----- Original Message -----
From: Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I tend to agree with this point of view .. That the benefits of drug use
is
> in the training room/practice track .. And if this is the case then my
> original question still stands .. What does this translate to on the
> competitive track ??
Discussions I have had with powerlifters and bodybuilders both on and off
the internet give me the impression that drugs with anabolic effects
(testosterone, HGH, steroids) are most effective at building muscle mass,
reasonably effective at promoting muscular repair and recovery between
workouts, and least effective at enhancing absolute strength and power.
Bodybuilders, who as a class are the heaviest drug (ab)users, display
impressive muscular hypertrophy, and while strong, are nowhere as near as
strong as powerlifters or olympic lifters (who are also often competing in
weight classes) -- or even elite track athletes.
To paraphrase a powerlifter speaking about drug use in his sport, if
steroids were the sole key to absolute speed, elite bodybuilders would be
winning the 100m in unheard of times.
(With stimulants like ephedrine, amphetamines, caffeine etc the effect
during competition is clear.)
Anabolics enable track athletes to train harder by speeding up recovery
between workouts. Training harder and remaining injury free for longer is
easier with steroids, definitely. But I don't think the top speeds attained
by drugged athletes are entirely impossible to attain drug-free, they would
just be run a lot more infrequently. It takes a lot more luck to train
extremely hard, run fast races, and recover and stay injury free for
extended periods without dope.
It's easy to give personal favourites the benefit of the doubt, but I have
always found it hard to believe that floaters like Obadele Thompson or the
young Carl Lewis for instance, were on drugs, and they have certainly run
fantastic times. Talent, training, and luck help a great deal.
Cheers,
Elliott
