By entering these forums you agree to our Rules
on the logo to return to our homepage
[ Return to Index ] [ Original Message ]Original Message
|Subject: ||RE: Flojo's 10.49|
Regarding FloJo's physique:
I have seen, in person, WR-holder sprint women both who were caught using, and who weren't caught, and who were likely clean. Was FloJo using anabolics? Impossible to say.
Women vary tremendously in the degree of "masculinization" they exhibit, because they vary tremendously in basic body type. Also, since their physiognomy isn't primarily based on testosterone effects, it can be altered significantly more than men's physiognomy through testosterone-elevating training.
For me, there is a number of clearly different female sprint body types:
1) long and lean--Arron, Jones, Jackson
2) disproportionately strong lower body--Thanou and VCB
3) balanced--FloJo, Jeter, Privalova, Pintusevich-Block
4) demonstrably, and clearly, doped--White and Issajenko
5) the natural--Rudolph, Ashford, Felix
There are more in each category, obviously.
IMHO, everyone has a finite amount of muscle mass that their biochemistry will allow them to support, given the proper training--the question is how that muscle mass is distributed.
If running and jumping is the focus of training, as it is in sprinting, preferential muscle development can be expected in the upper legs/butt/abs--TO THE DETRIMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ELSEWHERE.
This accounts for profile #2.
Longer sprinters in profile #1 can distribute the same muscle mass over a greater length, and therefore look slimmer than profile #2.
As Charlie Francis used to say, you sprint with your upper body, and lower body development should ideally not come at the direct expense of upper body development, but should perfectly complement it--profile #3.
The jump to profile #4 occurs when you add drugs to the lower body of profile #2, and get a huge overall body; or when you add drugs to the entire balance of profile #3 and amplify the whole thing.
Girls like FloJo and Jeter aren't big, they just look big on camera. Imagine VCB if her upper body matched her lower body, and then put that person side-by-side with somebody from profile #3, and you would see what I'm talking about.
None of this is to say that the athletes in profile #3 weren't using--they could have started off with a slight body type and used anabolics to just amplify the original physiognomy, or they could just be the products of good balanced training, and be taking some drug other than anabolics.
Some sprinters in profile #3 are/were using. It is difficult, especially for women, to simultaneously maintain high muscle mass and stay lean. When you see a girl with large muscles, she always has a good amount of fat to go along with it--nature's balance (think Serena). I've seen this many times. If they try to lose fat, their body preferentially keeps some fat at the expense of muscle, which gets metabolized to some extent.
This is why muscular women can't stop working out. They will lose the muscle before they lose all the fat--ouch. To stay lean and "toned", (profile 3) rather than muscularly dense, workouts are needed that balance fat burning with muscular force production--workouts exactly like the 400m-and-shorter workouts that FloJo did.
But when you train like that, you can't maintain the kind of muscular density of a White or an Issajenko without the use of anabolics. Period.
Of course, athletes in profile #2 could also be doped, and not have the natural potential to hypertrophy as much as they have in the lower body.
As is obvious, even athletes in profile #1 could be doped.
The only ones we can be somewhat certain about not taking anabolics are in profile #5. If they do take anabolics, they rather quickly jump to one of the other profiles--Jones to #1, Thanou to #2, Pintusevich-Block to #3, White to #4.
Was FloJo on anabolics? Maybe. They key would be in the rapidity of her progression--but it would be impossible to say definitively, given that she had the precise type of training program that would, IMHO, be the only one that could possibly produce the same types of gains naturally.
For me, she's not CLEARLY in profile #4, based on physiognomy alone--but then again, I feel the same way about Jeter, whose trajectory is for me dispositive evidence of her using.
I don't know enough about FloJo's exact trajectory to come down one way or another, but I'm sure some of you guys do.
d, what do you know?
My 2 cents.
To combat message board spam (by non runners). We are making people answer a brief question before they can post on a thread that is over 20 days old.
If you answer this question you should be able to post.