Proof barry bonds used steroids,

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
Originally posted by: Accipiter22
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
If we got rid of all the players that juice you can say goodbye to ALOT of players from the NFL and the MLB. I dont believe steroids have a place in sports but they are here to stay. There is too much $$ in it. It will never end.

and BTW... this writer has no idea about steroids.

3 week cycles do not exist, especially for baseball purposes.


sure they do....what makes you think they don't?? (I dunno for baseball purposed) but bonds didn't sound exactly worried about effectiveness...he sounded more like a glutton


First of all yeah 3 week cycles exist but they are ineffective.

The only roids that will have any effect in that time are short ester injectables and orals but noone will run an inject for just 3 weeks. It makes no sense. They are normally ran for 6 or 10-18 weeks. ie. Tren, Test Prop as short esters. And most orals are fast acting ie. anavar, winstrol, anadrol. But once again, it makes no sense to only run them for 3 weeks. My point is, you dont make big gains in 3 weeks. I know this post is a mess. I am tired.

edit... some roids may only be used for 3 weeks but that roid is only a part of the whole cycle.

example.

weeks 1-3 50mg of Dbol everyday

weeks 1-12 500mg of test enanthate Mon and thurs

weeks 6-12 50 mg of winny everyday

make sense?


Now, this guy knows what he is talking about.

I swear, nearly every time I see something about steroids in the media, the writer seems to just make stuff up when describing the steroids or their properties.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
For everyone saying that his records should be erased I have a question:

Should everyone in modern times have their records erased as well considering they had advantages that the likes of Hank Aaron didn't. There wasn't as much knowledge about supplements back then. Careers are also extended now because of non-invasive surgeries. Where is the line drawn?

Last I checked, improved surgical procedures of the years isn't against baseball rules. Steroids on the other hand, are.

If there was ever a case for an asterisk next to someone's stats, it would be warranted here.

What about creatine?
Glutamine?
Isolate Protein?
Contact lenses?

The point is where is the line drawn?
Was wondering where all the SF fanboys were.

Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate. Hence, any offender could be eating KFC for a week and anabolically create muscle with little to no fat. How's that for drawing the line?



Hahaha shut the fu.ck up. You don't know what you're talking about.

Steroids do not "increase testosterone production" and your notion that one can take steroids and eat KFC and become a better athletic performer is even more retarded.

Keep out of things you're uninformed on, you just end up screwing things up.

:thumbsdown:
If someone was on a heavy cycle and only ate Fried chicken (and obviously did their normal workouts), they would undoubtedly get big. I'm a powerlifter and I know a juicer (injects Winstrol and God knows what else he is stacking) at the gym who did this. After lifting, he eats KFC or Popeyes FRIED chicken breasts. The guy is a freaking tank, and shredded. He does absolutely no cardio but his lifts are incredible. Steroids undoubtedly increase testosterone levels and production in the body, are you fcking stupid? Andro alone increases testosterone in the body by 30-40% (read the above link to the study), and that's not even including your normal increased production from working out. Stop posting.

 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Was wondering where all the SF fanboys were.

Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate. Hence, any offender could be eating KFC for a week and anabolically create muscle with little to no fat. How's that for drawing the line?

I'm by no means a SF fan, I'm a fan of knowing about something (ie steroids) before commenting. Please show me where you read the above quote. If you can not provide data then please don't portray media hype as fact.
"Although we observed a significant increase in the serum levels of testosterone in our study," said Dr. Doug King, a researcher at Iowa State University, "it is unlikely that this dose of androstenedione would enhance muscle size or strength. Most earlier research suggests that the serum testosterone must be increased by more than 100 percent in order to increase muscle strength."
Text

Actually, trenbalone increases testosterone levels much higher than andro... so it could realistically be much much higher than 100%. God knows what B.Bond's levels were at when he was juicing.


You are behaving like a fool. It is spelled "trenbolone"

You are attempting to sound like you know what you're talking about but you just come off sounding like someone who says "Well Intel is faster because they run at 3.4ghz while AMD only runs at 2.8."

You have no depth of understanding of this.

Steroids do NOT INCREASE TESTOSTERONE PRODUCTION like you said.
No sht it doesn't make your TESTICLES produce more... it raises your levels. Can you read? If you think that trenbAlone (it can be spelled either way dipsht) doesn't increase Bond's testosterone levels to more than 100% a normal man's, then give me some of the drugs you've been smoking.

