Performance Enhancing Drugs

mx 219 wrote:

Exactly needs to be as fair as possible for EVERYONE...including no. 20 and 40 to the gate..They are already down on performance of bike to the...

Exactly needs to be as fair as possible for EVERYONE...including no. 20 and 40 to the gate..They are already down on performance of bike to the factory guys, do they really need any more disadvantages.

I think its funny how the "insiders" dont find it a big deal...its cheating, especially if there are rules against it, which there are no?

Mod Killer wrote:

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this...

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this thread, there are so many angles and variables that one must consider with this topic. perspective is everything here.


im not sure if there are rules written that ban some of the more extreme stuff that goes on. as far as i know, its just a few recreational drugs that are banned.

ive been told that IV re-hydration between moto's is banned, but ur a fool if youre not doing it. and that isnt even a health risk. but technically its cheating. some here will agree, others like myself simply call it being more competitive than the next guy.

and even if the more serious stuff is banned, its isnt REALISTICALLY tested for so it isnt exactly illegal. its pseudo-illegal. i know im talking in semantics but its the truth. and i believe this threads initial question.

the ama needs to just try and police the technical side of things with regards to legal bikes. they cannot even do that properly. and that's worlds easier and cheaper to police than PED's.

raceface brings up valid points, but the whole "comptetitive balance" argument is flawed. for the very reasons i outlined in my initial post and expanded upon later, and also because of what nerd is talking about. WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

are we to ban the use of oxygen chambers that riders can sit in to simulate high altitude riding in prep for the colorado national? its expensive. it could easily be rationalized as a unfair competitive advantage by some here. im told that its not a health risk yet has nearly the same performance effects as doping so whats the difference? and if we are going to ban high altitude simulations, should we also ban high altitude training altogether?.....hell, for that matter, should private tracks be banned? they provide a serious advantage that no privateer can compete with. some of you may not like the outlook of myself or others on this topic, but you have to admit, the competitive balance debate is seriously flawed.

unless a rider is sacrificing as much as lance, jordan, RC, or dungey did/do in their careers for as long as they did/currently do.......they have no right to complain about competitive imbalance. the biggest competitive imbalance in this sport lie between the average riders ears. not wallet.

we are going further and further into the grey areas of this topic, and that grey area is growing which is fine, but perspective isnt so this discussion is turning into a convoluted mess imo.



and for trey's mom. i apologize if you think i was implicating your son. i sincerely mean that. the last thing i'd do is discredit your kids efforts. im very aware of just what a huge accomplishment his outdoor lites title is. in a perfect world, we could discuss the topic of this thread openly and rationally and he'd get the credit he deserves for that title in that he overcame more than just a huge points deficit against a very talented pourcel. imo, trey's championship that year is arguably the most amazing feat in the last ten years of this sport in my personal opinion.

Nerd wrote:

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and...

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and practice time riders get - like they do in other motorsports - and really level it.

Otherwise, all you're doing is taking a stance against something that frankly you don't even understand because someone once told you it's bad.

Mod Killer wrote:

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this...

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this thread, there are so many angles and variables that one must consider with this topic. perspective is everything here.


im not sure if there are rules written that ban some of the more extreme stuff that goes on. as far as i know, its just a few recreational drugs that are banned.

ive been told that IV re-hydration between moto's is banned, but ur a fool if youre not doing it. and that isnt even a health risk. but technically its cheating. some here will agree, others like myself simply call it being more competitive than the next guy.

and even if the more serious stuff is banned, its isnt REALISTICALLY tested for so it isnt exactly illegal. its pseudo-illegal. i know im talking in semantics but its the truth. and i believe this threads initial question.

the ama needs to just try and police the technical side of things with regards to legal bikes. they cannot even do that properly. and that's worlds easier and cheaper to police than PED's.

raceface brings up valid points, but the whole "comptetitive balance" argument is flawed. for the very reasons i outlined in my initial post and expanded upon later, and also because of what nerd is talking about. WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

are we to ban the use of oxygen chambers that riders can sit in to simulate high altitude riding in prep for the colorado national? its expensive. it could easily be rationalized as a unfair competitive advantage by some here. im told that its not a health risk yet has nearly the same performance effects as doping so whats the difference? and if we are going to ban high altitude simulations, should we also ban high altitude training altogether?.....hell, for that matter, should private tracks be banned? they provide a serious advantage that no privateer can compete with. some of you may not like the outlook of myself or others on this topic, but you have to admit, the competitive balance debate is seriously flawed.

