and they avoided the much improved detection, it follows that the other competitors would be able to achieve the same. What we can be almost certain of, due to the massive economic incentives of modern sport, is that we see a level playing field these days, in whatever sport. What's preposterous is that the Jamaican program could be boosted by dope unknown to other athletes and (especially more affluent and sophisticated) nations.

One thing in Bolt's favor is he was world junior champion at 15, continued to improve and become world class while still in high school and continued to steadily improve up to 2008. This achievement progression is the pattern of a phenom, not a doper (despite being posted here by some yoohaw that used Bolt's PR progression against him. Or maybe he was doping at 15!).

15 years old: 200m in 20.61
16 years old: 200m in 20.40
16 years old: 400m in 45.35
18 years old: 200m in 19.93
20 years old: 200m in 19.86
21 years old: 200m in 19.75

The doping suspicions should be cast on athletes who experience sudden, shocking improvement. FloJo was a decent American sprinter for 10 years then went off the charts of possibility - still no one has approached her times. She should have made like Jack Jack of The Incredibles and kept it a little closer. In 2004 the womens 100 meter champion, Yuliya Nesterenko of Belarus, improved her time by a half-second in single year to win the gold (she was not ranked in the world top-50 the year before). At the press conference she was grilled by the media about her training methods that delivered such incredible sudden improvement. She replied through an interpreter, "I do not wish to talk further about my training" and left the press room. Also in 2004 the womens 400 hurdles champ was an unknown Greek woman named Fani Halkila, whose Olympic record of ~52.8 was superior to her lifetime best without hurdles the previous year. "What hurdles?"

[notfooled]

Brad,

Call me a yoohaw (???!!!), but I can do the simple math. It took Bolt 3 years to shave .18 of a second off his 200m time. Suddenly, he chushes the field by shaving off another .45 of a second. Come on! That's HUGE!

Marion Jones passed 160 drug tests without detection. If not for a trainer giving the doping committee the serum, it could have been 200.

[notfooled]

It's earier to improve times while a person is still developing. It's extreamly hard to shave off time as a person starts to hit their peak and the peak of the world's elite. I'll do the math for those not willing or able.

15 years old: 200m in 20.61
16 years old: 200m in 20.40 (-0.21 / yr)
18 years old: 200m in 19.93 (-0.235 / yr)
20 years old: 200m in 19.86 (-0.07 / yr)
21 years old: 200m in 19.75 (-.11) +
21 years old: 200m in 19.30 (-.45)
(-.57 / yr) (he turned 22 just after the race)

This was a new WR and 2nd place was 19.96 (after DQ's) by the previous 2004 Olimpic gold medalist — the largest margin of victory in an Olympic 200M.

Nobody other than Bolt and Johnson have ever run the 200M in under 19.72 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_record_progression_200_metres_men).

[YEah]

If bolt is on dope thne micheal phelps is sooooooo obvious!!!

[clear the dirty air]

For those who are still either unlearned or naive to think
Phelps, Torres, and most other athletes aren't doping,
i have disappointing news for you.
There are hundreds, if not a thousand or two, BALCO's.
You can buy exotic, custom made "juice" ONLINE.
There are forums online where amateurs, semi-pro, and pro athletes
advise each other on how to properly "juice" themselves without detection.
Google "cutting cycles", and you'll see my point.
Keep in mind that while the IOC and US Anti-Doping agency test for some
known substances, they DO NOT test for HGH, IGF-5, The Clear, and a whole slew
of other exotic and yet-unknown substances.

[Slava]

All best athletes are dopers. This fact can destroy people's interest to sport. Therefore it must be mask.