 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Was wondering where all the SF fanboys were.

Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate. Hence, any offender could be eating KFC for a week and anabolically create muscle with little to no fat. How's that for drawing the line?

I'm by no means a SF fan, I'm a fan of knowing about something (ie steroids) before commenting. Please show me where you read the above quote. If you can not provide data then please don't portray media hype as fact.
"Although we observed a significant increase in the serum levels of testosterone in our study," said Dr. Doug King, a researcher at Iowa State University, "it is unlikely that this dose of androstenedione would enhance muscle size or strength. Most earlier research suggests that the serum testosterone must be increased by more than 100 percent in order to increase muscle strength."
Text

Actually, trenbalone increases testosterone levels much higher than andro... so it could realistically be much much higher than 100%. God knows what B.Bond's levels were at when he was juicing.


You are behaving like a fool. It is spelled "trenbolone"

You are attempting to sound like you know what you're talking about but you just come off sounding like someone who says "Well Intel is faster because they run at 3.4ghz while AMD only runs at 2.8."

You have no depth of understanding of this.

Steroids do NOT INCREASE TESTOSTERONE PRODUCTION like you said.

No sht it doesn't make your TESTICLES produce more... it raises your levels. Can you read?

Originally posted by you:


"Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate"

If you think that trenbAlone (it can be spelled either way dipsht) doesn't increase Bond's testosterone levels to more than 100% a normal man's, then give me some of the drugs you've been smoking.


I guess it can be spelled either way if you count internet sites that also misspell it.
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
For everyone saying that his records should be erased I have a question:

Should everyone in modern times have their records erased as well considering they had advantages that the likes of Hank Aaron didn't. There wasn't as much knowledge about supplements back then. Careers are also extended now because of non-invasive surgeries. Where is the line drawn?

Last I checked, improved surgical procedures of the years isn't against baseball rules. Steroids on the other hand, are.

If there was ever a case for an asterisk next to someone's stats, it would be warranted here.

What about creatine?
Glutamine?
Isolate Protein?
Contact lenses?

The point is where is the line drawn?
Was wondering where all the SF fanboys were.

Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate. Hence, any offender could be eating KFC for a week and anabolically create muscle with little to no fat. How's that for drawing the line?



Hahaha shut the fu.ck up. You don't know what you're talking about.

Steroids do not "increase testosterone production" and your notion that one can take steroids and eat KFC and become a better athletic performer is even more retarded.

Keep out of things you're uninformed on, you just end up screwing things up.

:thumbsdown:
If someone was on a heavy cycle and only ate Fried chicken (and obviously did their normal workouts), they would undoubtedly get big. I'm a powerlifter and I know a juicer (injects Winstrol and God knows what else he is stacking) at the gym who did this. After lifting, he eats KFC or Popeyes FRIED chicken breasts. The guy is a freaking tank, and shredded. He does absolutely no cardio but his lifts are incredible. Steroids undoubtedly increase testosterone levels and production in the body, are you fcking stupid? Andro alone increases testosterone in the body by 30-40% (read the above link to the study), and that's not even including your normal increased production from working out. Stop posting.



Big deal I know a plenty of people who use gear.


No, you're stupid, or misinformed.


Steroids do not increase testosterone PRODUCTION in the body. If you understood the mechanisms at work you'd realize why your continued claims that they do are wrong.

You have little understanding of what you're trying to speak of, it makes it tougher to argue the points.

(Steroids actually decrease natural testosterone production when introduced due to the negative feedback loop that regulates testosterone production in men.)


Your original post implied someone could use AAS and then sit around and gain athletic ability even though all they do is eat KFC.

Untrue.

Even with "juice" your "powerlifter friend" still needs good genetics to stay lean eating all that KFC.

Many others would get fat no matter how much AAS they were using.

 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Originally posted by: Accipiter22
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: ntdz
/q]



where did you get ANY of that info in your post??

Well the premise came from the SI article sourced from the book. My other info comes from "experience" . . . as a doctor. I didn't dabble during my athletic years.

Someone mentioned Bonds being "uninformed" but its kinda hard to fathom that Anderson would give Bonds crappy cycles. It's too easy to do it the right way to believe Bonds' regimens were as bad as described by that article.

The article just doesn't make sense. Bonds shifts to his designer gear to avoid detection but less than a year earlier he's hopped up on Deca which is going to scream positive for a year or more?! All the while, he's subject to random (albeit announced) drug tests?!

