Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
How much do steroids enhance athletic performance ?
- Thread starter gpten
- Start date
Cauliflower Ear
New member
well...eq sure helps me with fighting...ill tell you that much...as far as baseball...obviously if you are bigger and stronger it is easier to knock the ball out of the park...no?
fcfmuaythai
New member
it depends which sport you're in. EQ helps with some sports for endurance, but the typical bulking drugs wouldn't be as beneficial in those sports because too much weight will slow you down. In other sports it is desireable to be as huge as possible and the water retention actually helps with performance. So, it really depends on the sport.
ViperHMS
Well-known member
I'll tell you one thing, IT DOES NOT MAKE YOU SUPERHUMAN, like the media would have you believe. Yes it does help, to an extent, but it does not make someone who has no talent become an amazing athlete. It an athlete does not have the talent or ability, steroids are not a wonder drug that is going to give them that talent or ability.
Sassy69
New member
Probably a huge point is the recovery factor as well....
A comment they've made about comparing baseball players today w/ those of the past (e.g. breaking Babe Ruth's record) -- they play many more games / year these days --- that is a situation where the recovery factor would definitely be an asset.
A comment they've made about comparing baseball players today w/ those of the past (e.g. breaking Babe Ruth's record) -- they play many more games / year these days --- that is a situation where the recovery factor would definitely be an asset.
BigCracker
New member
There's no short answer to this question. There are way too many variables to say just what exactly they do for any given individual. Many factors such as genetics, diet, and discipline play an equal role as the performance enhancing substances that are used. In many caes the drugs are used to compensate for shortcoming in these other areas.
A lot of people think that if all roids were removed from athletics, the same guy would still be at the top of their game. I have to disagree. Different people respond to drugs differently, so it's impossible to tell just how much of their performance is enhanced as opposed to god given talent/genetics.
I know a lot of guys that use tons of drugs-yet they barely look like they even workout. Consequently I know guys that use small amounts of drugs and they look incredible.
A lot of people think that if all roids were removed from athletics, the same guy would still be at the top of their game. I have to disagree. Different people respond to drugs differently, so it's impossible to tell just how much of their performance is enhanced as opposed to god given talent/genetics.
I know a lot of guys that use tons of drugs-yet they barely look like they even workout. Consequently I know guys that use small amounts of drugs and they look incredible.
schneiderc2004
New member
Without gear, some very famous athlete would not have won the World Series, that's how much gear can help! 
BigCracker
New member
Keep in mind that for every 3-4 lbs of fat you gain, you'll gain 1 lb of muscle just to support it.
theprofessor
New member
being a hard worker or not is up to the individual... correct, many juicers arent hard workers, but some are... unfortunately genetics have a lot to do with it... hard work/good dieting etc makes a hell of a difference though..gpten said:
macrophage69alpha
New member
gpten said:
really varies a lot.
for some it will make a significant differnce in performance, others not so much.
improving musculature does not neccesarily improve performance...
GoldenDelicious
New member
write down a big list of all the attributes you need to be a successful ball player ie speed, endurance, skill, hand eye co-ordination etc...then think about which of those steroids would affect positively and negatively.
your question is too open ended (and a tad pointless) to be answered meaningfullyin the context of this forum imo
your question is too open ended (and a tad pointless) to be answered meaningfullyin the context of this forum imo
karachi183
New member
The beast come from within...
I
immortalis
Guest
Previous posts have touched on all the points I am about to make...
If you are athletic, comitted to training and eatting right with the appropriate amount of sleep... steroids will definitely make you better at whatever sport it is you are competing in.
Now, depending upon what type of sport you are competing in, there are different steroids out that that will be more suited to your needs. As stated, a baseball player does not have the same needs a football player or basketball player does etc.
The recovery time for your muscles when using steroids is SIGNIFICANTLY decreased, which allows you to train harder and thus increase your gains even more over your average athlete.
Steroids give all athletes an edge over people who do not use steroids... unless youre a genetic freak which is extremely rare.
If you are athletic, comitted to training and eatting right with the appropriate amount of sleep... steroids will definitely make you better at whatever sport it is you are competing in.
Now, depending upon what type of sport you are competing in, there are different steroids out that that will be more suited to your needs. As stated, a baseball player does not have the same needs a football player or basketball player does etc.
The recovery time for your muscles when using steroids is SIGNIFICANTLY decreased, which allows you to train harder and thus increase your gains even more over your average athlete.
Steroids give all athletes an edge over people who do not use steroids... unless youre a genetic freak which is extremely rare.
