Beefy's Corner - The Off-Topic Chat Thread

Christie failed a drugs test in the 1988 final but was cleared claiming that some sort of herbal remedy had given him a false reading. Complete and utter bullshine, as he later got caught. A guy who ran quicker at 30 than 20, do me a favour.

There are 2 types of sprinters, those who are drug cheats and those that haven't been caught yet.

 

Just watching David Guetta's set at TITP on BBC3, that crowd is absolutely crazy!

 

J&B. A duty free bottle given to me by a friend who has just come back from Turkey.

 

This may come off as a little bit conspiracy theory-ish, but I honestly think doping is rife in every top level sport. I mean, just look at Wimbledon - you see people put in gruelling performances when it's ridiculously hot, then as early as a day or two later perform at exactly the same level (or with very little dropoff). The commentators always wonder, "how do they recover so fast, nobody recovered like that in my day!" Hmm, I wonder? It was similar in cycling, and we all know how that's turned out - everyone at the top for years was doping. I mean, Lance Armstrong's statement of "If you wanted to win the tour, you had to be into doping" says it all. Now we hear Powell and Gay fail a drugs test in the same day, personally, I wonder how long it'll be until it all gets unraveled.

 

I have been told one or two things about football, especially for injury recovery.

 

Well, in the same conspiracy theory style, I've heard people claim athletics "cleaned up" for a short time about 10 years ago. In 2003, just after the BALCO drug scandal in the US, Kim Collins won the 100m at the World Championships in a time of 10.07. A year later in the Olympic final Collins ran 10.00... and finished 6th. Maurice Greene was eliminated in the semi finals in 2003 with a time of 10.37. In 2004 he finished third overall with a time of 9.87. Obviously that doesn't prove anything and the track, form etc can play a part but those numbers are quite striking.

You may have a point about tennis, although long matches certainly aren't a new thing. In fact with the introduction of the tie break they're probably rarer than they used to be. I mean Djokovic was clearly somewhat affected at Wimbledon by his long semi-final. Still I've seen several players say the drug testing in tennis is very poor.

The main difference/improvement that has come in a lot of sports recently is the athleticism of the competitors. In some sports I can accept it's just increased professionalism (for example cricket and probably rugby union given they weren't pros at all not long ago) but in others you have to ask questions.

 

Diet and increased knowledge about recovery are also important. Schneiderlin recently said that he was put on a diet (correct eating not calorie counting) by Saints...they delivered his food to his house. He said the change in how he felt and the improvement in his performance was dramatic. Players are much more professional now...especially when they see that it works. This is also why sportsman can carry on playing for years longer than they used to. It was rare to see players in their thirties at the top level when I was young...poor physical form and injury forced their retirement. Le Tissier may not have liked it, but imagine what a fully fit Matty could have achieved.

 

I think that Tennis has a drug problem, we all love to see an underdog come through and play brilliantly to beat a big name, i.e. Rosol v Nadal but for anyone that see's these matches surely there is something going on, can a player play the game of his life all of a sudden against the worlds best and then didn't he lose in the next round? I hate myself for even contemplating this but maybe we have to question whether Federer did or not? Similar situation to Armstrong maybe? With the fact that serve and volley has pretty much disappeared, excluding the instances at this years Wimbledon, rallies are now much longer and from the baseline these guys cover a hell of a lot of ground so although going 5 sets isn't a new thing the players are working a lot harder than ever before.

 

It is not uncommon for a tennis player to pull one great match out of the bag...that's what makes it interesting. They have nothing to lose, they win a few points and confidence rockets. The other player starts to snatch at things...add an element of luck and Bob's your Uncle. The adrenaline rush takes it out of them and they lose the next game against another player who is alerted to the danger. Remember how we beat City, Chelsea and Liverpool...step up your game and throw the 'better' side off their game.

 

It's a good point about the longer points in tennis. Having said that, from what I can see tennis players generally run a maximum of about a mile per set and most of their matches are 2 or 3 sets long. In comparison it's not unusual for a Premier League midfielder to run 7 miles in a game. Tennis players still suffer from the really intense 5 set tennis matches, which are rare these days - you could see Djokovic starting to serve-volley in the Wimbledon final and I would guess that was at least partly an attempt to win some cheap points. As Fran says, freak performances in a single match happen. If you saw a previously unknown player suddenly raise his game and win a Grand Slam at 28 or something then that would obviously be very suspicious.

 

The phrases Ray Lewis and deer antler spray come to mind

 

Remember the match that last three days a couple of years ago with Isner and Mahut? Some people reckon they shortened their careers by about 6 months by completing the entire match at full pelt.

 

A 17 year old kid could be racing in F1 next year...my life is officially over.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108789

 

Get him on a bike, like he should be at 17

All this car driving just makes you fat.

 

I can believe they did. That match was such a freak and became almost pointless after a while. Isner was a total wreck afterwards and lost easily in the next round.

 

Mrs Q still won't let me get a bike.

 

Why..?

 

Doesn't want me to die, I suppose. I've tried reasoning with stats and other sensible stuff, she's not budging.

 

Mark this one down in the books, but I agree with Duckhunter..........

Linford was about as clean as Stig of the Dump. I've had some very interesting conversations about him and drug use in athletics across the 80's and 90's with some of his peers.......let's just say it wasn't exactly a secret.

 

Very, very unlikely to be next year I'd suspect.