"Doping" in rugby?

[Hornet]

There have been quite a few deaths in cycling which were linked to EPO use. Marco Pantani is one name I remember.

Pantani died of a cocaine overdose in 2003, long after the end of his Professional career, not EPO.

[Morf]

Or Pierre Spies

Haskell.

[Tricky Dicky]

Everyone knew Lance was doping. I didn't for one second believe he was clean. There were too many rumours. I wouldn't like to bet a lot that Greene was completely clean either. A lot of athletes from that time were drug takers, like Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones. I want to trust the system though.

Usain Bolt ran 19.93 for 200m at age 17. There's no way that guy's doping. He runs like a cat, not a tank. I'd bet anything that David Rudisha and Haile Gebrselassie are clean too.

Your assertion that any winner is on drugs is based on the assumption that everyone's on the same talent level starting off. That's ridiculous. No amount of drugs would make Mike Ross faster than Tommy Bowe over 100m. Some people are just naturally more athletic than the rest which is the case with Bolt or Ashton Eaton.

There have been quite a few deaths in cycling which were linked to EPO use. Marco Pantani is one name I remember.

You haven't addressed my point about individuals putting their health at risk to get an edge. In your perfect world where everyone's on drugs presumably everyone would improve by the same amount, making legalising drugs redundant. Individuals would take more and more drugs to get an edge. Where would it stop?

Victor conte head of BALCO claimed all the finalists in the mens 100m in 2000 were doping, he was supplying a lot of them. Marion Jones passed every test.
"Usain Bolt ran 19.93 for 200m at age 17. There's no way that guy's doping"....... That says it all, they have a thrid world testing system and when you are growing is when you get the most gains, Bolt is/was juiced to the gills.
you are right about talent level, but I know I could knock a fair few seconds of Ross's 100m time if I had him for a year.
Pantani died from cocaine abuse
thats not how they work, its not quite less is more, but there are ideal dosages depending on your sport, you dont want water retention or extra unnecessary mass, so taking 2cc's of Winstrol for example, wont make you a better spinter then a guy who takes 200-500mg a week.

Personally, I've strong doubts about Bolt. However, the hyperbolic claim that every medal winner who performed impressively is on drugs is utterly laughable. John Treacy claimed silver at the 1984 Olympics in the marathon, pretty much equalling the Olympic record. Not a hope he was on drugs.

If you look at the progression of a lot of world records over that time, the times aren't particularly stunning in a lot of events. The 5,000m world record has come down only about 20 seconds in 30 years. Mo Farah has never posted a time in the top 15 fastest of all time at 10,000m. If these guys were doping, they'd surely be going faster? The fact is that it's simply not a vintage field in the 10,000m event these days.

It's genuinely scary that someone could advocate permitting drug taking in sports given the massive evidence of the damage it does to individuals.

Granted not every medal winner is, I dont know enough about the training programming or drug routines for anything out of certain power/speed ranges so I cant comment, fair enough on the marathons I dont know, but I would suspect they are on some EPO type of drug, maybe Farah isn't and is just lucky to be racing against cr@p. I know for certain 100 to 400 is all drugs, all weightlifting is drugs, mens gymnastics has a lot of drugs.
PED's dont harm people, idiots misusing them do

Bolt won the 200m at the World Juniors when he was 15, beating U20 athletes. How far back do you want to go? Next you'll be telling me that he was doping when he was 12.

You play rugby, don't you? I'd say the testers might want to cast their eye in your direction. You have the air of someone who's trying to justify their own doping by telling themselves that they're not cheating. It's just for recovery and sure everyone else is doing it and you'd have got there anyway

[fourthirtythree]

There have been quite a few deaths in cycling which were linked to EPO use. Marco Pantani is one name I remember.

Pantani died of a cocaine overdose in 2003, long after the end of his Professional career, not EPO.

It's difficult to say for sure because unregulated use of drugs off prescription is by definition difficult to investigate but to suggest Pantani's death was unrelated to his cycling drug abuse is not entirely unreasonable, but not the most likely turn of events.