unless a rider is sacrificing as much as lance, jordan, RC, or dungey did/do in their careers for as long as they did/currently do.......they have no right to complain about competitive imbalance. the biggest competitive imbalance in this sport lie between the average riders ears. not wallet.

we are going further and further into the grey areas of this topic, and that grey area is growing which is fine, but perspective isnt so this discussion is turning into a convoluted mess imo.



and for trey's mom. i apologize if you think i was implicating your son. i sincerely mean that. the last thing i'd do is discredit your kids efforts. im very aware of just what a huge accomplishment his outdoor lites title is. in a perfect world, we could discuss the topic of this thread openly and rationally and he'd get the credit he deserves for that title in that he overcame more than just a huge points deficit against a very talented pourcel. imo, trey's championship that year is arguably the most amazing feat in the last ten years of this sport in my personal opinion.

Nerd wrote:

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and...

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and practice time riders get - like they do in other motorsports - and really level it.

Otherwise, all you're doing is taking a stance against something that frankly you don't even understand because someone once told you it's bad.

SuperMario wrote:

Its pretty easy to regulate a F-1 testing, since they need to rent a circuit to test on. How would you stop anyone from testing, as...

Its pretty easy to regulate a F-1 testing, since they need to rent a circuit to test on.

How would you stop anyone from testing, as they can go anywhere to ride.

Nerd wrote:

"So an atmosphere that promotes endangering your health to remain competitive is what we're after?" Ummm... You just described motocross racing perfectly. Nice work. "An advantage...

"So an atmosphere that promotes endangering your health to remain competitive is what we're after?"

Ummm... You just described motocross racing perfectly. Nice work.

"An advantage is a factory bike or a trainer. An unfair advantage is being allowed to have a bike that is 10 lbs. below the legal minimum while everyone else has to be above 220 lbs."

What about the fact that factory bikes are 220 lbs., and everyone else's is 15-20 pounds heavier than that?

RaceFace wrote:

I knew it was pointless to engage you in any fashion. You're right, PED's are a wonderful addition to the sport. Why put any effort into...

I knew it was pointless to engage you in any fashion. You're right, PED's are a wonderful addition to the sport. Why put any effort into doing what is best for the sport? Sticking your head in the sand is always the best way to handle problems.

Bleh, might as well eliminate factory bikes then! Really? That is rational reasoning to you?

Nerd wrote:

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and...

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and practice time riders get - like they do in other motorsports - and really level it.

Otherwise, all you're doing is taking a stance against something that frankly you don't even understand because someone once told you it's bad.

Mod Killer wrote:

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this...

thats not the case. nerd is simply bringing up the valid point of "where do you draw the line?" and as many have said in this thread, there are so many angles and variables that one must consider with this topic. perspective is everything here.


im not sure if there are rules written that ban some of the more extreme stuff that goes on. as far as i know, its just a few recreational drugs that are banned.

ive been told that IV re-hydration between moto's is banned, but ur a fool if youre not doing it. and that isnt even a health risk. but technically its cheating. some here will agree, others like myself simply call it being more competitive than the next guy.

and even if the more serious stuff is banned, its isnt REALISTICALLY tested for so it isnt exactly illegal. its pseudo-illegal. i know im talking in semantics but its the truth. and i believe this threads initial question.

the ama needs to just try and police the technical side of things with regards to legal bikes. they cannot even do that properly. and that's worlds easier and cheaper to police than PED's.

raceface brings up valid points, but the whole "comptetitive balance" argument is flawed. for the very reasons i outlined in my initial post and expanded upon later, and also because of what nerd is talking about. WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?

are we to ban the use of oxygen chambers that riders can sit in to simulate high altitude riding in prep for the colorado national? its expensive. it could easily be rationalized as a unfair competitive advantage by some here. im told that its not a health risk yet has nearly the same performance effects as doping so whats the difference? and if we are going to ban high altitude simulations, should we also ban high altitude training altogether?.....hell, for that matter, should private tracks be banned? they provide a serious advantage that no privateer can compete with. some of you may not like the outlook of myself or others on this topic, but you have to admit, the competitive balance debate is seriously flawed.

unless a rider is sacrificing as much as lance, jordan, RC, or dungey did/do in their careers for as long as they did/currently do.......they have no right to complain about competitive imbalance. the biggest competitive imbalance in this sport lie between the average riders ears. not wallet.

