Top Natural Powerlifters on steroids
- 05-02-2006, 11:12 PM
Top Natural Powerlifters on steroids
If you took the strongest lifetime Natural powerlifters in the world and put them on steroids, GH, and any other drugs you can think of, how much stronger do you think they would get?
Do you think that a person could go from Squatting 600 and benching 400 (raw w/o powerlifting gear) to squatting 1000 and benching 700 with powerlifting support gear and maximum drug use?
I personally don't see why this wouldn't be entirly possible. Most people don't agree with me, and I can't figure out why.
What is the deal with these people who are lifting 700+ and squatting 1000+? How strong do you think they would be had they never touched a drug in thier life?
- 05-02-2006, 11:40 PM
I must say that I agree with you. I am sure that the drug free powerlifters could easily ad a few hundred pounds to each of their lifts by using drugs.
- 05-03-2006, 12:31 AM
Its completley impossible to say what would happen. Everybody responds diffrently to steroids and just because you are the strongest naturaly doesn't mean you will be the strongest juiced. Of coarse most would be alot stronger than they currently are. By the way benching 700lbs with powerlifting gear on is not going to put them anywhere near the strongest benchers. Scott Mendelson can do over 700lbs raw.
05-03-2006, 01:01 AM
I've read an Olympic coach say that the stronger and more talented an athlete is before using steroids, the more they will respond to steroids.
I believe this is true.
For example; Scott Mendelson would probably have been able to compete with the strongest natural powerlifters had he never done steroids.
It doesn't seem feasible to me that someone like Mendelson would be able to go from lifting say 250 lbs. raw bench before drugs, to a 700 lbs. bench after drugs.
I can see him going from say a 400 lbs. raw bench before drugs to a 700 lbs. raw bench with the drugs. But this would make him close to the world record holder in the Lifetime Natural division.
05-03-2006, 06:36 AM
??? that doesn't make any senseOriginally Posted by Mr. Methyl
it has to do with one's affinity of his receptors
plus the stronger they are the closer they are to their genetic limit meaning the gear can only take you so much further
05-03-2006, 07:01 AM
Approaching this with no nutritional training what so ever. I'll relate it to over clocking a video card - I'm a geek not a nerd.
Some video cards come out OC'd to the max already - AAS cards. Others have decent performance and just no matter what you can get nothing else - poor genetics. Then you have the sucker that has pipelines left to open and good core and memory over clocking capabilities - the strong natty lifter.
Sometimes you can only go so far with that strong natty lifter before some component over heats or gives up the fight, other times you can over clock the crap out of it and with good cooling - PCT, you can make it twice the card it used to be.
Basically like ‘glenihan’ said “the gear can only take you so much further” I just need to do some typing this am.
05-03-2006, 07:49 AM
This coach was saying that the more natural receptors you have, the more natural strength and speed you have to begin with, so when androgens are added from a synthetic source, you will be able to make much better use of them then a person who has no natural talent, because the fact that they have no strength/speed is a sign that they have both low androgen levels, and low receptors.
Also it would make sense because if a person is off cycle, a higher natural testosterone level would help them retain the mass gained from the time on cycle.
Still, it seems impossible to go from being average strength before the drugs, to top 10 in the world after drugs.
But I don't doubt this may be reality. I just don't see how the hell some people can lift so much weight if they weren't naturally very strong to begin with.
05-03-2006, 08:04 AM
agreed, AAS and the like will only take you so far. if you don't have the genetics el naturale, then being top 10 material isn't going to happen, regardless of what substance you use. JMO.
05-03-2006, 08:20 AM
It seems to me that most juicers tend to want to believe that they are gifted and that "not everyone responds to the juice the same". "Therefore even if natrually strong people took the juice, they would not be stronger than them necessarily".
Keep dreaming...It is BULL!!!
It make very little sense to think that people with less natural strength and potential would have more improvement with drugs than people with more natural strength. (although they may go up percentage wise more)
I seriously doubt in overall poundage increase though.
Gifted lifter before bench 350 ...after drugs 550
Non-gifted before 250 after drugs 400
I have been a competetive powerlifter (drug-free) for over 20 years and have had known a lot of other lifters and bodybuilders Natural and unnatural. The ones that were very strong and very muscular prior to drugs always showed greater overall gains than ones who lifted and were not strong or big to begin with.
I have seen people respond differently to different drugs, but EVERYONE who takes Roids, GH etc will respond very well as long as the stuff is real! They may respond better to certaind kinds though. I have seen both gifted and ungifted lifters make huge gains on the stuff. The gifted ones always end up ahead.
