OPERACION PUERTO AND FOOTBALL?

[freshie]

I'd love to know how Messi being given HGH isn't classed as 'bad' but if it came out Ronaldo was smashing the bulking roids, which to be fair he could well have done going to his size over night, he'd get hung out to dry.

Cos Ronaldo's a cunt

[Mase]

Cos Ronaldo's a cunt

So is Messi, the little man syndromed Falklands war wanker.

[Rag_hater]

Every competitor should have the same access to them then.

If I can get them off 'Baz' down the road I'm sure an elite athlete can get them mate.

It is easy for some bloke in Spain to get these things (allegedly). Far less easy for an Ethiopian.

Or does fair competition have no place in sport any more?

There is a story of Arse being caught for it in the 20's,there is a link in this thread that tells of incidents that happened over 50 years ago,so this idea of fair competition in sport is a bit to radical methinks.

[Dameerto]

I think Bolt is clean, or at least not on steroids. Bolt doesn't have the muscle mass associated with steroid abuse nor did Lewis. Having said that, I'm not familiar with steroid alternatives if there are any, but it would take something similar for a sprinter to gain an advantage since they need a power increase which means more muscle. EPO or some other type of blood cell increaser might have some benefit to a sprinter from a training point of view though - they could recover from training/injury quicker and so presumably get a performance advantage that way.

That's exactly what steroids do - allow your muscles to recover quicker. So if someone had a muscle injury, such as a tear, it wouldn't take as long for them to recover. Chambers took an anabolic steroid and it didn't do his speed any harm.

Carl Lewis failed three drugs tests before that race with Johnson.

Bolt is a beast! You don't have to be an abuser of steroids and be ridiculously massive like pro-bodybuilders to be on the stuff. But looking at Bolt I genuinely think he could be.

Look at pictures of Chambers and Johnson 'during' then look at pictures of them afterwards - that is what I mean about a power increase through steroid abuse. Then look at pictures of Lewis before during and after his career - whatever you are saying he took I don't believe it was steroids and certainly not anabolic steroids. (one of their side effects is stimulation of muscle growth which is why they're so appealing to sprinters and not suitable for endurance athletes).

[Mase]

Look at pictures of Chambers and Johnson 'during' then look at pictures of them afterwards - that is what I mean about a power increase through steroid abuse. Then look at pictures of Lewis before during and after his career - whatever you are saying he took I don't believe it was steroids and certainly not anabolic steroids. (one of their side effects is stimulation of muscle growth which is why they're so appealing to sprinters and not suitable for endurance athletes).

What kind of anabolic steroids are you talking about our kid because you sound like you know more than me about it so I'm genuinely interest. 'Anabolic steroids' is a very very loose term. They're are not just for building muscle but also cutting fat.

Chambers looks exactly the same now as when he was on the roids. I don't see a difference. If you can post the pics though...?

Re Lewis: "Carl Lewis has broken his silence on allegations that he was the beneficiary of a drugs cover-up, admitting he had tested positive for banned substances but claiming he was just one of "hundreds" of American athletes who were allowed to escape bans.

Lewis received only a warning after officials ruled that his positive tests were due to "inadvertent" use. Some scientists believe the substances could have been a masking agent for more serious drugs, such as anabolic steroids."

[Dameerto]

I've just had a quick look because it passed me by when it broke ten years ago, he seems to have tested positive three times for stimulants. You're the one saying he was on 'riods so you would have to tell me which ones.

[Beefymcfc]

I've just finished a course of 30mg of Dianabol a day and 400mg of testosterone a week. Probably the same thing Caicedo took that summer he came back as a beast! I think stuff like that goes on but just goes under the radar.

Creatine is shite. If there was an advert for not taking creatine it's probably one look at Danny Mills' body.

Cock off?

[Dameerto]

I've just been looking for images of Chambers to show what I mean't, I can't find ones from head on which is the best angle.

This is the best I can do really. This first one is taken at the 2002 European Championships where there is documentary evidence supplied by Chambers himself that he was on a 'cocktail' of seven different banned substances, it's from the side though, so doesn't really show the bulk around his chest and neck:


This second one is from the 2010 World Indoor Championships when he made his 'clean' comeback:


From the proper angle it would be more apparent - he seems to be naturally muscular around the shoulders and arms but it was the neck and head where it was really noticable that he'd lost bulk.
Having looked at a few more pictures from last year and this year I would agree with you that there doesn't seem to be much difference anymore though.

