steroids.....

[Halb]

NoelWatson said:

Halb said:

NoelWatson said:

Halb said:

Powerlifters and strongmen do have massive muscles, their muscles just look different since they go for maximal/static strength and/or explosive/dynamic strength over the pump.

Even drug free powerlifters and strongmen?

Yes is the short answer. It might difficult to find a drug free one at the top end? Though there are drug free competitions you can enter. And amateur competitions, I have toyed with the idea myself to enter one. If you were to take a powerlifters pectoral and rip it off and cook it as a steak, it would be a pretty thick and heavy steak (all in relation to the body frame, on a big frame big muscles need to be immense to look 'big'), or to put it another way, I know I don't look good next to many in my gym, but I know my muscles are bigger than most in there.

SO if you took two twins, put one on the juice and they followed exactly the same schedule (taking care that the non-juicer wasn't overtraining), they would look exactly the same?

edit...I see bales covered the point adequately.

Animal makes a good point aboot tendon strength. Wrestlers are always detaching their ,muscles from the ligaments because of the over usage of steroids. I think Batista has ripped his triceps three times in three years.
I take it you mean identical (monozygotic) twins? Split in the egg. I would guess at no. But then, I would also guess that they would not look the same regardless of the different types of steroids one could take. The one on the steroid could recover faster and make gains faster? They might look different I suppose, but there are lots of variables.

Edited by Halb on Friday 9th July 15:52

[NoelWatson]

bales said:

To answer your question if both the twins trained identically, with identical weights, identical reps, identical diet etc etc....yes I think they would look the same. However the one on steriods would probably find it easier and not be as sore and therefore want to train harder heavier.

Would be good to see if there have been case studies done in the past.

[markcoznottz]

bales said:

You don't 'look' a certain way due to taking steroids, you look a certain way due to the type of training that you do. It means that with steroids you can go further with that type of training than someone 'natural' would and therefore be stronger/bigger.

Absolute rubbish. You have obviously never hung around a juicers gym. I have for years, although the recession seems to be killing them off. Take steroids = get big. End of. In fact I would say that most juicers hardly train at all, or what they do is actually detrimental to thier progress. Anyone can spout an opinion, but look at pictures of larry scott, arnie, ferringo,oliva, pre juice. My god, they were tiny. Some bodybuilders are strong, some arent. Seems to be genetically predisposed strength. Very few people nowdays do squats, its almost forgotten, as is deadlifting, but they can add natural size, not much else can. There is not, and never has been a way to get massive and ripped naturally, thats why bodybuilders experimented with roids.

[Phooey]

markcoznottz said:

bales said:

You don't 'look' a certain way due to taking steroids, you look a certain way due to the type of training that you do. It means that with steroids you can go further with that type of training than someone 'natural' would and therefore be stronger/bigger.

Absolute rubbish. You have obviously never hung around a juicers gym. I have for years, although the recession seems to be killing them off. Take steroids = get big. End of. In fact I would say that most juicers hardly train at all, or what they do is actually detrimental to thier progress. Anyone can spout an opinion, but look at pictures of larry scott, arnie, ferringo,oliva, pre juice. My god, they were tiny. Some bodybuilders are strong, some arent. Seems to be genetically predisposed strength. Very few people nowdays do squats, its almost forgotten, as is deadlifting, but they can add natural size, not much else can. There is not, and never has been a way to get massive and ripped naturally, thats why bodybuilders experimented with roids.

Lift a few weights to your body's max ability, eat like Fck and cycle roids = get bigger - very very quick. You aint getting huge without them!

[Pvapour]

disagree with you on this one Bales, juicers have a completely different look to natural bodybuilders, I can spot one a mile away, acne, football head, oily skin, most have a very synthetic look to the whole physic, very blocky and overcrowded muscles, not to mention bad attitudes.

[Lost_BMW]

markcoznottz said:

bales said:

You don't 'look' a certain way due to taking steroids, you look a certain way due to the type of training that you do. It means that with steroids you can go further with that type of training than someone 'natural' would and therefore be stronger/bigger.