Now this is not to say at all that the best drug free would beat the best drug lifters (even when they went on), but its foolish to think that they would not beat a "non-gifted drug user" after going on themselves.
Also you are right -- 700 pound BP is not close to the top. The people with top benches are very specialized. But if you can have a 700 BP and SQ 900 and DL 900 you are world class (even with drugs and gear). And if someone can bench over 400 or 500 natural they will sure the heck outbench some one who can only bench 300 natural, if they both go on the drugs!
05-03-2006, 08:46 AM
We've all seen the guys who are absolutely nothing while natural and as soon as the gear hits them they just sprout genetics. This one guy at my gym has absolutely no muscle when he is natty but a month after hitting the sauce his arms go freaky, only gets to 180 - 190 but his arms just bloom.
I wonder about a persons heart while a natty lifter, some people need the constant gains to keep their motivation going.
05-03-2006, 11:32 AM
05-03-2006, 12:10 PM
From what i've read the longer you stay natural the more receptor sites you will have for the gear to latch onto. Look at Trevor Smith he stayed natural way longer than anyone else and was ridiculously big and strong. So if their is a natural powerlifter who's been training for 20 year then ya he'll make some pretty insane progress when he goes on gear. This goes for bodybuilding as well, these guys that just hope on the gear are limiting their potention significantly, with the exception of maybe Flex Wheeler but he had a partial blockage of myostatin.
05-03-2006, 12:19 PM
I'm with you!Originally Posted by guyfromkop2
05-03-2006, 07:05 PM
I personally think that the strong natural lifter has to dial in the diet, lifting etc. so when the added AAS comes into play they are already on their game.
05-03-2006, 10:14 PM
true for the most part. however, i happen to know one of the top guys in the sport on a personal level and his diet was absolutely deplorable. i don't mean just sh!tty eating, i'm talking 100grams of protein at the most, maybe 2K cals as a daily total and this guy is well over 3 bills. genetics are crazy.
05-03-2006, 10:20 PM
a lot of top guys are like thisOriginally Posted by Beelzebub
05-03-2006, 10:39 PM
They should ban great genetics in sports :P
05-03-2006, 10:52 PM
By the way Tiny Meeker benched 942lbs at the Scott Mendelson Classic and goes on to say that he plans to put up 1000lbs drug free. The article is in the march 2006 edition of powerlifting usa. So their is one strong mofo that claims to be natural. The problem with what if this guy juiced scenario is how do you know he isn't already. I don't care what kind of drug test you come up with someone will find a way to pass. Either way putting up 942 bench suite and all is still damn impressive.
05-04-2006, 10:03 AM
05-07-2006, 01:14 PM
Don't give the feds any ideas.Originally Posted by Jayhawkk
05-08-2006, 08:27 AM
People respond differently to steroids. However you are asking two questions - how much can be added with both kinds of gear.Originally Posted by Mr. Methyl
There are people that have squatted 1000 and benched 700 in powerlifting gear without the use of steroids. In most cases, this probably takes about a 600-700lb raw squat and a 450+ raw bench. Now there are those who lift a lot more raw than that who are still "only" squatting 1000 or benching 700, but we're talking about the minimums here for a significant portion of the population.
As far as what it could do for the top drug-free guys...who knows. One example I know of is a guy who pulled 804 (on multiple occasions I think, but I know at least once) drug-free in his late 30's. When he got to his early 40's, he started using. His pull (he pulls in just a belt, no gear) has only gone up maybe 30lbs since then. Other guys seem to gain a lot more (especially if they're weaker to start with). You also don't know the hormonal makeup of some of the drug-free guys, so it's hard to tell what they're working with anyway.
05-25-2006, 07:31 PM
Actually it might make more sense than we care to think. Think of it this way. Genetically superior (for strength or muscle mass) individuals probably have receptors with a higher affinity for the hormones that naturally circulate in their veins. This is possibly one of the reasons that they recuperate better, get stronger/bigger easier etc. It then stands to reason that these same people would respond exceptionally well to exogenous hormones as well.Originally Posted by glenihan
Just something to ponder.
Similar Forum Threads
- By serengo in forum PoliticsReplies: 12Last Post: 12-10-2004, 03:19 AM
- By The Rob in forum AnabolicsReplies: 8Last Post: 09-28-2004, 02:08 AM
- By Lakevillethor in forum General ChatReplies: 44Last Post: 08-28-2004, 12:00 AM
- By rbbm81 in forum Exercise ScienceReplies: 14Last Post: 01-02-2004, 05:29 PM
- By AlexParty in forum General ChatReplies: 23Last Post: 06-11-2003, 05:51 PM