Thoughts on AAS/PH effects on gains. reps for good responces
- 05-19-2013, 10:30 PM
- 05-19-2013, 10:35 PM
IMO it's like turbo charging or supercharging a car. Support is rebuilding it to withstand the psi. Boost controller and tunes are AI and pct. But what it all comes down to is who the driver is, where you drive it, and what kind of engine you want to slap it on. Different strokes for different folks. If you have a stupid driver(you), a horrible mechanic(your source and doctor), and a poor vehicle(your body) it doesn't matter where you drive it(sport specific bodybuilding, pwr lifting, etc.), it'll be a disaster.
(Lots of other factors play in but hopefully you get me lol)BLACK LION RESEARCH
Supplements for bodybuilders
- 05-20-2013, 12:14 AM
I want to read, repost with spaces between paragraphs please.Olympus labs super pct, don't cycle without it. It's the best IMO. Get some an you'll be glad you did Olympus labs rep
05-20-2013, 02:25 AM
i still don't understand why no one wants to go by a definitional use of the term 'cheat', which would be, paraphrased, to obtain an unfair advantage by means that are against the rules. if steroids are banned in a sport, then i don't understand why people will refuse to admit it's cheating, when, by definition, it's exactly that.
regarding personal gains, i wouldn't say it's cheating because that seems like a stupid word to use to for the advancement of ones own goals. in a way, i understand it because of how many (maybe even most) use steroids/ph's these days and instead of using proper means to meet their end goal; they half ass and use drugs to meet that goal. so if 2 people have the same goal in mind and one uses drugs instead of self control and hard work, i guess i understand the other person's point of view. but that's the same way i view school, imo, we all want to make good grades, but when someone that doesn't need them is taking drugs to make themselves focus for 12 hours straight, it's not right to say, "well, you COULD take those drugs too, so it's your fault that you choose to do the work on your own merits".
basically, it comes down to what is allowed and what isn't allowed in a sport. if steroids are banned, as they are in almost every sport, then taking them is cheating. if using creatine is banned, then that's cheating as well. anything that's against the rules is cheating. i don't understand why people squabble over minor things that are nowhere near as beneficial as steroids when you could just look at the definition of "cheat" and determine that, in the world of sports, it's clearly cheating. i mean, saying, "well, everyone does it" doesn't make it any less against the rules, all that means is that the system for testing is broken.
it's like with college sports, i went to a d1 college, but they'll never be a real contender in ncaa football because they don't have the means to cheat as easily as sec schools who pay their players and get away with more things that are against the rules. i guess i just have an inherent problem with society saying it's ok to do things that are blatantly against the rules just because other people are doing it. i think ncaa sports are the biggest joke because it pretty much comes down to who can cheat the system most efficiently (whether it's with steroids, paying players, or anything else that's against the rules).
just because a lot (or most) people do something, doesn't make it any less against the rules. instead of saying it's not cheating to break the rules and deny the definition of the term "cheat", people should start pushing to have more stringent regulations so most people or teams aren't able to get away with it.
05-20-2013, 02:34 AM
and if you take steroids to obtain certain personal goals, thats completely fine with me, i'd do the same. my only problem stems from the fact that the vast majority of people i've seen do this walk around as if they're better than everyone that they're bigger than. that's what's aggravating to natural guys... putting in hard work and effort and then being looked down upon by someone that would be smaller and weaker than them if not for taking steroids.
i feel like everyone has similar goals in mind, and anyone saying they don't compare themselves to others in the gym with respect to that personal goal is a liar (whether it's strength, size, aesthetics, or a little bit of everything). so when someone is natural and they see someone pass them up as a result of steroid use, it's easy to refer to that person as a "cheater" because that person is reaching that goal in a much easier way. i just think it's kind of a stupid term to slap on something as ambiguous as personal goals, but i do understand where it comes from.... i just think its much easier to quantify someone as a "cheater" when they're doing something in a capacity that is blatantly against the rules.
05-20-2013, 03:09 AM
05-20-2013, 03:17 AM
Sorry to but in guys but I need some opinions fast, is this stuff fake? Looks nothing like any omegs I have seen
Work Hard. PLAY HARDER!!
05-20-2013, 03:18 AM
05-20-2013, 03:38 AM
05-20-2013, 07:19 AM
05-20-2013, 07:26 AM
05-20-2013, 03:25 PM
05-20-2013, 03:29 PM
05-20-2013, 04:18 PM
05-20-2013, 04:20 PM
What irritates me regarding the steroids/cheating debate is that they only target Winners.
They want to tear apart Lance Armstrong only to award the 2nd place loser who was surely taking drugs as well. Or if they tear apart and target the home run leader, they leave all the other juicers who came in 2nd to last alone.
Can you blame some of these guys for lying when their accusers are usually guilty one way or another. If they say yes and plead guilty, then they're crucified by the public and losers who juice and still couldn't perform get the trophy.
And if elevated test is cheating, then I guess it's unfair and cheating that some guys have 800-1000 test while others are trying to function at 300-400. Better make a new rule.
05-21-2013, 02:33 AM
I want to believe that most natural BB competitions contain drug free competitors. I'm not a complete idiot, i'm not talking about muscle mania, but other federations.
basically the top 20 against lance were all doping.
Edit: also, there aren't non tested tour de Frances.
These bikers don't really have a chance to compete against non tested guys in a separate fed..
BB and Pl is a different story
05-21-2013, 08:46 AM
05-21-2013, 10:29 AM
So, if your on trt, but keep it a secret, and compete in Natty shows, is that cheating?
Say guy next to you has natural test levels in the 800s, but yours naturally are in the 200s, but after trt, yours are in the 800-1,000s,
Are you cheating?
Olympus labs super pct, don't cycle without it. It's the best IMO. Get some an you'll be glad you did Olympus labs rep
05-21-2013, 10:43 AM
05-21-2013, 11:39 AM
05-21-2013, 01:06 PM
Good point. TRT is becoming so popular now days. There must be dozens if not hundreds of professional athletes on TRT. I wonder how they handle it?Originally Posted by jbryand101b
05-21-2013, 05:28 PM
05-21-2013, 05:57 PM
If you juice, then admit it and just go into that category; don't claim natty when you aint.
If you are using TRT as an excuse to bump test back into the normal-mid range of 400-500ish, then that would be fine. But Bumping it up to high imo is just being dishonest.
05-21-2013, 06:00 PM
05-21-2013, 06:03 PM
05-21-2013, 06:09 PM
05-21-2013, 06:11 PM
05-21-2013, 07:10 PM
Was Lance cheating even if every other person in the competition was also doping? Seems like an even playing field to me.
Like Darrell Waltrip and many other NASCAR racers have said - If your note cheating, your not racing. Let alone winning.
05-21-2013, 07:41 PM
05-21-2013, 07:51 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By bigdavid in forum AnabolicsReplies: 4Last Post: 02-10-2012, 03:54 AM
- By cghardwick in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 10-23-2009, 01:45 PM
- By cloc in forum AnabolicsReplies: 3Last Post: 02-07-2007, 02:16 AM
- By GTOman in forum General ChatReplies: 1Last Post: 02-27-2005, 12:54 AM
- By Blatalian in forum AnabolicsReplies: 52Last Post: 09-13-2004, 11:11 PM