Armstrong SARMs S4 Undetectable Drug

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
python said:
just so you know guys..

if there is an undetectable effective drug right now, here, today out there that's been used (but not yet abused cos only a handful knows about it) it would be a designer anabolic steroid.
Hey David... You reading this? Watch TV, train only on weekends & Honk yourself up on this drug, its perfect & your guranteed Tour success in '010.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
yup.

Rise Of The Dead said:
No they can't... The untrained person doesn't have the strength/strength endurance of an elite rider, so comparing them two extremes is way off.

Strength isn't a factor in road cycling???... How about you go & say that to Fabian Cancellara.

Your way off....
Yup, I agree...

BigBoat said:
Muscle strength like you see in body builders or even sprinters bares no real resemblance to Grand Tour success unless you goal is to win some flat stages.
Muscles are the engines of the body. You can increase the size or efficiency of the engines, or improve the fuel delivery system, or the quality of the fuel, or all of the above, or any combination.

BigBoat said:
If you go to Robbie McEwen's web pages and look at him his muscle strength isnt that impressive either. I can get more strength in chest and thighs after 3 weeks in the gym.
Really? What's your measure? How are you determining that?

BigBoat said:
The real cycling doping increases 02 carrying,.
That's part of the equation but you really can't separate the fuel and delivery systems from the engines they're feeding.

BigBoat said:
Lances secrets lie in increasing his V02 max. Like blood doping with his own blood for starters as somebody else showed a picture of.
Yeah, because for the most part he already has the legs.

BigBoat said:
Dr. Ferrari's success as a dope guru has to do with increasing the sustainable power of his riders with 02 doping..
It's not like Ferrari didn't have anabolic/recovery agents on his menu though.

BigBoat said:
My mom has enough strength to push 500 watts on a bike, its not very hard. :) Maintaining that for a 5 minute effort wont happen for her, let alone an hour.
For how many revolutions?

There are all sorts of compromises made to win a GT but it seems obvious that you need a high level of strength/anaerobic, and aerobic capacity to win either sprints, classics, or Tours.

Most of these arguments on here seem to be based on semantics.

I'm just guessing, but your comments lead me to believe that you have a lot of power on the bike for top end speed, but lack the ability to hold that, or a substantially lower speed for any great distance. Others, such as myself are trying to solve the opposite problem.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Race Radio said:
Also important is increasing muscle mass while keeping weight low. All that oxygen carrying capability is useless if you have no muscle to use it.
Yeah, exactly.

Some people here are looking at absolute strength to the exclusion of all else. It's obviously a blend.

Obviously an engine of a 777 is incredibly powerful, but look at the weight it has to move. That doesn't mean that a 600cc motorcycle engine doesn't produce incredible power too.

Yeah, a Top Fuel dragster is more powerful and much larger than an F1 engine. They may also use different fuels.

With the artificial distinction between "strength" and "endurance" this thread went off on a silly tangent.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
BigBoat said:
Well it depends...Sprinters want more muscle force per kilo whereas G.C. contenders want more oxygen assimilation per kilo. Its like contrasting talents.
It's one and the same talent. Fuel provided to an engine to produce power measured in watts.


BigBoat said:
If I was a Tour contender I'd honestly spend zero time strength training. I'd ride long and hard when jacked on HGH, or IGF-1, etc but just hard and short when clean.
Yes, but each person has different strengths and weaknesses.


BigBoat said:
A sprinter like Robbie, or Cavendish will need some force though.
You're making meaningless distinctions. Everyone needs force. That's what you are imparting to the pedals and what's trying to be measured in the lab to improve your position on the bike to increase the force imparted to the pedals during the stroke.

BigBoat said:
They dont really spend tons of time sprinting because its a genetic god given talent they were born with...Twice a week is good nuff....
You're making the incorrect assumption, that more of anything equates to better. In strength training you are actually trying to find the minimum amount required to produce the desired results, rather than the maximum you can tolerate. You do realize that you can lose strength by overtraining and the required amount of strength training is very small. What is required is very high intensity.

BigBoat said:
They spend an awful lot of time training V02 max and FTP so they can keep up with the pack...And yes blood doped Cavendish will win twice as many races as clean Cavendish no question...Ever been in the last 5Km of any bike race field sprint and its easy to see you need lots of oxygen.
Well, yeah, because improving your ability to deliver oxygen to the muscles requires a different type of training than anaerobic maximal efforts. That doesn't mean that even the skinniest climbers aren't incredibly strong for their weight.

