Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Christian Coleman [cleared by USADA] [Facing new suspension?]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Christian Coleman [cleared by USADA] [Facing new suspension?]

    Originally posted by mungo man View Post
    Those leagues don't need to test as much as track and field. The more skill is required in a sport, the less the athletes need to dope. In basketball, doping is not as useful..
    I think that is a fantastically naive view. The more money at stake, the more allure to avail ones self of every possible advantage. Basketball is a perfect sport for performance enhancing drugs, no different than the NFL. The use of drugs is widely accepted in the major sports, it is simply verboten to speak of it and grounds for removal if you get excessive with it.

  • #2
    PEDs may not improve your hook shot, or your drive-the-lane-and-dish-off-pass at the last second to the open man in the corner, but they might help you get through this physical 48 minute game less tired or sore, and the next one, and the next one, and the next 79 games in the NBA regular season.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by user4 View Post

      I think that is a fantastically naive view. The more money at stake, the more allure to avail ones self of every possible advantage. Basketball is a perfect sport for performance enhancing drugs, no different than the NFL. The use of drugs is widely accepted in the major sports, it is simply verboten to speak of it and grounds for removal if you get excessive with it.
      Please explain how doping would benefit a basketball player.

      The basic skills required to play in the NBA are skills like dribbling, shooting, passing, vision, reflexes, anticipation, court vision.
      Please explain How would doping enhance those skills.

      Secondly If basketball is perfect for doping then why do so few basketball players fail drug tests? NBA players are tested randomly about 4 times a year. How come there are so few people who are busted for doping? I know of only 4 or 5 NBA players who have failed a drug test.

      I know you will mention that EPO would help with endurance. But an NBA caliber player can easily attain the fitness requirements needed for basketball without EPO. All you need is a good trainer and dietician. And if you find that you still cant attain those fitness levels then you can play less minutes, take plays off and some players have the luxury of simply not playing defence. There are legendary players like Magic and Nash who never played defence and saved all their energy for offence.

      On the other hand, the fitness levels required to run a 2:05 marathon are beyond the reach of most Olympic caliber marathoners. Yet to make decent money as a marathoner, you must be in the 2:05 range. That's why track athletes resort to doping more often than do basketball players.

      So does it make sense for an NBA player risk a two year suspension to take EPO when he can attain the necessary fitness levels without doping?
      Please explain.

      The only situation where it might make sense for an NBA player to dope is if he picks up an injury and is out of contract. In which case he will resort to HGH because it is a PED that quickens recovery from injury. Which is why 50% of the dope tests conducted by the NBA are for HGH. But the NBA has guaranteed contracts so even HGH might not be worth the risk for many players.

      In summary, the risk - reward ratio for doping is much higher in track than it is in the NBA
      And the effect of doping in track is much higher because track is a sport that relies on raw ability rather than learned skills
      Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 10:17 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DrJay View Post
        PEDs may not improve your hook shot, or your drive-the-lane-and-dish-off-pass at the last second to the open man in the corner, but they might help you get through this physical 48 minute game less tired or sore, and the next one, and the next one, and the next 79 games in the NBA regular season.
        I mentioned some points that are worth repeating.

        1. Nowadays NBA players don't play all 82 games. That's old fashioned. They simply request their coach to sit out games to aid in recovery.
        2. Nobody plays 48 minutes. If you find that you are struggling with fitness, it is better to ask the coach to let you play fewer minutes than to risk a 2 year suspension.

        An NBA player will have no problem with playing fewer minutes and losing a match. They get paid most of their money anyway. An NBA player can miss the entire season and still get paid all his money.
        A track athlete has no choice but to win. Their pay depends on winning or placing or qualifying. If you don't place you don't get paid. So the incentive to dope is much higher in track


        I am not saying that an NBA player will not dope. I am saying that the incentive for doping in the NBA is far less than in track.
        I am also saying that the impact of doping is more significant in track. It literally makes all the difference. You can go from being a mere participant to being a medal contender. That can never happen in basketball. If you are not an NBA caliber player to begin with then doping to make you fitter or stronger won't help. If it did then doping would be as rampant in basketball as it is in track.
        Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 10:15 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          I am not saying that an NBA player will not dope. I am saying that the incentive for doping in the NBA is far less than in track.

          Considering the money available in basketball is astronomical compared to the pittance in track I find that hard to believe.... also the fact the NBA really doesn't test at all. But everyone has their fantasies.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
            I am not saying that an NBA player will not dope. I am saying that the incentive for doping in the NBA is far less than in track.

            Considering the money available in basketball is astronomical compared to the pittance in track I find that hard to believe.... also the fact the NBA really doesn't test at all. But everyone has their fantasies.
            If the NBA does not test at all then why have some NBA players been suspended for PED?

            Also. It seems you only read one sentence out of each post then you press the reply button. Your responses are very simplistic and offer no substance. Its almost like you've never watched or played basketball. You haven't even tried to explain what aspect of basketball would be enhanced by doping.