Here's two articles on a cluster of suspicious deaths in '03-'04

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2004/f ... g.cycling1
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/39997062/#!bqyOKA

Cycling is not the only sport to have had suspicious deaths (I may have mentioned a flamboyant American sprinter whose records have, as teh wikis put it "yet to be seriously challenged". More than 25 years later!) though it is probably the most investigated in this regard due to the use of the criminal legal system as the sports doping agencies failed to step up.

[Broken Wing]

you are right about talent level, but I know I could knock a fair few seconds of Ross's 100m time if I had him for a year.

Any trainer worth the name could improve Ross's 100m time with a year's training and without magic potions.

I would suspect they are on some EPO type of drug,

You suspect because it serves your delusion for it to be true. I imagine you'd great a great reception if you wandered into an athletics club in Ireland and shared your downright insulting opinion that the 10K runners were doping.

I know for certain 100 to 400 is all drugs, all weightlifting is drugs, mens gymnastics has a lot of drugs.

You know this for certain do you? Or do you just strongly believe it because, once again, it suits your delusion to believe that nobody is clean and that makes it OK.

no athlete from the past 30 years who wins a medal with any sort of impressive or WR/OR is clean

Does that mean if they won a medal but didn't set a record you believe they are clean? Because that destroys your claim that 100 to 400 is all drugs. If it's just about winning medals then how about Derval O'Rourke? She won medals including an Indoor World Gold in the 60M hurdles and two European Silvers at 100m. Are you claiming she was doping?

[Hornet]

There have been quite a few deaths in cycling which were linked to EPO use. Marco Pantani is one name I remember.

Pantani died of a cocaine overdose in 2003, long after the end of his Professional career, not EPO.

It's difficult to say for sure because unregulated use of drugs off prescription is by definition difficult to investigate but to suggest Pantani's death was unrelated to his cycling drug abuse is not entirely unreasonable, but not the most likely turn of events.

Here's two articles on a cluster of suspicious deaths in '03-'04

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2004/f ... g.cycling1
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/39997062/#!bqyOKA

Cycling is not the only sport to have had suspicious deaths (I may have mentioned a flamboyant American sprinter whose records have, as teh wikis put it "yet to be seriously challenged". More than 25 years later!) though it is probably the most investigated in this regard due to the use of the criminal legal system as the sports doping agencies failed to step up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/r ... igure.html

[leinster4life13]

you are right about talent level, but I know I could knock a fair few seconds of Ross's 100m time if I had him for a year.

Any trainer worth the name could improve Ross's 100m time with a year's training and without magic potions.

I would suspect they are on some EPO type of drug,

You suspect because it serves your delusion for it to be true. I imagine you'd great a great reception if you wandered into an athletics club in Ireland and shared your downright insulting opinion that the 10K runners were doping.

I know for certain 100 to 400 is all drugs, all weightlifting is drugs, mens gymnastics has a lot of drugs.

You know this for certain do you? Or do you just strongly believe it because, once again, it suits your delusion to believe that nobody is clean and that makes it OK.

no athlete from the past 30 years who wins a medal with any sort of impressive or WR/OR is clean

Does that mean if they won a medal but didn't set a record you believe they are clean? Because that destroys your claim that 100 to 400 is all drugs. If it's just about winning medals then how about Derval O'Rourke? She won medals including an Indoor World Gold in the 60M hurdles and two European Silvers at 100m. Are you claiming she was doping?

I said if they are posting world class times I would suspect they are, but as I clarified earlier I dont know, I have never trained distance nor know what they would take outside of EPO, toradal etc nor do I know their training programming etc, so, I cant comment. If they are beating times set by East Germans, Soviet runners, and smashing WR's whilst based in Ireland, well then yeah, I would call foul.
100 to 400 I know about,I know about power, training for those distances and weightlifting,Oly lifting never has been clean and never will be, look at the history, go on any lifting forum and its an accepted part of the sport, no one cares. Anyone beating times of doped athlete from 100 to 400 is dirty, end of story, You cant claim drugs are a massive cheat on the one hand and then say, well X is not on drugs even though he is beating the times of athletes who were, that is utterly illogical.

