michael johnson doper?

The thing about MJ that doesn't fit with these other dopers is that look how small he stayed his whole career. All of the athletes Conte talked about had huge, immediate weight gains. They all said they could tell a huge difference in their body. Being as skinny for a sprinter as MJ was, you'd think it would have been easily recognizable if he was doping. Just my thoughts.

Does EPO make you look bigger?

no....epo is strickly within your blood not muscles.

Michael Johnson, was, in my opinion, one of the most OBVIOUS examples of doping in recent memory. He's a very meticulous guy, and not a complete moron, so I'd expect his doping regimen was fairly systematic---HGH (His body _screamed_ HGH IMHO [very low bodyfat, extremely "full" and round muscles at all time, a certain sheen or glow to the skin]), EPO, some modest steroid or testosterone use, possibly insulin...

And he is, by all accounts, a total asshole to boot.

OK, but why did no one get even close to him for about eight seasons?

Just because of drugs (was he the only 400 meter guy doping?)

Do you have some evidence to substantiate your claims?

maybe man wrote:

Being as skinny for a sprinter as MJ was, you'd think it would have been easily recognizable if he was doping. Just my thoughts.

Er.. you sure he was skinny?

The striking thing to me was the density of MJ's muscles during the 96 season, compared to subsequent years. As early as 97 he started looking less "ripped." If you look at pics from 96, his ridiculously carved body is beyond nomal genetics.

I don't know. He said that part of the plan for the '96 double was to add 10lbs of muscle mass. He was amazing to watch.

at the international level- yes, most everyone uses.

maybe man wrote:

The thing about MJ that doesn't fit with these other dopers is that look how small he stayed his whole career. All of the athletes Conte talked about had huge, immediate weight gains. They all said they could tell a huge difference in their body. Being as skinny for a sprinter as MJ was, you'd think it would have been easily recognizable if he was doping. Just my thoughts.

This has been discussed quite a bit. MJ was hardly small when he was running 19.32. He put on a significant amount of muscle mass throughout his career (he WAS relatively small coming out of college).

I can't understand how people look at the following and don't at least consider that MJ was using drugs:

- We know there is widespread drug use in our sport and in MJ's events.

- MJ DOMINATED his competition AND ran significantly faster than anyone else over 200m and 400m. So he was not only winning against a large group of dopers - he was consistently dominating over a long period of time.

- A test for HGH didn't become available until 2004.

I realize that there are people out there who will simply say he's a genetic freak who trained right and thus did freakish things. I agree that he was a freak, but in that sense, so was Frankie Fredericks, Ato Bolden, etc. The top elites are already freaks without taking drugs - add drugs to the mix and you end up with records that are deservedly unbelievable (19.32).

I don't think everyone should accuse MJ, but everyone SHOULD use some rational thought and CONSIDER that there's a good chance that he was doping.

BDG

Even if he was doping, 19.32 (minus performance enhancers) would still be much faster than an other person in history.

what happened to 78Champ's post?

well how about jeremy wariner then?

I think this comes down to MJ's uniqueness: how often does a 10.0 100m runner train (essentially) as a 400/600m runner?

trackhead wrote:

I think this comes down to MJ's uniqueness: how often does a 10.0 100m runner train (essentially) as a 400/600m runner?

well, he wasn't a 10.0 guy first....he trained as 400 guy.gaitlin was 10.0 guy who ran 400/4x400 in college, he didn't run sub 44.

and wariner; doping? nahh just a college kid with great coahcin.

There is a difference between running the 4x4 to help out the team and training to be the world's best 400m runner. I bet Gatlin's doing a lot more 150s than he is 600s or 800s.

michael johnson just didn't explode one year out of the ordinary, his muscle build was gradual. I am not to sure if he used it or not, noone may ever know, but all i know was that he was an incredible athlete with or without the use of performance enhancers. I would like to believe the latter

I really hope MJ never used, and I have always thought he was simply a genetic freak (similar to Wariner, who knows what that kid is going to do in the future). However, if you talk to most Track fans outside the US, they think we are insane. They wonder how we can be so blind as to not at least consider the possibility that MJ was doping (most of them believe, without a doubt, that MJ was amazingly dirty). Just thought I'd toss that perspective out there....maybe we are a bit blind because he's from the US and such an amazing athlete?