Personally, I think he's done something but the descriptions in the article sound ridiculous . . . collectively. Some of the elements are plausible, though.
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: ntdz
What proof? These are writers for The San Francisco Chronicle. While I believe Bonds did use roids, there is no proof in this book. A postive result on a blood test = proof.

Not going to endorse ntdz but . . . this book has the credibility of WMD in Iraq . . . reasonable assumption but where's the beef?!

The details of the story also sux but I'm not sure if the SI writer is a moron or the sources are just ignorant.

1) I'm not sure there's such a thing as a 20 pills at a time anabolic/anti-catabolic regimen that's actually illegal. Further, almost all orals "cook" your liver. Any person with "expert" medical assistance probably wouldn't bother with orals . . . particularly if they had no problem with needles. Aside from the liver toxicity issue, why would Bonds bother with small dose Dbol or Winny tabs when he could just buy the good stuff in higher doses?

2) There's no such thing as taking a week or two off for heavy cycles. You need A LOT of time off from a heavy cycle. If you were going to break that short, might as well stay on all the time.

3) Anabolics/anti-catabolics don't give you energy . . . you get that some stimulants. Now androgenics certainly make you aggressive, though.

4) They call Winny (stanozolol) a powerful anabolic and say Bonds gained 15lbs of muscle in 100 days. Winny is used to get hard but it's a mild musclebuilder. Nobody on the planet has gained 15lbs on Winny . . . except maybe the Internet vendor that sells Winny. Now the notion of a torn triceps . . . sort of works . . . but not for the reason they mention. Winny isn't so good for the connective tissue.

5) Bonds hit 46 HR in 1993, 42HR in 1996, and 1997. His first year of doping(1998) when he blew up with 18lbs of muscle . . . 37HR? His peak year is 2001 . . . three years after allegedly starting his doping regime. Yet somehow his HR power diminishes to the mid40s for consecutive years despite AGGRESSIVE doping activity?! Bonds has fewer at-bats during those years but the decline in HR production is much larger than the decline in ABs.

6) Bonds starts deca-durabolin after the 1999 season. Deca-durabolin is a workhouse steroid. Everybody gains on Deca. But Deca . . . in fact . . . no steroid . . . improves muscle mass if you are just sitting around bangin' the mistress. Muscles grow in response to stress . . . no stress . . . no growth. Anabolics allow you to maximize gains. Anti-catabolics minimize losses. And both improve recovery. So the argument that Deca is a lazy guy's anabolic is just dumb.

7) Nobody gets huge on hGH (human growth hormone). But I have heard that it improves eyesight, skin texture, recovery, great for joints, etc. Granted at $1000 a month it better do something.

8) Allegedly, Bonds didn't get any testosterone until after the 2000 season. Now that's one of the most retarded approaches ever. ALL cycles should include Test. There's rarely a good reason to omit Test.

9) From the way the article is written, it gives the impression that clomid wasn't started until after the 2000 season. But that doesn't make sense. Bonds would need Clomid for most (if not all) of those early cycles if they were really as heavy as the authors imply. Technically, even mild-moderate cycles would suppress the HPG axis enough that you would need a kick start to get the twins in action.

10) Modafinil is NOT a powerful stimulant. It's a mild stimulant. It promotes wakefulness and arguably vigilance but its definitely NOT comparable to the various amphetamines (speed) that most major league players take.

11) One more thing about DECA. It's the LAST steroid one would use if they wanted to avoid detection. You will test positive for Deca a year and a half AFTER your last dose.

12) Roger Maris hit 39HR the year before he hit 61. He hit 33HR the year AFTER he hit 61. Aside from that 3 year stretch his best years were 23, 26, 28. Does Marist deserve an asterik?


I agree with everything said here regarding steroids, however the impact of 17-AA's on the liver like dbol is often over-rated IMO

 

five40

Golden Member
Oct 4, 2004
1,875
0
0
There must be a lot of people on steroids in OT because look at all the namecalling. It's roid rage on the forums in this thread. Fvck you..no fvckyou...can you kick my ass?....fvck you.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
"testosterone decanoate (a fast-acting steroid known as Mexican beans)"

Interesting... A fast acting steroid (15 day half life), known as Mexican beans.


LOL do your homework buddy. I know bonds did roids but at least get your facts straight.



