RJJ v McClellan

First topic message reminder :

Evening all,

I was reading the other day about Gerald Mcclellan beating Roy Jones Jr before they turned pro with a 3-2 split. Mcclellan by all accounts couldn't spar after as his jaw was messed up from the fight despite the win. Apparently it was a great fight with them both really going for it. How does everyone see it going if they had met in the pro ranks? Also was there ever an opportunity where it came close to happening?

Cheers

kingraf wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

kingraf wrote:I don't know if he is or not, but my physio told me that Bolt's musculature and biomechanical composition was almost designed for 100m. He literally changed the previously accepted limits of huma  speed. Now it's hypothesised that we can get down to 9.44

I thought it was always said he was the 'wrong build' for 100m (being to tall and long-legged) but perfectly suited to his preferred event of 200m??

?

Sorry, my tablet seems to be acting up. The gist of what I wrote is "Sorry think youre right. She may have said 200m. Its his freak fast twitch fibre composition that allows him to overcome the difficulties associated with being 6'5 and racing 100m"

Ah ok, cool

kingraf wrote:9.58 is a HUGE improvement. For reference Jesse Owens would have been in a fight for his life to beat Abdul Hakim Sani Brown in the Junior IAAF finals if he ran 10.2

0.6 of a second improvement over 80 years is not a huge improvement at all- Owens ran on cinder tracks with the most basic of shoes. We have hand huge steps in sports science, training methods, track technology, shoe technology and the improvement is less than 0.1 seconds a decade. My point is that humans have not evolved in the last 80years, an even with all the drug use in sprinting, aren't really much faster- PEDs can't turn an average man into a great athlete.

horizontalhero wrote:

kingraf wrote:9.58 is a HUGE improvement. For reference Jesse Owens would have been in a fight for his life to beat Abdul Hakim Sani Brown in the Junior IAAF finals if he ran 10.2

0.6 of a second improvement over 80 years is not a huge improvement at all- Owens ran on cinder tracks with the most basic of shoes. We have hand huge steps in sports science, training methods, track technology, shoe technology and the improvement is less than 0.1 seconds a decade. My point is that humans have not evolved in the last 80years, an even with all the drug use in sprinting, aren't really much faster- PEDs can't turn an average man into a great athlete.

Jesus. Christ. Like you as a poster but to use just one example makes a bit of a mockery of the average to great athlete part.

There was that Irish swimmer (had to google her) Michelle Smith who shaved something like 45s off her PB over a course of 3 years and went from 90th in the world to 1st in that time... And her hubby with stuffing her full of more than just his schlong.

Just one example of what a difference it makes munching PEDs

horizontalhero wrote:

kingraf wrote:9.58 is a HUGE improvement. For reference Jesse Owens would have been in a fight for his life to beat Abdul Hakim Sani Brown in the Junior IAAF finals if he ran 10.2

0.6 of a second improvement over 80 years is not a huge improvement at all- Owens ran on cinder tracks with the most basic of shoes. We have hand huge steps in sports science, training methods, track technology, shoe technology and the improvement is less than 0.1 seconds a decade. My point is that humans have not evolved in the last 80years, an even with all the drug use in sprinting, aren't really much faster- PEDs can't turn an average man into a great athlete.

I think you have to have never ever watched athletics in your life to think 0.6 seconds isn't a huge leap. I mean 16-year olds are running 10.2!! To put it into perspective... the gap between Jesse Owens and Usain Bolt is about the same as the gap between Jesse Owens and Jonah Lomu.

You've got to remember that over 100m, changes to footwear and even track make a very miniscule difference. Almost non-existent really. As for the rate of change... Interestingly enough... the record actually onl yimorpved by lesds than 0.05s a decade from 1930-60. Even from 1960-1999 in those forty doped up years the record only improved by a touch over 0.05s a decade. And yet in the 2000s, the record went down by 0.21s in a decade. in other words, a third of the change in the last 70 years happened in the last fifteen years. That's a HUGE leap in sprinting