and who cares if they course cut right, so long as they don't win in the open categories. rules are for losers.
-
140
-
a straight man here wrote:
Que fking pasa wrote:
Yes. "Countless" influencers using illegal substances? I doubt it. Name names.
If expand influencer to the whole of the "fitness" community, there's plenty of them taking something. If we expand outside of influencers, and just recreational runners that are just doing their own thing, the prevalence of testosterone and peptides in the running world is much higher than people think. Just think of what percent of the sport is made up of middle aged men maintaining a full time job, taking care of a family, sleep is less than optimal, our environment/diet is so toxic the average testosterone levels have dramatically decreased in the last 50 years etc. You really think every 45 year old is staying clean even though there's a testosterone prescription they can get from a doctor that would dramatically increase every aspect of their life? Especially their running life which for a lot of men it's one of the few things they look towards doing after working and taking care of kids.
While I believe in clean sport, this post is brutally honest about being a male in the mid-2020s and I can see WHY men do this to a degree. More than just peptides and BPC-157. The root of this convo is about fairness and expectations for men/of men, to an extent. The peptides/testing is the surface-level manifestation of a deeper issue IMO. I may be wrong.
Men have to be protectors/providers, have great jobs, etc., provide for families, etc. I see things like this on the askmen and askmenover30 subreddits, guys are stressed and burned to the core by 35-40, and they are 20-25 years from retirement. Plus spousal issues and kids. So the peptides seem like an expensive but worthwhile shortcut, these men have one advantage in that $ is not an issue.
The last sentence is brutal but true--at a certain point men are expected to be in the background, as accessories to their families and in-laws, and just provide, provide, provide, etc. To be fair the best couples equally share parenting duties and both work, etc. But not always the case.
This does not excuse people from doing this and making the sport unfair but the post does a good job explaining why certain folks act they way they do (not calling anyone out either).
317 -
Cam's a moran wrote:
Cams crashing out is hilarious - Sage at times you've annoyed me but I'd be absolutely laughing my a** off every day about this, Cam acting like a big old baby! Congrats!
For the people arguing that "it doesn't matter"... no one taking PEDs draws a really nice clean line about the rules. There's no grey area or "I only ran 2:xx so it's ok" whilst someone 2 seconds ahead of you can't because an arbitrary line is drawn. Everyone on the start line, from 1:59 to 8 hours follows the same rules. Simple.
It's the same reason Cam can't shoot an animal on the 31st March, but can shoot it on 1st April. Yes, there could be some deeper nuances applied each year, or a simple and very clear line is drawn that has no ambiguity or room for interpretation. Everyone's on the same page.
As someone watching this from afar, it's bizarre how the US somehow both has no rules but also crazy rules and permits and layers of rubbish impacting daily life. And then in this instance with a pretty clear and obvious rule a group decides to argue the case. Goes some way to explaining sovereign citizens I guess?
As an aside, this made me look at hunting more. There is very sound reasoning as to hunting cut-off dates, for those who are curious:
For most hunters in the U.S., hunting season refers to deer hunting. In most regions, the fall season signals the opening of big game hunting season, as it roughly corresponds with the start of the breeding period (also known as the rut). However, many local environmental factorscan change when the rut starts, and each state adapts its hunting season accordingly. The primary reason behind modern hunting seasons is wildlife conservation. If the deer population within a particular area is too high,they may cause overgrazing, depriving many small animals of nesting habitats.
What is a limiting factor? A limiting factor is a biological term referring to an element that reduces the population of a given species in a specific area. They include natural circumstances like disease, food, water supply fluctuations, predators and human factors like hunting and urban development. By allowing people to hunt within a designated period, the deer population in each surveyed area can be maintained at a healthy level, protecting it from the damages of overpopulation.
