Track And Field May Scrap Its Records Because Of Doping Scandals.

Ok guy. If you and I race who do you think would win? You definitely take a whole lot more juice than I do. Probably have more muscle too. Guarantee I smoke you.
Why do you think that is?
Yes I am sure that you would win vs me in a race.
Why you ask?
There could be tons of reasons why. Again, you get to a point where more muscle is not beneficial... Just like having too little muscle is not beneficial.
Training is most important, I have never said that drugs are more important than training. However proper drugs+training is what creates world champions.

Training is of course not being overlooked. But when you are making comparisons like this we are assuming that all things are equal besides the PED use right? So training and all that is the same.
 
I am speaking from a point of view that I have personally experienced. I am a decently athletic person. If you have ever followed any of my logs in the past I always keep up with my athletic training on and off cycle.

I have out performed people on steroids while I was natural because I busted my ass off in my training. If they had equal work ethic maybe they could have been better than me, I don't know.
But considering those people took steroids and were still at an obsolete level just seems like no matter what they do, that person will always fall short.

@Sworder maybe you can just wake up, roll out of bed, and out sprint a collegiate level athlete. I sure fucking can't. Maybe for here up north, but definitely not down south where everyone runs a 20-21 200.

Yeah steroids will help an athlete become faster, because that athlete is already training for speed. But I don't think taking steroids has a direct affect on how fast your muscles can fire.

No I don't think if @ddp7 were to take steroids he is going to become a fucking sprinter. Because he doesn't know how to train like a sprinter.
 
Yes I am sure that you would win vs me in a race.
Why you ask?
There could be tons of reasons why. Again, you get to a point where more muscle is not beneficial... Just like having too little muscle is not beneficial.
Training is most important, I have never said that drugs are more important than training. However proper drugs+training is what creates world champions.

Training is of course not being overlooked. But when you are making comparisons like this we are assuming that all things are equal besides the PED use right? So training and all that is the same.

Alright there I agree with you. Proper training plus drugs creates world champions. Maybe Allyson Felix is natural. I don't care if she is or isn't. But she's a world champion. Regardless of if she is taking drugs or not, she didn't just roll out of bed and decide she was going to be a repeat Olympic gold medalist.

There are still a lot more factors that come into play. I could take the same drugs and do the exact same workout protocol that Ben johnson did, and I can about guarantee I will not be able to sprint at the same speeds as him. I just think he has the genetics for sprinting. Some people have it, some don't.
Just like bodybuilders have better genetics than others for how they look and react to the drugs and training.
 
No I don't think if @ddp7 were to take steroids he is going to become a fucking sprinter. Because he doesn't know how to train like a sprinter.


While certainly true as posed how about 2 identical sprinters (twins work well for gedanken experiments), who are both well versed in training and well motivated.

1 takes AAS to increase his ability to recover post training and increases his muscle mass as well.

The other stays natural.

I would posit that *for sprinting* the use of AAS easily increases the enhanced sprinters *performance* but not inherent skill or technique. He simply has more horsepower to apply to each well techniqued stride, more expressed power as a percentage of his total available strength , and each stride is more of a sub-maximal effort than the natural sprinter's would be.
 
Back
Top