Holyfield's amazing transformation

I’m a huge Holyfield fan but it’s simple. Holyfield embraced sports science, nutrition and like most fighters of that era, some serious juice. But it was still the hard work, dedication, work ethic and good genetics that made the difference in his appearance not magic beans

This content is protected

Still working harder in his 50’s than most of today’s heavyweights.

 

Man_Machine, I do appreciate your attention to detail & that you are cautious in assigning guilt as a matter of principle.
I had to skip replying to your post, since I had over 1000 characters...

I routinely have the same reticence when folks lazily assume everyone is using without evidence of the frequency, erroneously assuming a guesstimate of only incentives can guide them to the answer.
Or condemn someone for using on faulty logic & without good indication of cheating.

We see the evidence differently, but there are times when you misunderstand what I am arguing.
Or what evidence I find suggestive of what. I will go point by point.

First there is no need for a failed drug test to form a reasonable opinion in some cases.
Investigations are part of the reasons-& what they uncovered about Holyfield applies-& so does simple logic *if* applied fairly & consistently.
However, only in a *criminal* case is the burden of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". In other cases it is a preponderance of the evidence. But you set a standard beyond even the former because you avoid the word "reasonable". While there should be less of a burden to merely form a fair opinion, based upon your standard nobody ever would be even convicted of anything (& we should be more cautious with a man's freedom & reputation) because there is always a *possibility* that anyone is innocent.
Just like any bizarre fact we invent *could* be true, the world is made up of pickles below the mantle & is a trapezoid. ;-)

Also you misunderstood what I was saying about the hyperlink & what Holyfield could possibly achieve naturally.
I said that based upon those standards, he was within it for everything, with the possible exception of neck & the (unmeasured dimension) of trapezes.
However even though I said the latter tends to be disproportionately blown up with PEDs due to androgen receptors, I did add that the single dimension that they might get wrong is the neck-because again, boxers may develop only that more than bodybuilders...
The weight falls under within natural potential. Again since Holyfield had a relatively small lower body-which normally accounts for ~60% of body mass, the glutes are the largest human muscle-that is not surprising.

However I think you overrate the probability that there is an innocent explanation in large part because you did not address the evidence from the government investigations & raid.
You gloss over not addressing all of my evidence-that is the central point.


I do believe you are going to a relative, though harmless & well-intended, extreme in reserving judgement on Holyfield.
Normal standards can be described many ways. In this case, it is that given a credible government source & investigation, the fact that a name & address so laughably an approximation of Evander's-& that his home phone # was listed which he answered-is a case where most anyone fair & balanced would have to conclude that it is very unlikely this is a lie, an error, or another explanation could account for events.
The other information about Holyfield tied to HGH in an actual raid of signature pharmacy, a common supplier of HGH & steroids to many, is at least combined with the former example pretty damning.
It is highly unlikely this was an error-like some single lab sample mishandled...

I think you can see now that everything about the potential natural body mass formula is a misapprehension-I did not indict him for anything related to it!
But purely for interests sake, you need not cross-examine him-you can check out his methods & his study methods, there is mucho scien-terrific approach on the website for other matters of weight training-& compare it to what other folks claim.

FYI, his calculations are more *generous* than you likely will find elsewhere.
That is mostly due to him being savvy enough to include measurements of frame via wrist & ankle.
Also he considers "bulking", meaning if people have a lot of food in various stages of digestion (part of trying to gain muscle mass).
So for example, if you take someone tall but not really unusually so, say 6' 2", & give them dinasaur bone dimensions that usually occur for guys closer to 7' (but this happens sometimes, just as some tall guys can have a small bone structure...
You might find someone who at just 10% BF weighs 250 lbs.! Occasionally absent any "bulking".
Obviously not a Holyfield..A great example of this, before modern training or steroids were even *invented* was Primo Carnera. At "only" 6'5.5", someone here listed him at 284 in an early fight, & while not as lean then, he was fairly lean up to 270! A pituitary giant & strongman, & modern day cheats take advantage of the fact that drug testing bodies feel compelled to allow the roughly 1 in 10,000 man (in hormonal levels) to get away with micro-dosing.