This post was edited 29 seconds after it was posted.41 -
This thread ceased to be interesting about three days. Now it’s the same five people posting the same five things over and over again and writing page length posts describing what we already know. It’s funny that nobody has changed their mind and is not going to. My final thought is that you people have started a witch hunt against Cam the Man Hanes for what amounts to something so trivial and benign that it’s virtually nothing: an almost 60 year old who admittedly and openly takes PEDs and has never at any point claimed he is a professional athlete. Whatever the reasons are; jealousy, resentment, boredom, I hope that you people can find some time to reflect how wrong you all are and what is causing you to be so irrationally hateful.
344 -
Aravapia wrote:
My first ultra (a 100m) was a beautiful disaster because I’m in 40s, was moderately out of shape and pretty undertrained. I knew what I needed to do to get to the start healthy and with the confidence in my expierence to finish
It never occurred to me to dope despite all the resources my family used so I could do the race. I wasn’t thrilled with how I did but it was an honest effort that I can respect. Maybe others have poor ethics but if I was all roided up I think I would not be as proud of it.
Doping isn’t going to prevent a dnf in an ultra. it’s too long Ans too much goofy stuff can happen as we saw with cam’s cocodona dnf. Maybe all the doping is giving hobby joggers a false sense of security and lack of “grit” that is coming back to bite them in the race.
Theoretical question: How far would Cam (or any runner in his position, not singling him out) have gone without allegedly using any supplements?
Good on you for crushing the 100M. I don't know how ultra folks do it, it really does take grit. The closest I came to ultras was doing 25- to 30-mile hikes with my Boy Scout troop in the early 2000s and overnight camping on the Appalachian Trail (Pa.).
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.40 -
ButterMyBananaBread wrote:
Cam is continuing to crash out, double down, change his story, and attempting to shift the focus off of him on his social media: https://imgur.com/a/T0FQpFT
He's now pointing out how the winner of the Eugene Marathon also wasn't tested, as if that is the reason why he's getting heat. Cam, as far as I know, Jax Siddell hasn't admitted to taking a peptide not approved for human consumption that he somehow claims to have gotten from a doctor, partnered with a TRT company for several years, written a series of blog posts about his PED usage, or gone on the Joe Rogan podcast and admitted to taking a huge stack of supplements that he's unsure of the purpose of. If he has, please let us know, and we'll lead the charge to get both you and him removed from the 2026 results.
He's also sharing the Eugene waiver, as if it not explicitly saying "Hey, don't be a roided out grandpa and enter our race" is some sort of gotcha defense. Cam, that waiver doesn't say anything about wearing your bib in a visible location, how'd you and all the other thousands of competitors know to do that, if it wasn't in the waiver? Looks like the waiver didn't say anything about not cutting the course either, I guess you and everyone else were suckers for running the full 26.2 huh? Oh, yeah, there are rules to road racing that aren't listed in a waiver for legal liability purposes that anyone who's been doing marathons for 20+ years would know. You've proven time and time again that you think you're such a special, unique flower that the rules don't apply to you though.
Just quoting this to keep in on the most recent page. To reiterate, Cam is literally arguing that as long as something is not explicity stated in the liability waiver he signed for a race, then it can't be against the rules.
211 -
The Idiot Marathoner wrote:
ButterMyBananaBread wrote:
Cam is continuing to crash out, double down, change his story, and attempting to shift the focus off of him on his social media: https://imgur.com/a/T0FQpFT
He's now pointing out how the winner of the Eugene Marathon also wasn't tested, as if that is the reason why he's getting heat. Cam, as far as I know, Jax Siddell hasn't admitted to taking a peptide not approved for human consumption that he somehow claims to have gotten from a doctor, partnered with a TRT company for several years, written a series of blog posts about his PED usage, or gone on the Joe Rogan podcast and admitted to taking a huge stack of supplements that he's unsure of the purpose of. If he has, please let us know, and we'll lead the charge to get both you and him removed from the 2026 results.