[Mase]

I've just been looking for images of Chambers to show what I mean't, I can't find ones from head on which is the best angle.

This is the best I can do really. This first one is taken at the 2002 European Championships where there is documentary evidence supplied by Chambers himself that he was on a 'cocktail' of seven different banned substances, it's from the side though, so doesn't really show the bulk around his chest and neck:

This second one is from the 2010 World Indoor Championships when he made his 'clean' comeback:

From the proper angle it would be more apparent - he seems to be naturally muscular around the shoulders and arms but it was the neck and head where it was really noticable that he'd lost bulk.
Having looked at a few more pictures from last year and this year I would agree with you that there doesn't seem to be much difference anymore though.

I've just been looking for images of Chambers to show what I mean't, I can't find ones from head on which is the best angle.

This is the best I can do really. This first one is taken at the 2002 European Championships where there is documentary evidence supplied by Chambers himself that he was on a 'cocktail' of seven different banned substances, it's from the side though, so doesn't really show the bulk around his chest and neck:

This second one is from the 2010 World Indoor Championships when he made his 'clean' comeback:

From the proper angle it would be more apparent - he seems to be naturally muscular around the shoulders and arms but it was the neck and head where it was really noticable that he'd lost bulk.
Having looked at a few more pictures from last year and this year I would agree with you that there doesn't seem to be much difference anymore though.

Turn it in mate there's no difference and you know it haha. It's okay to admit you're wrong.

My point was anabolic steroids aren't just for putting on size and having bigger muscles. A sprinter could do a 'cutting' cycle and strip the fat off him. If he's got less fat on him he's more likely to run faster.

Re lewis: he could have simply been on testosterone or anavar for his endurance so he could train longer.

the scientist are probably wrong then. You're right.

[sidSmith]

I've just been looking for images of Chambers to show what I mean't, I can't find ones from head on which is the best angle.

This is the best I can do really. This first one is taken at the 2002 European Championships where there is documentary evidence supplied by Chambers himself that he was on a 'cocktail' of seven different banned substances, it's from the side though, so doesn't really show the bulk around his chest and neck:

This second one is from the 2010 World Indoor Championships when he made his 'clean' comeback:

From the proper angle it would be more apparent - he seems to be naturally muscular around the shoulders and arms but it was the neck and head where it was really noticable that he'd lost bulk.
Having looked at a few more pictures from last year and this year I would agree with you that there doesn't seem to be much difference anymore though.

If you sat on the couch and took steroids you'd just get fat or nothing would happen at all. Unlike the old days when there was a lot of water retention, rather than actual bulk, which for a body builder rather than an athlete, is actually beneficial, steroids give you the ability to train for longer. You take them along with the hormones required to repair the muscle more quickly, the breakdown and repair is what builds muscle, and this allows you to train again sooner, so the muscle is built more quickly. This proces builds regular muscle that you use like anybody else, you just built it with assistance.

My point is that if you did this, like Chambers, you will have built the muscle this way and once you stop the muscle is still there. Regular training would maintain most of it and a top class athlete would have no problem maintaining with their intensive schedule. So before and after pics wouldn't show too much difference.

This is why letting people back in after a ban is a joke as some of the advantage is still there. I'm all for juicing them all up and letting anything go. Like someone said, that Ben Johnson race was fantastic and even though we all know he cheated, it's still a fantastic spectacle.

Biggest problem with drug testing is you can only test for what you know exists. So the athletes/doctors are always 1 step ahead. This is what screwed Armstong as they retrospectively tested some of his old samples using new tests that didn't originally exist.

[Dameerto]

Turn it in mate there's no difference and you know it haha. It's okay to admit you're wrong.

My point was anabolic steroids aren't just for putting on size and having bigger muscles. A sprinter could do a 'cutting' cycle and strip the fat off him. If he's got less fat on him he's more likely to run faster.

Re lewis: he could have simply been on testosterone or anavar for his endurance so he could train longer.

the scientist are probably wrong then. You're right.

There's no difference TODAY (and last year) - in his own words he has been training in the States and Jamaica, he is a proven cheat and at this stage of his career he has little to lose (in my opinion) - which is why I used a picture from his comeback in 2010. It is the one period in his career where he is the most likeliest to have been clean (and the picture from 2002 as I mentioned is from a period where he has documentary evidence that he was taking multiple banned substances). I remember watching his comeback (after watching him through his career to that point) and I clearly remember thinking he looked literally half the man he used to be.