Absolute rubbish. You have obviously never hung around a juicers gym. I have for years, although the recession seems to be killing them off. Take steroids = get big. End of. In fact I would say that most juicers hardly train at all, or what they do is actually detrimental to thier progress. Anyone can spout an opinion, but look at pictures of larry scott, arnie, ferringo,oliva, pre juice. My god, they were tiny. Some bodybuilders are strong, some arent. Seems to be genetically predisposed strength. Very few people nowdays do squats, its almost forgotten, as is deadlifting, but they can add natural size, not much else can. There is not, and never has been a way to get massive and ripped naturally, thats why bodybuilders experimented with roids.

I can't even imagine the gym(s) you've been in to witness this. I've trained with and around people when they have started using steroids or who cycled them (so seen the difference between on and off periods) and have seen the effect of them - quick increases in size, weight, strength, leanness and acne(!) but all have trained really hard.

Probably harder on them than off, either inspired to new levels by the thought of using and the effect, or because they feel they need to justify using steroids by giving it their all. Powerlifters will tend to be able to lift heavier weights for a given bodyweight/appearance of size/muscle mass but to think bodybuilders are generally weak is nonsense. All top level (and many lower) bodybuilders are very strong by any normal standard so I'd love to know who it is you regard as not strong?

I'm also puzzled by the reference to the pictures of Arnold et al. Some were very short so might not look much in clothes but I've never seen a picture or video clip of any of those looking tiny unless you're referring to them pre training or as kids?

[Lost_BMW]

speed_monkey said:

Controversial one here but I was watching Louis Theroux the other night and they raised the subject of steroids.

Are they truly that effective when coupled with an aggressive work out regime? What exactly does it do?

I'm not looking to be recited back all the usual crap about "roid rage" etc etc

I'm genuinely interested, maybe not necessarily in using them, just a strange interest in their effectiveness. Also is there any legal supplement than has similar effects?

If you want to find out about steroids etc. check out Mick Hart who is regarded internationally as being amongst the most knowledgable and honest in his opinions:


http://www.bodybuildingandsteroids.com/laymans-ind...

[markcoznottz]

Lost_BMW said:

markcoznottz said:

bales said:

You don't 'look' a certain way due to taking steroids, you look a certain way due to the type of training that you do. It means that with steroids you can go further with that type of training than someone 'natural' would and therefore be stronger/bigger.

Absolute rubbish. You have obviously never hung around a juicers gym. I have for years, although the recession seems to be killing them off. Take steroids = get big. End of. In fact I would say that most juicers hardly train at all, or what they do is actually detrimental to thier progress. Anyone can spout an opinion, but look at pictures of larry scott, arnie, ferringo,oliva, pre juice. My god, they were tiny. Some bodybuilders are strong, some arent. Seems to be genetically predisposed strength. Very few people nowdays do squats, its almost forgotten, as is deadlifting, but they can add natural size, not much else can. There is not, and never has been a way to get massive and ripped naturally, thats why bodybuilders experimented with roids.

I can't even imagine the gym(s) you've been in to witness this. I've trained with and around people when they have started using steroids or who cycled them (so seen the difference between on and off periods) and have seen the effect of them - quick increases in size, weight, strength, leanness and acne(!) but all have trained really hard.

Probably harder on them than off, either inspired to new levels by the thought of using and the effect, or because they feel they need to justify using steroids by giving it their all. Powerlifters will tend to be able to lift heavier weights for a given bodyweight/appearance of size/muscle mass but to think bodybuilders are generally weak is nonsense. All top level (and many lower) bodybuilders are very strong by any normal standard so I'd love to know who it is you regard as not strong?

I'm also puzzled by the reference to the pictures of Arnold et al. Some were very short so might not look much in clothes but I've never seen a picture or video clip of any of those looking tiny unless you're referring to them pre training or as kids?