He's also sharing the Eugene waiver, as if it not explicitly saying "Hey, don't be a roided out grandpa and enter our race" is some sort of gotcha defense. Cam, that waiver doesn't say anything about wearing your bib in a visible location, how'd you and all the other thousands of competitors know to do that, if it wasn't in the waiver? Looks like the waiver didn't say anything about not cutting the course either, I guess you and everyone else were suckers for running the full 26.2 huh? Oh, yeah, there are rules to road racing that aren't listed in a waiver for legal liability purposes that anyone who's been doing marathons for 20+ years would know. You've proven time and time again that you think you're such a special, unique flower that the rules don't apply to you though.
Just quoting this to keep in on the most recent page. To reiterate, Cam is literally arguing that as long as something is not explicity stated in the liability waiver he signed for a race, then it can't be against the rules.
He should put his money where his mouth is and wear rollerblades at his next race
140 -
Also I would be PISSED if I was Jax Siddall, in the same way I'd be pissed if I was the DFL guy at Cocodona. Cam continues to baselessly claim, or at best insinuate, his competitors are doping too, as an excuse for his own behavior.
This post was edited 24 seconds after it was posted.170 -
I hope Jax sees that. Would be hilarious if this is what gets other elites to say something
120 -
Cam Rules wrote:
This thread ceased to be interesting about three days. Now it’s the same five people posting the same five things over and over again and writing page length posts describing what we already know. It’s funny that nobody has changed their mind and is not going to. My final thought is that you people have started a witch hunt against Cam the Man Hanes for what amounts to something so trivial and benign that it’s virtually nothing: an almost 60 year old who admittedly and openly takes PEDs and has never at any point claimed he is a professional athlete. Whatever the reasons are; jealousy, resentment, boredom, I hope that you people can find some time to reflect how wrong you all are and what is causing you to be so irrationally hateful.
It's interesting enough that the same person with the exact same writing style keeps posting on sock puppet accounts the same themes and making the same arguments in defense of Cam. There aren't multiple people defending Cam on this thread. There is one, and I think we all know who it is.
The rest of us are not hateful. We're just saying that if you're on PEDs, you shouldn't be participating in and competing sanctioned events. And we're also saying that the ultrarunning community needs to take a serious look in the mirror if it cares about its integrity.This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.271 -
jecht wrote:
Aravapia wrote:
My first ultra (a 100m) was a beautiful disaster because I’m in 40s, was moderately out of shape and pretty undertrained. I knew what I needed to do to get to the start healthy and with the confidence in my expierence to finish
It never occurred to me to dope despite all the resources my family used so I could do the race. I wasn’t thrilled with how I did but it was an honest effort that I can respect. Maybe others have poor ethics but if I was all roided up I think I would not be as proud of it.
Doping isn’t going to prevent a dnf in an ultra. it’s too long Ans too much goofy stuff can happen as we saw with cam’s cocodona dnf. Maybe all the doping is giving hobby joggers a false sense of security and lack of “grit” that is coming back to bite them in the race.
Theoretical question: How far would Cam (or any runner in his position, not singling him out) have gone without allegedly using any supplements?
Good on you for crushing the 100M. I don't know how ultra folks do it, it really does take grit. The closest I came to ultras was doing 25- to 30-mile hikes with my Boy Scout troop in the early 2000s and overnight camping on the Appalachian Trail (Pa.).
Thanks. It was a lot more mental than physics as long as you didn’t outright hurt yourself and could keep moving above the cut offs. At some point I tossed out my goals and just carried on more carefree
If I understand it what happened, he fell and hit his head and was pulled by medical. That’s about as random as it gets. I usually fall trail running/hiking when I’m not paying attention, trying to move too fast or tired. Maybe he was overconfident (aided by drugs) and was outrunning his balance, maybe it was just an accident, maybe he was overtrained and fatigued going into it. But I think overconfidence gets a lot of people into falling or blowing up and not having the strength to work through it and carry on.
50 -
There are some already suspicious marathon OTQ’ers liking Cam’s recent ig post on the matter, hmmm. That’s a bold move, don’t slip up too much now.
