Wait so the Easter Bunny isn’t coming?
[quote]rainjack wrote:
KSman wrote:
5.
AAS will make your testicles into tinycles.
This does not have to happen… hCG
This is an indirect effect, but the press will not care about spitting hairs. So not a myth.
Maybe I am a freak - but I have been on AAS for the betterpart of 3 years, and my testicles are the same sizw as they were when I started.
I think testicle size is just a matter of pride. If you need the extra reinforcement, then get some hcg.
I have yet to see any applicable use for the shit, other than it makes for bigger balls. [/quote]
I think you are a freak. If I was on for basically 3 years straight, mine would be tiny. As for pride who cares, big balls never did anything for me except get sat on and cause severe distress.
[quote]FuriousGeorge wrote:
dean12345 wrote:
STEROIDS MAKE YOU A BETTER ATHLETE
This pisses me off more than anything. Athletes who are competent, hard working and intelligent in the areas of diet and training utilize the muscle building, tissue repair and strength increasing properties of AAS (HGH, Peptides, insulin all included as well).
If you take a shitty athlete with shitty work ethic you don’t get jack out of any cycle.
If you take a great athlete with shitty work ethic you come out with the same athlete, MAYBE a little leaner, little stronger.
If you take a great athlete with impressive work ethic and knowledge of training and diet, then your going to have a bigger, faster, and stronger athlete than before. Using new physical tools to apply athletically.
Drugs do not put players in the NFL. They keep them around longer.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, assholes who use steroids as a Magic bullet in place of knowledge and hard work aren’t getting any advantage anyway.
Being born with NFL or MLB genetics is the same as playing the lotto, its not up to you. Someone who lakes the natural athleticism and uses ass busting work and AAS to catch up to the luckier guys is more deserving than someone who has talent they don’t have to work for.
Because in the end, AAS users will still be dwarfed by the better athletes at some point. This is how I see it anyway.
-Rant Over-
Look Clemens nobody is accusing you here, just let it die…j/k
I have to call bullshit on this though. steroids most definitely make you a better athlete. Why the fuck would olympic/pro athletes take them if they didn’t. I think you need to define “makes you a better athlete” if you mean coordination or the ability to make a jump shot I don’t think it will do crap.
If you mean the ability to win through improved strength and endurance I think it is a very big factor. It won’t make a huge difference but in a game of inches or seconds it is the difference between 1st place or last place, a home run or a fly out, a touchdown or a goaline stop. It’s not going to make a shitty athlete an olympian but it can give that little competitive edge to someone that is the difference. [/quote]
I agree with you, this is mainly the point I was trying to convey. It gives an edge in physical aspects of strength and size. But the “athletic” attributes are not affected, obviously. Within the realm of competition an athlete is able to compete at, aas will give him an advantage, but its not going to put a division 3 athlete in a div 1 program.
There are things to consider though
-
A great athlete, who lacks size to compete at another level: AAS can grant size to an already good athlete, giving him a chance to compete at his athletic ability with larger athletes.
-
Raw physical statistics: An athlete is attempting to walk on to a college team. With aas he will have a better bench, 40, powerclean etc. So this may convince a coach to let him walk on and try out, but if he can’t play ball, it’s ot gonna matter. This also could go hand in hand with combines and raising ones stock.
So like you I agree it can give a physical edge, but not enough to propel an athlete out of his realm of physical ability.
I don’t know if any of this makes sense, it’s 5 in the morning and I am tired.
[quote]dean12345 wrote:
FuriousGeorge wrote:
dean12345 wrote:
STEROIDS MAKE YOU A BETTER ATHLETE
This pisses me off more than anything. Athletes who are competent, hard working and intelligent in the areas of diet and training utilize the muscle building, tissue repair and strength increasing properties of AAS (HGH, Peptides, insulin all included as well).
If you take a shitty athlete with shitty work ethic you don’t get jack out of any cycle.
If you take a great athlete with shitty work ethic you come out with the same athlete, MAYBE a little leaner, little stronger.
If you take a great athlete with impressive work ethic and knowledge of training and diet, then your going to have a bigger, faster, and stronger athlete than before. Using new physical tools to apply athletically.
Drugs do not put players in the NFL. They keep them around longer.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, assholes who use steroids as a Magic bullet in place of knowledge and hard work aren’t getting any advantage anyway.
Being born with NFL or MLB genetics is the same as playing the lotto, its not up to you. Someone who lakes the natural athleticism and uses ass busting work and AAS to catch up to the luckier guys is more deserving than someone who has talent they don’t have to work for.
Because in the end, AAS users will still be dwarfed by the better athletes at some point. This is how I see it anyway.
-Rant Over-
Look Clemens nobody is accusing you here, just let it die…j/k
I have to call bullshit on this though. steroids most definitely make you a better athlete. Why the fuck would olympic/pro athletes take them if they didn’t. I think you need to define “makes you a better athlete” if you mean coordination or the ability to make a jump shot I don’t think it will do crap.
If you mean the ability to win through improved strength and endurance I think it is a very big factor. It won’t make a huge difference but in a game of inches or seconds it is the difference between 1st place or last place, a home run or a fly out, a touchdown or a goaline stop. It’s not going to make a shitty athlete an olympian but it can give that little competitive edge to someone that is the difference.
I agree with you, this is mainly the point I was trying to convey. It gives an edge in physical aspects of strength and size. But the “athletic” attributes are not affected, obviously. Within the realm of competition an athlete is able to compete at, aas will give him an advantage, but its not going to put a division 3 athlete in a div 1 program.
