• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Anyone game to say how much PEDs help your performance?

Good comments.

Lamar Grant, assuming a 15% gain, would still be dealdifting 270kg at under 60kg. He did 310kg.

This is freakish, PEDs or no PEDs.
 
Spartacus, it seems that you are suggesting that the performance improvements that you listed earlier are insufficient to justify use.

Even the sprint performance example of 3% is 3 metres in a 100m race. That is an enormous advantage, probably equal to the difference between the semis and the podium at the olympics. The 15% strength result is even more of an attractant.

Rather than discouraging use, I think that those figures would encourage people to take that route if they were confident of the other variables involved.
 
As a reference, in the 90s and 00s when cyclists were at the heights of their doping (when EPO was undetectable and blood doping wasn't checked) the top climbers had Watts/kg (ie power to weight ratio) between 6.4 and 6.7. now, things are a hell of a lot cleaner than they were (either they're not using, they're using trace amounts to avoid detection or they're using newer and less effective but undetectable stuff) and the power levels are more like 6 Watts/kg.

imho, evans and wiggins were both clean winners. racing is very different when the riders aren't doped to the eyeballs - no superman like 24hr recoveries, less ambitious attacks. the nature of competition is quite different. both types of racing are exciting to watch but for different reasons.
 
Bull, to address your points, no, the advantage of drugs is huge.

If a sport is not trully consistent in its drug-testing across all nations, then certain aths will have huge advantages. I have written on this subject.

Is the current sports drug-testing regime fair? | The Roar

What i am suggesting, geared more to young and vulnerable not sure what to do, is whether they would still go on gear knowing that all they will get is a 10-20% edge (or whatever), or whether they would simply lift and then assume they would lift this or that with drugs.

That is why i asked whether anyone would be willing to inform what knowledge they knew about performance gain from PEDS.

Of course, what aths do at top level to enhance propsects of winning is up to them. No doubt, many will always look to whatever advantage they can get.
 
I dont agree that coan would have been the best withou PED usage.
If he could have been without, then why bother. There is simply no way of telling if he would or not so its pointless speculating.

You cant have your cake and eat it
 
spartacus said:
Anyone game to say how much PEDs help your performance?
Click to expand...
For me the question is not use vs. no use, (and to what extent an improvement has been achieved in comparison); for me the question is use vs. proper (knowledgeable) use. Improper/haphazard kind of usage as is most often the case in the west, can at times be compared with no use, and I have no problem with that. My comment was related (and restricted) to the sport Olympic weightlifting.
 
The Hamburgler said:
I've heard creatine is good for 20%, imagine if you combined that with Test and GH
Click to expand...

I've run 4g per week before and reached a sticking point, then I threw in a creatine/no product and started making gains all over again. So yeah creatine is one sup that definitely packs a punch weather your on gear or not.
 
The only real way to figure out the difference would be to eliminate the variables in the people using PED. That's only really going to be possible in a controlled study or using elite athletes who are all "doing everything right" and would probably require prior-AAS benchmark and then AAS after that.

You could do it yourself if you're natural and never used AAS before. Your result will not be accurate if you have previously used AAS though as AAS use, even for a week, has been shown to increase density of certain elements in the cells that don't appear to go away after ceasing AAS.
 
The difference is ALOT more than people think

the difference is night and day

BUT you need good work ethic and many years of training take advantage of it
i do not think beginners would notice much but the more advanced you become the greater leaps and bounds you make
 


Too some people yes night and day to a degree - to others it will make no difference.

The key to your post is - 'good work ethic and may years of training'

No amount of steroids will make you a champion, a ifbb pro, an Olympic sprinter - its how hard you work.

To the OP - I don't think anyone can put a % on it, how would people know, its impossible - yes you can say they helped but to say it added 200kg to my total, 1.3 seconds to my sprint time etc - is impossible.
 
can make no difference, what a stupid thing to say. Only a peanut would get no benefit.

Fact is that many athletes and studies do estimate benefit, because it is quite easy to do, especially for experienced athlete. .

Laurie Butler openly indicates he gets about 15% strength gain, Aust's greatest powerlifter. Another big name in Aust powerlifting also told me he gets around 15%.

Myself, and every other of my close bb mates who dabbled, all got 15-20% strength improvement.

Sure, others may get less strength gain, but I don't know too many.
 

i totally agree
but i think youd be surprised about what food and drugs can do to a body
IF used correctly
 
years of training and good food also makes no difference. The physiological benefit you get from drugs will be similar; it is just you will be at a much higher level to begin with.

What I am suggesting here, is that the benefit I got in early 1990s (say 15%), would be the same if I waited until I got to much higher strength standard clean.

I doubt many on here will admit the benefit they get; they will pretend not much difference or just keep quiet.
 
incorrect

there are many systems in the body and epigenetics that Turn On when you work hard or are exposed to certain things

its simply not that simple @spartacus ;

just like calories in vs calories out isnt even
there are other hormones like insulin resistance and a many many things that arnt well studied that change metabolism how the body works and i could go on and on

atleast what im saying is the studies your reading dont take these things into account

edit for example a well trained athlete whos exposed themselves to very hard training will be able to shuttle lactic acid out faster and cope with that extreme state much easier

this is a very important factor for training to elite levels
 
Last edited:
whatever, like I said, I personally know few who ever got less than around 15% strength gain, so there.

You may turn subject into a riddle, I am only pointing to experience and observation.

it is possible some men may get less, say 5-10%, but I think they would be in minority, unless doing other critical factors wrong, like too low dosage, few calories and overtraining.

but we are not talking about rocket science, most athletes who take get fundamentals reasonably right.

now I have pointed t experience and observation ,so I think you should take this on board rather than listen to those who say they have never taken.

Let us see what others admit to in terms of benefit, say oni.

PS, my observations only refer to experienced male trainers who had a good background before they took drugs. I also only refer to athletes; pro bb's may even get more benefit given their willingness to do whatever it takes to look HUGE.
 

What do you mean years of training and good food will make no difference? No difference to what?

Training and food are the foundation of a good athlete - this is how they achieve results - are you saying that if an athlete did not train or eat good food their results would be the same on the platform or on the field?
 
any halfwit can work out that hard training and good food is very important. I am talking abut effect of PEDS, which i understand you have never taken.

Do you know any athletes that have?

My observations are mostly from top athletes. Aussie champions many of them. And guess what, they still got at least 15% strength gain, virtually all of them. If any told me otherwise, i would indicate. But not one.

Thread asks for estimates of gains. Not philosophy.

i am open to new info from other PED users.
 
id say alot more than 15%

more like 25% if not more when you consider how fast gains can come
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register