170 -
Running UberNerd wrote:
Cam Rules wrote:
This thread ceased to be interesting about three days. Now it’s the same five people posting the same five things over and over again and writing page length posts describing what we already know. It’s funny that nobody has changed their mind and is not going to. My final thought is that you people have started a witch hunt against Cam the Man Hanes for what amounts to something so trivial and benign that it’s virtually nothing: an almost 60 year old who admittedly and openly takes PEDs and has never at any point claimed he is a professional athlete. Whatever the reasons are; jealousy, resentment, boredom, I hope that you people can find some time to reflect how wrong you all are and what is causing you to be so irrationally hateful.
It's interesting enough that the same person with the exact same writing style keeps posting on sock puppet accounts the same themes and making the same arguments in defense of Cam. There aren't multiple people defending Cam on this thread. There is one, and I think we all know who it is.
The rest of us are not hateful. We're just saying that if you're on PEDs, you shouldn't be participating in and competing sanctioned events. And we're also saying that the ultrarunning community needs to take a serious look in the mirror if it cares about its integrity.
Your profile name fits your persona perfectly. Why would Cam waste his time posting on Letsrun? They are not one account using sock puppets. It’s like impossible for you to accept that several people on here support Cam and think that what Sage did was a low move. Check the comments on his YouTube page. Tons of his supporters are calling out Sage. I think the opposite is true. Sage used multiple sock puppets on this thread to make it seem like more people are on his side. It’s really just Sage and a few others who have any problem with Cam. There is nothing wrong with doping in the ultra community and you know it.
035 -
jecht wrote:
a straight man here wrote:
If expand influencer to the whole of the "fitness" community, there's plenty of them taking something. If we expand outside of influencers, and just recreational runners that are just doing their own thing, the prevalence of testosterone and peptides in the running world is much higher than people think. Just think of what percent of the sport is made up of middle aged men maintaining a full time job, taking care of a family, sleep is less than optimal, our environment/diet is so toxic the average testosterone levels have dramatically decreased in the last 50 years etc. You really think every 45 year old is staying clean even though there's a testosterone prescription they can get from a doctor that would dramatically increase every aspect of their life? Especially their running life which for a lot of men it's one of the few things they look towards doing after working and taking care of kids.
While I believe in clean sport, this post is brutally honest about being a male in the mid-2020s and I can see WHY men do this to a degree. More than just peptides and BPC-157. The root of this convo is about fairness and expectations for men/of men, to an extent. The peptides/testing is the surface-level manifestation of a deeper issue IMO. I may be wrong.
Men have to be protectors/providers, have great jobs, etc., provide for families, etc. I see things like this on the askmen and askmenover30 subreddits, guys are stressed and burned to the core by 35-40, and they are 20-25 years from retirement. Plus spousal issues and kids. So the peptides seem like an expensive but worthwhile shortcut, these men have one advantage in that $ is not an issue.
The last sentence is brutal but true--at a certain point men are expected to be in the background, as accessories to their families and in-laws, and just provide, provide, provide, etc. To be fair the best couples equally share parenting duties and both work, etc. But not always the case.
This does not excuse people from doing this and making the sport unfair but the post does a good job explaining why certain folks act they way they do (not calling anyone out either).
Oh yes it’s so hard and tragic to be a middle class, middle age man in America...
81 -
Aravapia wrote:
Thanks. It was a lot more mental than physics as long as you didn’t outright hurt yourself and could keep moving above the cut offs. At some point I tossed out my goals and just carried on more carefree
If I understand it what happened, he fell and hit his head and was pulled by medical. That’s about as random as it gets. I usually fall trail running/hiking when I’m not paying attention, trying to move too fast or tired. Maybe he was overconfident (aided by drugs) and was outrunning his balance, maybe it was just an accident, maybe he was overtrained and fatigued going into it. But I think overconfidence gets a lot of people into falling or blowing up and not having the strength to work through it and carry on.
Was he pulled by medical? or did he just quit after tripping? I’ve been in a lot of ultras and medical rarely pulls you. more often patch you up and try to nudge you back out absent life threatening issues to yourself and/or others.