LOL ... decanoate anything one of the heaviest esters and slowest acting steroids. GEEZ.
Testosterone decanoate = testosterone + decanoate ester attached, i.e. a long ester. You're talking about DECA which is nandrolone + decanoate ester attached. Two totally different things. The Mexican beans referenced in their book is correct. A lot of people who claim the SI article is miswritten should do their homework first.
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
No I'm not, I said that testosterone deconoate would not be a fast-acting steroid. I know what nandrolone and "deca" are.

BTW, you REALLY need to do your homework.

Again, you remind me of someone who keeps saying "Well intel is faster because they operate at 3.4ghz and AMD only operates at 2.6"

Someone with a little bit of knowledge but not enough to be correct and it is obvious to anyone with any substantive amount of knowledge that you don't know what you're talking about.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: slimrhcp
For everyone saying that his records should be erased I have a question:

Should everyone in modern times have their records erased as well considering they had advantages that the likes of Hank Aaron didn't. There wasn't as much knowledge about supplements back then. Careers are also extended now because of non-invasive surgeries. Where is the line drawn?

Last I checked, improved surgical procedures of the years isn't against baseball rules. Steroids on the other hand, are.

If there was ever a case for an asterisk next to someone's stats, it would be warranted here.

What about creatine?
Glutamine?
Isolate Protein?
Contact lenses?

The point is where is the line drawn?
Was wondering where all the SF fanboys were.

Anabolic steroids increase testosterone production by over 100% a normal man's rate. Hence, any offender could be eating KFC for a week and anabolically create muscle with little to no fat. How's that for drawing the line?



Hahaha shut the fu.ck up. You don't know what you're talking about.

Steroids do not "increase testosterone production" and your notion that one can take steroids and eat KFC and become a better athletic performer is even more retarded.

Keep out of things you're uninformed on, you just end up screwing things up.

:thumbsdown:
If someone was on a heavy cycle and only ate Fried chicken (and obviously did their normal workouts), they would undoubtedly get big. I'm a powerlifter and I know a juicer (injects Winstrol and God knows what else he is stacking) at the gym who did this. After lifting, he eats KFC or Popeyes FRIED chicken breasts. The guy is a freaking tank, and shredded. He does absolutely no cardio but his lifts are incredible. Steroids undoubtedly increase testosterone levels and production in the body, are you fcking stupid? Andro alone increases testosterone in the body by 30-40% (read the above link to the study), and that's not even including your normal increased production from working out. Stop posting.



Big deal I know a plenty of people who use gear.


No, you're stupid, or misinformed.


Steroids do not increase testosterone PRODUCTION in the body. If you understood the mechanisms at work you'd realize why your continued claims that they do are wrong.

You have little understanding of what you're trying to speak of, it makes it tougher to argue the points.

(Steroids actually decrease natural testosterone production when introduced due to the negative feedback loop that regulates testosterone production in men.)


Your original post implied someone could use AAS and then sit around and gain athletic ability even though all they do is eat KFC.

Untrue.

Even with "juice" your "powerlifter friend" still needs good genetics to stay lean eating all that KFC.

Many others would get fat no matter how much AAS they were using.
Ok, I reread what I posted and did write production, when I meant levels. I understand the principles quite fine, along with the negative feedback cycle (look at Caminiti before he died, he had to shoot up b/c his body completely shut down testosterone production b/c he abused so much).

My friend at the gym is only 19 and Winny is used for cutting so I can't see why that's hard to believe (teenage metabolism + winny). He turned fried chicken (not every meal though, he said he also ate regularly ate tuna for lunch) that he would eat at least 5 nights a week into solid gains (I drive home with him in separate cars and saw him stop at the Popeyes on the way). He originally started as a skinny shrimp who could rep on 135 (plate on each side) to 275, and his weight went from 170 to 210 over the span of 6 months. He would openly tell us he was juicing, and that Stanz was one of his drugs of choice but wouldn't elaborate any more than that.

 

KarenMarie

Elite Member
Sep 20, 2003
14,372
6
81
Originally posted by: kranky
Nothing would please me more than if they wipe all Bonds' records off the books.

I agree. and the same goes for every one of them that got in the books by cheating.
 

PlatinumGold

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
23,168
0
71
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: kranky
Nothing would please me more than if they wipe all Bonds' records off the books.

