Jump to content

Alan Wells In Drug Taking Allegations


Recommended Posts

Yes, it is plausible. Wells never ran the sort of stupidly fast times that Lewis, Johnson and Christie all managed. His PB for the 100m (without wind assistance) was 10.11. His 200m best was 20.21.

Moreover, Wells didn't beat Lewis, Johnson or Christie at a major championships (he did beat Johnson at the Commonwealths in 1982, but that was long before Johnson's peak). The significance of that should be clear enough.

The one top sprinter that Wells never beat was Calvin Smith. And guess what? He never failed a drugs test in his career and has never, to my knowledge, been accused of being a drugs cheat. To this day, he says that he won the 1988 Olympic 100m final, as he was the first 'clean' athlete to cross the line.

You seem to be suggesting that drugs ought to make everybody as good as each other. It's entirely logical that if we assume everybody is taking drugs, one of the drug-takers has to be the slowest, so not running the "stupidly fast times" of others doesn't necessarily make someone clean. Simply being able to compete with the dopers would push a clean athlete into the freak talent category. Calvin Smith may really be that freak. He was certainly built like the old generation of sprinters, not the new generation. Looking at him standing next to Johnson and Christie is hilarious. I'm happy to give anybody untainted by any suggestion of doping the benefit of the doubt. The secret recordings of Wells' doctor make that a little harder.

Johnson was already on steroids in 1982. Of course he wasn't at his peak, he was 21. When Wells was 21 he wasn't even a sprinter. Wells' best time would have won him silver in Los Angeles, ahead of a doped Johnson. It would have taken bronze from a ridiculously doped Christie in the 1987 world championships. He might not have ran elite times against the best fields at major championships, but then neither has Asafa Powell. He still ran them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This. The way he kept referring to himself as an athlete :lol: What a fanny.

Also this. The guy beat, on various occasions, the elite sprinters and known dopers, Carl Lewis, Ben Johnson and Linford Christie. Is that plausible? As a clean, not to mention white, man?

Are you suggesting that Wells being a white man adds weight to the argument that he was a drugs cheat ?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting that Wells being a white man adds weight to the argument that he was a drugs cheat ?

I'm saying that it's a demonstrable fact that the vast majority of top sprinters since the 1960s are of West African heritage, and for a white guy who isn't taking drugs to beat the very cream of the elite black dopers of his era in an era of extremely lax testing would suggest he was not just a top athlete but a freakish outlier. Allan Wells may well have been.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm saying that it's a demonstrable fact that the vast majority of top sprinters since the 1960s are of West African heritage, and for a white guy who isn't taking drugs to beat the very cream of the elite black dopers of his era in an era of extremely lax testing would suggest he was not just a top athlete but a freakish outlier. Allan Wells may well have been.

You probably saying what a lot of people think but I must admit he was one of my sporting heroes when I was growing up so I suppose I'm prepared to believe he did it cleanly unless someone can prove otherwise and if a Scot can win Wimbledon I'm prepared to believe a White Scot can beat the fastest men in the world cleanly :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You probably saying what a lot of people think but I must admit he was one of my sporting heroes when I was growing up so I suppose I'm prepared to believe he did it cleanly unless someone can prove otherwise and if a Scot can win Wimbledon I'm prepared to believe a White Scot can beat the fastest men in the world cleanly :)

:lol: Wha's like us?

I have no idea if he took drugs or not and I wouldn't particularly judge him if he did. I'm not one of these "sports cheats are the devil, won't somebody please think of the children!" types. I blame the coaches, the testers, the authorities, the sponsors etc before I'd blame the young folk who grow up dreaming of being a champion and then find out the whole game is rigged, and they can either play it or go home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be suggesting that drugs ought to make everybody as good as each other. It's entirely logical that if we assume everybody is taking drugs, one of the drug-takers has to be the slowest, so not running the "stupidly fast times" of others doesn't necessarily make someone clean. Simply being able to compete with the dopers would push a clean athlete into the freak talent category. Calvin Smith may really be that freak. He was certainly built like the old generation of sprinters, not the new generation. Looking at him standing next to Johnson and Christie is hilarious. I'm happy to give anybody untainted by any suggestion of doping the benefit of the doubt. The secret recordings of Wells' doctor make that a little harder.

Johnson was already on steroids in 1982. Of course he wasn't at his peak, he was 21. When Wells was 21 he wasn't even a sprinter. Wells' best time would have won him silver in Los Angeles, ahead of a doped Johnson. It would have taken bronze from a ridiculously doped Christie in the 1987 world championships. He might not have ran elite times against the best fields at major championships, but then neither has Asafa Powell. He still ran them.

I'm well aware that not all cheats perform equally well, but thanks for pointing it out anyway. Next you'll be telling me that Elvis is dead.

My argument is that it is plausible that Wells could have achieved what he did without the aid of drugs, not that drugs are an equaliser.

First, though, let's look at Linford Christie.

You say that Christie was 'ridiculously doped' at the '87 World Championships, but where is your evidence for that assertion? We all know that Christie narrowly escaped disqualification at the '88 Olympics after testing positive for pseudoephedrine and was later busted for use of performance enhancing drugs. But in 1987? There's simply no evidence on which to base your claim.