Anyway your jest about Casey Butts (yes, his real name) considering E.H. a Saint is appreciated.
A more nuanced approach is that he would not find that his dimensions (neck possibly exempted) in themselves indicative of PED cheating!
But that was never my case, & I see no reason why he would find not being so large exonerating.
Tons of folks take PEDs to limited degree or effect. He would have to examine evidence unrelated to mass.

You did not accurately state how Holyfield lost his hair both rapidly, never had heart problems before, & both conditions took effect fairly soon after he became so muscular up top.
I did not rely on a priori assumptions, nor say we should dispense with all other possible explanations.
I am saying that there are no other explanations for such sudden onset of the problems-in a super-healthy athlete-that are very likely.
IF it was merely baldness-& again its rapidity makes one wonder-I would not raise an eyebrow much.
But add a first time ever heart problem, it becomes statistically unlikely to not be PEDs.
It *is* reasonable to connect the dots...If the likelihood of corruption is strong enough to secure a strong probability that other explanations are not plausible.
It did not quite meet that standard for me, but it is debatable & suggestive...
So without the investigations & raid...I would not draw so firm a conclusion.

Two more brief points, & I appreciate your patience.
The circumstantial evidence I have been referring to is again the most solid thing; the formal government investigation & later raid of Signature Pharmacy.
Although just the former is enough to say it would be naive to reserve judgement about his guilt being overwhelmingly likely.

Finally I appreciate that it is unusual for folks to reconsider their opinions, due to honest differences of opinion & usually ego is involved.
However i wonder if upon consideration of seeing what evidence I consider strong, you might contemplate believing something like yes, we both say he was not too massive to be natural.
And we put the balance differently, but even he does not say the sudden onset balding & heart problems were a clincher...

But perhaps you may decide that the governmental investigations of, & later raid of laboratory & the particular official records of Holyfield's association make it very likely he juiced?

These things are much more persuasive than his close association with the likes of 8 time Mr. Olympia champion (& sometime PED supplier) Lee Haney.

 

I apologize if I misunderstood precisely what you were claiming.
However I am saying that what you described about Tyson, taken in part or in whole, is not any reasonable indication of juicing.
Especially since again, he was 190 at 13-without being tall or obese-that is genetics.
195 at 17 is really nothing man-some high schoolers are bigger than that under 6' without being at all overweight. Or juicing.
His background & dysfunctional family account for his rages.
Juice is readily available, especially for the likes of Tyson-in prison.
He lost weight because he was unmotivated to train, & maybe depressed.
Now if you show his weight gain later was *too* rapid, I might agree with you.
But muscle has memory, this & great genetics & access to top training means the muscle is gonna come back faster than an ordinary human.

 

These things could be naturally explained as you say, but they are also consistent with juicing.
Correlation is not causation, however, so it isn't proof, but if you like me think just about everyone juiced, it is an indication. Not that much is needed if one already believes the vast majority was doing it.

 

You think it silly that some random blogger could have doctored a photo to make a point? You sure have more faith in people than me.
But no matter the case with that, that photo isn't a good representation of how even an '87 version of Holy looked like in his fights. You know that as well as I do.

 

Agreed - in some cases.

As I previously asked - have you seen the prescription that Llosa & Wertheim claim to have reviewed?
Regarding the "Investigations", can you provide the details of this and how Holyfield was engaged by the authorities?
Other than the prescription in the name of Evan Fields and this person being believed to be Evander Holyfield, what else did the investigations uncover?

I am not comparing casual debate on an Internet Forum to the rigors of the courtroom, but the truth is the truth, no matter the setting - and, if the truth is important then I see nothing unreasonable in saying I'd want more evidence, before leveling accusations of serial PED use.

You yourself used the phrase "

This content is protected

" But, you cannot possibly know this and the limited evidence in play does not support such a statement.

If you have some big reveal from the investigations you keep pointing to then now would be the time to bring it to the fore.

As above - unless you can provide more evidence, beyond the prescription that two SI journalists allege they reviewed, then I can't see what else there is to address here.

OK - so, its just the prescription then. In which case, I have addressed that point, more than adequately, already.

