If there were no rules on doping.....

[Life Saab Itch]

...just how fast would competitors be?

What improvements could be made?

How much lower would world records go?

[davepoth]

Based on previous doping, it looks like for the 100m it was worth about 2/10ths of a second in the 80s. So that would take us down to 9.4 seconds. Chances are the technology has moved on, maybe another tenth on top.

[andyjo1982]

A small part of me wishes there was a doping competition, but it would soon descend into absolute carnage... I'm surprised there haven't been tests done to see just how fast someone could go.

[taaffy]

In 1988 Ben johnson ran 9.79 in the 100m on drugs..... WR today at 9.58 so in 14 yrs we caught up .....how much quicker would todays 100m runners be with drugs who knows ??????

Edited by taaffy on Saturday 4th August 13:15

[anonymous-user]

andyjo1982 said:

A small part of me wishes there was a doping competition, but it would soon descend into absolute carnage... I'm surprised there haven't been tests done to see just how fast someone could go.

It works in the body building world.

[otolith]

I'd watch that. I want to see the 100 metres for athletes with extra genetically modified legs and the cycling race for people who actually have sprouted wings.

[Life Saab Itch]

otolith said:

I'd watch that. I want to see the 100 metres for athletes with extra genetically modified legs and the cycling race for people who actually have sprouted wings.

Well Oscar Pistoria runs the 400m with modified legs...

[anonymous-user]

Tour de France stage times would be the same as Armstrong or Contadors.
Most Chinese women's swim times wouldn't be much quicker.

[EDLT]

I think the difference would be less than 20%

Totally unrelated fact: When you come off steroids you don't lose all of the muscle you gained while you were taking them.

[MadMullah]

with the above comment i think thats what is happening with some of the chinese athlete's

they've been on them and come off

or

there's some new/unbanned/modified drug thats been developed in a lab in china which in a few years will be on the banned list.

[Digger]

EDLT said:

I think the difference would be less than 20%

Totally unrelated fact: When you come off steroids you don't lose all of the muscle you gained while you were taking them.

Really!? Would love to read an explanation of that.

[maisoumenos]

I fear some athletes are ahead of the game. They pay huge fees to doctors who know how to manipulate hormone levels and avoid detection because of the advancement in technology. One only has to look at Lance Armstrong and how sophisticated his team were. In fact this only came to light because of a whistleblower if I'm correct. It's like the multinationals outfoxing HMRC.
What I feel is one particular anomaly is that of Yohan Blake's 19.26 200m time last year. This was the second fastest 200m time ever and yet he failed to be within reach of this at London 2012. It was also remarkable to see the burst of speed he had towards the finishing line in relation to the other athletes.
It is an interesting area of debate which one can also draw lines of argument from in relation to the use of brain boosters such as ritalin in schools.

[amare32]

I think there should be a 'steroid' Olympics along with the 'regular' and Paralympics. Therefore it covers all bases and if you want to compete 'juiced up' then at least it'll be 100% the athlete's call. Doesn't mean it would stop cheaters participating the regular events though.

If that was the case, I'd reckon 100m sprinters will be running below 9 secs in no time.

[andr3w]

Yohan Blake is an interesting case. Seemed to put on a lot of upper body muscle very quickly. Notice also the stretch marks in the area between his shoulders and chest. Steroids make the skin less stretchy and also the skin is not able to expand at the same rate as the muscles when on steroids.

I think all the top sprinters are on stuff. They have to be to keep up with each other. This is an interesting interview:

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

[LostBMW]

andr3w said:

Yohan Blake is an interesting case. Seemed to put on a lot of upper body muscle very quickly. Notice also the stretch marks in the area between his shoulders and chest. Steroids make the skin less stretchy and also the skin is not able to expand at the same rate as the muscles when on steroids.

I think all the top sprinters are on stuff. They have to be to keep up with each other. This is an interesting interview:

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

Proves absolutely zip. Just speculative finger pointing.

Loads of people get stretch marks from training without ever going near a drug.

[andr3w]

LostBMW said:

andr3w said:

Yohan Blake is an interesting case. Seemed to put on a lot of upper body muscle very quickly. Notice also the stretch marks in the area between his shoulders and chest. Steroids make the skin less stretchy and also the skin is not able to expand at the same rate as the muscles when on steroids.

I think all the top sprinters are on stuff. They have to be to keep up with each other. This is an interesting interview:

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

Proves absolutely zip. Just speculative finger pointing.

Loads of people get stretch marks from training without ever going near a drug.

I agree but speculate is all we can do without all the facts. All we can do is look at the available evidence and indicators and conclude that it's likely the jamaican sprinting team has a very sophisticated doping progam. Bolt went from 10.03 to 9.69 in the space of a year. Most experts agree that's very unlikely without drugs.

[Cheib]

andr3w said:

LostBMW said:

andr3w said:

Yohan Blake is an interesting case. Seemed to put on a lot of upper body muscle very quickly. Notice also the stretch marks in the area between his shoulders and chest. Steroids make the skin less stretchy and also the skin is not able to expand at the same rate as the muscles when on steroids.

I think all the top sprinters are on stuff. They have to be to keep up with each other. This is an interesting interview:

http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=6611

Proves absolutely zip. Just speculative finger pointing.

Loads of people get stretch marks from training without ever going near a drug.

I agree but speculate is all we can do without all the facts. All we can do is look at the available evidence and indicators and conclude that it's likely the jamaican sprinting team has a very sophisticated doping progam. Bolt went from 10.03 to 9.69 in the space of a year. Most experts agree that's very unlikely without drugs.

Well having read a lot of the accounts of the cycling doping and the "glow period" the experts comments then were that if you really wanted to cheat there was still little chance of catching people. You have to think the doping controllers would fin it very hard to descend unannounced on a sprint team based on a small island...you'd hope they'd pose as tourists there on a two week holiday but I bet they fill in visa's stating their business!

[Derek Smith]

It is in most sports.

I know one young player in a sport I am familiar with as I failed at it many times who showed great promise. He was light on his feet, incredibly agile and his acceleration was remarkable. He got injured a bit; not much but opposing teams got to know him and targeted him, putting three people on him in one match.

He now plays for a national premier division team and England. I went to see him play and did not recognise him.

As with other youngsters, he got put on a development squad and never played a match (so are not tested). They then reappear after 18 months as giants, indistinguishable from those who went before them.

It makes for great spectatoring. Nice to cheer on someone you know, if not recognise.

[otolith]

Derek Smith said:

As with other youngsters, he got put on a development squad and never played a match (so are not tested). They then reappear after 18 months as giants, indistinguishable from those who went before them.

To be fair, 18 months of intensive training is a long time for a youngster with the right genetics - I would think that pretty shocking results can be achieved without drugs.

[Derek Smith]

otolith said:

To be fair, 18 months of intensive training is a long time for a youngster with the right genetics - I would think that pretty shocking results can be achieved without drugs.

I agree. However, the lad spent three years in a college on a sports bursary doing just that. He filled out to an extent. The change was gradual in college despite pumping iron day after day.

Perhaps I'm making it up in my own mind. But it seems magical.