O Rourkes best 60m hurdles time is miles off the WR, dont want to throw aspersions as hurdling is technical not just power based, it would be stupid to claim , however, the fact people have beaten East German times in the 60m is highly suspicious, training has not outstripped drugs. Again though I clarified my comment by saying "impressive time", I have no doubt plenty of medal winners (in fact all medal winners technically are clean as it is not in their system if they are using anything unless they have a new compound or are stupid) are clean, however the chances of any record holder being clean are miniscule, there are no genetic freaks that can beat drugs, because most top class athletes are genetic freaks to begin with.

[Broken Wing]

I have no doubt plenty of medal winners (in fact all medal winners technically are clean as it is not in their system if they are using anything unless they have a new compound or are stupid) are clean, however the chances of any record holder being clean are miniscule, there are no genetic freaks that can beat drugs, because most top class athletes are genetic freaks to begin with.

That's a massive climbdown from

what time does Santa Claus visit your house? No top athlete is clean

[Schumi]

I'd have my doubts on 400m. Only 8 of the top 25 times in history have been ran in the 21st century. If doping is rife, that suggests that 400m has generally been a poor standard naturally for up to 15 years.

Not a great example as 13 of the top 25 were run by Michael Johnson. Compared to him, the 400 metres has been a poor standard.

[ceemec]

Not a great example as 13 of the top 25 were run by Michael Johnson. Compared to him, the 400 metres has been a poor standard.

Take MJ out of the equation and it still doesn't look good for modern runners. Of the top 10 fastest athletes ever over 400m, only 3 of them have ran this century. Given today's training techniques and developments, that doesn't reflect well on current 400m runners.

[leinster4life13]

I have no doubt plenty of medal winners (in fact all medal winners technically are clean as it is not in their system if they are using anything unless they have a new compound or are stupid) are clean, however the chances of any record holder being clean are miniscule, there are no genetic freaks that can beat drugs, because most top class athletes are genetic freaks to begin with.

That's a massive climbdown from

what time does Santa Claus visit your house? No top athlete is clean

No its isn't, you can be a medal winner with an unimpressive time in an unimpressive field. As for no top athlete being clean I stand by it, times are too impressive, too much money involved and, not wanting to fall foul of any defamation laws, its impossible to beat doped athletes.

For example, the likes of GHRP-2 are out of your system in under a day, as with most peptides, although I cant vouch first hand for the rest. Cost wise its poor to middle ranking athletes who will go for the known compounds, the newer stuff, GH, peptides are more expensive at around 40eu a day(but undetectable), compared to say an average of between seven and 16 quid a week for any of the anabolic hormones, which is what people get caught for. Are you telling me a top athlete who can afford this stuff wont take it, knowing he wont get caught? I know in SA, Craven week is rife, was told first hand. League and Aussie Rules are all on GH, they just cant prove it as it is out of your system and the tests are cr@p, why would you bet rugby isn't? Peptides aren't as good as anabolics, but they are far and above being natty.

[fourthirtythree]

Pantani died of a cocaine overdose in 2003, long after the end of his Professional career, not EPO.

It's difficult to say for sure because unregulated use of drugs off prescription is by definition difficult to investigate but to suggest Pantani's death was unrelated to his cycling drug abuse is not entirely unreasonable, but not the most likely turn of events.

Here's two articles on a cluster of suspicious deaths in '03-'04

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2004/f ... g.cycling1
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/39997062/#!bqyOKA

Cycling is not the only sport to have had suspicious deaths (I may have mentioned a flamboyant American sprinter whose records have, as teh wikis put it "yet to be seriously challenged". More than 25 years later!) though it is probably the most investigated in this regard due to the use of the criminal legal system as the sports doping agencies failed to step up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/r ... igure.html

I'm not sure what your point is. Is it a good film?

[simonokeeffe]

Or Pierre Spies

Haskell.

they were always big guys

[Hornet]

I'm not sure what your point is. Is it a good film?