Prizz
New member
gpten said:
I don't know if I agree with this statement..... Having been a pitcher for many years, I have to say muscle recovery isn't a big part of pitching..... It's more the connective tissue that needs time to recover for a Pitcher (IE: Tendons and Ligaments) AAS will do lil or nothing for connective tissue recovery, unless he's using a form of Deca which will help for sure..... So, a pitcher that uses AAS might throw faster and harder due to more muscle mass, but that "edge" won't last very long if he's in for a long time.... So, your statement about Relief pitchers can be true.... The arm and shoulder get very sore after pitching a few Innings, and unless youre using Deca, I don't see that changing much.....
rizz
Of course steroids will give you markedly better performance in virtually any sport you want to play. Why would you ask a question like that? Seriously.
You don't think being a LOT bigger and MUCH stronger helped Bonds go from a good player his whole career, who would hit 30-35 HRs a year, to a guy who suddenly hit 73 HRs in a single season.... after the age of 35???!!! OF COURSE IT DID.
You don't think being a LOT bigger and MUCH stronger helped Bonds go from a good player his whole career, who would hit 30-35 HRs a year, to a guy who suddenly hit 73 HRs in a single season.... after the age of 35???!!! OF COURSE IT DID.
Prizz said:
I see, and I could agree to a certain extent. But recovery could be very beneficial to a pitcher, especially an elder one. I've always suspected that roger clemens used something due to his sustained dominance well into his 40's. He had the stamina and endurance that a younger pitcher didn't even posess.
Tallguy1 said:
This really doesn't anwser my question though, bonds is an isolated incident. Leaguewide, statiscians have confirmed that there's very little evidence that steroids even had a small impact on baseball homerun numbers - Ofcourse, there may be isolated incidents, but nonetheless, very little have seen an increase like that, if any at all.
It would also depend if steroids increases fast-twitch muscle fibers, which increases batspeed - Which has a lot to do with flexbility, but it does make sense that the added muscle would help you turn some warning track flyballs into homeruns, or a pitcher throw 95mph instead of 90mph.
Ok guys, here's the deal; steroids are a PERFORMANCE ENHANCER, and nowhere does it give you TALENT! It also doesn't help with HAND-EYE COORDINATION which is what you need to hit the fuckin' ball in the first place. I don't give a shit how strong you are, if you don' thave that, you can't fuckin' hit, PERIOD. Look at the story of Casey at the Bat; huge, strong guy that everyone was intimidated by that struck the fuck out. All that strength didn't do him a shit bit of good. My advice is get some good hand-eye coordination THEN you can juice the shit out of yourself and swing for the fences.
Bruce
New member
from my experience it does. i was a cunt hair away from playing tennis at a pac 10 school. had i known about deca then i would have made it. i played in leagues and tourney's though i wasn't on the team and my last year at school when i started juicing my serve jumped up to 130mph from 122mph and it was consistent. the recovery was phenomenal. i also played lacrosse and i'll tell you right now playing in an indoor men's league and being on eq, which is what all the rugby players took at my college even if they didn't lift, i do not get tired. deca is the ultimate anabolic allowing muscle recovery and lubrication so serving a tennis ball or pitching would be improved as far as enurance and consistency of velocity. eq is great for endurance and i'd love to go back to h.s and hit the lax field on some eq and tbol
ass_face
New member
In sports where your max output is a short time... like Baseball and football. I think they are very beneficial... but for sports that require stamina and longterm output... not as useful. The exceptions to this would be Boldenone Undeclynate (EQ) and possibly Anavar. If you are engaging in a sport that requires cardiovascular output for 20-40 minutes... you would want to keep the potential for water retention and excess weight gain low. Thus, High Test cycles, Deca, Tren, D-Bol etc... would be useless.
Just my experience.
Just my experience.
How can you really say that? If the pitchers use steroids for example (or the stadiums get bigger or whatever), would that not have an effect on the batters?gpten said:
If you say something about fast-twitch muscle fibers again I might choke. AAS cannot increase the number of muscle cells you have in the first place, but they can increase the size. This though is a matter of training. In reality, ANY type of training will cause fibers to take on endurance characteristics (which is why some of the highest % of fast twitch is seen in couch potatoes!), so training for the quality you want (whether it be strength/speed/etc.) is what would need to be done, not aiming at a specific fiber type. 90 vs 95mph? Get real man.
Interestingly enough, there was an elite sprinter (<10s) who had a muscle biopsy (well published) and was less than 50% fast twitch! So much for the whole fast twitch argument.
jagerbombme
BANNED
BigCracker said:
does this mean you cannot put on muscle without putting on fat??