I agree. and the same goes for every one of them that got in the books by cheating.

it's a real shame that mcwire, sosa, bonds, and a host of others will be left virtually untouched by baseball for cheating and seriously putting into question the integrity of the game of baseball, whereas pete rose will serve a lifetime ban for doing the same basic thing.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
My friend at the gym is only 19 and Winny is used for cutting so I can't see why that's hard to believe (teenage metabolism + winny). He turned fried chicken (not every meal though, he said he also ate regularly ate tuna for lunch) that he would eat at least 5 nights a week into solid gains (I drive home with him in separate cars and saw him stop at the Popeyes on the way). He originally started as a skinny shrimp who could rep on 135 (plate on each side) to 275, and his weight went from 170 to 210 over the span of 6 months. He would openly tell us he was juicing, and that Stanz was one of his drugs of choice but wouldn't elaborate any more than that.

So here's the kicker:
1) teenagers (or even guys in their 20s) shouldn't use gear . . .
2) most steroid users are probably guys in their late20s - early40s

Winny just does NOT make people big. Your buddy was stacking his winny with some testosterone. If his cycle was all oral it was probably winny and dbol (which is NOT testosterone) . . . breakfast of wimps that can't take a 21g in the buttocks.

Again, the Bonds story just doesn't sound right. If I were advising him, he would have started with a nice cycle of 10-12wks of Equipoise and Sustanon . . . even a bonehead like bonds couldn't mess that up. Kill the booby potential with Arimidex and hop the twins up with Clomid. Nice solid muscle gains (but not too much that it draws attention) . . . good for the joints too. Only probelm is that EQ is gonna flame up a urine sample for over a year. Then again, baseball's testing regime wasn't exactly IOC.

But as an old guy, I could see Bonds' rationale for being juiced all year. They play 162 games a year! Even for a lazy sport like baseball that's still a lot.
 
Mar 9, 2005
2,809
1
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
"testosterone decanoate (a fast-acting steroid known as Mexican beans)"

Interesting... A fast acting steroid (15 day half life), known as Mexican beans.


LOL do your homework buddy. I know bonds did roids but at least get your facts straight.



LOL ... decanoate anything one of the heaviest esters and slowest acting steroids. GEEZ.
Testosterone decanoate = testosterone + decanoate ester attached, i.e. a long ester. You're talking about DECA which is nandrolone + decanoate ester attached. Two totally different things. The Mexican beans referenced in their book is correct. A lot of people who claim the SI article is miswritten should do their homework first.

I assume you were not referring to me. I stated that it was a 15 day ester which is correct. And also that it is a slow release unlike Test Prop, which is quick has a 3 day half-life. And alot of people refer to mexican beans as fina pellets. Hes just throwing terms out there.
 

KarenMarie

Elite Member
Sep 20, 2003
14,372
6
81
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: kranky
Nothing would please me more than if they wipe all Bonds' records off the books.

I agree. and the same goes for every one of them that got in the books by cheating.

it's a real shame that mcwire, sosa, bonds, and a host of others will be left virtually untouched by baseball for cheating and seriously putting into question the integrity of the game of baseball, whereas pete rose will serve a lifetime ban for doing the same basic thing.

I do not think that what Rose did and what these guys did are comparable. Rose sold out his team and everyone who trusted him for his own personal ends. These guys are doing stuff to themselves to enahance their game. The only thing these two things have in common is that they are both illegal.

What is really disgusting is that these guys will will keep their records and any upcoming kid will find it nigh on impossible to achieve the same honestly.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Originally posted by: ntdz
What proof? These are writers for The San Francisco Chronicle. While I believe Bonds did use roids, there is no proof in this book. A postive result on a blood test = proof.

Not going to endorse ntdz but . . . this book has the credibility of WMD in Iraq . . . reasonable assumption but where's the beef?!

The details of the story also sux but I'm not sure if the SI writer is a moron or the sources are just ignorant.

1) I'm not sure there's such a thing as a 20 pills at a time anabolic/anti-catabolic regimen that's actually illegal. Further, almost all orals "cook" your liver. Any person with "expert" medical assistance probably wouldn't bother with orals . . . particularly if they had no problem with needles. Aside from the liver toxicity issue, why would Bonds bother with small dose Dbol or Winny tabs when he could just buy the good stuff in higher doses?

2) There's no such thing as taking a week or two off for heavy cycles. You need A LOT of time off from a heavy cycle. If you were going to break that short, might as well stay on all the time.

3) Anabolics/anti-catabolics don't give you energy . . . you get that some stimulants. Now androgenics certainly make you aggressive, though.

