Steriods were on the market 40 years before testing was established in 1976 and WADA wasn't around until 1999 and wasn't full operating at that time .would you say that the modern era of track has atleast a little more doping control.
Always have more positive tests, but that is only because we are testing more. That's what I think about alot of countries that have alot of athletes testing positive too, it isn't necessarily more dopers it's stricter testing.
We not always sorry for the typo
Steroids have been on the market since 1958
No, it is dirtier than ever. There are more drugs available today and antidoping cannot keep up. Testing catches very few. As David Howman (former WADA head) says, the dopers are more sophisticated than those trying to catch them. It is a race that has been lost long ago.
Armstronglivs wrote:
No, it is dirtier than ever. There are more drugs available today and antidoping cannot keep up. Testing catches very few. As David Howman (former WADA head) says, the dopers are more sophisticated than those trying to catch them. It is a race that has been lost long ago.
And you are part of the problem. Stop with you abuse.
why do you ask? wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
No, it is dirtier than ever. There are more drugs available today and antidoping cannot keep up. Testing catches very few. As David Howman (former WADA head) says, the dopers are more sophisticated than those trying to catch them. It is a race that has been lost long ago.
And you are part of the problem. Stop with you abuse.
op asked a question and a answered it with a viewpoint that is very widely held. he didnt abuse anyone.
didnt make yourself look very good did you?
pupil3142 wrote:
why do you ask? wrote:
And you are part of the problem. Stop with you abuse.
op asked a question and a answered it with a viewpoint that is very widely held. he didnt abuse anyone.
didnt make yourself look very good did you?
Read carefully. And you also stop abusing young athletes.
You and Armstronglivs are cowards and abusers.
This is true, I should have said available for use in 1936.They weren't officially on the market for regular consumers until 1958, but athletes were doping with steriods in the early 50s possibly before.
But before 2000 antidoping was almost non existent athletes in the modern era must atleast regulate the dosages of the PEDs they use. Most athletes are still using very old steriods and epo which was synthesized in the 80s and a few are getting caught for it. Designer drugs are harder to come by, possibly unsafe, and possibly ineffective,which is why you see people using common steriods like nandralone. Before 2000 you couldn't get caught for almost any drugs so I would disagree with you. More antidoping should mean the sport is slightly cleaner.
Athletes today look very different than they did 20+ years ago in the BALCO days.
Many of them look more muscled than they did 20 years ago,and much more ripped than they were 40 years ago.more cut,more shredded,bulkier,more unnatural looking and more like laboratory experiments.even many distance runners are impossibly muscled,yet remain very thin and gaunt.I dont believe the sport is cleaner than it once was.My tv is large,and i saw how caked in acne they are,and also facial hair on women.
There isn't a sprinter today who looks like ben Johnson. Look at flo jo compared to women today too the sprinters from 1988-2000 were huge. There are a few huge sprinters today but not the same quantity
why do you ask? wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
No, it is dirtier than ever. There are more drugs available today and antidoping cannot keep up. Testing catches very few. As David Howman (former WADA head) says, the dopers are more sophisticated than those trying to catch them. It is a race that has been lost long ago.
And you are part of the problem. Stop with you abuse.
Perhaps you should say that to the former head of WADA. Denial doesn't make doping go away.
WADA is coming for u run wrote:
There isn't a sprinter today who looks like ben Johnson. Look at flo jo compared to women today too the sprinters from 1988-2000 were huge. There are a few huge sprinters today but not the same quantity
They all look like Ben Johnson. Or Flojo. None of them look like Jesse Owens or Wilma Rudolph.
why do you ask? wrote:
pupil3142 wrote:
op asked a question and a answered it with a viewpoint that is very widely held. he didnt abuse anyone.
didnt make yourself look very good did you?
Read carefully. And you also stop abusing young athletes.
You and Armstronglivs are cowards and abusers.
But not the suppliers of drugs, and the cheats who use them?
paris2024hawk wrote:
But before 2000 antidoping was almost non existent athletes in the modern era must atleast regulate the dosages of the PEDs they use. Most athletes are still using very old steriods and epo which was synthesized in the 80s and a few are getting caught for it. Designer drugs are harder to come by, possibly unsafe, and possibly ineffective,which is why you see people using common steriods like nandralone. Before 2000 you couldn't get caught for almost any drugs so I would disagree with you. More antidoping should mean the sport is slightly cleaner.
Athletes today look very different than they did 20+ years ago in the BALCO days.
An investigation reported in 2019 on Al Jazeera revealed that the black market in doping is a billion Euros industry. It claimed there are at least 100 doping substances available on that market that escape detection. Doping has become more sophisticated. David Howman, the former head of WADA, says there are very few opportunities to catch athletes, as they would have to be tested only hours after they have taken the drugs - which won't happen in countries where there is poor OC testing - and in many instances of microdosing the drugs are out of the athletes' system after they have raced. Only "the dumb and the careless" are caught. 1% of tests result in a positive but according to Howman at least one in ten athletes will be doping and in some instances it is likely to be much higher. Some sports and some countries are worse than others. Howman says doping will never be eradicated; the best they might hope for is that they might limit it. But while doping is ahead of anti-doping, that won't happen.
Armstronglivs wrote:
No, it is dirtier than ever. There are more drugs available today and antidoping cannot keep up. Testing catches very few. As David Howman (former WADA head) says, the dopers are more sophisticated than those trying to catch them. It is a race that has been lost long ago.
Yes, exactly. Everyone is doping at the top. All casual fans / uneducated are in denial.
many of todays sprinters are much more muscled than ben.the women are more muscled than flo jo.
why do you ask? wrote:
pupil3142 wrote:
op asked a question and a answered it with a viewpoint that is very widely held. he didnt abuse anyone.
didnt make yourself look very good did you?
Read carefully. And you also stop abusing young athletes.
You and Armstronglivs are cowards and abusers.
0/10, Too much emotion too obvious.
Andre de Grasse won 3 medals, the sprintz are officially CLEANZ!
Can you name a top level sprinter as big as ben Johnson, baker, kerley, degrasse, Jacob's,Trayvon,simbine, and most of the other guys are smaller.
And shelly, sherika, shacarri, ta lou, del ponte, kambunji, Daniel's, and most female sprinters are much less muscular than flo jo.
I will agree that Wilma Rudolf and some 60s sprinters were smaller but that's because steriod use didn't peak until the 80s.