Cauliflower Ear
New member
all good info guys
BigCracker
New member
jagerbombme said:
My statement was directed more towards the avg person that doesn't exercise or pay attention to diet. For them, their steady diet of fast food, sugary soda, doughnuts, etc will inevitably cause weight gain over time. Most will be fat, but some additional muscle will be required just to carry it around every day. Now if you're totally inacive (bed-ridden from obesity?), you're not going to gain enough muscle to support your added fat. This is what leads to having to call paramedics because the toilet disappeared up your ass while taking a dump.
Generally speaking, the body does not like to build muscle and burn fat simultaneously. That's why bodybuilders use seperate phases of training, diet and drugs for bulking and seperate phases of training, diet and drugs for getting ripped. Doing both (gaining muscle/burning fat)at the same time is quite possible, but most guys seem to get more effective results doing one at a time.
Prizz
New member
gpten said:
Yeah totally Clemens made a HUGE comeback.... What about Kurt Schilling? He was washed up when he was with the Phillies, but went to the Diamondbacks and became great again..... He was looking at MAJOR shoulder surgery, and prob NEVER recovering..... However, he's amazing now, and he's well into his 40's.... Not sure if he had the surgery, but I think he did..... Even more of a reason to use Deca post surgery.... I would bet the Farm he's using Deca, and that's what did it..... Good Pts Gpten....
rizz
clubelite said:
Read this article -
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4845
clubelite said:
I was questioning it because bulking up isn't necessarily going to benefit some to a great degree - Now I could agree that somene could see some warning track flyballs fly out of the park with the added strength, but it could also hurt flexbility - which a hitter needs.
Here's an interesting article to ponder - http://www.arthurdevany.com/webstuff/images/DeVanyHomeRunMS.pdf
The literature on highly hypertrophied body builders demonstrates slower contraction/relaxation speeds and a muscle fiber shift away from the fastest type IIx/IIb muscle fibers toward slower fast twitch type IIa and even the slow twitch type I muscle fiber
That did not prove any of your points.gpten said:
Let's see, a 300+lb bodybuilder (contest shape) vs a baseball player at 240lbs MAX--not really comparable. Your point on flexibility is moot as we can see from pro bodybuilders with their flexibility and range of motion that is much better than the average joe (see the guys doing a variety of splits, shoulder rotations, etc.).
Your point about a shift to IIa is probably most dubious and stupid as ANY activity will lead from a shift from IIb to IIa, even explosive weightlifting and sprinting (yes look up the studies)! As proven by the fact that there are elite sprinters with low %'s of fast twitch muscle fibers, it is not the end all be all of athletic performance that you are trying to make it out to be. If you really want to get to it, there have been studies showing more effective training, for speed, using HYPERTROPHY, bodybuilding protocols on the hamstrings rather than strength protocols!
Just stop and read and think before you make these posts, please.
clubelite said:
Sure it did, outside of a few isolated incidents, there's very little evidence that steroids even had a remotely noticeble impact on numbers. Either for pitchers or batters.
Let's see, a 300+lb bodybuilder (contest shape) vs a baseball player at 240lbs MAX--not really comparable. Your point on flexibility is moot as we can see from pro bodybuilders with their flexibility and range of motion that is much better than the average joe (see the guys doing a variety of splits, shoulder rotations, etc.).
clubelite said:
Nor did I see it was the " end all be all " of athletic performance - But it does indeed take flexbility to have fast batspeed, and again, there's no legitimate evidence to prove that steroids do indeed INCREASE batspeed, which actually wouldn't generate more HR power, but wait longer on pitches, to make better contact.
Also, I posted the article which did an indept analysis of steroids impact on offensive numbers, which again, debunks a widely accepted myth that there was an offensive explosion never seen before this-time which is completely false.
BigRupe said:
I agree that the recovery aspect of the drug could be beneficial, but could it also cause various types of injuries ?
There's been a noticeable large amount of injuries in the " steroid era " among superstars - If I could find the link to the article, I will post it.
If both get better from steroids (highly simplified), then the changes in numbers would be less significant. Of course, looking at the fact that pitchers are throwing faster than ever is fairly good evidence that something has changed. Steroids are also not just a 90's phenomenon as you are trying to make them. Steroids have been VERY prevalent in the US in pro sports since the 60's, albeit, the popularity has increased more recently.gpten said:
F=MA. Simplified, but if you think that bat speed will not generate more HR power you are a tool (the fact that steroids will also add mass, most likely, doesn't help out your point much either). You missed my point. You can be flexible while on steroids. Bodybuilders, olympic lifters, and sprinters, all of whom need great flexibility, use steroids.