Has the prescription record, that Llosa & Wertheim claim to have reviewed, ever been made available to the public? Have you seen the prescription or does it remain just an 'Internet story'?

Do we know for certain that the pharmaceuticals were not prescribed for legitimate therapeutic use, based on a genuinely diagnosed medical condition?

Given this revelation came about so late on in Holyfield's career, more than 10 years after he would have most likely have benefited from such substances, why do you not treat with equal suspicion the fact that no other records were found - just this one lone prescription?

Maybe that's because I don't know. However, I do know that hair-loss can occur at a young age and be relatively rapid. The correlation in the timing between these physical changes may be connected by a single cause or they may each have separate causes - OR, the one cause might be something other than PED-related.

Back to the subjective world of 'likelihood' again then... ... ... ... ...

So "

This content is protected

"? I'd love to see your workings out for that calculation
And, "

This content is protected

This content is protected

We now know, through more recent studies, that the overexertion some athletes can't help but partake in (Holyfield being one, who trained extremely hard and always appeared to be in shape), can cause temporary and, if not addressed quickly enough, permanent damage to the heart.

We also know that certain types of exercise (weight training being one of them, along with other strength-training workouts) can boost testosterone levels, as can legal supplements. Holyfield did weight train.

How do you know for sure that naturally boosted testosterone did not play a part in Holyfield's physical changes?
How do you know for sure that he didn't cause damage to his heart, through overexertion in training?

The investigations and the raid are some way in the future and, so far, I am not seeing much about it, other than a tale told by two journalists, who refer to the DEA and a prescription. How does that story trace back, over 10 years or more, to the point in time you are alleging that Holyfield was on PEDs and undergoing physical changes.

I think questioning this huge gap in the timeframe is more than reasonable.

As previously mentioned, the article you cited, in regards to "Signature Pharmacy", didn't even contain Holyfield's name. What other material, relating to the Signature Pharmacy scandal, which implicates Holyfield, do you have?

Again, government documentation on these scandals would be premium. Do you have any I can refer to?

See above - and ego has nothing to do with it. It's about drawing conclusions based on both valid and reliable evidence.

If that's all you've got and there's no additional documents or relevant, verifiable events, then there's still no solid case to answer. If you have more than just the chit chat of a couple of journalists, e.g. formalized evidence and outcomes from the DEA's investigation into Evander Holyfield, then I'm all ears.

Seriously - give me the truth and I'm on board.

Right now - it has all the appearances of a Bandwagon.

Ah! That old chestnut!!

 

Yes, of course it was published in a magaazine, but it can easily be doctored after that.

But it isn't in either case representative of how even CV Holy looked in the ring. You know this as well as I do.

I've kept repeating this a number of times now, so I think I'll step out here.

 

Steroids

 

We agree on the fact that things could be naturally explained, but given the totality of physical evidence the odds are against it.
Mainly the heart problem-when he had none before-& how rapid the weight loss is.
But the real clincher is the investigations & lab raids related to BALCO & signature Pharmacy.
Especially how they had a laughably similar name & address to Holyfield's in BALCO-& when they called the listed phone number Holfyfield answered, smh!

I actually have been saying that we have no good way to know whether a significant minority or almost everyone juiced.
Just reasoning it out absent evidence, I do not think we can compute how folks weighed the relative advantages & disadvantages competitively or if caught & health concerns & matters of honor & principle & fair play...It seems unreasonable to assume that few chose the path of legality & fair play.

That said it could be either way. Or maybe the majority at least dabbled, but many fewer transformed their body & performances to the degree of a Holyfield.

We really do not know.

 

Man_Machine, I needed to leave out your words in order to get under the length limit. I trust you will see this, & know I continue to address your arguments point by point.

I believe the amount of evidence you require & the degree of skepticism you have exceeds what is reasonable to believe Holyfield juiced.
Whatever else the investigators discovered does not matter.
We do not need to see the prescription to trust that if a lab infamous & established to supply steroids & HGH to many athletes has him listed under a thinly disguised/barely altered address & name, & if he answers that phone call-yes that makes him extremely likely to have been a customer.