Not seen the film, but have seen from other sources how he felt that he was unfairly singled out and, in his view, persecuted by those around him. He did dope in his career, I don't think there is much doubt about that. He couldn't brazen it out like Riis, Ullrich or Armstrong. He could not handle the label of being a cheat and doper. He was a weak man in a sport where mental strength is a given. He could not handle that weakness and in the end, aided by his cocaine habit, it killed him. Fellow competitors died due to their doping, others were shamed into leaving the sport, (and rightly so). The biggest shame in doping through all sports, is that those who do not dope are tainted by association, and face the accusations constantly, (note Wiggins outburst at the 2012 Tour). Pantani is still revered by a large contingent of the Italian Cycling fraternity. Even Nibali see's him as a hero of Italian Cycling, (as many British riders revered Tommy Simpson). Pantani died due to his inability to handle the accusations, Simpson died due to his doping in the Tour de France. Neither would be heroes of mine. Doping (the taking of Performance Enhancing Drugs) is wrong. It will always be wrong, not only for the (illegal) advantage it gives, but for the negative effect they might have on the body.

[fourthirtythree]

I'm not sure what your point is. Is it a good film?

Not seen the film, but have seen from other sources how he felt that he was unfairly singled out and, in his view, persecuted by those around him. He did dope in his career, I don't think there is much doubt about that. He couldn't brazen it out like Riis, Ullrich or Armstrong. He could not handle the label of being a cheat and doper. He was a weak man in a sport where mental strength is a given. He could not handle that weakness and in the end, aided by his cocaine habit, it killed him. Fellow competitors died due to their doping, others were shamed into leaving the sport, (and rightly so). The biggest shame in doping through all sports, is that those who do not dope are tainted by association, and face the accusations constantly, (note Wiggins outburst at the 2012 Tour). Pantani is still revered by a large contingent of the Italian Cycling fraternity. Even Nibali see's him as a hero of Italian Cycling, (as many British riders revered Tommy Simpson). Pantani died due to his inability to handle the accusations, Simpson died due to his doping in the Tour de France. Neither would be heroes of mine. Doping (the taking of Performance Enhancing Drugs) is wrong. It will always be wrong, not only for the (illegal) advantage it gives, but for the negative effect they might have on the body.

Personally I agree with all of that. I might change emphasis, for me things like the lemonds' story of getting that phone call from the wife of a cyclist and him cold and dead in bed beside her, she waiting for the ambulance sobbing, his heart stopped on EPO... sh!t like that is worse than the integrity of sport.

Nibali TTs rather well for such a climber doesn't he? Competition was knackered of course, but his team looked to have underperformed to me, yet he was fresh as a daisy.

There is a great quote in the second article I linked to about the safety of drugs "We have no idea how doping affects athletes, because we have no idea what they take, how much of it or for how long. They won't tell. Researchers won't run clinical trials because giving test subjects the amount of drugs believed to help performance would be unethical." There is simply no evidence based rationale for suggesting they are harmless and should be allowed free for all in competition. An environment in which we encourage extreme behaviour.


You don't have to be Tom Simpson and die in the saddle to have your life ruined by drugs in sport.

Barely related anecdote: I had a flu recently (shocking experience, lost 4kg of muscle in around a week, was wrecked for several) and was given steroids for a few days. I didn't show it at any point but I was really confused at the waves of horrible anger coursing through me.

[simonokeeffe]

was another roid rage case in news today, guy in Cork beat the cr@p out of his girlfriend and throttled a woman who tried to help her; so ya know the more people doing steroids the better

[neilinboston]

was another roid rage case in news today, guy in Cork beat the cr@p out of his girlfriend and throttled a woman who tried to help her; so ya know the more people doing steroids the better

yeah, but still, better than being 'natty', n'est pas? at least he wasn't average!

[Morf]

was another roid rage case in news today, guy in Cork beat the cr@p out of his girlfriend and throttled a woman who tried to help her; so ya know the more people doing steroids the better

Isn't that just an acute case of being from Cork?

Thanks ladies and germs, I'm here all week.

[Peg Leg]

I thought the roid rage thing was debunked?

[Broken Wing]

Apparently not:

What is 'roid rage?

'Roid rage, in many ways, I would characterize as a form of loss of impulse control. It provokes overreactions via a stimulus that normally doesn't produce such a severe reaction.

So say somebody says something to you that you don't like. You may put your fist through a wall. The impulse is there; it's overreaction. Forget the 'roid, for the moment. It's a rage ... and that rage is precipitated by the brain being exposed to anabolic steroids.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/facts-and-m ... roid-rage/