4) They call Winny (stanozolol) a powerful anabolic and say Bonds gained 15lbs of muscle in 100 days. Winny is used to get hard but it's a mild musclebuilder. Nobody on the planet has gained 15lbs on Winny . . . except maybe the Internet vendor that sells Winny. Now the notion of a torn triceps . . . sort of works . . . but not for the reason they mention. Winny isn't so good for the connective tissue.

5) Bonds hit 46 HR in 1993, 42HR in 1996, and 1997. His first year of doping(1998) when he blew up with 18lbs of muscle . . . 37HR? His peak year is 2001 . . . three years after allegedly starting his doping regime. Yet somehow his HR power diminishes to the mid40s for consecutive years despite AGGRESSIVE doping activity?! Bonds has fewer at-bats during those years but the decline in HR production is much larger than the decline in ABs.

6) Bonds starts deca-durabolin after the 1999 season. Deca-durabolin is a workhouse steroid. Everybody gains on Deca. But Deca . . . in fact . . . no steroid . . . improves muscle mass if you are just sitting around bangin' the mistress. Muscles grow in response to stress . . . no stress . . . no growth. Anabolics allow you to maximize gains. Anti-catabolics minimize losses. And both improve recovery. So the argument that Deca is a lazy guy's anabolic is just dumb.

7) Nobody gets huge on hGH (human growth hormone). But I have heard that it improves eyesight, skin texture, recovery, great for joints, etc. Granted at $1000 a month it better do something.

8) Allegedly, Bonds didn't get any testosterone until after the 2000 season. Now that's one of the most retarded approaches ever. ALL cycles should include Test. There's rarely a good reason to omit Test.

9) From the way the article is written, it gives the impression that clomid wasn't started until after the 2000 season. But that doesn't make sense. Bonds would need Clomid for most (if not all) of those early cycles if they were really as heavy as the authors imply. Technically, even mild-moderate cycles would suppress the HPG axis enough that you would need a kick start to get the twins in action.

10) Modafinil is NOT a powerful stimulant. It's a mild stimulant. It promotes wakefulness and arguably vigilance but its definitely NOT comparable to the various amphetamines (speed) that most major league players take.

11) One more thing about DECA. It's the LAST steroid one would use if they wanted to avoid detection. You will test positive for Deca a year and a half AFTER your last dose.

12) Roger Maris hit 39HR the year before he hit 61. He hit 33HR the year AFTER he hit 61. Aside from that 3 year stretch his best years were 23, 26, 28. Does Marist deserve an asterik?
Must have missed your post Bali. I'll respond to a few of them.

1) It doesn't specifiy what timeframe, between 98-03, Bonds took orals and/or when he was injecting. He most likely started out oral and then graduated to injections.

2) Nowhere did they classify the 3 week cycle as "heavy". You also don't know the doses of THG/Cream/Clomid that he took so that is inconclusive.

4) I doubt he was just on Winny after 100 days, it only says he was started on it. That doesn't mean that after 100 days, he was still only on Winny. Anderson probably stacked more as he progressed.

5) Wrong, 1998 wasn't his first year. From the article: Through 1998, for instance, when he turned 34, Bonds averaged one home run every 16.1 at bats. Since then -- what the authors identify as the start of his doping regimen -- Bonds has hit home runs nearly twice as frequently (one every 8.5 at bats). 1999 was his first year of stats you have to look at. The results? 34 Homeruns in almost 200 AB's less than 1998.

6) You got that Deca was a "lazy man's drug" out of this sentence? The book said Anderson and Bonds subsequently tweaked the program, adding such drugs as the steroid Deca-Durabolin and growth hormone, which allowed Bonds to retain his energy and physique without rigorous training. I translated it as: start Deca, work out less, maintain current size. It never said he was sitting around, and not working out at all.

7) HGH is used for joints in order to prevent injury so you can support freakishly large amounts of mass. So yeah, you can get huge on it in conjunction with anabolics. If steroids are the cement of body construction, then human growth hormone is the rebar, taken in an attempt to strengthen joints so they can hold the added muscle mass produced by steroids. Human growth hormone can be detected only in specific blood tests, not the standard urine test used for other performance-enhancing drugs. It is prescribed to treat dwarfism in children, but it can also change a mature person's body structure and facial characteristics. Players joke about the swollen heads, protruding brows and lantern jaws of hGH users.

