GrumpyCatFace wrote:Yes, but what about the 8th guy that made it WITHOUT them? He is, therefore, the superior athlete, is he not???
No he's not. The guys who finished ahead of him are, they put in the work, just because the PEDs allowed them to push themselves harder in training than they would have been able to do without them, that doesn't make them worse athletes. Also maybe the 8th guy was on the drugs, he just didn't get caught.
Listen to what you just said.
Chemical X allowed the 7 to do more than #8 could. Therefore, they are better, superior athletes, and should receive our admiration.
#8 is probably a cheater too, anyway. We should not admire his accomplishment because he didn't take the chemicals that would have allowed him to do more.
Montegriffo wrote:No one is saying PEDs will turn a no hoper into a winner. What they will do is turn the fourth or fifth fastest man into the winner. Ben Johnson was not going to beat Carl Lewis unless he cheated.
Nonsense. Ben Johnson was the better man, you're just an idiot who thinks cheating is the only reason he won, because you know nothing about PEDs and think are super drugs. Carl Lewis probably cheated too, and if he didn't well that's on him, it didn't make the difference between winning and losing, Ben Johnson just ran the race of his life. Passing a drug test doesn't make you clean, and it shouldn't make you the winner of contest you never won.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Yes, but what about the 8th guy that made it WITHOUT them? He is, therefore, the superior athlete, is he not???
No he's not. The guys who finished ahead of him are, they put in the work, just because the PEDs allowed them to push themselves harder in training than they would have been able to do without them, that doesn't make them worse athletes. Also maybe the 8th guy was on the drugs, he just didn't get caught.
Listen to what you just said.
Chemical X allowed the 7 to do more than #8 could. Therefore, they are better, superior athletes, and should receive our admiration.
#8 is probably a cheater too, anyway. We should not admire his accomplishment because he didn't take the chemicals that would have allowed him to do more.
We should admire his 8th place finish, and that he's smart enough to pass the drug test, not everyone is smart enough to not get caught. He didn't finish 1st, and I'm not going to pretend he did, the only people who do that are those who think PEDs are super drugs that make the difference between winning and losing and I am not one of those idiots.
Montegriffo wrote:No one is saying PEDs will turn a no hoper into a winner. What they will do is turn the fourth or fifth fastest man into the winner. Ben Johnson was not going to beat Carl Lewis unless he cheated.
Nonsense. Ben Johnson was the better man, you're just an idiot who thinks cheating is the only reason he won, because you know nothing about PEDs and think are super drugs. Carl Lewis probably cheated too, and if he didn't well that's on him, it didn't make the difference between winning and losing, Ben Johnson just ran the race of his life. Passing a drug test doesn't make you clean, and it shouldn't make you the winner of contest you never won.
The only clean athlete in that field was Calvin Smith who came 4th.
Smith was robbed of his gold medal by not only Johnson but Lewis and Christie too.
It took another 11 years for a clean athlete to lower the record. Johnson beat it only because the drugs gave him that advantage. Johnson was not the best man, his qualifying times were well below several men in that race and he took the drugs just before the final to improve his race.
Last edited by Montegriffo on Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:42 am, edited 2 times in total.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
The underdog beat Carl Lewis, that can only be because of cheating, there is no other way. That's the level of argumentation I'm up against, like I said one hand tied behind my back without breaking a sweat, and they still have nothing.
Passing a drug test doesn't make you clean, and him taking steroids wasnt the reason he broke the world record, you just assume it was because no "clean" guy did so for a while after. What kind of logic is that? Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test yet he was setting records and people considered him "clean", they just got all butthurt when he confessed like a moron, as if Lance Armstrong owes those idiots anything, they felt entitled to their outrage nonetheless, he should have known better.
You act like because there is no parallel universe where everyone is clean we don't the difference between the athlete and the chemicals, but those who know anything about PEDs can tell the difference. It's only the ignorant who think the chemicals did all the work, not the athlete, "so strip them of their shit immediately, I'm morally outraged for no reason!", how about we don't do that and say we did?
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
StCapps wrote:The underdog beat Carl Lewis, that can only be because of cheating, there is no other way. That's the level of argumentation I'm up against, like I said one hand tied behind my back without breaking a sweat, and they still have nothing.
Johnsons time improved massively between the qualifying rounds and the final because he took the drug on the day of his win. The dramatic improvement was what lead to his result being questioned and his cheating being found out. He catorgorically did not win because he was the better man, he won because of the drug.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Montegriffo wrote:Johnsons time improved massively between the qualifying rounds and the final because he took the drug on the day of his win. The dramatic improvement was what lead to his result being questioned and his cheating being found out. He catorgorically did not win because he was the better man, he won because of the drug.