            Your statement is the equivalent of a person saying: "Most sprinters must be on EPO since the distance runners use it and sprinters make a lot of money"..
            Any track fan would deem that an ignorant statement since the impact of EPO on sprinting is minimal.
            Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 11:07 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mungo man View Post
              Please explain how doping would benefit a basketball player.
              The basic skills required to play in the NBA are skills like dribbling, shooting, passing, vision, reflexes, anticipation, court vision.
              Please explain How would doping enhance those skills.
              Its very simple, these drugs make you faster, quicker, stronger, more explosive, they allow the athlete to recover much faster. They are perfect for basketball performance enhancement and they ARE being used in the NBA.
              Last edited by user4; 06-17-2020, 10:44 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by user4 View Post

                Its very simple, these drugs make you faster, quicker, stronger, more explosive, they allow you recover much faster. They are perfect for basketball performance enhancement and they ARE being used in the NBA.
                I don't deny that doping can help in basketball. You lot are using the tactic of willful distortion.

                Question: Do you think doping in the basketball is as rampant as it is in track?

                If so then why is it that when a doping scandal is exposed such as the Balco scandal that engulfed track and to a lesser extent baseball, no NBA players are ever exposed. Don't you think Victor Conte and Balco for example would have had numerous NBA clients?

                Why is it that almost all the Balco clients were track athletes and no NBA players?
                Please explain

                Note: Their are far more people trying to make it to the NBA than those trying to earn a living in track. So the likes of Victor Conte and Balco should be making a lot more money in basketball than they do in track.

                So please explain why Balco had few or no basketball clients.
                Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 11:08 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  DrJay and User4

                  While you are at it, please explain why state sponsored doping programs are usually targeted at track and field and not basketball ?
                  I know doping can benefit soccer as it does basketball, so why didn't East Germany dope their soccer players to the extent they did with track. After all soccer is more prestigious in Europe?
                  In fact East Germany was very poor in team sports. They only did well in sports that required raw ability namely track and swimming. This is where drugs are most useful.
                  Why has there never been a state sponsored doping scandal in basketball?


                  Why is it that Eastern European countries that had doping programs did so well in track but poorly in basketball. Whereas the Eastern European countries that excelled in basketball were poor in track e.g. Croatia, Serbia, Lithuania et al.

                  Please explain why the recent Russian doping scandal exposed by Hajjo Sepelt did not engulf any Russian soccer or basketball players.

                  Coach Ma Jun Ren of China suddenly produced an army of world record breaking athletes in China in the early 1990s. Basketball is very popular in China. Far more popular than track or soccer. So how come we have never seen anything similar in basketball?


                  The simple answer to all these questions is that the impact of doping especially state sponsored doping is much higher in track than it is in basketball.
                  Basketball requires a lifetime of constant practice to commit the skills to muscle memory. Basically your brain must memorize the moves until they become 2nd nature. Doping won't help with muscle memory. That's why East Germany and other nations that had state sponsored doping programs were so poor at sports that require skill.
                  Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 11:05 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mungo man View Post
                    .........

                    Why is it that almost all the Balco clients were track athletes and no NBA players?
                    Please explain
                    Victor Conte had roots in the track world dating back to the '80s.... that's simply how his business developed.

                    Track was always far more cutting-edge in the PED department than were the pro ball leagues.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by mungo man View Post
                      Question: Do you think doping in the basketball is as rampant as it is in track?
                      Answer, yes, it is. But there is no aggressive testing so there is no proof. Where there is no proof there can be no presumption of guilt and in a multi billion dollar business with countless advertisers and lawyers and very few testers there will be no drug scandals.

                      Let me go one step further and move us back to the topic of this thread: Christian Coleman is no more a PED abuser than 50% of NBA and NFL players... and that is a worst case scenario of Coleman.
                      Last edited by user4; 06-17-2020, 11:10 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by gh View Post

                        Victor Conte had roots in the track world dating back to the '80s.... that's simply how his business developed.

                        Track was always far more cutting-edge in the PED department than were the pro ball leagues.
                        And why has track always been more cutting edge when it comes to doping?
                        Could it be because the demand for doping is higher in track than it is in basketball. I.E. the demand is market driven?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by user4 View Post

                          Answer, yes, it is. But there is no aggressive testing so there is no proof. Where there is no proof there can be no presumption of guilt and in a multi billion dollar business with countless advertisers and lawyers and very few testers there will be no drug scandals.

                          Let me go one step further and move us back to the topic of this thread: Christian Coleman is no more a PED abuser than 50% of NBA and NFL players... and that is a worst case scenario of Coleman.
                          I see you have conveniently skipped the rest of my questions 😂😂

                          So you are suggesting that NBA players were protected from being mentioned in the Balco scandal due to lawyers and advertizers?
                          For your info Lance Armstrong also had an army of advertizers and lawyers.
                          Last edited by mungo man; 06-17-2020, 11:16 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by gh View Post
                            Track was always far more cutting-edge in the PED department than were the pro ball leagues.
                            I disagree. PED use in the NFL was just as cutting edge starting in the 1980s.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by user4 View Post

                              I disagree. PED use in the NFL was just as cutting edge starting in the 1980s.
                              And it probably still is, given that the NFL has deliberately not adopted the World Anti-Doping Code.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X