The issue is the lack of choice. For sprinters, there really aren't many designer steroids out there, which means HGH and insulin are the mainstay. If athletes had the choice, they'd use oxandrolone, boldenone or stanozolol. They enable much better power to weight ratio. Athletes in the 80s tended to look far more "whippet" like and sinewy. And whoever was talking about clenbuterol sensitivity: the sensitivity was there in the early 90s. No-one is taking that anymore... unless they're stupid.
Boldenone was hardly ever used with sprinters - it's an oil-based injectable with a long glow time & a higher androgenic base. Oxandrolone (Anavar) & stanozolol (Winstrol) are orals with much shorter glow times. And both are highly anabolic with very low androgenic properties with neither one aromatizing (anavar is a big favorite with female bodybuilders). Winstrol is still being used in pro sports as there was.a top MLB pitcher that just tested positive for Winstrol in spring training.
I'm seeing a lot of positives in athletics & Olympic weightlifting for "SARMs." I don't know much about this PED as my expertise is more with the science of anabolic steroids & testosterone.
A few questions if you know the answers:
1. How long does it take while on a cycle to start seeing major gains in strength?
2. How long after a cycle are strength gains maintained? How long before the gains start to really drop off.
3. Any idea how long before testing an athlete would need to end their cycle to be safe? Are we talking weeks or days?
He was a doper 40 years ago, and given that he was busted, he wasn’t very good at it.
Lance also got caught. So you think doping has stopped today? I don't think WADA would agree.
That’s not the point I was trying to make. Some posters believe that Johnson, because he was a doper, can visually identify dopers, know what PEDs they’re using and how they are beating the tests.
I have no clue about the current doping in sprinting and neither do you. You base your accusations on performances and nothing else.
Lance also got caught. So you think doping has stopped today? I don't think WADA would agree.
That’s not the point I was trying to make. Some posters believe that Johnson, because he was a doper, can visually identify dopers, know what PEDs they’re using and how they are beating the tests.
I have no clue about the current doping in sprinting and neither do you. You base your accusations on performances and nothing else.
I don't. I base it on what I know about the sport, the history and the nature of doping, and what experts say about that. Then I might evaluate individual athletes. The evidence is that it has been throughout sprinting for decades. Those sprinters who have doped necessarily know something about it.
Lance also got caught. So you think doping has stopped today? I don't think WADA would agree.
Lance didn't get caught.
He did. Being "caught" doesn't necessarily require failing a doping test, but that the fact of his doping was made clear - in his case by a team-mate who had also doped. Lance was forced to admit it.
He did. Being "caught" doesn't necessarily require failing a doping test, but that the fact of his doping was made clear - in his case by a team-mate who had also doped. Lance was forced to admit it.
It wasn’t just one teammate. If Armstrong had decided to defend himself in court, there was a long conga line of people ready to testify against him. At that time, at least, Landis was a lowlife, and just him probably wouldn’t have been enough.
Jeez Louise! Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it? I was quoting another comment not elucidating on the veracity of it!
You weren't elucidating on anything. But nor were you quoting anyone else. That usually requires quotation marks.
The irony that you had to use the 'Quote Post' functionality on my original post, but still don't understand that that means that you are (pay attention now), quoting said post, is actually brilliant. Thank you for the laugh; it was very much appreciated!
He did. Being "caught" doesn't necessarily require failing a doping test, but that the fact of his doping was made clear - in his case by a team-mate who had also doped. Lance was forced to admit it.
It wasn’t just one teammate. If Armstrong had decided to defend himself in court, there was a long conga line of people ready to testify against him. At that time, at least, Landis was a lowlife, and just him probably wouldn’t have been enough.
IF they swapped the 4 x 400 mixed relay for the 400 meter CONGA-LINE ....can you imagine the interest and popularity ??? No more bonkers than pole-vault...but more entertaining.
You weren't elucidating on anything. But nor were you quoting anyone else. That usually requires quotation marks.
The irony that you had to use the 'Quote Post' functionality on my original post, but still don't understand that that means that you are (pay attention now), quoting said post, is actually brilliant. Thank you for the laugh; it was very much appreciated!
So you don't know how to use quotation marks, which is a standard practise in the English language (your second language?) How much of your post above is a quote? The way you reason, it all could be. But you duck the main point which is the observation in your original post was a stupid one.