we are going further and further into the grey areas of this topic, and that grey area is growing which is fine, but perspective isnt so this discussion is turning into a convoluted mess imo.



and for trey's mom. i apologize if you think i was implicating your son. i sincerely mean that. the last thing i'd do is discredit your kids efforts. im very aware of just what a huge accomplishment his outdoor lites title is. in a perfect world, we could discuss the topic of this thread openly and rationally and he'd get the credit he deserves for that title in that he overcame more than just a huge points deficit against a very talented pourcel. imo, trey's championship that year is arguably the most amazing feat in the last ten years of this sport in my personal opinion.

RaceFace wrote:

The line is drawn at performance enhancing drugs. It is actually pretty easy where the line is drawn. There are plenty of advantages, some involving individual...

The line is drawn at performance enhancing drugs. It is actually pretty easy where the line is drawn.

There are plenty of advantages, some involving individual traits. Some people have ridiculous efficiency in their body's ability to oxygenate the blood, other's have the ability to clear lactic acid from their blood more efficiently, some have bigger hands and don't suffer arm pump. Such advantages exist and can't be changed.

I agree that this is the sanctioning body's repsonsibility and they already have cheating going on that they don't curtail. I'm more railing against the attitude of "who cares?" about the possible existence of it (in the sport). If it is as prominent as some say, it will come out at some point and the whole sport will suffer as will those that are found to be guilty of using. If I'm a guy trying to be a clean champion and I'm getting beat by a guy using, I'm outing him. I guess the attitude from others would be to keep your mouth shut, but if I'm losing millions in bonuses because someone is cheating? Aww, hell no.

RaceFace wrote:

I knew it was pointless to engage you in any fashion. You're right, PED's are a wonderful addition to the sport. Why put any effort into...

I knew it was pointless to engage you in any fashion. You're right, PED's are a wonderful addition to the sport. Why put any effort into doing what is best for the sport? Sticking your head in the sand is always the best way to handle problems.

Bleh, might as well eliminate factory bikes then! Really? That is rational reasoning to you?

Nerd wrote:

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and...

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and practice time riders get - like they do in other motorsports - and really level it.

Otherwise, all you're doing is taking a stance against something that frankly you don't even understand because someone once told you it's bad.

RaceFace wrote:

LOL! Are you drinking?

Nerd wrote:

Here's another one: I don't think many would call it a "competitive advantage" if a guy lost a leg and then had to wear a prosthesis...

Here's another one:

I don't think many would call it a "competitive advantage" if a guy lost a leg and then had to wear a prosthesis to race, would they?

Okay, so what if you don't lose a leg. Your body simply loses its ability to make HGH or Testosterone like it should. Is it a "competitive advantage" to supplement your hormone levels to be within the range of your competition?

Nerd wrote:

Sprite. Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's...

Sprite.

Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's all. It won't kill you. Lyle Alzado didn't get brain cancer from steroids, he got it from hitting his head a few hundred times a week for over 15 years. There is zero scientific evidence linking steroids to brain cancer, like he claimed. In other words, it's safe. In some ways, probably safer than Tylenol.

EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too.

You don't know anything about what it is you're talking about. You've decided that "drugs are bad, mmmkay" but you can't even define what is or isn't a PED and why, nor can you handle my points about guys running $100,000 suspension on their bikes while other guys have the stock shit. But you think that's fair?

Okay.

Nerd wrote:

Sprite. Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's...

Sprite.

Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's all. It won't kill you. Lyle Alzado didn't get brain cancer from steroids, he got it from hitting his head a few hundred times a week for over 15 years. There is zero scientific evidence linking steroids to brain cancer, like he claimed. In other words, it's safe. In some ways, probably safer than Tylenol.

EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too.

You don't know anything about what it is you're talking about. You've decided that "drugs are bad, mmmkay" but you can't even define what is or isn't a PED and why, nor can you handle my points about guys running $100,000 suspension on their bikes while other guys have the stock shit. But you think that's fair?

Okay.

Rizzo wrote:

"EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe...

"EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too. "

Be careful when comparing EPO to anabolic steroids or other PED's. There is a very fine line or threshold with EPO with severe or deadly consequences that does not compare to steroids. Anabolic steroids or HgH are not even in the same league as EPO when it comes to consequences. The effects of EPO will thicken your blood and lower your resting heart rate. For endurance athletes, the lowering of resting heart rate is a positive thing and has a big effect on max heart rate and overall output. A top cycling team would have a full time doctor on staff, most importantly to monitor these athetes while on EPO. The cyclists using EPO would sleep with heart rate monitors on and proper medical staff equiped with defribillators, watching over them while they sleep. The use of EPO will lower your resting heart rate so much, that it is hardly pumping, combine that with your blood thickening as the other consequence and next thing you know, the doctors are putting paddles on your chest trying to jumpstart your heart. This is a very real possibiltiy and risk that comes with EPO, too much of it and you die while you sleep. Shooting anabolics, HgH or other steroids will not cause your blood to thicken and your heart rate to drop like EPO does. Sure, there are other side effects and consequences with steroids, but there is a much larger "learning curve" or margin for error with steroids or HgH. I'm no expert trainer or doctor, but a casual gym rat or weekend warrior can mess with roids and not run too much risk, but that same weekend warrior messes with EPO just like they messed with some Deca or Sustanon and it's lights out, flat line.......................................Even a full time doctor on your team might not help, many cyclists have paid the price, look how the king of pop ended up with his full time doc. EPO is fuckin gnarly and there is a very very fine line between "perfectly safe" and "getting too crazy," a line that doctors with a PhD have not been able to master.

Nerd wrote:

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and...

If you're concerned with having a level playing field, yes. Don't be a hypocrite. Get rid of factory bikes, start regulating the amount of testing and practice time riders get - like they do in other motorsports - and really level it.

Otherwise, all you're doing is taking a stance against something that frankly you don't even understand because someone once told you it's bad.

RaceFace wrote:

LOL! Are you drinking?

Nerd wrote:

Sprite. Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's...

Sprite.

Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's all. It won't kill you. Lyle Alzado didn't get brain cancer from steroids, he got it from hitting his head a few hundred times a week for over 15 years. There is zero scientific evidence linking steroids to brain cancer, like he claimed. In other words, it's safe. In some ways, probably safer than Tylenol.

EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too.

You don't know anything about what it is you're talking about. You've decided that "drugs are bad, mmmkay" but you can't even define what is or isn't a PED and why, nor can you handle my points about guys running $100,000 suspension on their bikes while other guys have the stock shit. But you think that's fair?

Okay.

Rizzo wrote:

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one...

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one is led to believe a "little EPO" might be OK, which it's not. The line that seperates too little from too much EPO is so thin, doctors can barely manage it, thats not the case with steroids. Lets say someone did a 8 week cycle of steroids with no adverse effects, that person might feel confident in trying a cycle of EPO and that could be deadly. My point being, these 2 are apples and oranges and even a little bit should not be considered. A little testosterone, a little HgH, thats a different league compared to a little EPO, wouldn't you agree?

RaceFace wrote:

LOL! Are you drinking?

Nerd wrote:

Sprite. Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's...

Sprite.

Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's all. It won't kill you. Lyle Alzado didn't get brain cancer from steroids, he got it from hitting his head a few hundred times a week for over 15 years. There is zero scientific evidence linking steroids to brain cancer, like he claimed. In other words, it's safe. In some ways, probably safer than Tylenol.

EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too.

You don't know anything about what it is you're talking about. You've decided that "drugs are bad, mmmkay" but you can't even define what is or isn't a PED and why, nor can you handle my points about guys running $100,000 suspension on their bikes while other guys have the stock shit. But you think that's fair?

Okay.

UpTiTe wrote:

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell...

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell you first hand they can cause kidney and liver damage. Even when monitered and done safely they still cause your kidneys to work harder then normal and could very well cause damage.

Nerd wrote:

Sprite. Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's...

Sprite.

Unless you're going absolutely nuts with it, the biggest risk of testosterone or HGH use is that your body will stop making it naturally. That's all. It won't kill you. Lyle Alzado didn't get brain cancer from steroids, he got it from hitting his head a few hundred times a week for over 15 years. There is zero scientific evidence linking steroids to brain cancer, like he claimed. In other words, it's safe. In some ways, probably safer than Tylenol.

EPO is a different story, and if you get too crazy with that, it'll kill you. But if you don't get too crazy, it's perfectly safe, too.

