Drugs in other sports and the media.
Comments
-
Russian athletics....throughout this year a veritable smorgasbord of positive dope tests...
Just to cheer up people who bang on about the state of Our Sport ™ :
News just in of the gold medallist from this year's Universiade's 5000m race, having tested postive. So title goes to the silver medallist...who tested positive a week after the Games.
Go Russia! Go athletics!0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... overy.html
Would the media be as blazay about this if they found it going on in cycling?0 -
If someone could explain the ethical difference between blood transfusions and blood spinning, that would be good
WHY THE BUGGERY IS THIS ALLOWED0 -
Because blood spinning is a legitimate medical procedure used to treat legitimate injuries. If WADA start denying sportsmen the right to genuine healthcare then they are on a very dodgy legal footing. Like cortisone in cycling maybe they should impose a 'no play' period after the treatment.Richmond Racer wrote:If someone could explain the ethical difference between blood transfusions and blood spinning, that would be good
WHY THE BUGGERY IS THIS ALLOWED
On the other hand blood transfusions have no medical merit (in the doping context).Twitter: @RichN950 -
DL1987 wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/10512393/Tottenham-use-controversial-blood-spinning-technique-to-hasten-injured-players-recovery.html
Would the media be as blazay about this if they found it going on in cycling?
If I recall correctly I've read reports that Nadal also used this to hasten his recovery from injuries.
Edit: Just noticed this is actually mentioned in the article itself.0 -
14% of iron man triathletes on PEDs - and we're talking about amateurs here, not pros.
http://www.bt.dk/oevrig-sport/massivt-d ... te-stofferWarning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
That explains why I was so crap.0
-
RichN95 wrote:14%? That's a suspiciously precise number.
It was the result of a single study at a single Iron Man in France. So it might not extrapolate, but it is grounded in empirical measurement :-)Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
It's all Lance's fault!
Give him a double lifetime ban :P0 -
RichN95 wrote:14%? That's a suspiciously precise number.
Got to agree with you there. Seems that the media always comes up with these weird numbers. i.e. a weatherman here in Toledo once said that there was a 32% of rain tomorrow. 32? :roll:
It's getting pretty weird. 17% better braking in the wet with brand X pads. 12% more aero than the next fastest wheel.
15% more breathable than any other cycling jersey. Sort of leaves me with the impression that THEY(whomever THEY are) don't really have a clue but for some reason believe that we will swallow just about anything. :?0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:RichN95 wrote:14%? That's a suspiciously precise number.
It was the result of a single study at a single Iron Man in France. So it might not extrapolate, but it is grounded in empirical measurement :-)
Sorry, my mistake, it was the result of a study of 3 iron man events in Germany.
The fully study is available here.
http://www.irishtriathlon.com/wp-conten ... -study.pdfWarning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Was chatting to a few friends from my secondary school who I hadn't seen since then. They were all good rugby players and pretty keen on it too.
All 3 claimed stopped at university after they were told (with varying degrees of severity) to take a load of drugs and spend a lot of time in the gym if they wanted to compete. Reminded me of the stories I read about about the Italian amateur scene in the early '00s.
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....
Don't worry, Kimmage is ghosting the O'Driscoll autobiography, I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of it.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....
Don't worry, Kimmage is ghosting the O'Driscoll autobiography, I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of it.
Jeez that's a match made in heaven!0 -
I'm just pleased that there's no doping in cycling any more.0
-
And who exactly has ever suggested that?0
-
While I don't doubt that there is doping in rugby (South Wales amateur rugby is awash with 'roids), even in Uni rugby, the modern rugby player is just generally huge naturally. Drugs can make you a little bit bigger, but not that much bigger, and certainly not taller.Rick Chasey wrote:Was chatting to a few friends from my secondary school who I hadn't seen since then. They were all good rugby players and pretty keen on it too.
All 3 claimed stopped at university after they were told (with varying degrees of severity) to take a load of drugs and spend a lot of time in the gym if they wanted to compete. Reminded me of the stories I read about about the Italian amateur scene in the early '00s.
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....
The huge increase in size over the last 15 years may very well be partly down to drugs but it's mostly that nowadays scouts and coaches look for size first and make them more skillful while in the past they looked at skill as the primary factor.
Living in Cardiff I see quite a lot of world class rugby players, past and present. No amount of drugs would turn someone like Barry John or JPR into someone like Jamie Roberts.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
While I don't doubt that there is doping in rugby (South Wales amateur rugby is awash with 'roids), even in Uni rugby, the modern rugby player is just generally huge naturally. Drugs can make you a little bit bigger, but not that much bigger, and certainly not taller.Rick Chasey wrote:Was chatting to a few friends from my secondary school who I hadn't seen since then. They were all good rugby players and pretty keen on it too.
All 3 claimed stopped at university after they were told (with varying degrees of severity) to take a load of drugs and spend a lot of time in the gym if they wanted to compete. Reminded me of the stories I read about about the Italian amateur scene in the early '00s.
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....
The huge increase in size over the last 15 years may very well be partly down to drugs but it's mostly that nowadays scouts and coaches look for size first and make them more skillful while in the past they looked at skill as the primary factor.
Living in Cardiff I see quite a lot of world class rugby players, past and present. No amount of drugs would turn someone like Barry John or JPR into someone like Jamie Roberts.