8) The article isn't detailing exactly what he got and when. The book will. I would think that Anderson would have paired testosterone with Winny in 1999, especially since most of his clients used the Cream (testosterone) paired with THG. Anderson was a pro and knew what he was doing, just look at Bond's numbers for 99.

9) Not sure which heavy cycles you're implying... if you're talking about the 3 week ones, scroll back up to 2.

10) Don't know much about the drug. I do know that it is also used for moods and ADHD, maybe Bonds was having trouble focusing or thought it would increase his mood, things that a normal OTC stimulant can't do.

11) Do you think Bonds was all that concerned about getting caught in 99? Do you know what the testing policy in MLB was like then? Even if he was caught, it would never have been publisized. The fact that the "Clear" was undetectable was just a bonus for ballplayers, getting caught wasn't really a concern back then.

12) Yes, and Brady Anderson hit 16, 50, 18, and 18 homeruns. What's the point? That Bond's 73 was just a "coincidence"? Look at AB/HR for when Bonds was allegedly doing roids, starting with 1999.
1999: 10.44
2000: 9.79
2001: 6.52
2002: 8.76
2003: 8.67
2004: 8.28

His best AB/HR ratio in 11 years before his roid years (didn't include his rookie year so 1987 to 1998)?
1994: 10.56
1993: 11.71
1996: 12.30
Overall average from 1987 to 1998: a HR every 15.71 at bats. So at 34.5 years old (1999) to the present he has had a significantly better HR/AB ratio than the first 11 years of his career. Believable?
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
"testosterone decanoate (a fast-acting steroid known as Mexican beans)"

Interesting... A fast acting steroid (15 day half life), known as Mexican beans.


LOL do your homework buddy. I know bonds did roids but at least get your facts straight.



LOL ... decanoate anything one of the heaviest esters and slowest acting steroids. GEEZ.
Testosterone decanoate = testosterone + decanoate ester attached, i.e. a long ester. You're talking about DECA which is nandrolone + decanoate ester attached. Two totally different things. The Mexican beans referenced in their book is correct. A lot of people who claim the SI article is miswritten should do their homework first.

I assume you were not referring to me. I stated that it was a 15 day ester which is correct. And also that it is a slow release unlike Test Prop, which is quick has a 3 day half-life. And alot of people refer to mexican beans as fina pellets. Hes just throwing terms out there.
Yup, they probably meant Propionate, I was thinking the same. More than likely he had a mix of 3 or 4 though with the slow and fast release.
 
Mar 9, 2005
2,809
1
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: shortspanishguy
"testosterone decanoate (a fast-acting steroid known as Mexican beans)"

Interesting... A fast acting steroid (15 day half life), known as Mexican beans.


LOL do your homework buddy. I know bonds did roids but at least get your facts straight.



LOL ... decanoate anything one of the heaviest esters and slowest acting steroids. GEEZ.
Testosterone decanoate = testosterone + decanoate ester attached, i.e. a long ester. You're talking about DECA which is nandrolone + decanoate ester attached. Two totally different things. The Mexican beans referenced in their book is correct. A lot of people who claim the SI article is miswritten should do their homework first.

I assume you were not referring to me. I stated that it was a 15 day ester which is correct. And also that it is a slow release unlike Test Prop, which is quick has a 3 day half-life. And alot of people refer to mexican beans as fina pellets. Hes just throwing terms out there.
Yup, they probably meant Propionate, I was thinking the same. More than likely he had a mix of 3 or 4 though with the slow and fast release.


yeah that would be sustanon... and BTW I got most of my steroid knowledge from my fathers business, which happens to be boarding race horses.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
My friend at the gym is only 19 and Winny is used for cutting so I can't see why that's hard to believe (teenage metabolism + winny). He turned fried chicken (not every meal though, he said he also ate regularly ate tuna for lunch) that he would eat at least 5 nights a week into solid gains (I drive home with him in separate cars and saw him stop at the Popeyes on the way). He originally started as a skinny shrimp who could rep on 135 (plate on each side) to 275, and his weight went from 170 to 210 over the span of 6 months. He would openly tell us he was juicing, and that Stanz was one of his drugs of choice but wouldn't elaborate any more than that.

So here's the kicker:
1) teenagers (or even guys in their 20s) shouldn't use gear . . .
2) most steroid users are probably guys in their late20s - early40s

Winny just does NOT make people big. Your buddy was stacking his winny with some testosterone. If his cycle was all oral it was probably winny and dbol (which is NOT testosterone) . . . breakfast of wimps that can't take a 21g in the buttocks.

