How much can a SPRINTER improve by using PEDs? Any scientific studies?

And what does the fact TMont dealt heroin have to do with PED use exactly? Sure, TMont is a sh1thead. He was lazy, too. That doesn't change the fact he is a hell of a lot more talented than Mo, but he has worse coaching, a worse work ethic, and didn't dope the way Mo doped.

the thief ben johnson woud never have been quicker than 10.1 basic if he'd never swallowed a steroid factory for 1/2 a decade

he ended up at ~ 9.75 basic ability

if you want a limit figure for steroid improvement, you woudn't be far off with

9.75/10.10 = 0.965 ->

3.5 %

SkyArt wrote:

It depends on the person and the drug. Ben Johnson was the kind of person who had a lot to gain from drugs, while some people don't improve as much.

Victor Conte said that it was about 0.2 sec for men, and 0.4 for women

All you need- and it more like .2 and .4 over the ones who are not on as good drugs

not the point .

chronic steroid use is just not possible

anymore unless from jamica , kenya etc and this

is just in off-season . what is going on during race season!!

so can you tell me what the likes of chambers ,collins

gatlin ,lemaitre,vicaut,gemilli ,peimeng etc ,others are on

as much synthetic testosterone as can get away with and s4 and sarms and hgh

are all that can think of ,that easily beat tests and not going to produce results seeing from above .

how many of these are going to even risk testosterone , so left with s4 ,an average androgen that just not going to

achieve said results .a nice little ped for sprinters but not where it is at .

IT IS THE LIGHTNESS LR3 THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE !!!!!

lemaitres and peimeng's physique suggest that for them

not majority androgen based program .relieing on their own .

so tell me what the hell are they on!!!!!!!!!

all about nervous system ,didnt think possible yet

but what happening ,look at s.a.f. stride frequency

or bolts from 2006 to 2007 .that is the difference

thought imagining but wasnt,subtle difference but noticeable charlie francis said the

soup de jour was hgh + s4 and beleieved him but obviously

out of loop and busy with cancer , didnt think lr3 could be where at .

tell why the preference for taller sprinters for men

all of sudden .

so then what does lr3 give to elites time

lr3 peak cycle is the equivalent maybe in time gains

that a heavy dht steroid cycle would give user

to nervous system ,as similarly what does but better .

without sides or unfortunately much of strength gains.

as for improving times from 11 seconds to 10.00 seconds

is possible .maybe not older athlete

but seeing it in youths/juniors with this stuff

if get them early enough and obviously have some talent

as know no gaurantee how a young 11 second sprinter will

progress and many dont but with this seeing same drops

in time in many juniors .

it cant be coincidence .

Charlie Francis said in his book Speed Trap that the "clean" record of Ben Johnson was 10.25, so do the math.

But 10.25 was in the early 20's of Ben, so you could say that probably his ceiling was 10.10/10.15, every athlete has a margin of progression, even cleanly.

Obviously, that 10.10 didn't make it at the time.

Robson Da Silva's 10.00 was in Mexico City altitude and also with timing malfunction. His real PB was 10.02 (+1.7), and I doubt that he ran a "corrected sub 10".

Calvin Smith's 9.93 was in Colorado Springs altitude...you could argue that his real PB was 9.97 in Zurich 1988 (10.03 corrected)

And Smith and Da Silva were clean supposedly.

I suspect that the NATURAL CEILING of the 80's, for a clean athlete, was 10.00 basic.

Yep, Ben Johnso won a medal in 1984 running 10.2. He has already been on drugs for 2 years at that point.

You have to be crazy to think the best responders are getting anything less than .4.

Ben Johnson was a 10.4 sprinter. We ran him many times in the Hamilton area. When he ran 10.25, he was already using. He started using probably in 1982.

Don't be fooled wrote:

Ben Johnson was a 10.4 sprinter. We ran him many times in the Hamilton area. When he ran 10.25, he was already using. He started using probably in 1982.

Ok. So do you know more than Charlie Francis about Ben Johnson?

Ben Johnson -according himself, Charlie, Angella Issajenko, Desai Williams and the rest of "Inquiry Dubin" witnesses- began to use in late 1981. In the following season, by example, with his first drug protocol, he was silver medalist in 1982 Commonwhealth Games behind Allan Wells in a windy 10.05 (Wells ran 10.02)

So you can see how he was a 10.10 basic (at his peak form) athlete in 1982, with only one cycle. Yes, he ran many 10.3 and 10.4 races in the circuit. But do you think that Usain Bolt run 9.5's and 9.6's EVERY SINGLE RACE?

Issajenko began with drugs before 1981 and, in certain ways, she was the "guinea pig" of Charlie Francis optimist's group.

Charlie said he talked about and had Ben using starting in '83, but admits that Ben already knew everything about it and was working with doctors on his own. It is perfectly conceivable he was using before 1983. He was consistently a 10.5-10.6 guy before 1983. A rare race with some nice tailwind and maybe some altitude does not define a sprinter IMO.

Charlie also says Ben was using 5mg of dianabol lol. Everyone knows what a joke that is. A 175lb guy doesn't bench 405lbs on 5mg of dianabol.

I was able to bench 365 at that weight and 5'8.5. I was a sprinter. No drugs. It's not a reach to think someone with a little more talent could hit those numbers clean. I was not world class by any means. So drugs or no drugs those numbers could be hit.

Drugs are not needed for speed power events. Can they help less talented athletes or coaches? Sure but good training, talent, and diet can achieve similar numbers. I have seen these with my own coaching and training.