Strength is mainly genetic. A few bodybuilders who have tried strongman events havent done well, but like all things in life it isnt black and white. Spend long enough in a gym, and you can tell the juicers a mile off, sometimes because if you havent seen them for 3 weeks, thyre now a stone heavier!. I have seen individuals who used to look like mr bean, transform into something that they never could be otherwise. But the real acid test, is that you see people week in week out, 100% natural guys, bust thier ass out training, and most never really get bigger. Steroids do work big time, some people have made a mint out of sticking needles in themsleves!.

[Halb]

markcoznottz said:

Strength is mainly genetic. A few bodybuilders who have tried strongman events havent done well, but like all things in life it isnt black and white. Spend long enough in a gym, and you can tell the juicers a mile off, sometimes because if you havent seen them for 3 weeks, thyre now a stone heavier!. I have seen individuals who used to look like mr bean, transform into something that they never could be otherwise. But the real acid test, is that you see people week in week out, 100% natural guys, bust thier ass out training, and most never really get bigger. Steroids do work big time, some people have made a mint out of sticking needles in themsleves!.

Maybe the level at which your strength starts to plateau and then peak is genetic. Bodybuilders tend to fail at strongman because their training is different, just like most strongmen would fail in bodybuilding.

[Lost_BMW]

markcoznottz said:

Lost_BMW said:

markcoznottz said:

bales said:

You don't 'look' a certain way due to taking steroids, you look a certain way due to the type of training that you do. It means that with steroids you can go further with that type of training than someone 'natural' would and therefore be stronger/bigger.

Absolute rubbish. You have obviously never hung around a juicers gym. I have for years, although the recession seems to be killing them off. Take steroids = get big. End of. In fact I would say that most juicers hardly train at all, or what they do is actually detrimental to thier progress. Anyone can spout an opinion, but look at pictures of larry scott, arnie, ferringo,oliva, pre juice. My god, they were tiny. Some bodybuilders are strong, some arent. Seems to be genetically predisposed strength. Very few people nowdays do squats, its almost forgotten, as is deadlifting, but they can add natural size, not much else can. There is not, and never has been a way to get massive and ripped naturally, thats why bodybuilders experimented with roids.

I can't even imagine the gym(s) you've been in to witness this. I've trained with and around people when they have started using steroids or who cycled them (so seen the difference between on and off periods) and have seen the effect of them - quick increases in size, weight, strength, leanness and acne(!) but all have trained really hard.

Probably harder on them than off, either inspired to new levels by the thought of using and the effect, or because they feel they need to justify using steroids by giving it their all. Powerlifters will tend to be able to lift heavier weights for a given bodyweight/appearance of size/muscle mass but to think bodybuilders are generally weak is nonsense. All top level (and many lower) bodybuilders are very strong by any normal standard so I'd love to know who it is you regard as not strong?

I'm also puzzled by the reference to the pictures of Arnold et al. Some were very short so might not look much in clothes but I've never seen a picture or video clip of any of those looking tiny unless you're referring to them pre training or as kids?

Strength is mainly genetic. A few bodybuilders who have tried strongman events havent done well, but like all things in life it isnt black and white. Spend long enough in a gym, and you can tell the juicers a mile off, sometimes because if you havent seen them for 3 weeks, thyre now a stone heavier!. I have seen individuals who used to look like mr bean, transform into something that they never could be otherwise. But the real acid test, is that you see people week in week out, 100% natural guys, bust thier ass out training, and most never really get bigger. Steroids do work big time, some people have made a mint out of sticking needles in themsleves!.

Still not sure about your definition of strength but I don't think we have much of an argument in general, there aren't many on here saying steroids don't work.

Who'd argue that genetics is the limit - on or off drugs? Or responsible for a predisposition to a certain body type/shape which might push some more towards bodybuilding if they know/are told they have the genetics to look right for competition and success. Some have a gift for it + either an interest/love of it or a known ability to make money and a career to sustain the dedication. The diet alone is horribly hard work.

