Everybody's on steroids?

Donaire is the only one I would bet money on.

 

His ears are chemically enhanced. Dead giveaway.

 

Yeah, it makes no sense for anyone to fight an opponent who is suspected of being enhanced and not do your best to even the odds.

 

So when Greg LeMond was sacked for not taking PEDs when asked by his team, was actually taking PED's but just chose to get kicked of the best team in cycling at the time and the money that came with that to join a small minor team where he had a smaller chance of victory? That doesn't make sense to me.

LeMond has never failed a test or even been accused by other cyclists of doping to my knowledge. People saw what he achieved and now speculate he must of been doping because it's easier to believe that, especially in a sport where doping is so common at all levels than believe he was simply that good.

Yeah today's athletes maybe cleaner, not doping to the same level, because they have to be more careful due to the anti doping protocols for the most part being better, though of course in some countries like Russia they are probably still doping to crazy levels and hiding it and then being more careful when the leave Russia. Same in China too where it's highly likely there is a state funded doping program. Kenya too is another country which came close to being kicked out of the Olympics because they basically were not testing their athletes enough while in Kenya. So yeah athletes maybe cleaner now but I would argue not that much cleaner from certain countries.

I remember Blake and when he was seen as a threat to Bolt. I think you are exaggerating the difference PED's make, not enough PED's in the world to make Bolt run under 9 seconds lol, even if he was clean which is a big if. Jamaica have had some high profile doping cases and Blake and Bolt trained under the same coach, so I suspect Bolt was using PED's. We'll probably know for sure at some point as they keep historical samples and test them decades later now, so as the testing improves they'll catch more cheaters.

PED's make a difference but they won't make an average athlete an exceptional one. No matter how many PED's I take, I will never dunk a basketball lol. PED's won't turn me into Jordan, fact is two people can look the same but one can be vastly more naturally talented than another in a given sport. So I don't find the idea of genetic freaks existing and just being on another level that outlandish. 13 year old , nearly 200lbs Tyson looked not to different to the Tyson who won a title against Berbick, was Tyson doping at 13?

I just find it hard to believe everyone is doping in every sport that's a sweeping generalisation. I get why people think that because doping is so prevalent in sports but maybe I'm being an eternal optimist, I just want to believe some are clean, at least in some sports.

 

It's difficult to say for sure, most wrongly assume it's about gaining muscle, it isn't it's about quicker recovery and in boxing that's going to be an important factor. I think it is easier for the elite in sport as they can afford the resources to do it properly and evade (mostly) detection.
A mistake often made is also the "body beautiful" myth, the likes of Fury and Miller popped and both are butter balls.
I can't really assign a percentage because I don't know, despite reading a lot on the subject and being interested in it for a long time.
I think it was probably more prevalent in previous decades, or they are taking smaller doses as not to be so obvious.

 

Well Crawford is with Victor Conte what does that tell you

 

the richer the country, the more athletes doping and the better the dope. drug testing always lags behind development of new undetectable drugs. I used to work with a bodybuilder juiced to the gills who never failed a test.

 

I actually agree with a lot of what you said in this response, so I'll focus on the disagreements.

Using the fact LeMond never failed a drug test as evidence to why he hasn't taken PED's is odd considering Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test. Plus like I said, considering that entire TdF's have been declared without winners because so many people were known to have taken drugs, it's statistically unlikely to be point of impossibility to believe that LeMond is clean.

The position of burden of proof in these situations isn't based on accusation, it's based on likelihood. Imagine seeing a lady that smelled like booze, had a family history of alcoholism, had been arrested multiple times for drunk driving, had cirrhosis of the liver and had a child with fetal alcohol syndrome. Is the burden of proof on me to prove this lady is an alcoholic? Nay it's on her to prove she's not. Likewise, the burden of proof isn't on the accusers to prove that the Armstrong's, Bolts and Barry Bonds of the world's that are very likely on drugs, are on drugs. It's on the defenders to prove that the person who is very likely on drugs, ISN'T on drugs.

"Was Mike Tyson doping at 13? This is another thing that people who (no offence) don't know a lot about PEDs say. They assume that it's self evident that young teenagers and kids don't take PEDs for some reason, when we know for a fact that a lot of Olympians and high level athletes started taking them in high school, like Marion Jones for example. I personally don't think he started taking them at such a young age but it's not unlikely, nor would it have been difficult considering his upbringing and drug use.

Besides being 5'10 and 200lbs at 13 doesn't mean much considering Tyson was 5'10 and 215lbs as a grown man. He just grew early, doesn't mean he's any more genetically freaky than late bloomers.

In regards to the effects of PEDs being overstated taking PED's takes you from the 99th percentile to the 99.999th percentile. In sprinting it can be the difference between a 10.2 and a 9.8, which is the difference between never qualifying for the Olympics and being a top 20 Olympian in your sport. For Barry Bonds it was the difference between being the best in the world and being the best of all time. Furthermore PED's literally improve your skills and can make you learn things faster and remember them for longer. They can rewire your brain. So when people say "PED's can't give you good footwork" or something like that it's literally not true lol. Chess Players, Musicians and Surgeons amongst others take them for this reason.

Last thing, considering sports and PEDs have existed since classical antiquity, why are you against them in the first place? PED's don't create anymore of an unfair advantage than anything else in sports.

 

The way I see it….if you take a vitamin C pill is that to be considered natural?……

 

In combat sports those caught using performance enhancement drugs should be bad for life

 

Lebron maybe

 

Right up there with body building

 

In athletics and swimming you look for athletes who suddenly, after years of doing every legitimate thing already, take a big step in improvement and how often a positive test follows. The personal times recorded for their event helps flag these things but in boxing we don't have that luxury.

I'm a huge fan of Zhang but is he too good to be true at 40, when in 2012 when he was around 30, he was so ordinary?

 

thats hilarious

 

How? He spends half a million on his body. Let's not forget that Crawford is with Victor Conte but none of you guys say anything about that