You don't know anything about what it is you're talking about. You've decided that "drugs are bad, mmmkay" but you can't even define what is or isn't a PED and why, nor can you handle my points about guys running $100,000 suspension on their bikes while other guys have the stock shit. But you think that's fair?

Okay.

UpTiTe wrote:

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell...

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell you first hand they can cause kidney and liver damage. Even when monitered and done safely they still cause your kidneys to work harder then normal and could very well cause damage.

Nerd wrote:

You're talking about this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/sports/10steroids.html

That's hardly conclusive, nor is it applicable to MXers.

UpTiTe wrote:

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell...

I agree that Steroids wont cause brain cancer, but if your saying they're completely safe, which I'm not sure you are, you're nutty. I can tell you first hand they can cause kidney and liver damage. Even when monitered and done safely they still cause your kidneys to work harder then normal and could very well cause damage.

Nerd wrote:

You're talking about this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/sports/10steroids.html

That's hardly conclusive, nor is it applicable to MXers.

UpTiTe wrote:

No, Honestly I have never seen that article before. But I do know through my own experiences and through my own studies I know that filtering...

No, Honestly I have never seen that article before. But I do know through my own experiences and through my own studies I know that filtering blood with steroids in it is hard on the kidneys.

Rizzo wrote:

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one...

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one is led to believe a "little EPO" might be OK, which it's not. The line that seperates too little from too much EPO is so thin, doctors can barely manage it, thats not the case with steroids. Lets say someone did a 8 week cycle of steroids with no adverse effects, that person might feel confident in trying a cycle of EPO and that could be deadly. My point being, these 2 are apples and oranges and even a little bit should not be considered. A little testosterone, a little HgH, thats a different league compared to a little EPO, wouldn't you agree?

Nerd wrote:

Yes, definitely. But under doctor supervision, it's not that insane. Basically every cyclist in the TDF today uses it, and they don't die from it anymore.

Rizzo wrote:

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one...

I'm just saying, nobody in moto should be messin with EPO period, not even a little bit. Although you did seperate the two of them, one is led to believe a "little EPO" might be OK, which it's not. The line that seperates too little from too much EPO is so thin, doctors can barely manage it, thats not the case with steroids. Lets say someone did a 8 week cycle of steroids with no adverse effects, that person might feel confident in trying a cycle of EPO and that could be deadly. My point being, these 2 are apples and oranges and even a little bit should not be considered. A little testosterone, a little HgH, thats a different league compared to a little EPO, wouldn't you agree?

Nerd wrote:

Yes, definitely. But under doctor supervision, it's not that insane. Basically every cyclist in the TDF today uses it, and they don't die from it anymore.

Rizzo wrote:

"Under Doctors supervision," that is pretty common in the competitive cycling world, which is much more lucrative than moto. Very few in moto would have the...

"Under Doctors supervision," that is pretty common in the competitive cycling world, which is much more lucrative than moto. Very few in moto would have the means to support doctors supervision like they do in cycling.

"They don't die from it anymore," thats the learning curve I mentioned, the margin for error is very small and someone claiming to be "an expert" could weasel their way into the moto industry much easier than they could the cycling world. The moto industry is behind the times when it come to PED's, whereas cycling is at the forefront especially with EPO, lets face it, the cycling community are a bunch of "pro's." Compare testing methods, like you said, a piss test ain't gonna find shit, but moto is way behind the cycling world in so many levels. One person dying from EPO in the moto industry is one too many, whereas it's almost accepted in cycling, although not as much now, but do you want to see moto go through the same "learning curve?" You and Matthes reporting 10 years from now that "they don't die from it anymore."

To put it simply, I would mess with steroids 100 times over before I ever touched EPO. Most up and comers in moto would treat EPO like steroids and run down to Mexico and get some not knowing they are messing with something that is 100x's gnarlier than the Deca or Winstrol that their high school buddies used the year before. Even then, only the top few riders in the sport would have the means to justify the cost of doing things right when it came to EPO and those without would be flirting with death.

JayDoubleU wrote:

I really didn't want to comment on this thread but I guess I can't hold back. I'm not going to say i think this guy is...