So, they won't usually train like a powerlifter or get as strong pound for pound but unless your definition of strong is right up there in the top few percentile I think you're being unfair to bodybuilders as a group because most are strong, and might get stronger if their training shifted to powerlifting.

That big Irish bloke (name's gone) who is so successful at strong man started as a bodybuilder for example. Arnold and Ferrigno were strong, Olivia an Olympic weightlifting champ and then look at the weights the likes of Coleman, Levrone, Cormier and so many others can shift. That's not weak.

But admittedly most will get bigger and stronger on drugs just like a lot of powerlifters and strongmen undoubtedly have.

[Mark300zx]

I have been competing at a strength sport for about 20 years and steroids do work end of story.

The downsides are I have seen people die or go into the looney bin or get locked up for violent crime!

They are not like taking a recreational drug where with sensible use the affect wears off the next day.

At the end of the day it's not worth it!

[bales]

Pvapour said:

disagree with you on this one Bales, juicers have a completely different look to natural bodybuilders, I can spot one a mile away, acne, football head, oily skin, most have a very synthetic look to the whole physic, very blocky and overcrowded muscles, not to mention bad attitudes.

My point I was getting at though is do you not think that the look is dictated by the type of training they do and incorrect/extreme dosage?

There are plenty of athletes (unfortunately) who have taken PEDs who have looked pretty normal - and no I'm not talking about Chambers - look at Marion Jones, Justin Gatlin etc all sprinters who go banned for doping but didn't 'look' a specific way in fact they were both relatively slim. To me that was because they had a very very strict regime that was specifically worked out for them to just boost the strength where they needed it? i.e the whole BALCO scandal.

I completely agree with what you say regarding a lot of meatheads in gyms and how they look but my point was surely thats down to extreme doses and specific hypertrophy training. Also regarding the blocky and overcrowded muscles is that not simply that is very difficult to generate that amount of muscle mass without resorting to drugs - so its the steriods allowing the body to achieve that state through the training?

I am not disagreeing that you can spot 'some' people on 'roids a mile off - as you blatantly can in some cases - where in others people have been going about their sports at the top level for years with nobody suspecting? How can you explain that?

[NoelWatson]

bales said:

where in others people have been going about their sports at the top level for years with nobody suspecting?

Some examples?

[bales]

I gave two examples in the text.

[Pvapour]

bales said:

Pvapour said:

disagree with you on this one Bales, juicers have a completely different look to natural bodybuilders, I can spot one a mile away, acne, football head, oily skin, most have a very synthetic look to the whole physic, very blocky and overcrowded muscles, not to mention bad attitudes.

My point I was getting at though is do you not think that the look is dictated by the type of training they do and incorrect/extreme dosage?

There are plenty of athletes (unfortunately) who have taken PEDs who have looked pretty normal - and no I'm not talking about Chambers - look at Marion Jones, Justin Gatlin etc all sprinters who go banned for doping but didn't 'look' a specific way in fact they were both relatively slim. To me that was because they had a very very strict regime that was specifically worked out for them to just boost the strength where they needed it? i.e the whole BALCO scandal.

I completely agree with what you say regarding a lot of meatheads in gyms and how they look but my point was surely thats down to extreme doses and specific hypertrophy training. Also regarding the blocky and overcrowded muscles is that not simply that is very difficult to generate that amount of muscle mass without resorting to drugs - so its the steriods allowing the body to achieve that state through the training?

I am not disagreeing that you can spot 'some' people on 'roids a mile off - as you blatantly can in some cases - where in others people have been going about their sports at the top level for years with nobody suspecting? How can you explain that?

type of drug used and how smartly (there are cloning drugs as well)

I have trained naturally as a bodybuilder since I was 14, competed as a junior and won, was a big for a teenager, 16" arms at 16, 17" arms at 17 and so on till 20" arms at 20. At 20 I stopped as I could see what was happening around me with drugs, I started doing BB/training to be healthy and drugs didn't fit in with that.