There is no reason to believe I have any new information I have been withholding.
No more is required. But you do have a fair point when you now bring up if Holyfield was a serial user.
Besides that it is very unlikely that he contracted with among the biggest suppliers only briefly, while having associations with long term juicers who set up many others-it is not a "chestnut" about Lee Haney, but if he *only* had hom as a trainer I would not call that definitive-& that it is fair to point to the odds against having very sudden both heart problems & baldness for the first time ever after he got big...

There is the other incident I have been referring to, his link again with PEDs in another Government action. Again: Holyfield was again linked to HGH in September 2007, when his name came up following a raid of Signature Pharmacy in Orlando, Florida.[url][53][/url] Signature Pharmacy was under investigation for illegally supplying several professional athletes with steroids and HGH.[url][54][/url]

If I create a thread about this issue & give various options about whether he used PEDs in a significant way that helped transform his body & physical assets, providing choices from highly unlikely to we have no idea to highly likely...I'll bet that at least 4 out of 5 would find it from likely to highly likely he used.
This is despite there being much admiration for his skills, toughness & achievements.
And some do not object to PED usage.

It is not reasonable to expect someone to produce or that there is any scientific formula to divine what one claims is likely or unlikely. There is none; still many people use PEDs & cheat, others do not.
Above someone points to Holyfield's baldness coming on between a couple fights 3 months apart.

This combined with the sudden heart problems are remain highly unlikely.
You argue for athletes with intense workout programs sometimes getting cardiac issues.
Since you made the claim, if you would like to maintain that belief & argue for it, the burden of proof is upon you.
I submit that the percentage of young athletes who suddenly develop heart problems-meaning also never had any cardiac issues-from working out is *very* low indeed.
It also is highly unusual in boxing.

Next, you do not intend to throw in an irrelevant distraction, but Holyfield raising T-levels naturally is one.
You ask "how do you know he did not raise testosterone levels through working out"?
I have lifted weights for decades. The answer here is quite basic.
First whether he did or not does not address if he used PEDs-& the investigative evidence is overwhelming,
Next, of course he raised levels of productive hormones & got stronger in part from lifting!
Any even partially effective program does.

But that only takes you so far.
What athletes take-unless it is "micro-dosing", which still can have a large effect & tends to not be detected-strongly tends to be some number of TIMES what they could possibly ever create through diet & exercise.
We are talking exponentially more androgen circulating in the body-& effects that can dwarf what any natural athlete achieves. Oh, & even guys like Holyfield who cannot benefit from having the extreme levels of mass-not only get stronger, more energy & aggression-but things like the ability to quickly 8recover* from workouts so you can hone your body again is a large benefit.

I am speaking now in general terms about what is done.
Guys who take steroids & HGH overwhelmingly "stack" them with other drugs.
Including Insulin Growth Factor, which like when your body releases this in normal quantities to process sugar for energy-really potentiates the muscle building potential of androgens & related drugs!

FYI, besides allowing much more total muscle & developing/synthesizing it much faster than otherwise possible...normally at low body fat you cannot maintain as much lean muscle mass as if you have average or above body fat.

That is why you can have some guys like Ronnie Coleman, under 6' (he was a max of 5' 11"/180 cm) in competition shape (meaning south of 5% body fat), nearly nude, minimal food in the system soon before one takes the stage-weigh ~300 lbs.!

Under the above conditions & measurements of height, fat, food, & even with among the largest skeletal/bone structure you could find in such a man...
*No natural human* would weigh more than perhaps somewhere in the 220's!!

Edit: running the numbers, even with the largest bone structure someone of around average height is likely to ever have, the super-lean, non-bulked with food weight of someone is extremely unlikely to exceed around 210-215 lbs.
I suppose someone could *also* have disproportionately huge width of shoulders & pelvis + long muscle bellies-which would provide more surface area for adding muscle-but this combination would be exceedingly rare.

Perhaps the more extreme specimens of Neanderthals had such traits, lol!

There are tons of other strength training & natural potential details on this website, which also represents folks with generally above average genetic potential & some folks likely did use PEDs in the past-doing so can permanently increase your capacity even when later clean.
Best to dial 5% off of the results for what is realistic to achieve. And realize that most people somewhat underestimate their body fat, thus overestimate their current lean body mass. Meaning also many have more lifetime potential than they calculate if they put in the wrong BF levels! [url]http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html[/url].