That's not how steroids work. Taking on the day of, yields no real performance enhancing results, it's the extra training you put in before the competition, that's what yields the performance enhancing results. His time improved because he found his groove and got in the zone, you think it's because of the drugs, because you don't know anything about the drugs, especially steroids apparently, hot damn you don't know the first thing about them. Not that I'm surprised, I saw this coming, you are like all the other anti-PED idiots all hitting the same notes and playing the same dreadful tune.
You think you can just sit on your ass with no training and run a faster 100m if you just take steroids the day of? Your ignorance is quite high, steroids require you to put in work to see any real athletic gains. Waiting until the day of competition, to use steroids, that would have been no help to Ben Johnson, aside from maybe a placebo effect. Learn something about steroids before claiming it won Ben Johnson a gold medal and got him a world record, that would be a start anyway. Just because some people got suspicious because his time improved and they thought he looked like he was juicing doesn't mean the drugs were the reason for that improvement, that's just their silly assumption on the part of those who are ignorant about PEDs. Your time is suppose to improve between the opening and final rounds of the 100m competition, it has nothing to do with PEDs, guys hold back until the final if they know the can qualify, that's not unusual at all, it's a strategy all the top sprinters use.
You are acting morally outraged about the result of a race, in a sport you know nothing about, because of drugs that you know nothing about. Maybe you should simmer down and leave the outrage to people who know what they are talking about, that would be my advice.
Carl Lewis' loss must have hit you hard, and now you are all butthurt about it.
Suck it monte. They may have stripped him of the gold medal, but we all know who won the race and broke the record. Canada lucked into having two of the best sprinters of a generation, you can attribute Johnson's success to PEDs, but we all know Canada just had it's shit together in the 100m back in the day by using Jamaican imports. Carl Lewis was overrated, get real.
Steroids work in training because they enable you to work harder and push your body beyond its natural limits. To believe that being able to push your body past its limits in a race is not an advantage is just denial.
Ben Johnson used drugs to enable him to train harder and when he realised he still was not going to win he took them during competition to enable him to push his body harder than he was able to without them.
Steroid users stop using them before competition to flush them out of their bodies and pass the drug tests. It's not because they have no effect, it's to avoid getting caught. Back in 1988 at the time of the Seoul Olympics there was no regime of out of competition drug testing like there is today. Ben Johnson got caught because he made the mistake of using steroids on the day of the final and was tested because he was such a surprise winner. Nowadays all medal winners get tested, that was not the case in '88.
Let me ask you this, if there is no advantage to using steroids before a race why did Ben Johnson take them on the day?
He knew he was not going to win without them and gambled that he would not be tested.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
Montegriffo wrote:Let me ask you this, if there is no advantage to using steroids before a race why did Ben Johnson take them on the day?
He knew he was not going to win without them and gambled that he would not be tested.
Because he wanted to keep his cycle going, and figured they wouldn't test him, not because he knew he couldn't win if he cycled off and played it smart. Idiocy explains this, you just want to believe that the steroid use the day of the final explains his improved time, when it does not. His limits had already been raised and weren't being anymore raised when he took the steroids on race day, he was maintaining and being heat bag about it, so he got caught. This can't win without taking PEDs on race day theory of yours is not backed by the science, steroids don't turn you into a superman the way you think they do, if he had cycled off and more cautious about getting caught, he would have had the same gains with less chance of getting caught, he just wasn't smart about it and wanted the placebo effect of knowing he was on it, maybe he didn't fully understand how steroids work as well, athletes aren't exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Sure it helps a little to be on during a competition, but the real actual tangible gains come from being on steroids in the training prior to competition, not during the competition, the benefit you would have if you only took steroids the day of the competition, would literally be non-existent beyond placebo effect. You couldn't just all of a sudden push yourself any noticeable amount harder day one at the beginning of a cycle thanks to the wonder drug that is anabolic steroids, that's just not how that shit works. Ben Johnson was on steroids well before competition day, he just also took them on competition day, or he did them in a way that gave him no benefit and had nothing to do with whether he won a gold medal other than giving him unearned peace of mind.
If all Ben Johnson did was take steroids on competition day, like a complete noob, then he deserves even more credit for breaking the world record and winning that gold medal than even I thought and even more credit for being a complete moron who should covered his tracks far better and was basically asking to get caught. If that was actually the case, then Johnson pretty much was clean and he's dumb as box of rocks, but he's still broke the world record and deserved that gold medal, 100%, zero doubt about it. So if that's your theory, trash the man for being dumb, not for not being the best at 100m in the world at that time, and all time up to that point.
Last edited by StCapps on Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