With pitchers throwing even faster than before, the numbers may be skewed to an extent. Also, the offensive numbers ARE skewed, albeit, maybe not for the entire league. For the upper echelon of players, it most certainly is. Stop before you dig yourself deeper.
gpten said:
Who is more likely to get hurt: the 40 year old doing his daily jog or an elite sprinter running under 10 seconds?
Baseball players now are much more athletic than the ones of the past could ever dream of being (many of whom were not in any way athletic outside of baseball skills). The higher level the athlete, generally the greater the risk of injury because of the mass and speed of the player.
clubelite said:
Actually, there have been studies done by historians that debunks the myth that today's pitchers throw harder.
http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=37240
http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=20992
And yes, I know there was steroids used in the 60's. There was a pitcher who admitted to using them.
clubelite said:
None of this can be proven with legitimate evidence. Generating fasterbat speed does not mean better homerun power - It means a quicker swing. You can wait on a pitch longer. Using a corked bat can do this for a hitter too - Though, it doesn't make them hit homeruns further.
And I never said bodybuilders, sprinters, etc, had no flexbility - Your putting words in my mouth, and insulting me with pety jokes while doing it.
clubelite said:
Again, there's no evidence that pitchers today throw harder than pitchers of yesteryear. None whatsoever. And you keep saying im " digging myself in a deeper hole " when you have yet to provide legit evidence that any of your claims are true. You've basically attacked me, while I'm trying my best to remain civil.
Here's the article on admitted steroid user tom house - http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-05-03-steroids-house_x.htm?csp=34
House said he gained almost 30 pounds while using steroids, blaming the extra weight for contributing to knee problems. He said the drugs helped improve recovery time and conditioning but did not add velocity to his fastball.
And I'm assuming the recovery time he's speaking of is workouts, right ?
House said he gained almost 30 pounds while using steroids, blaming the extra weight for contributing to knee problems. He said the drugs helped improve recovery time and conditioning but did not add velocity to his fastball.
And I'm assuming the recovery time he's speaking of is workouts, right ?
gpten said:
That debunks NOTHING. Besides the fact that the story is most likely inaccurate, there is a difference between a couple guys throwing that fast and the league standard to be throwing that fast. If you think the average fast ball has not increased in speed over the years, you're crazy. The availability of more pitching coaches has also changed the game to an extent.
Explain to me how someone who weighs the same, using the same bat, hitting the ball on the same location, but faster will not hit the ball further than if they hit it at a slower speed. You are completely wrong and your physics is way off. More force, because of the increased speed (and most likely increased mass) will make the ball go further.
I didn't say you did, so don't jump to conclusion. What you did say was that steroids hard flexibility, which must not be to any significant degree judging by the fact that the athletes mentioned need MORE flexibility than baseball players and are well known for steroid and other drug use.
Actually, you took a couple outliers (where the evidence is very vague and probably not accurate) to try to give an example of all of major league baseball. If I say people over the last few hundred years have gotten taller and larger, but you give a couple examples of large people from back in the day, that does not change the fact that the average man has gotten larger. Extreme example, but hopefully you see the point.
That debunks NOTHING. Besides the fact that the story is most likely inaccurate, there is a difference between a couple guys throwing that fast and the league standard to be throwing that fast. If you think the average fast ball has not increased in speed over the years, you're crazy. The availability of more pitching coaches has also changed the game to an extent
No proof of this. It does debunk your arguement, you haven't given me legit evidence that proves today's pitchers throw ' harder " than before. None whatsoever.
I guess we have different ways of arriving at " the truth ".
Explain to me how someone who weighs the same, using the same bat, hitting the ball on the same location, but faster will not hit the ball further than if they hit it at a slower speed. You are completely wrong and your physics is way off. More force, because of the increased speed (and most likely increased mass) will make the ball go further.
Again, I never said steroids don't make the ball go further - The added strength would turn warning track flyballs into HR's, and maybe some velocity on a pitchers fastball. But again, there's no legit evidence that steroids would increase batspeed, None at all. Again, batspeed has to do with how long you wait on the pitch, contact, not homerun power. Corked bats are ligher for a reason - They can increase batspeed. And they help you hit better, but do NOT help you hit homeruns further.
