I have no doubt that you are absolutely correct. The use of PEDS in the hobby sports circle ALONE is staggering. I can only imagine how that translates to professional sports.

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

Here we go, crashinggirl. There may be a reason your friends "all" look younger. Either they are not in the sport too long, do have the right genes (very rare), or they have committed to the dark side.

From a physiological and biological perspective the training volumes needed to "race"" Ironman over a period of several years are not "healthy"!

There is a benefit of moderate regular daily exercise, but training 6 hours per day is certainly not slowing down your biological aging process!

More is not always better!

---

adrialin

(BOMK, racing drug and supplement free since 1985)

I think that it is incredibly cynical to think that a lot of age group competitors are using preformance enhancing drugs. As a fairly good age grouper (I was 18th in men's 35-39 and 150th overall in Hawaii a few weeks back..... maybe 148th after Kraft and Beke get removed from the list) I was putting in some pretty heavy training and take my racing very seriously. However, to take drugs just to get to Hawaii each year is plain stupid. I could probably qualify any year that I wanted to without them and the only benefit that would come my way would be a faster time that I know was obtained by cheating (sort of like the idiot, cheaters who draft their way to a Kona spot and feel good about their race and rationalize that the "course was too crowded so it couldn't be helped") which wouldn't make me feel good about the race.

I race to challenge myself and don't have any financial gains that depend on my results (actually it is quite the opposite since qualifying and making the trip to Kona cost me a bundle!). The cost associated with stocking my cabinets with Power Bars, protein powders and multi-vitamins are high enough without adding in HGH, dianabol and EPO. Then there are the health risks and family implications. There may be a few age groupers that are so driven to win (why they aren't in the pro ranks I don't know) that they would use them but I really think that the number is very, very small. I do a lot of training and racing with some pretty fast age-group athletes and I'm not aware of anyone who is using PEDs.

Hmm. Do you think Lori Bowden (for ex) looks older than 37?

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

"Boy, that's a pretty cynical viewpoint"

Slick, I'd doubt if it's rampid, but I'd suspect that there are some AG'ers out there that are into the juice. Just go into any weight room/club and there's all kinds of non pro muscleheads popping the roids. Most of them don't even compete, but just want to look big around the gym. One club I belonged to years ago had a guy who used to shoot up pig steroids that he bought black market from a veterinarian. Totally stupid from a long term health perspective, but they're doing it.

But I have enough faith to believe that AG'ers on the stuff in tri would be a very small minority, but I'd suspect it's still out there.

"And correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Monniger end up being banned for a year because he took an illegal substance (knowingly or NOT it's still illlegal)."

Scott never denied the presence of nandrolone metabolytes in his urine and he never expected or requested no suspension. But he knew he never intentionally took banned substances and thought he should not be subject to the full 2 year suspension. He had just bought a new brand of supplement and thought that might be the cause. He had time to search for other samples of the same production lot and have those and the remainder of his batch tested to show they were tainted. As a result, the suspension was only one year. None of that would have been possible if he hadn't had time to perform his own investigation. And if I recall correctly, you called for the athlete to respond within 48 hours after a single positive.

"Tyler has 3 positives, not 2.

Carry on"

Actually the score is now 3 positive, 1 negative (the Olympics test was initially ruled negative).

Oh come on! It was negative because it was inadvertantly frozen!

I think the 48 hour should be for the B sample notification. I agree that no one should be considered positive until they have had the opportunity to defend themselves. But once an A is positive I think the athlete should be notified immeditately and called in for the B test ASAP. If the B test is positive then let them explain why the banned substance is in their blood. I think all athletes should be given the full process of appeal and the option of going all the way up to the CAS if needed - but I think the national federations should make a point of holding their hearings as quickly as possible after a positive A & B sample.

I think Scott seems like a stand up guy - Sorry if I implied that he was deliberately using PED - my bad. I think what happened to him is unfortuante. But I think his case is a wake up call to all elite / pro athletes to be fully aware of all the rules and of everything they put into their bodies.

"I think Scott seems like a stand up guy - Sorry if I implied that he was deliberately using PED - my bad. I think what happened to him is unfortuante. But I think his case is a wake up call to all elite / pro athletes to be fully aware of all the rules and of everything they put into their bodies. "

I didn't take it that you meant he did it deliberately. My only point is that sometimes it takes time to fully investigate what underlies a positive test and there shouldn't be a single level of punishment for all offenses.

As to being aware of everything we put into our bodies; I don't think that's completely possible unless we grow and raise all our food ourselves.

And don't forget, she will not rest until the real killers are found.

No, Francois, you weren't the intended target...sorry about that. It was a general observation. I mean't to erase your name from the subject line...my attention to detail was crappy today... ;-)

"from a physiological and biological perspective the training volumes needed to "race"" Ironman over a period of several years are not "healthy"! "


There is absolutely no proof in that statement. There is a sizable body of evidence showing the opposite. Several studies have been done in marathoners showing those with the greatest amount of milage showed the greatest long term health benefits.

A follow-up to my previous post about Nina's looks. Can anyone honestly look at her features and NOT see masculinization? Heavy brow, large chin, jaw, and nose.

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

Give me a break - this is just a bad picture. How many of us don't have some pictures we'd rather not share? I sure wouldn't want all of my pictures evaluated like this!! I'm not sticking up for her - she did a stupid, stupid thing - but I don't think this picture is an indication of anything.

D.

you need to compare that to a pic of a few years ago for an honest comparison. Putting up a pic then damning her in a public forum for steroids reflects a poor use of judgement on your part. Having a big forehead and chin is not proof of doing steroids.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Yeah, but Dawn, how can you deny the signs of steroid in this picture of Nina taken yesterday....

















And for the record, Tyler has 1 positive test, one (unfortunately) inconclusive test.

---

_______________________________________________

Tyler also tested positive twice at the Tour of Spain.

Ahhh, you blew it! Now, a picture of Triple H would have been funny.

---

---------------

"Remember: a bicycle is an elegant and efficient tool designed for seeking out and defeating people who aren't as good as you."

--BikeSnobNYC

"Tyler also tested positive twice at the Tour of Spain"

Help me out with something. If I break my leg and have an x-ray taken, how many times have I tested positive for a broken leg if a doctor looks at the x-ray five times? How about if five different doctors look at the same x-ray? What about if the same leg is x-rayed five times? Running the same sample through the same test over and over again is still only one positive.

Sorry, but I don't feel too badly about holding her up to scrutiny at this point. And no, that is not a bad picture, it is a good representation of her features. Why people feel the need to defend of make excuses is beyond me.

---

__________________________________________________
A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is just putting on its shoes.
- Mark Twain

ok crashinggirl as you really want to stir the shit...

1. she tested positive to EPO. she admitted, the deed is done
2. you don't know her and base your comments on your husband who said 'oh look, she must be on something blah blah blah'
3. I do know her and also saw pictures of her when she was younger. she looked just like this, just younger...

so she is guilty admitted, but you need to add some crap on tenuous grounds

How about you post of picture of you so we can tell you what you're on?

I've seen her at 17 (before she did any sports) and she looked the same.
the argument of facial features is only valid when you compare over time...