Ryry wrote:

I was able to bench 365 at that weight and 5'8.5. I was a sprinter. No drugs. It's not a reach to think someone with a little more talent could hit those numbers clean. I was not world class by any means. So drugs or no drugs those numbers could be hit.

Drugs are not needed for speed power events. Can they help less talented athletes or coaches? Sure but good training, talent, and diet can achieve similar numbers. I have seen these with my own coaching and training.

Sure, maybe if you train for powerlifting specifically, not for fvcking sprinting.. Ben supposedly benched 450x2 (Charlie's claim) and 405x5. Impossible for a clean athlete of that size.

I'm not sure what your height has to do with sh1t in benching. If anything, it'd help you at the lighter weight.

You are a retard if you think drugs aren't needed for speed/power events. Tell us the last clean 9.8 man... let alone 9.5 man...

10.2 used to medal at the Olympics, even in the 80s. Now it only provisionally/B-standard qualifies you for US nationals.

Ryry wrote:

I was able to bench 365 at that weight and 5'8.5. I was a sprinter. No drugs. It's not a reach to think someone with a little more talent could hit those numbers clean. I was not world class by any means. So drugs or no drugs those numbers could be hit.

Drugs are not needed for speed power events. Can they help less talented athletes or coaches? Sure but good training, talent, and diet can achieve similar numbers. I have seen these with my own coaching and training.

There's a difference when you're hitting those numbers, and 'hitting' those numbers outside of your natural ability.

Anyone can lift big. But running fast is completely different. When smaller guys who run fast and don't lift big numbers, hit big numbers on juice- then Ben Johnson-like times happen.

We've had another very recent example of this in Gay, he was usually thinner but looked a little larger this season, wonder what his lifts were and how much they came up. No question if he hadn't been caught he would have gone 9.6's in either Europe or in Moscow, yes perhaps even in the rain into a headwind.

Size almost never equals speed. But if you have speed and then get the size, it usually adds ridiculous times to the equation. The problem is naturally, putting on that much muscle is difficult. Bolt is 6'5" and its obvious he struggles at 200-205.

Its easy to get big, but being big and being fast are completely different things. Plenty of big guys in the NFL. Very, very few go under 4.3 in the 40.

There are physiological reasons this happens, muscle type ratios, true speed is rare.

Lifts have zero correlation to speed. Some of the fastest guys are poor jumpers and poor lifters. The biggest guys that put up the best jumps are usually slower. This is true even in the combine. There seems to be some triangular power metric with regards to lifts, jumps, and speed where one strong suit hurts the others or at least one other part. Its a funny relationship that still today isn't entirely understood.

But what is clear is if you take a speedy guy who is thin, and you make him bigger he will usually go faster to a certain point at the cost of speed endurance, which can be trained in also to a certain point. The difference of these certain points in individuals is what determines first and last.

I've said it before, if guys got faster by being 240lbs there would be 240lb men running sprints and winning but there aren't.

Ben Johnson was a freak that responded well to steroids, and was average for elite males in 100m.

Wtf crack are you smoking?

Where did I say anything to lifts correlating to speed? Or bodyweight for that matter? How about you actually respond to what I said you dumb piece of sh1t?

I said a guy lifting that weight at that bodyweight while not even training as a powerlifter was clearly on LOTS of juice. Not some pissant doses, but some seriously massive amounts of dope.

Well there is a lot to respond to here so I will try to hit a couple ideas here. First as someone who has coached at a high level I can tell you drop is not needed to lift those weights even if not trained as a power lifter. I was trained as a sprinter and lifted those numbers without drugs or massive hypertrophy. I had good genetics as my grandpa, grandma, and father all had great genetics. My coaching for track was very sub par. I know that now as I have had a chance to pick the brains of elite coaches at the Olympic training center as well as other venues. When you ask who has done "x" time without drugs you miss the point that those types of people are extremely rare and yes I admit more rare without drugs. Drugs as I attend before are a Great equalizer for bad coaching and less talented individuals. That all being said that doesn't means those people aren't walking around. Another major problem is some of our best athletes in the states have been coached by morally questionable individuals. Think about how much easier it is for a coach to dope up an athlete to achieve results vs. getting them to do large volumes of speed endurance and special endurance work?

How do I prove that?

Brah, 450x2 when your arms are short is weak sh*t.

Its nothing, its not that impressive amongst elite power athletes.

Just because you can't do 300 doesn't mean you need to get excited. I am 100% sure not a single one of the guys in the London 100m final could do 450x2. Bailey might have been able to do over 400 and only Powell(clean?)and Bolt could do 350.

What I'm saying is we ran against Ben many times up until the end of the summer, 1981. He always ran 10.4 or 10.5 and that was hand timed on many occasions. He was a 10.4 sprinter at best. He didn't run anything close to 10.25 FAT before he started using drugs. A 10.25 FAT sprinter is a much faster person than Ben was. I have run against some and there was no comparison.

He used to finish 4th or 5th in those regional races - Canadian athletes with some USA college talent from the midwest. He ran out of Hamilton, I believe. So we knew him and his ability. He was a 10.4 guy. I can list the sprinters from Michigan State, Eastern Michigan and Kentucky State that used to dust him off regularly and they were not even in that good condition.

So Do I know more than Charlie Francis? I wasn't his coach. But I knew his speed because I ran next to him and I measured him - like you do when you race anybody. So I know him as much as competitors know each other. Track is about progression and his progression after that year, like a lot of athletes in the USA, was off the charts.

So I hope this doesn't dismantle any of your theories about how much he gained with PED's, but if you were out there, you would know what I mean.

FYI, Carl Lewis was also a 10.4/10.5 sprinter in '79 and a little faster in '80 as well as a hurdler like his sister Carol.