Kelly Baggett:
Manufactured Strength Vs Natural Strength
Before I get into it I'd like to point out that no supplemental training method is perfect and has a perfect transfer to sport. The practice of adding strength and size thru weight training in an attempt to apply the benefits of that strength and size to a sport is effective but it won't ever be perfect. You're basically manufacturing something that wasn't there to begin with - You're allowing your body to adapt to one stimulus and then applying those adaptations to another area. It really is cheating in a way. The only thing that isn't cheating would be actually playing the sport and letting your body adapt naturally. However, we know there are limits to that. But this is one reason why people that have "natural" strength, size, and power will generally have a "functional" strength advantage over those who have to manufacture it. Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor, and Mike Tyson rarely if ever lifted a weight. Compare them to muscled up guys like Frank Bruno, Tony Mandarich, and Vernon Gholston. Manufacturing size and strength isn't perfect regardless of how you acquire it, but it beats the alternative and can allow you to compete at a level you wouldn't have.
I'm not the first to bring this up, but I still don't see much distinction between barbell use and steroid use.
I know that steroids are currently considered cheating and that they're illegal, but neither makes much sense. Steroids help you get stronger, but so do barbells. Steroid use can result in long-term health complications, but again so can barbells as can sports in general, especially contact sports like boxing and American football.
well, you have to weigh the pros and cons of steroid vs barbell... each method can results in improvement, each method can result in injury/complications.. the injury/complications results amplify greatly with PED use, especially unsupervised or improper PED use.. then you have to understand how athletes will utilize something that works, to the fullest AND beyond, in order to gain and edge on their competition....
is this safer with barbells/performance training, or with PED usage?
it's obviously safer with barbells/performance training, athletes aren't going to simply run themselves completely into the ground leaving them unable to compete.... however, athletes will utilize more pharmaceuticals to try and gain an edge, of which can be very deadly.
so, it's not about being the "police", but, do you want your sport to end up like professional bodybuilding? insanely roided freaks who are bound to have some serious health issues... you can't compete on the pro level at all, unless you are a chemistry experiment.
by the same line of reasoning though, anything can be considered on the level of PED's... eating, water, sleep, etc, they all benefit performance and provide an advantage, but overdoing them cause an immediate drop in performance generally.. for example, taking in too much testosterone won't have that effect, it'll make you feel like a monster for the short term.
Again, I know that steroids are against the rules. I just don't think it makes any sort of sense. It's like drug prohibition in general. Alcohol is more destructive than just about any other drug that you go to prison for possessing, yet it's perfectly legal; alcohol destroys health, induces aggression, impairs judgment (and leads to horrible life-wrecking outcomes), yet we can buy it and consume as much of it as we want...but can't smoke weed or snort cocaine because they're "bad" for us...
right but alcohol in moderation can be beneficial, especially in the form of red wines etc... PED's in moderation could be beneficial also, of course, but, once everyone is allowed to utilize them and compete, the idea of moderation is thrown out of the window......... people will need MORE to compete at a high level, if a small portion of the athletic field starts to utilize them beyond moderation and experience gains in performance but possible detrimental effects on health or increased risk of injury.
I digress, but I hope the digression underscores the point.
In my own case, I've more than doubled my strength levels from where they were in my early twenties, at least by a couple of measures. I'm far more athletic than I was 15 years ago when I was in my "prime" because of barbell use, particularly the almighty barbell back squat. I've gone from 130 lbs to 180 lbs by taking my unequipped full squat from ~150 to ~350. I've sort of wrecked my knees in the pursuit of squat strength, but I can still do every physical activity better than my 18-20-year-old self could; my knees just hurt a lot more when I do it.
right, now imagine having lifted & utilized PED's.. you'd either be better off, or far worse.. without ped's, when you feel like shit & get that feeling to take a rest day, you rest, generally.. ped's can mask that inhibition, which adds up over time..
There are those who would argue that I used my "natural" or inherent chemistry in building up my strength. But the fact is I used the assistance of a very unnatural artifact of industrial civilization--the rotating collar barbell--to alter the structure and functioning of my body. I built strength that did not come naturally by "unnatural" means. In the past only natural athletes, those who were big, strong and fast just because that's how they were, had a chance of competing at any meaningful level. Barbell training changed that and gave the naturally small, weak and slow a way to make themselves bigger, stronger and faster than they would have been otherwise, even with diligent participation in their sport. Serious athletes nowadays go outside their sport to acquire strength with barbells (and with steroids) and then apply that new strength in their sport.
yup
I would not have become so much bigger, stronger and faster just by running, swinging from trees and lifting rocks. It took very detailed programming of the use of man-made objects to get me where I am. The man-made objects in my case were the barbell, weight plates and a squat rack. Would it have really been so bad if I added chemical supplementation to that to take me even further?
maybe, maybe not.. but just like if something works, for example, squatting, you want to do more of it.. ie, smolov... ped's will work, and perhaps you'll want to do more of them, but that's completely different when using them recreationally vs competitively... ped's in a competitive field would exceed moderation/safe levels very quickly.
Our culture is one steeped in myths about the wickedness of drugs (except alcohol, at least these days). It's not unlike the American South where there are cultural fears that black men are ticking white-women-rape bombs. Steroids are like the lurking Negroes of the world of S&C lily white womanhood in the Old South. Those who would protect the virtue of the S&C world gotta string up them damn steroids every chance they get.
lmfao!$!@
Also, there's this pride in building strength "naturally" that makes me chuckle. I'm a guy who cheered when he got his first 135-lb back squat because that was a hug accomplishment to me when I was a 120-lb adult. I built my strength "naturally" up to a 365-lb squat recently (using loose knee wraps; I'm getting old). But how "natural" was that strength really? "Natural" strength would be the 200-lb 15-year-old who squats 315 deep for a few reps the first time he walks into a gym (I believe Andy Bolton worked up to 405 his first time under the bar).
I'm not writing this to convince anyone. My mind's made up and I'm sure yours is too. I just know that while I acknowledge that steroid-use is cheating under almost all current rules (except untested powerlifting feds), I think that policy is the outcome of hysteria and something like superstition.
Thanks for reading.
well, like i've said in previous posts on this topic...... if you want to compete, you have to follow the regulations.. i have no problem with PED's for recreational use, people can put anything in their bodies as far as i'm concerned, absolutely anything... When it comes to competition in professional sport, the regulations are there to ensure a "fair" playing field... anyone in this field can lift weights, eat however they want, sleep however they want, etc, they will do so in a way that allows them to achieve their maximum potential. Perhaps it will carry health risks, but in my opinion, those health risks are far less than utilizing PED's in combination with today's methods to achieve maximal potential. Sometimes regulation is needed, for example an age limit on driving, an age limit on buying alcohol etc. That is simply where we are at with PED's in competitive sport: there is a limit to what we can ingest/intake in order to try and maintain a healthy & fair playing field.
so anyway, like i always say, if people want ped's allowed in sport, create untested leagues/associations... i'd rather watch clean, though i'd watch those freaks also, but they need to be separate just like drug free PL and untested PL.
pC
Show Posts