I didn't say you did, so don't jump to conclusion. What you did say was that steroids hard flexibility, which must not be to any significant degree judging by the fact that the athletes mentioned need MORE flexibility than baseball players and are well known for steroid and other drug use.
Sure you did, you've been attacking my this whole thread, claiming im wrong, without providing a shred of evidence to back up your claims.
And actually, I started this same thread on another forum, and recieved different responses disagreeing with your claims - There's no reason for me to take any of your opinions as gospel.
Actually, you took a couple outliers (where the evidence is very vague and probably not accurate) to try to give an example of all of major league baseball. If I say people over the last few hundred years have gotten taller and larger, but you give a couple examples of large people from back in the day, that does not change the fact that the average man has gotten larger. Extreme example, but hopefully you see the point.
if everything you state is true, prove it to me. link me some articles that provide legit evidence to back up your claims. Shoe me evidence that today's pitchers throw with more velocity than pitchers of yesteryear. I already provided two of many links on research dont by baseball historians that prove that myth to be false.
No proof of this. It does debunk your arguement, you haven't given me legit evidence that proves today's pitchers throw ' harder " than before. None whatsoever.
I guess we have different ways of arriving at " the truth ".
Explain to me how someone who weighs the same, using the same bat, hitting the ball on the same location, but faster will not hit the ball further than if they hit it at a slower speed. You are completely wrong and your physics is way off. More force, because of the increased speed (and most likely increased mass) will make the ball go further.
Again, I never said steroids don't make the ball go further - The added strength would turn warning track flyballs into HR's, and maybe some velocity on a pitchers fastball. But again, there's no legit evidence that steroids would increase batspeed, None at all. Again, batspeed has to do with how long you wait on the pitch, contact, not homerun power. Corked bats are ligher for a reason - They can increase batspeed. And they help you hit better, but do NOT help you hit homeruns further.
I didn't say you did, so don't jump to conclusion. What you did say was that steroids hard flexibility, which must not be to any significant degree judging by the fact that the athletes mentioned need MORE flexibility than baseball players and are well known for steroid and other drug use.
Sure you did, you've been attacking my this whole thread, claiming im wrong, without providing a shred of evidence to back up your claims.
And actually, I started this same thread on another forum, and recieved different responses disagreeing with your claims - There's no reason for me to take any of your opinions as gospel.
Actually, you took a couple outliers (where the evidence is very vague and probably not accurate) to try to give an example of all of major league baseball. If I say people over the last few hundred years have gotten taller and larger, but you give a couple examples of large people from back in the day, that does not change the fact that the average man has gotten larger. Extreme example, but hopefully you see the point.
if everything you state is true, prove it to me. link me some articles that provide legit evidence to back up your claims. Shoe me evidence that today's pitchers throw with more velocity than pitchers of yesteryear. I already provided two of many links on research dont by baseball historians that prove that myth to be false.
macrophage69alpha
New member
jdvega64 said:
coordinabolin
dexteravar
BigCracker
New member
So Barry Bonds isn't natural?
The burden of proof is on you, as you are trying to debunk a myth as you say, which has not been provided.gpten said:
Take high school physics over again. Tell me how faster bat speed will not make a ball go further. f=ma buddy.
You provide illegitimate and/or false evidence and expect me to provide more evidence to refute your's? This is a message board and in reality, I could care less whether or not you believe that I am right--the fact is I am and you are wrong. The matter of you believing that or not is another subject altogether.
There are idiots in large numbers. Kind of like the idea that steroids will cause you to lose flexibility.
Actually, you provided a message board thread as your main evidence--hardly reputable baseball historians. Again, I don't really care if you believe me or not and I'm not going to spend the time to get the sources to prove you wrong, but you are. There is no point in going beyond the obvious that there IS a significant increase in offensive numbers at the very elite (ie Bonds) level over the last decade or so. If you believe pitchers back in the day were throwing as fast, on average, as the guys now, then believe that. I hope you understand how dumb you sound though.
Cauliflower Ear
New member
I think you guys should just fight to the death and settle it
big49ersfan
New member
i personally dont know of any sportman in any sport that wouldnt benefit form eq and anavar a low dose of test and a'dex.
the above cycle IMO would be beneficial for all sportman if you play football or rugby increase the test dosage. could always add in primo to the equation.
they will deal with any pain after exercise, help with strength, endurance, agression, witht the righ training go towards helping speed as well.
the above cycle IMO would be beneficial for all sportman if you play football or rugby increase the test dosage. could always add in primo to the equation.
they will deal with any pain after exercise, help with strength, endurance, agression, witht the righ training go towards helping speed as well.