What is Contador, 5'10", under 140lbs? The guy is a powerhouse no matter what your standards are.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
buckwheat said:
It's one and the same talent. Fuel provided to an engine to produce power measured in watts.




Yes, but each person has different strengths and weaknesses.




You're making meaningless distinctions. Everyone needs force. That's what you are imparting to the pedals and what's trying to be measured in the lab to improve your position on the bike to increase the force imparted to the pedals during the stroke.



You're making the incorrect assumption, that more of anything equates to better. In strength training you are actually trying to find the minimum amount required to produce the desired results, rather than the maximum you can tolerate. You do realize that you can lose strength by overtraining and the required amount of strength training is very small. What is required is very high intensity.



Well, yeah, because improving your ability to deliver oxygen to the muscles requires a different type of training than anaerobic maximal efforts. That doesn't mean that even the skinniest climbers aren't incredibly strong for their weight.

What is Contador, 5'10", under 140lbs? The guy is a powerhouse no matter what your standards are.
He's a powerhouse because of his oxygen consumption (Contrador), in other words he has a lot of type one fibers. Cavendish has more force production and less Oxidative capacity, he has more type II B fibers than Contador has and he also is bigger.

Mitochondrial density is low with Type II, B fibers. Type II B fibers move up to 10 times faster than Type 1 fibers for short efforts, but even Type II A fibers are larger in size than slow twitch fibers. A 400 meter sprinter is going to have bigger muscles than his identical twin who works on 4,000 meter efforts.
 
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
Originally Posted by BigBoat
If you go to Robbie McEwen's web pages and look at him his muscle strength isnt that impressive either. I can get more strength in chest and thighs after 3 weeks in the gym.
When push comes to shove, after 200k's of racing you wouldn't figure against Robbie in the sprint. Sprinting is explosive strength, not raw. All that strength means nothing if you can't use it explosively.

Originally Posted by BigBoat
Lances secrets lie in increasing his V02 max. Like blood doping with his own blood for starters as somebody else showed a picture of.
9 riders in in the '05 Tour had larger capacities than his with the ability to uptake more oxygen?... Ohh wait a minute, them 9 riders didn't figure in the overall GC. Time to find yourself another secret.

Originally Posted by BigBoat
If I was a Tour contender I'd honestly spend zero time strength training. I'd ride long and hard when jacked on HGH, or IGF-1, etc but just hard and short when clean.
I hope the Schlecks are taking note...

Originally Posted by BigBoat
They dont really spend tons of time sprinting because its a genetic god given talent they were born with...Twice a week is good nuff....
Sprinters spend alot of there time preparing both physically & mentally for sprinting, which is literally full-time. Its not a god-given talent. Any rider can improve there sprinting with specific training.

Originally Posted by BigBoat
They spend an awful lot of time training V02 max and FTP so they can keep up with the pack...And yes blood doped Cavendish will win twice as many races as clean Cavendish no question...Ever been in the last 5Km of any bike race field sprint and its easy to see you need lots of oxygen.
Wrong. A blood doped Cavendish will not win twice as many races as a clean Cavendish. A patient, drafting Cavendish will have all the oxygen he needs to explode for the line in a bunch sprint that will only last for around a 30 second effort. There is a huge difference in the amount of energy going into the pedals from Cavendish drafting at 5k out, as opposed to him exploding in the final seconds.
 
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
BigBoat said:
He's a powerhouse because of his oxygen consumption (Contrador), in other words he has a lot of type one fibers. Cavendish has more force production and less Oxidative capacity, he has more type II B fibers than Contador has and he also is bigger.

Mitochondrial density is low with Type II, B fibers. Type II B fibers move up to 10 times faster than Type 1 fibers for short efforts, but even Type II A fibers are larger in size than slow twitch fibers. A 400 meter sprinter is going to have bigger muscles than his identical twin who works on 4,000 meter efforts.
Marathon runners can uptake more oxygen than Contador, they can't turn the pedals though. So no, there is more to Contador & cycling performance in general than just oxygen uptake.

Would you put your mortgage on guessing Contador has a lot more Type I fibers???... Its just that I'm thinking of his Prologue performance in Monaco at this years Tour, 2nd place, 18 seconds down on Cancellara. I'm sure putting in such a powerful performance, there must be some Type II B fibers in there somewhere... Sprint athletes are all about Type II B fibers, some of them thin & in the hall of fame. Carl Lewis, Kim Collins example.
 