Now 42 I am pretty much the same size as when I was 20 and stopped competing (not training) but I have always been curious to watch and listen to all the drugs going on around me

the athletes you refer to as looking normal do not use the type of steroid that makes bodybuilders look the way they do, they target strength per pound drugs (akin to hp per ton caterhams) obviously they dont want the cumbersome size that bodybuilders and powerlifters want.

I do not think it is down to the WAY they train that creates the look they have but the type and way they use the drugs, there is a certain amount of 'short' muscle look due to their lack of rounded training i.e they dont stretch, do full range of exercise or athletic sports, but primarily its down to the drugs, like I say, I have watched with interest over many years.

Its funny actually because a large lean Natural BB looks even more strange to the common man, as most times you see large muscled types they'll have quite full faces (more in proportion with their body) whereas in natural trim their faces are quite slim as on a normal athlete and look at odds with the size of their body (not sure that explanation is clear)

Edited by Pvapour on Monday 12th July 09:20

[bales]

Pvapour said:

I do not think it is down to the WAY they train that creates the look they have but the type and way they use the drugs, there is a certain amount of 'short' muscle look due to their lack of rounded training i.e they dont stretch, do full range of exercise or athletic sports, but primarily its down to the drugs, like I say, I have watched with interest over many years....

Fair enough, you obviously have more experience in the bodybuilding side of things.

I admit I was always under the impression that the drugs just facilitated the 'look' they have but I'm happy to concede that I'm wrong.

[NoelWatson]

bales said:

I gave two examples in the text.

I couldn't see any (all allegedly of course!)

Edited by NoelWatson on Monday 12th July 09:20

[Pvapour]

bales said:

Pvapour said:

I do not think it is down to the WAY they train that creates the look they have but the type and way they use the drugs, there is a certain amount of 'short' muscle look due to their lack of rounded training i.e they dont stretch, do full range of exercise or athletic sports, but primarily its down to the drugs, like I say, I have watched with interest over many years....

Fair enough, you obviously have more experience in the bodybuilding side of things.

I admit I was always under the impression that the drugs just facilitated the 'look' they have but I'm happy to concede that I'm wrong.

sorry edited whilst you were replying..

the real evidence I think is when you stand a lifelong natural BB (type) alongside a 3 year drug user type, maybe some of it is the time taken to atain the muscle as well??

Its funny actually because a large lean Natural BB looks even more strange to the common man, as most times you see large muscled types they'll have quite full faces (more in proportion with their body) whereas in natural trim their faces are quite slim as on a normal athlete and look at odds with the size of their body (not sure that explanation is clear)


to OP , that is Synthol usage and is plain ridiculous and dangerous, didn't think the 'must have now' BB look could get any more stupid, I was wrong

Edited by Pvapour on Monday 12th July 09:36

[bales]

NoelWatson said:

bales said:

I gave two examples in the text.

I couldn't see any (all allegedly of course!)

Edited by NoelWatson on Monday 12th July 09:20

I mentioned Justin Gatlin & Marion Jones, obviously top sprinters are 'always' under suspicions of being on drugs however compared to the red eyes and acne of Ben Johnson and the heavily muscled Dwain Chambers (though to be fair he is just as big now) those two never looked like the classic 'doping' sprinters.

As far as I am aware up until they failed drugs tests there weren't a huge amount of suspicions surrounding them compared to say someone like Carmelita Jeter currently with her deep voice or some of the very heavily muscled male sprinters.

Though if you listen to some people all current world class sprinters are doping but I think that is a depressing view - and imo not true either.

Especially when you note that this week a 20 year old white french lad (Christophe LeMaitre) who is very skinny and has no muscle whatsoever runs 9.98s for the 100m.

[NoelWatson]

bales said:

I mentioned Justin Gatlin & Marion Jones, obviously top sprinters are 'always' under suspicions of being on drugs however compared to the red eyes and acne of Ben Johnson and the heavily muscled Dwain Chambers (though to be fair he is just as big now) those two never looked like the classic 'doping' sprinters.

With Jones there were whispers after her ex got caught back in 2000