I disagree. Granted you have to eat big as well but as a regular gym user for the last 25 years I've seen some incredible transformations including a colleague who regularly cannot decide whether he wants to look 13stone athletic or 18stone bouncer and fluctuates like a dodgy currency over 18 month periods.0 -
In case anyone's interested, the IAAF today announced a total of 82 new doping bans since 10 Dec.
82
Eighty Two0 -
Yellow Peril wrote:RichN95 wrote:
While I don't doubt that there is doping in rugby (South Wales amateur rugby is awash with 'roids), even in Uni rugby, the modern rugby player is just generally huge naturally. Drugs can make you a little bit bigger, but not that much bigger, and certainly not taller.Rick Chasey wrote:Was chatting to a few friends from my secondary school who I hadn't seen since then. They were all good rugby players and pretty keen on it too.
All 3 claimed stopped at university after they were told (with varying degrees of severity) to take a load of drugs and spend a lot of time in the gym if they wanted to compete. Reminded me of the stories I read about about the Italian amateur scene in the early '00s.
Wouldn't be surprised if journalists look back on all those articles discussing the huge increase in size and weight of player in the last 15 years with a different eye....
The huge increase in size over the last 15 years may very well be partly down to drugs but it's mostly that nowadays scouts and coaches look for size first and make them more skillful while in the past they looked at skill as the primary factor.
Living in Cardiff I see quite a lot of world class rugby players, past and present. No amount of drugs would turn someone like Barry John or JPR into someone like Jamie Roberts.
I disagree. Granted you have to eat big as well but as a regular gym user for the last 25 years I've seen some incredible transformations including a colleague who regularly cannot decide whether he wants to look 13stone athletic or 18stone bouncer and fluctuates like a dodgy currency over 18 month periods.
I'm sure his weight fluctuates but i'd doubt he goes from 5ft8" to 6ft4" over 18 months. I think what Rich is implying is drugs won't change your overall size. 5ft7 & 10st soaking wet Barry John can not transform into 6ft5 17st Jamie Roberts no matter what drug he takes.0 -
I used to be into Body Building in my late teens early 20s. I saw guys go from 11stone up to 13/14 stone in under 2 years.
The amount of muscle that can be gained by some is extraordinary.
You also have to eat a lot of food. Its very difficult.
There was one lad who was desperate to get huge . He took all kinds of stuff /Ped's and ate everything but just ended up fat with a red face and a very quick temper.
Some people seem to respond well to PED's others not so well.0 -
Any link to this ? They seem better at dealing with this / sweeping it under the carpetRichmond Racer wrote:In case anyone's interested, the IAAF today announced a total of 82 new doping bans since 10 Dec.
82
Eighty Two0 -
rayjay wrote:I used to be into Body Building in my late teens early 20s. I saw guys go from 11stone up to 13/14 stone in under 2 years.
The amount of muscle that can be gained by some is extraordinary.
You also have to eat a lot of food. Its very difficult.
There was one lad who was desperate to get huge . He took all kinds of stuff /Ped's and ate everything but just ended up fat with a red face and a very quick temper.
Some people seem to respond well to PED's others not so well.
I guess a lot depends on what base you're starting from. I lost maybe 5 stone in 2 or 3 years while putting on muscle (not a huge amount, I wasn't really aiming to).
Personally, I disagree entirely with the bit I've emphasised!Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
sherer wrote:
Any link to this ? They seem better at dealing with this / sweeping it under the carpetRichmond Racer wrote:In case anyone's interested, the IAAF today announced a total of 82 new doping bans since 10 Dec.
82
Eighty Two
The IAAF Jan 2014 newsletter on their website
http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/document ... newsletter
Extra-special effort from Turkish athletes0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:rayjay wrote:I used to be into Body Building in my late teens early 20s. I saw guys go from 11stone up to 13/14 stone in under 2 years.
The amount of muscle that can be gained by some is extraordinary.
You also have to eat a lot of food. Its very difficult.
There was one lad who was desperate to get huge . He took all kinds of stuff /Ped's and ate everything but just ended up fat with a red face and a very quick temper.
Some people seem to respond well to PED's others not so well.
I guess a lot depends on what base you're starting from. I lost maybe 5 stone in 2 or 3 years while putting on muscle (not a huge amount, I wasn't really aiming to).
Personally, I disagree entirely with the bit I've emphasised!
Congrats on the weight loss. Respect is due to you sir.
Body builders tend to eat regularly through out the day , usually tuna ,chicken etc.
One of the guys at the gym I used to go to, set his alarm clock so he could eat in the middle of the night .0 -
Body builders tend to eat regularly through out the day , usually tuna ,chicken etc.
One of the guys at the gym I used to go to, set his alarm clock so he could eat in the middle of the night .
Completely agree. Used to live with a bodybuilder - it was an extreme diet. You have to eat an awful lot to put on a reasonable gain.0 -
What a strange post :?dennisn wrote:RichN95 wrote:14%? That's a suspiciously precise number.
Got to agree with you there. Seems that the media always comes up with these weird numbers. i.e. a weatherman here in Toledo once said that there was a 32% of rain tomorrow. 32? :roll:
It's getting pretty weird. 17% better braking in the wet with brand X pads. 12% more aero than the next fastest wheel.
15% more breathable than any other cycling jersey. Sort of leaves me with the impression that THEY(whomever THEY are) don't really have a clue but for some reason believe that we will swallow just about anything. :?
What sort of numbers would be believable?0 -
2.44% chance of it being the lazyness of rounding to the nearest integer?0
-
Ahh - not precise enough. I see!0