I really didn't want to comment on this thread but I guess I can't hold back.
I'm not going to say i think this guy is doing it or that guy is even though I think some things are obvious.
IMO ANY SPORT THAT HAS MONEY TO BE MADE THERE WILL BE CHEATING.
Yes I 200% believe Lance Armstrong was on every drug under the sun. I don't blame him... you arent going to win anything in cycling with out "cheating" but is it cheating if everyone else does it? I can see how every great cyclist hates lance for not getting caught but I look at it this way. If Lance is caught americans would feel heart broken or betrayed... His story... even if it is bull shit and he is the biggest asshole in the world I personally believe that he has saved lives and given people hope. That means more to me than anything else. He was getting drugs no one else could be obtain... and most people that get tested are not using epo they use their own blood.
I can think of a lot of other drugs that no one has listed here that would help any type of endurance sport a lot.
What Rizzo said I don't agree with. Steroid especially ORAL are very very bad for you.
Test is the best. It helps you recover gives you strength and endurance.
I think anyone on a oral is gonna go backwards...
EPO was very dangerous when no one really knew the limits or dared to push them anyways.
Even cycling in way makes epo legal. That might sound stupid but listen.
If most of you had blood drawn your crit would be in the 30's if you are healthy. Everyone is not the same. My natural crit is around 33-35. Since EVERYONE is not the same... the rule can not be everyone has to have a crit of 35 because some people are natural freaks. Im sure some people have a crit of about almost 40 and from 30 to 40 is a very big jump anyone riding a bicycle or running a lot would notice better performance. The legal limit in the tour is 50. No one should be that high... so basically you can cheat up to that point. Ive heard from good cyclist that they race at about 58-60 but that is really as high as you can go with no danger. 50 is claimed to be as safe as vitamin-c. People were dying when their crit was 70.
Yes it is dangerous if you take too much of it... but ANY PED is... This just kind of scares people that don't really know and I am glad it does so more people don't try it.
I'm not gonna keep ranting and explain exactly how they get away with cheating in the tour unless everyone really wants to read that.
My point being if you were really serious about your career and think PED are the only way it's more simple than you think.
All you really need is google.

I know this is a mx board but I just think out of the 7 or 8 pages on this thread 95% of what I read wrong.

I am sure some people do it in the sport. I know some personally.... but if you are sitting here reading this thinking you can go get EPO for endurance and hgh to recover and not have to put in the work you are crazy!! Hard work and diet comes first. With out that you will still have nothing to show no matter what needles you have in you. There is no drug for being determined... you just have to bust your ass twice as hard.

I have a question.
Do you guys really want to know if Ryan Dungey is using epo or hgh or whatever you might think he is taking?

I don't... It hurts the sport.

IMO epo and hgh will NEVER be caught in US mx... It costs too much and its too hard to catch in a sport where there is about 10 guys doing it in each class... not 300 and again I am thinking that no one WANTS to catch our heros of the sport the guys that bring people to watch the races... Chad Reed, James Stewart, Ryan Dungey, and RV.
There is no question in my mind that no matter what they take to recover their bodies that all of those guys bust their ass...
I don't want to see them not race nor do any of you really... I don't think the sport can handle it.

Im done going on and on even though I have so much more to say.

This quote is from Alex Zulle and badass pro cyclist who was busted along with everyone else that was great except for Lance. Put yourself in a pros shoes... the pressure to be the best... the money the fame all of it!!!


“It’s like when you’re driving. The law says there’s a speed limit of 100 km/h, but everyone is driving at 120 km/h. Why should I be the one who obeys the speed limit? So I had two options: either fit in and go along with the others or go back to being a house painter.”

JayDoubleU wrote:

Themrtoad It doesn't matter the country... If you think American mx riders are the only ones doing this then you're ignorant ! I read that post...

Themrtoad It doesn't matter the country... If you think American mx riders are the only ones doing this then you're ignorant ! I read that post as you have a grudge against American riders or maybe you are saying the AMA also? We "passed" your test. Your test won't catch a blood transfusion or hgh. I'd bet that test can't catch synthetic epo either. Along with others that there still is no test for. Ever hear of cjc1295 or ghrp 6? What about igflr3? You can buy those on several sites on the Internet and they are legal to buy!! The first two are ways to use hgh legally... With no test for them!!!
Lr3 can do similar things as hgh but it boost red blood cells as well . It boost them so much that when you get done loading epo you don't have to micro dose expensive epo(which isn't that expensive anymore). You can just use that stuff to keep your crit high for a long while until you're red blood cells die..

Sorry if I am wrong but it sounds like you were saying Americans cheat because there is no test euros don't because of the test!?

Could not disagree more. It might discourage cheating but if there is a will there is a way and I can think of several ways to hide it with ease.

