Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 There's great footage out there of Brian Oldfield, a 275lb shot putter(arguably the most shocking human specimen ever IMO) dusting the fastest woman of his day Dude... Where are you getting this information? Are you saying that Oldfield beat the fastest woman in the world at the time in a 100M race? Dusted her? No {censored}in' way... So he could run faster than 10.88 in the 100m in 1984? That is what Evelyn Ashford ran that year... No way Oldfield could run that fast... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Steve Steve reread my sentence, give kage a buzz, and ask him if he thinks this conversation is gonna benefit you or anyone else.designer steroids, as you mention... variants on our test:poke:Enanthate, propionate, cypionate and Aq suspensions are all test.Do you want to continue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Dude... Where are you getting this information? Are you saying that Oldfield beat the fastest woman in the world at the time in a 100M race? Dusted her? No {censored}in' way...So he could run faster than 10.88 in the 100m in 1984? That is what Evelyn Ashford ran that year... No way Oldfield could run that fast...Steve Yes, are you that dense? This is a well publicized race... look it up on {censored}ing youtube. Yeah, I'm just {censored}ing pulling {censored} out of my ass. Oldfield was god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Not true. This year at the World Junior Championships the fastest 100M mens time (they allow up to 18 year olds) was 10.29 seconds. The woman's record set by by Florence Griffith Joyner is 10.49. She would have qualified for the final and finished 6th overall against 18 and under men...There isn't a 15 year old boy on the planet who would have beaten, much less "destroyed" FloJo in 100M, scrawny or not...Steve Flo Jo == major juice. She is the reason women started growing their nails... Further, that was one race in her life.There are guys every year running 10.1... not at one meet you pick out. There are soph's that pull low 10's... that dusts any world level sprinter on the planet almost every year, ever. Come on, you got a bone up your ass and are really grasping. cherry picking meets is golden. Hell, the mens 400m relay hasn't finished yet in the Olympics this year... they must be slow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Flo Jo == major juice.She is the reason women started growing their nails...Further, that was one race in her life.There are guys every year running 10.1... not at one meet you pick out. There are soph's that pull low 10's... that dusts any world level sprinter on the planet almost every year, ever.Come on, you got a bone up your ass and are really grasping. cherry picking meets is golden. Hell, the mens 400m relay hasn't finished yet in the Olympics this year... they must be slow... What the hell are you talking about. It was this year's junior world championships? It is ok to be wrong. Don't be so defensive. BTW - what FloJo was on has nothing to do with what you said about scrawny 15 year olds beating the best woman. I just showed you this years world junior championships (not just "any" meet) and these are 18 year olds with a best time of 10.29. You come here with a bunch of general bull{censored} about things and don't back it up. I point to facts... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Flo Jo == major juice.She is the reason women started growing their nails...Further, that was one race in her life.There are guys every year running 10.1... not at one meet you pick out. There are soph's that pull low 10's... that dusts any world level sprinter on the planet almost every year, ever.Come on, you got a bone up your ass and are really grasping. cherry picking meets is golden. Hell, the mens 400m relay hasn't finished yet in the Olympics this year... they must be slow... You were wrong. Its ok... I didn't cherry pick anything it is the current Junior World Championships... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Yes, are you that dense? This is a well publicized race... look it up on {censored}ing youtube. Yeah, I'm just {censored}ing pulling {censored} out of my ass.Oldfield was god. Show me him running faster than 10.88. Stop avoiding what I'm saying and blah-blah-blahing about "well publicized". Where do I see him running 10.88? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Steve reread my sentence, give kage a buzz, and ask him if he thinks this conversation is gonna benefit you or anyone else. designer steroids, as you mention... variants on our test:poke: Enanthate, propionate, cypionate and Aq suspensions are all test. Do you want to continue? Sure. Do you think throwing around a few terms related to synthetic testosterone is gonna scare me off discussing this? I find that funny. I know what I'm talking about and you know it too. Kage is a friend of mine - I don't need his input on this frankly... I can carry on the conversation myself just fine. What are you talking about? I'm fully aware that steriods are all variants of testosterone - I don't ned a "lesson" from you. Synthetic testosterone can be tested for man - that is what happened to the cyclist who lost the Tour De France (Floyd Landis). He tested positive for synthetic testosterone. You said that the reason why people beat the tests is that steroids are close to naturally occurring harmones. That is bull{censored}. They beat the tests because it is either out of their system or they manipulate the stuff to beat the test. It has nothing to do with it being naturally occurring in men as you said. Get your facts straight and don't try to change the subject... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Megadeth Man Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 There's been rumours about Bolt all year. I'm just stoked that we, Great Britain, are still 3rd in the medals table. And, more importantly, pwning the Aussies hard! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Well, I wasn't a decathlete because they don't have that event in High School in CA. I was multieventer extrodinaire. I'm 5'8 and when I was in track, I weighed 180-190. My fastest 100m was 11.3 and my fastest 400 was 53.43, my fastest 110m was 16.7, my longest shot was 49'11'' and disc was 140'1'', so I could do well in all my events, just not well enough to get noticed:cry: No one is looking for a 5'8 decathlete with short legs I feel yah. So close, but so far. I got stuck @ 5'10'55'9 shot (with two huge throws that hit obstructions indoors:mad:)tore right hamstring and goofed 170'3" in the f'n disk... then easily 192 before college started up, 10 weeks outta surgery. 190 would've been a Va record for almost 10 years, so yeah, I'm bitter.I stopped running once my knee started getting messedand even then I only ran when they needed me on the 4x100. Too much damn work to get faster, and you're not going from 11.5 to 10.5 on just hard work, so screw that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 You said that the reason why people beat the tests is that steroids are close to naturally occurring harmones. That is bull{censored}. They beat the tests because it is either out of their system or they manipulate the stuff to beat the test. Reading comprehension FTL. Try a third time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 I just showed you this years world junior championships (not just "any" meet) and these are 18 year olds with a best time of 10.29. You come here with a bunch of general bull{censored} about things and don't back it up. I point to facts... Steve Uh no.let's take thishttp://www.usatf.org/statistics/records/view.asp?division=world&location=outdoor%20track%20%26%20field&age=junior&sport=TFThere's a 10.01, which is faster than your cherry picked instance of a meet vs a WR. Hell, I took your meet. If you look at 15-16, you get a 10.54 as the meet record which smokes every woman in the world ever except for one woman on one day at the height of her steroid use. Again, these are meet records vs WR. you do know enough that 15 year old boys can't keep their nerves in check and their best marks are rarely at the big show. Now, you know that this year's Olympic champ never EVEN BROKE 11 seconds prior to this year?!:cop::cop:Do you want a {censored}ing grid of all the top jr sprinters vs all the top women in history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Steroids are cool because you can beat the system because they are variants of or actual hormones that are supposed to be there, in guys. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members glenecho Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Jamaicans are in all likelihood doping big time, the surge just seems to outrageous. I hope that isn't the case because it's made for some great runs and great TV viewing (I'm not one of those dudes that gets all caught up in USA! USA! USA! {censored}...I like good sports). In other not so surprising news the IOC is now investigating the Chinese for the pre-pubescent girls they put on the mat in gymnastics (which only a fool would believe were 16). Chances are since the games are in China, and China has already "lost" the birth records of the girls, nothing will happen. But the IOC has been known to be tough...and no birth records may end up meaning medals being stripped. But being on China's home turf could get ugly for the IOC...if you know what I mean...and I have a feeling this story will "mysteriously" disappear pretty quickly. I admire a lot of elements of Chinese culture, but communism is bull{censored} and taking kids out of their homes at the age of 4 and 5 and putting them in sports boarding schools, often against the wishes of themselves or their parents, is just bull{censored}. I hope the Chinese get nailed on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Race @ 1:49 Notice the smoking, followed by a very specific tarzan manipulation of the female form. :oh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Uh no. let's take this http://www.usatf.org/statistics/records/view.asp?division=world&location=outdoor%20track%20%26%20field&age=junior&sport=TFThere's a 10.01, which is faster than your cherry picked instance of a meet vs a WR. Hell, I took your meet. If you look at 15-16, you get a 10.54 as the meet record which smokes every woman in the world ever except for one woman on one day at the height of her steroid use. Again, these are meet records vs WR. you do know enough that 15 year old boys can't keep their nerves in check and their best marks are rarely at the big show. Now, you know that this year's Olympic champ never EVEN BROKE 11 seconds prior to this year?! :cop: :cop: Do you want a {censored}ing grid of all the top jr sprinters vs all the top women in history? Ok, I can accept some of what you are saying based on the results... doesn't change my opinion though...I guess I just have a different idea of "smoking" someone. Based on what you posted, the meet record at the junior world championships for 15-16 men (set by a 16 year old prolly) is slower than the woman's world record. I'd say that it is still unlikely that the best 15 year old boy is gonna beat the fastest woman in the world any given year head to head, much less smoke her...Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HVjS6kdPjgRace @ 1:49 Notice the smoking, followed by a very specific tarzan manipulation of the female form. :oh: I never denied that he beat a woman runner. What I'm saying is that he could never have beaten the fastest woman in the world at the time over 100m if she was in shape. That video proves nothing to me. What was the distance of the race? Who is the woman? All it shows is the end of the race... Do you at least agree that Oldfield could not run 10.88 for 100M? Or are you saying that he could? That is what he would have had to run in '84 to beat Ashford over 100M... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 I read it. I stand by my reading. Explain it again and I'll listen. I don't have anything against you, I'm just discussing something and based on what you wrote, I think you are wrong. Steve I said varaints of (test)or actual (test)OK. Now, we agree not all steroids have equal effects on your own hormone profile, right? Things like Anavar aren't going to screw that up. You fail on something like Anavar because the IOC knows what Anavar looks like on a mass spectrometer, and you can't bull{censored} that. In addition to the IOC, US athletes have USATF testing randomly, so really... if you get caught with any known steroid, you are dumb in my book. USATF shows up to our house, your work, anywhere, and you pee. There's no more masking crap going on. This leaves "designers". They don't show up on the mass spec and neither do their metabolites, so you're in the Clear. So far, nothing contraversial, right? Well, for part one then all we need to establish is that for us to call something a steroid in sports we are referring to compounds that can mimic testosterone in that they can bind to sites designed for test. Some steroids in terms of atoms are very, very close, just a tweak here and there for uptake, manufacturing convenience, whatever. Some others don't chemically look like test, but bind like test. IMO, you can refer to these as "variants of"For part 2, we only need to accept that there are various actual testosterone injectables that you can take. Those, IMO can be refered to as "actual" hormones. You can take a certain amount of real test and never exceed guidelines. They test actual levels, and the test them vs epi. You can even take epi to skew your labs further as long as you don't get stupid. Part 2 is, IMO cool... except I think it should be legal go down that road so as to provide a level playing field.Incidentally, even though I was joking about BALCO, I see their rat has quite a bit to say about the medal shift and other country's testing policies vs USATF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sah5150 Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 I said varaints of (test) or actual (test) OK. Now, we agree not all steroids have equal effects on your own hormone profile, right? Things like Anavar aren't going to screw that up. You fail on something like Anavar because the IOC knows what Anavar looks like on a mass spectrometer, and you can't bull{censored} that. In addition to the IOC, US athletes have USATF testing randomly, so really... if you get caught with any known steroid, you are dumb in my book. USATF shows up to our house, your work, anywhere, and you pee. There's no more masking crap going on. This leaves "designers". They don't show up on the mass spec and neither do their metabolites, so you're in the Clear. So far, nothing contraversial, right? Well, for part one then all we need to establish is that for us to call something a steroid in sports we are referring to compounds that can mimic testosterone in that they can bind to sites designed for test. Some steroids in terms of atoms are very, very close, just a tweak here and there for uptake, manufacturing convenience, whatever. Some others don't chemically look like test, but bind like test. IMO, you can refer to these as "variants of" For part 2, we only need to accept that there are various actual testosterone injectables that you can take. Those, IMO can be refered to as "actual" hormones. You can take a certain amount of real test and never exceed guidelines. They test actual levels, and the test them vs epi. You can even take epi to skew your labs further as long as you don't get stupid. Part 2 is, IMO cool... except I think it should be legal go down that road so as to provide a level playing field. Well, actually, the first thing you said was "steroids", which include things like nandrolone that are easily tested for. No big deal though, we are splitting hairs... So all I'm saying is that the test is based on testosterone to epitestosterone ratio (4:1). So, people can only beat the test by staying within that range. They don't beat it because testosterone variants are close to naturally occurring testosterone, they beat it by being below the ratio. Landis was something ridiculous like 12:1 when he was tested. No way that can be naturally occurring. Basically, the TEST is how it is because the variants are basically indistinguishable from naturally occuring. They have to look for a ratio that is way over anything that could be normal. Even 4:1 is ridiculous. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 Here are the prelim results from this years junior nationals in the 15-16 division. Again, just one meet, these are not the best times of their year. The female gold medalist would have placed 7th. Last year, as she suddenly became faster, should would not even make the top 13 (even on her very best day all year) . Also, on the top men's times all ages this year, there are at least 3 high school students. 1 Rankin, Jeremy Unattached J 10.51Q 1.2 1 2 Gilstrap, Kenny 03 Titans 10.53Q 4.1 2 3 Caldwell, Jacques Texas Stars Trac 10.65Q 2.8 5 4 Farlow, Larry 04 Metro Dade 10.75Q 2.8 4 5 Cooper, Daamon 03 Quicksilver 10.77Q 3.2 3 6 Sweeney, Isaiah Track Houston Tr 10.76q 4.1 2 7 Brooks Jr, Kenneth 03 Durham Strid 10.78q 3.2 3 8 Smith, DeVon New Wave 10.84q 4.1 2 9 Lindsey, Torian River Ciites 10.91 2.8 5 9 Jones, Ryan Gems-Elite 10.91 2.8 4 11 Sellers, D' Jerrien Dallas Greyhound 10.92 4.1 2 12 Robinson, Terrence Track Houston Tr 10.96 1.2 1 13 Jordan, Stephone High Voltage Tra 10.99 2.8 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dark Angel Posted August 22, 2008 Author Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 They don't beat it because testosterone variants are close to naturally occurring testosterone, they beat it by being below the ratio. Exactly, or because they are very far from naturally occurring testosterone but still bind like test and the IOC doesn't know what the compound is yet. In the sea of piss, you gotta know what you're looking for first, then you can see if it is in a sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RhettHours Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 nas said they were being investigated. rumored substance abuse. alot of them have braces too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members STEEL KAGE Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 You are flat incorrect about this. You don't beat the tests because steroids are variants of naturally occurring hormones...Number one, you can easily test for synthetic testosterone (nobody dopes with natural testosterone- where would you get it - cadavers?). Also note that testosterone naturally occurs in women just as estrogen is present in men, it is only the levels of the hormones that are different. Note as well that they allow a 4 to 1 ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone in male athletes, when no one naturally is anywhere near that ratio. You're allowed to cheat right off the bat...Number two, the main reason people can beat the tests is because the levels of testosterone or other steroids like nandrolone, etc., eventually are no longer present in the bloodstream. They can also be masked by drugs as well, however, that is tricky because they can test for most of the masking agents as well. This is why many athletes choose to use the more dangerous orally ingested steroids - they leave the bloodstream faster. Its a fine line - use the steroids close enough to competition that you can recover from hard training and get the benefit, yet get off of them early enough that you don't get caught. The other big problem is that when you are getting off of them, it is like a declining saw tooth graph of how much is in the bloodstream - one day your Dr. tests you and finds no steroids and says your good to go - the next day, the steroid presence is higher, you race and get tested and you're busted...The only other reason you could get away with steroid use would be designer steroids (like "the clear" from Balco) that are manipulated so that the existing tests don't detect them.SteveNandralone Decanoate("Deca") is the easiest Steroid to detect because it can stay in the system for up to 18 months and you are right that anything synthetic is easy to test( I made a joke!!) for and highly detectable. The only way that these guys are passing tests are by going on heavy duty cleansing cycles and there are in fact undetectable cleansers that are completely natural. Im not talking Goldenseal and some of the other OTC products that show up more than the THC or Steroids that are being tested for. Never heard of Balco or the Clear though, very interesting!!! Kage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members starsnuffer Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 They mostly to go US colleges. I'm sure that they're taking the same stuff US athletes are. -W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members corporealJigsor Posted August 22, 2008 Members Share Posted August 22, 2008 I never denied that he beat a woman runner. What I'm saying is that he could never have beaten the fastest woman in the world at the time over 100m if she was in shape. That video proves nothing to me. What was the distance of the race? Who is the woman? All it shows is the end of the race...Do you at least agree that Oldfield could not run 10.88 for 100M? Or are you saying that he could? That is what he would have had to run in '84 to beat Ashford over 100M...Steve FWIW i seem to recall hearing he ran 10.75 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.