There are things to consider though
-
A great athlete, who lacks size to compete at another level: AAS can grant size to an already good athlete, giving him a chance to compete at his athletic ability with larger athletes.
-
Raw physical statistics: An athlete is attempting to walk on to a college team. With aas he will have a better bench, 40, powerclean etc. So this may convince a coach to let him walk on and try out, but if he can’t play ball, it’s ot gonna matter. This also could go hand in hand with combines and raising ones stock.
So like you I agree it can give a physical edge, but not enough to propel an athlete out of his realm of physical ability.
I don’t know if any of this makes sense, it’s 5 in the morning and I am tired.
[/quote]
No you are bang on the money there, I may have added a good deal of mass and increased my strength using AAS, but I still drop the fucking ball from time to time, no compound is going to help me with that!
another myth: test is excellent for mass gains but an effective cutting cycle requires additional compounds (some sort of stack).
In truth, you can easily drop fat while only using test (and an AI) provided you know what you’re doing.
[quote]dwilliams wrote:
Test-flu is not a myth. I have gotten flu like symptoms for a day or so after the first injection of a cycle. Achy and feeling like I’m just about to get sick without actually getting sick. I think that it is caused by your body treating the 1 or 2 ml of foreign substance that you have just injected like an infection. It’s more like injection-flu.[/quote]
flu like symptoms is a defence mech. from wich your body is fighting off a foriegn substance thats why it is usualy the first shot only… just my opinion…
As for the HCG question…
I’d just stick to using it during the cycle. Should lessen suppression and make post cycle a lot smoother.
[quote]dean12345 wrote:
FuriousGeorge wrote:
dean12345 wrote:
STEROIDS MAKE YOU A BETTER ATHLETE
This pisses me off more than anything. Athletes who are competent, hard working and intelligent in the areas of diet and training utilize the muscle building, tissue repair and strength increasing properties of AAS (HGH, Peptides, insulin all included as well).
If you take a shitty athlete with shitty work ethic you don’t get jack out of any cycle.
If you take a great athlete with shitty work ethic you come out with the same athlete, MAYBE a little leaner, little stronger.
If you take a great athlete with impressive work ethic and knowledge of training and diet, then your going to have a bigger, faster, and stronger athlete than before. Using new physical tools to apply athletically.
Drugs do not put players in the NFL. They keep them around longer.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, assholes who use steroids as a Magic bullet in place of knowledge and hard work aren’t getting any advantage anyway.
Being born with NFL or MLB genetics is the same as playing the lotto, its not up to you. Someone who lakes the natural athleticism and uses ass busting work and AAS to catch up to the luckier guys is more deserving than someone who has talent they don’t have to work for.
Because in the end, AAS users will still be dwarfed by the better athletes at some point. This is how I see it anyway.
-Rant Over-
Look Clemens nobody is accusing you here, just let it die…j/k
I have to call bullshit on this though. steroids most definitely make you a better athlete. Why the fuck would olympic/pro athletes take them if they didn’t. I think you need to define “makes you a better athlete” if you mean coordination or the ability to make a jump shot I don’t think it will do crap.
If you mean the ability to win through improved strength and endurance I think it is a very big factor. It won’t make a huge difference but in a game of inches or seconds it is the difference between 1st place or last place, a home run or a fly out, a touchdown or a goaline stop. It’s not going to make a shitty athlete an olympian but it can give that little competitive edge to someone that is the difference.
I agree with you, this is mainly the point I was trying to convey. It gives an edge in physical aspects of strength and size. But the “athletic” attributes are not affected, obviously. Within the realm of competition an athlete is able to compete at, aas will give him an advantage, but its not going to put a division 3 athlete in a div 1 program.
There are things to consider though
-
A great athlete, who lacks size to compete at another level: AAS can grant size to an already good athlete, giving him a chance to compete at his athletic ability with larger athletes.
-
Raw physical statistics: An athlete is attempting to walk on to a college team. With aas he will have a better bench, 40, powerclean etc. So this may convince a coach to let him walk on and try out, but if he can’t play ball, it’s ot gonna matter. This also could go hand in hand with combines and raising ones stock.
So like you I agree it can give a physical edge, but not enough to propel an athlete out of his realm of physical ability.
I don’t know if any of this makes sense, it’s 5 in the morning and I am tired.
[/quote]
Who cares. No one is up and arms because they think steroids turn shitty athletes into good athletes and propel them out of their realm of physical possibility. The issue is that they give an unfair advantage to elite athletes who choose to use over elite athletes who choose not too. Or rather, in today’s world, effectively deny the athletes the personal choice.
Because they almost need to use to be competitive at that level. I have problems with this. However, I don’t think the response of Congress or others has been appropriate but reaking of bullshit and ass-backwards.
I am all for intelligent use of steroids. But I think there are enough issues with them and it’s enough of a fundamental choice that it should BE an ACTUAL choice in the highest echelons of sports. The way current testing and policies are, it’s not. Instead of truly stringent requirements that would make it impossible to use, they generally sit with their thumbs up their asses but occaasionally decide to target the high-profile, elite ahtlete and fuck them over.
So, athletes hedge their bets and use because they have to in order to be competitive and chances are they won’t get caught. But some do. And then the ignorant public wags their finger and shakes their head, not realizing the truth of the matter.
Greatest myth out there: 17AA orals will destroy your liver.