Ever hear a cyclist scream dehydration after a long tour stage?

Saline dilutes it especially after a hard day threw the mountains where you are killing off the red blood cells anyways.

Sorry for ranting I just feel like everyone is missinformed.

Hell before epo cyclist did coke to raise red blood cells. Sound stupid? I bet if you googled hard enough you'd find it's true!

I went on too long again but I'll say it again and again. Is there a lot of money to be made in the sport? Then there will be cheating and it isn't cheating unless you get caught.

themrtoad wrote:

I sure the guys in europe cheat as well, but they have to be more careful which means they can't go all out. If you look...

I sure the guys in europe cheat as well, but they have to be more careful which means they can't go all out.
If you look at some of the greatets riders of today and the past in AMA ( Not Trey Canard) they have even changed their apperance. It's one thing if you loose a few pounds from training, but your chin normally doesn't grow.

The rules are different here from over there. But hey, the show must go on. I'm sure YS/FIM/AMA and all other parties involved can agree to not test for certain things in Lommel 2012. Cause we don't want the guests of honour to not show up, do we?

Sunhouse wrote:

PED´s aren´t cheating if there aren´t rules against them. The problem is that most of the substances are illegal by law, which makes it illegal for...

PED´s aren´t cheating if there aren´t rules against them. The problem is that most of the substances are illegal by law, which makes it illegal for sports too, even though the AMA doesn´t test for them. If you can afford a PC a-kit, and the rest of the privateers can´t - tough luck. But you are not breaking any rules. But the day you use illegal substances you are not only cheating, but you are breaking the law. Maybe that is the cheating issue. If you used them in a country were steroids, HGH and EPO aren´t illegal, and the federation isn´t testing for them, then you aren´t really cheating either.

Sunhouse wrote:

PED´s aren´t cheating if there aren´t rules against them. The problem is that most of the substances are illegal by law, which makes it illegal for...

PED´s aren´t cheating if there aren´t rules against them. The problem is that most of the substances are illegal by law, which makes it illegal for sports too, even though the AMA doesn´t test for them. If you can afford a PC a-kit, and the rest of the privateers can´t - tough luck. But you are not breaking any rules. But the day you use illegal substances you are not only cheating, but you are breaking the law. Maybe that is the cheating issue. If you used them in a country were steroids, HGH and EPO aren´t illegal, and the federation isn´t testing for them, then you aren´t really cheating either.

themrtoad wrote:

Maybe riders based in countrys with very liberal rules against PED's should thank their shitty tests instead of the man above in the winners circle? -...

Maybe riders based in countrys with very liberal rules against PED's should thank their shitty tests instead of the man above in the winners circle?

- I stayed away from cocain before this season, my cycle trainer gave me some great steroids and my Dunlop hooked up great...

JayDoubleU wrote:

Themrtoad It doesn't matter the country... If you think American mx riders are the only ones doing this then you're ignorant ! I read that post...

Themrtoad It doesn't matter the country... If you think American mx riders are the only ones doing this then you're ignorant ! I read that post as you have a grudge against American riders or maybe you are saying the AMA also? We "passed" your test. Your test won't catch a blood transfusion or hgh. I'd bet that test can't catch synthetic epo either. Along with others that there still is no test for. Ever hear of cjc1295 or ghrp 6? What about igflr3? You can buy those on several sites on the Internet and they are legal to buy!! The first two are ways to use hgh legally... With no test for them!!!
Lr3 can do similar things as hgh but it boost red blood cells as well . It boost them so much that when you get done loading epo you don't have to micro dose expensive epo(which isn't that expensive anymore). You can just use that stuff to keep your crit high for a long while until you're red blood cells die..

Sorry if I am wrong but it sounds like you were saying Americans cheat because there is no test euros don't because of the test!?

Could not disagree more. It might discourage cheating but if there is a will there is a way and I can think of several ways to hide it with ease.

Ever hear a cyclist scream dehydration after a long tour stage?

Saline dilutes it especially after a hard day threw the mountains where you are killing off the red blood cells anyways.

Sorry for ranting I just feel like everyone is missinformed.

Hell before epo cyclist did coke to raise red blood cells. Sound stupid? I bet if you googled hard enough you'd find it's true!

I went on too long again but I'll say it again and again. Is there a lot of money to be made in the sport? Then there will be cheating and it isn't cheating unless you get caught.