[freshie]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/23307913?SThisEM

Apparently the 100m sprinters Tyson Gay and Asafa Powell have now tested positive for banned substances. Both, unsurprisingly, are claiming their innocence

[kinkylola]

I think that there are very few top athletes in the world that are not taking advantage of performance enhancing drugs to some degree. When you are at the top, even talking about 1% difference in physical performance can make the difference in getting that huge contract pay-off.

it happens all over the world, in every sport ... and it's not the clunky old 'do steroids = get huge' method anymore. That was when guys were just constantly injecting themselves with an anabolic + some testosterone and pumping weights to swell up. The father of steroids in the USA is definitely Jose Canseco from Major League Baseball, and you could tell when he first started, he got MASSIVE.

But cheating will always evolve to get around improved testing measures. Steroids (or taking steroids) has evolved so much that the previously very obvious physical signs are not always there, and athletes cycle steroids so that they are not on them when competing ... but when recovering/training, they are juiced out of their minds. They've got stuff now that will never show up on modern tests, so how do you stop it? We can't rely on fucking sports stars' morals or sense of tradition or love of the sport to stop them ... it's about money ... more now than ever.

Canseco wrote a book called 'Juice' and i think it was a pretty interesting look into his reasons, and the physical benefits of steroids ... but also why the authorities don't really want steroids to go away, they just make a show of it. I don't know if you want to spend money on that, or the follow up "Vindicated" which continues where Juice left off ... but they should be pretty easy to get for free on the tubes.

[ross.mcfc]

By pure coincidence I watched a documentary on performance enhancing drugs (mainly steriods) in sport yesterday called bigger, stronger, faster. Only to switch off and read the news about Gay and Powell.

I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in drugs in sport. It’s all on youtube.

[kinkylola]

a bit more indepth discussion on a different site I follow ... pretty long read so I won't copy paste here.

http://www.reddit.com/r/sports/comments ... of/cb2jh0q

[john68]

a bit more indepth discussion on a different site I follow ... pretty long read so I won't copy paste here.

http://www.reddit.com/r/sports/comments ... of/cb2jh0q

Thanks for posting that Kinky. Interesting read.

Just for the record, following a large and long term study, a major drugs/sport statement was due to be released this week by (I believe) a French Government Dept or French NGO. It was postponed at the request of the owners of the TdF until the Le Tour is over. Not sure of the new date, but I expect something quite sensational in the next couple of weeks.

If the statement was a positive one, there would be no need to delay its publication. Its contents were certainly considered to be considered a danger and distraction to Le Tour.

[Dameerto]

Thanks for posting that Kinky. Interesting read.

Just for the record, following a large and long term study, a major drugs/sport statement was due to be released this week by (I believe) a French Government Dept or French NGO. It was postponed at the request of the owners of the TdF until the Le Tour is over. Not sure of the new date, but I expect something quite sensational in the next couple of weeks.

If the statement was a positive one, there would be no need to delay its publication. Its contents were certainly considered to be considered a danger and distraction to Le Tour.

Is there any info anywhere about this French thing John? I had a very quick google but couldn't find anything (probably my own fault) - I'd be really interested to find out a bit more about it.

[john68]

The only info I have came through cycling sources...as I said, a major statement was due ether tomorrow or Thursday, which was delayed until after Le Tour at the request of Le Tour owners.

The balance was my opinion that if there was no negative shit in the report, it would not necessitate any delay. The reason given for the request being granted was that the authorities were happy for it not to distract attention from Le Tour.

[Dameerto]

Righto.

[john68]

Dammeerto,...more info.

The statement I mentioned is actually from the French Senate and is a publication of a report on the retrospective testing for EPO on riders from the 1998 TdF. (There was no EPO test at the time). it contains a list of 40 riders who are reported to have tested positive for EPO. It is believed that Jalabert is one of the higher profile riders named.

The Mantova Case.
In the last day or two, an Italian judge has ruled that 27 people (18 riders, plus team staff and management) involved with the Lampre team, are to stand trial in Mantova, Italy, accused of doping.
Three of ther named riders: Cunego, Mori and Gavazzi are currently riding in the TdF.
The trial will start on 10th December.