80 -
Cam Rules wrote:
Running UberNerd wrote:
It's interesting enough that the same person with the exact same writing style keeps posting on sock puppet accounts the same themes and making the same arguments in defense of Cam. There aren't multiple people defending Cam on this thread. There is one, and I think we all know who it is.
The rest of us are not hateful. We're just saying that if you're on PEDs, you shouldn't be participating in and competing sanctioned events. And we're also saying that the ultrarunning community needs to take a serious look in the mirror if it cares about its integrity.
Your profile name fits your persona perfectly. Why would Cam waste his time posting on Letsrun? They are not one account using sock puppets. It’s like impossible for you to accept that several people on here support Cam and think that what Sage did was a low move. Check the comments on his YouTube page. Tons of his supporters are calling out Sage. I think the opposite is true. Sage used multiple sock puppets on this thread to make it seem like more people are on his side. It’s really just Sage and a few others who have any problem with Cam. There is nothing wrong with doping in the ultra community and you know it.
I know that you know the truth, and it's not this. But you think everyone else is dumber than you. And we're not.
171 -
The Idiot Marathoner wrote:
ButterMyBananaBread wrote:
Cam is continuing to crash out, double down, change his story, and attempting to shift the focus off of him on his social media: https://imgur.com/a/T0FQpFT
He's now pointing out how the winner of the Eugene Marathon also wasn't tested, as if that is the reason why he's getting heat. Cam, as far as I know, Jax Siddell hasn't admitted to taking a peptide not approved for human consumption that he somehow claims to have gotten from a doctor, partnered with a TRT company for several years, written a series of blog posts about his PED usage, or gone on the Joe Rogan podcast and admitted to taking a huge stack of supplements that he's unsure of the purpose of. If he has, please let us know, and we'll lead the charge to get both you and him removed from the 2026 results.
He's also sharing the Eugene waiver, as if it not explicitly saying "Hey, don't be a roided out grandpa and enter our race" is some sort of gotcha defense. Cam, that waiver doesn't say anything about wearing your bib in a visible location, how'd you and all the other thousands of competitors know to do that, if it wasn't in the waiver? Looks like the waiver didn't say anything about not cutting the course either, I guess you and everyone else were suckers for running the full 26.2 huh? Oh, yeah, there are rules to road racing that aren't listed in a waiver for legal liability purposes that anyone who's been doing marathons for 20+ years would know. You've proven time and time again that you think you're such a special, unique flower that the rules don't apply to you though.
Just quoting this to keep in on the most recent page. To reiterate, Cam is literally arguing that as long as something is not explicity stated in the liability waiver he signed for a race, then it can't be against the rules.
How is Cam not right? If doping is not explicitly banned in the waiver, then how could it be against the rules?
024 -
Running UberNerd wrote:
Cam Rules wrote:
Your profile name fits your persona perfectly. Why would Cam waste his time posting on Letsrun? They are not one account using sock puppets. It’s like impossible for you to accept that several people on here support Cam and think that what Sage did was a low move. Check the comments on his YouTube page. Tons of his supporters are calling out Sage. I think the opposite is true. Sage used multiple sock puppets on this thread to make it seem like more people are on his side. It’s really just Sage and a few others who have any problem with Cam. There is nothing wrong with doping in the ultra community and you know it.
I know that you know the truth, and it's not this. But you think everyone else is dumber than you. And we're not.
Denial is more than a river Egypt. Cam is likely going to come out of this Scott free and possibly even bigger than ever is the funny part. Watch him really smash the masters marathon WR and run faster than Sage. It would be priceless.
126 -
Cam Rules wrote:
The Idiot Marathoner wrote:
Just quoting this to keep in on the most recent page. To reiterate, Cam is literally arguing that as long as something is not explicity stated in the liability waiver he signed for a race, then it can't be against the rules.
How is Cam not right? If doping is not explicitly banned in the waiver, then how could it be against the rules?
You realize that race rules and legal waivers are different things right?
211
1 post was removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.