Christie finished fourth, incidentally, at the '87 Worlds. He was retrospectively awarded bronze after Johnson was busted at the '88 Olympics.

I disagree with your point about times. The track surface and atmospheric conditions always play a large part in determining the times for a particular 100m race. Wells' best time was set on a different day and on a different track to the races you mention, so it's not relevant to the races you mention. And Wells certainly didn't match it at the 1983 World Championships in Helsinki, when he finished behind all three Americans.

I agree that Cal Smith could have been a freak of nature. He was a wonderful athlete. However, is it really implausible that someone with a lower level of natural talent but who made up for it with hard work and determination could have competed at the highest level without using performance enhancing drugs? I believe that to be possible. Difficult, but possible.

A good, clean runner who had a strong race could have beaten Johnson at the Commonwealths in 1982. Cameron Sharp very nearly did, and I don't recall anyone suggesting that he ever took drugs. Was Sharp a freak talent? No. He was a fine runner who was, at his peak, a notch or two below the likes of Lewis.

It's therefore plausible that Wells, who was both a more experienced man than Sharp and Johnson and fresher at that late point in the season (he'd missed a good chunk of the season through injury) could have beaten Johnson that day without taking drugs.

The question is: did he? I believe he did.

I'll leave the last words to Wells' former coach.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/former-coach-denies-allan-wells-was-a-doping-cheat-1-3791952

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a great book by Richard Moore, "The dirtiest race in history", that lifts the lid on a lot of what was going on back then.

Yeah Great read , there was a documentary that was ok as well but not a patch on the book

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm well aware that not all cheats perform equally well, but thanks for pointing it out anyway. Next you'll be telling me that Elvis is dead.

My argument is that it is plausible that Wells could have achieved what he did without the aid of drugs, not that drugs are an equaliser.

First, though, let's look at Linford Christie.

You say that Christie was 'ridiculously doped' at the '87 World Championships, but where is your evidence for that assertion? We all know that Christie narrowly escaped disqualification at the '88 Olympics after testing positive for pseudoephedrine and was later busted for use of performance enhancing drugs. But in 1987? There's simply no evidence on which to base your claim.

Christie finished fourth, incidentally, at the '87 Worlds. He was retrospectively awarded bronze after Johnson was busted at the '88 Olympics.

I disagree with your point about times. The track surface and atmospheric conditions always play a large part in determining the times for a particular 100m race. Wells' best time was set on a different day and on a different track to the races you mention, so it's not relevant to the races you mention. And Wells certainly didn't match it at the 1983 World Championships in Helsinki, when he finished behind all three Americans.

I agree that Cal Smith could have been a freak of nature. He was a wonderful athlete. However, is it really implausible that someone with a lower level of natural talent but who made up for it with hard work and determination could have competed at the highest level without using performance enhancing drugs? I believe that to be possible. Difficult, but possible.

A good, clean runner who had a strong race could have beaten Johnson at the Commonwealths in 1982. Cameron Sharp very nearly did, and I don't recall anyone suggesting that he ever took drugs. Was Sharp a freak talent? No. He was a fine runner who was, at his peak, a notch or two below the likes of Lewis.

It's therefore plausible that Wells, who was both a more experienced man than Sharp and Johnson and fresher at that late point in the season (he'd missed a good chunk of the season through injury) could have beaten Johnson that day without taking drugs.

The question is: did he? I believe he did.

I'll leave the last words to Wells' former coach.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/former-coach-denies-allan-wells-was-a-doping-cheat-1-3791952

I would make a distinction between possibility and plausibility. I did not say it wasn't possible.

As for Christie, I don't believe I said there was evidence. Just as you are prepared to cite the understandably biased former coach of Allan Wells in support of your position, I'm prepared to cite the sudden improvement of a 27 year-old athlete who is now known to have been a proven doper in his prime and a proven doper in his decline. My belief that Christie was doped up to the eyeballs in '87 and your belief that Wells wasn't during his career are both just that - beliefs. But your willingness to give the benefit of the doubt to Christie in order to close off a possible point of discussion as far Wells goes seems an awful lot like reaching. There was "simply no evidence" to suggest Ben Johnson was doping in 1984 either, which is why he still has his bronze medal, but who would be prepared to claim he wasn't?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt steroids still have benefits once you are off them

Works the same way as muscle memory, once you come off it you'll have a higher 'natural' max strength than you did before.

I find it funny that people keep talking about this, re: Justin Gatlin, as if he's not STILL on them :lol:

9.75 today :praise:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So wee Mo Farah never heard his doorbell then!! :lol::lol:

Next to Serena Williams' excuse of "I ran and hid in my panic room for hours because I saw the testers on CCTV and thought they were burglars", it's relatively plausible :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next to Serena Williams' excuse of "I ran and hid in my panic room for hours because I saw the testers on CCTV and thought they were burglars", it's relatively plausible :P

She didn't actually say that, did she ?

She's a bear and could be her own bodyguard

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...