Again, the Bonds story just doesn't sound right. If I were advising him, he would have started with a nice cycle of 10-12wks of Equipoise and Sustanon . . . even a bonehead like bonds couldn't mess that up. Kill the booby potential with Arimidex and hop the twins up with Clomid. Nice solid muscle gains (but not too much that it draws attention) . . . good for the joints too. Only probelm is that EQ is gonna flame up a urine sample for over a year. Then again, baseball's testing regime wasn't exactly IOC.

But as an old guy, I could see Bonds' rationale for being juiced all year. They play 162 games a year! Even for a lazy sport like baseball that's still a lot.
Yeah, probably better off w/out Bold b/c of detectability... but MLB? Testing? lol

Still never found out what the kid was taking... but we definitely didn't agree with it because he was so young. Most of us are proud naturals so it was painfully obvious by the kid's gains, paired with the fact that he knew nada about lifting 6 months ago. Discovering he was on Winny was just affirming our beliefs.

 
Mar 9, 2005
2,809
1
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
My friend at the gym is only 19 and Winny is used for cutting so I can't see why that's hard to believe (teenage metabolism + winny). He turned fried chicken (not every meal though, he said he also ate regularly ate tuna for lunch) that he would eat at least 5 nights a week into solid gains (I drive home with him in separate cars and saw him stop at the Popeyes on the way). He originally started as a skinny shrimp who could rep on 135 (plate on each side) to 275, and his weight went from 170 to 210 over the span of 6 months. He would openly tell us he was juicing, and that Stanz was one of his drugs of choice but wouldn't elaborate any more than that.

So here's the kicker:
1) teenagers (or even guys in their 20s) shouldn't use gear . . .
2) most steroid users are probably guys in their late20s - early40s

Winny just does NOT make people big. Your buddy was stacking his winny with some testosterone. If his cycle was all oral it was probably winny and dbol (which is NOT testosterone) . . . breakfast of wimps that can't take a 21g in the buttocks.

Again, the Bonds story just doesn't sound right. If I were advising him, he would have started with a nice cycle of 10-12wks of Equipoise and Sustanon . . . even a bonehead like bonds couldn't mess that up. Kill the booby potential with Arimidex and hop the twins up with Clomid. Nice solid muscle gains (but not too much that it draws attention) . . . good for the joints too. Only probelm is that EQ is gonna flame up a urine sample for over a year. Then again, baseball's testing regime wasn't exactly IOC.

But as an old guy, I could see Bonds' rationale for being juiced all year. They play 162 games a year! Even for a lazy sport like baseball that's still a lot.
Yeah, probably better off w/out Bold b/c of detectability... but MLB? Testing? lol

Still never found out what the kid was taking... but we definitely didn't agree with it because he was so young. Most of us are proud naturals so it was painfully obvious by the kid's gains, paired with the fact that he knew nada about lifting 6 months ago. Discovering he was on Winny was just affirming our beliefs.


Its really hard to make big gains off of winny alone. He may be downplaying his use.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
absolutely true. from the yankees, redsox and mets salaries combined probably being greater than the salaries of the whole bottom half of MLB. that is just plain ridiculous.

the yankees by themselves probably have a bigger payroll than the bottom 6 or 7 teams combined.

the yankees have a bigger payroll than any 2 nfl teams, iirc.

the astros were in the top 1/3rd with about $85 million in payroll, much of that jeff bagwell and roger clemens' salaries. bagwell was ~$20 million last year, and i think is owed even more this year.


anyway, proof is merely the evidence that convinces that what the evidence shows is true. and the level it takes to convince is different for everyone, so proof is a subjective term and isn't worth fighting over.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Overall average from 1987 to 1998: a HR every 15.71 at bats. So at 34.5 years old (1999) to the present he has had a significantly better HR/AB ratio than the first 11 years of his career. Believable?

knowing how unathletic baseball players tend to be compared to NBA and football players, that could be believable. but it would require serious time in the gym. we all know the rocket does this, and look at what that guy can do. arguably he was better for the first 100 games of last season than he had ever been over any other comparably long period in his career.

of course, bonds has already admitted to using the cream and the clear. why people still deny that he used them i can't understand. bonds claims to have not known he was using steroids, that he thought he was merely using flaxseed oil for massages or something.