Oh, the fact that the evidence & investigations were some years after his presumed use of illegal PEDs is not a reasonable objection.
If it was, then nobody could prove anything-either about the guilt of men or the nature of the universe & what happened in ancient times or before. It is the quality of the evidence that matters.

I did not see you previously mention that the signature pharmacy issue did not contain Holyfield's name.
When I click on the citation, you are correct that it is not included there. But that is a single article, alluding to athletes in a few sports like wrestling & football, naming several of many others.
Do you think that the Wikipedia article is *wrong* that his name did not come up in this investigation?

But a simple Google search shows they just did not use a good citation article.
There are numerous accounts of Holyfield's ties to PEDs & related supplies, such as injection material, the drug "Glukor", HGH & steroids...The NY Post article does clarify that the Signature investigation showed he was linked to another Pharmacy he picked the junk up from, named Applied.
[url]https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=holyfield+and+signature+pharmacy[/url]

If you explore the hyperlinks from the search results, you will see that this is not about mere gossip between journalists. They were reporting how Holyfield was documented to be a client of PEDs. This does not even include the BALCO evidence.

I do respect that you do not just go with the masses. Doubtless you rightly believe that it is a logical fallacy that just because most believe something does not make it true. Whether folks believe that say evolution exists or the world is roughly round does not provide evidence for the veracity, nor make it so.

I am just saying that in a case like this you can say that more than adequate evidence is out there that establishes it is highly likely Holyfield both used a significant amount of PEDs & got a significant beneficial effect.
Thanks for listening![/QUOTE]

 

Why, when that was the case in most other sports? Where there were actual testing and a risk of getting caught.

And during these years when we know steroids were widespread in other sports, HWs just by a strange coincidence happened to become much bigger and more muscular? Guys like Smith, Bruno, Ruddock and Morrison didn't exist twenty years earlier. By the early/mid 80's they were staring to pop up like mushrooms. Just another funny coincidence?

 

It is funny that on the one hand I am arguing with someone else in Talmudic Detail about how it strains credulity that with all the circumstantial evidence beyond physical changes & problems but the actual government investigations that Holyfield certainly juiced his way to greater size strength & success...
And on the other hand I am saying that it is unreasonable to assume that almost all boxers used drugs absent just broad reasoning, lol!

I do agree with you about the Holyfield photo being deceptive though...

First, I question the premise. You need to be more specific than steroids were "widespread" in other sports. That could mean a HUGE number of things. Including that many took them, which could be far short of even approaching half ever dabbling in them.
There are many baseball players who bat over .300, or hit over 35 home runs a year-especially during the steroid era-but even then it was not nearly most.

Let alone "the vast majority".
It is broadly similar to other sports. You are just incorrect that the frequency of PED usage, casually or more intensely over some time, has even ever been established in any of these major sports.
We just do not know how many cheated & lied.

As for the examples you cited, it was rare, not non-existent, for men of that muscular size to exist. Primo Carnera & Abe Simon were much earlier examples.
But let us stipulate that in this case you are overwhelmingly correct-it was rare.

It is not black & white. It is not just a coincidence. In some cases guys definitely juiced!
But you should be aware that only in the 1980's was weight training-& attendant nutritional efforts to get more muscle mass-even considered valuable in boxing & baseball.

So Jose Canseco could be the Godfather of PEDs in baseball.
Although we still have no decent idea how common they ever were!
And if he never existed or nobody juiced, the average size would not have been so large.
But clearly even natural, the average man would have more muscle. Especially if they still had certain rule changes that favored power, the ball, stadium dimensions, lack of shame for strikeouts...Just like bigger gloves, only 12 round fights, & grappling unfortunately favored or allowed...

And the development of better training methods for big guys favored the evolution of large powerful men who were harder to dent but tended to have less endurance & workrate.

And yeah, allowed PEDs to become somewhat prevalent.
It still does not show whether say approaching 20% or 90 some % hardly dabbled-or used seriously to great effect.
Or of course something in between.