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
Animal said:
Oh dear oh dear.

Armchair sports fans with ESPN level knowledge.
Thats 100% correct.

An untrained person can apply the same amount force to the pedals as a Fabian Cancellara, Mark Cavendish etc, only VO2 being the limiting factor. Come back when you know what your talking about. :confused: VO2 is needed for every action we perform.

Animal said:
"strength" (the amount of force that a rider can apply to pedals) is not a factor in road cycling.
There you have it folks. "Strength" endurance isn't required.

No offense, I respect all cyclists, but your no Cancellara or Armstrong, they both lift & unfortuantly if you believe VO2 max is just the limiting factor to cycling performance, your way off line. Don't concentrate on one aspect of cycling performance or you won't get too the top, you will just plateau.
 
Rise Of The Dead said:
Don't concentrate on one aspect of cycling performance or you won't get too the top, you will just plateau.
Instead, concentrate on all those main factors of a power-endurance sport like cycling. So, in addition to blood doping and improving O2 delivery, don't forget that HgH, IGF, and all the other nifty little 'techniques' coming out, in addition to your training!
 
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
Ripper said:
Instead, concentrate on all those main factors of a power-endurance sport like cycling. So, in addition to blood doping and improving O2 delivery, don't forget that HgH, IGF, and all the other nifty little 'techniques' coming out, in addition to your training!
No! HgH, IGF, doping across the board, only goes towards enhancing one aspect of cycling performance. Concentrating on (one) limiting factor to cycling performance can't possibly make you a Tour contender or eventual winner. Lance Armstrong can't win the Tour doping, its impossible. Increasing O2 delivery through doping is one rider taking advantage of just one aspect of cycling performance.
 
Jan 3, 2010
1
0
0
Dr.Pharmstrong said:
Armstrong (sic) is taking (sarm s4) This is what it does, the perfect drug.

and the name of his groupset (sram) where do you think the name came
from ?

and yes all you guys buying sram groupsets pays for the research for the next coctail.
:eek:

Warning... for the public good, please be advised that S4 is NOT Ostarine. S-4 is a FAILED drug formally by GTx in partnerships with J&J that went by the name Andarine.

S-4 failed in the clinic for serious tox issues. However now there are black marketers... which I suspect include Dr. Pharmstrong... who are illegally selling S-4.

Need proof? See: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122688095/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

By the way, jerk weed: "SRAM Corporation is a privately held bicycle component manufacturer based in Chicago, Illinois, founded in 1987. SRAM is an acronym comprising the names of its founders, Scott, Ray, and Sam, (where Ray is the middle name of company head Stan Day)." (Thank you Wiki.)

SRAM has nothing to do with any company doing ethical research on Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators.

And to reply to another authors erroneous claims that SARM are like other "estrogen blockers" (then lists a few ... which are not ER antagonsits but aromatase inhibitors), SARMs are novel non-steroidal AR agonists and have nothing in common with agents you list. (By the way, the Wiki on S-4 / Ostarine is KNOWN to be in error....and there in now an investigation ongoing that suspects it is he or his cohorts that keeps reposting this error so he can sell his toxic brew.)
 
Jan 1, 2010
73
0
0
S-4 Warning said:
Warning... for the public good, please be advised that S4 is NOT Ostarine. S-4 is a FAILED drug formally by GTx in partnerships with J&J that went by the name Andarine.
No worries. Its impossible for a rider to win the Tour doping.
 
"No worries. Its impossible for a rider to win the Tour doping." posted by rise of the dead


I don't contribute much to the clinic, because i don't have any special knowledge or inside information about doping. I'm just a fan, who comes here to learn, since there are some very knowledgeable and well informed people posting here, and the best threads are very informative. however, it's very frustrating when what's looking to be a good thread, is destroyed by some moron posting things he can't possibly believe in himself, over and over again. (Like, for instance, "epo doesn't work", and variations of this.) I strongly encourage the posters here who actually knows something about cycling and doping (you know who you are..) to keep posting, and for the other morons: i sincerely hope you lose your fingers and are forced to type with your nose.
 
Sep 9, 2009
532
0
0
zapata said:
"No worries. Its impossible for a rider to win the Tour doping." posted by rise of the dead


I don't contribute much to the clinic, because i don't have any special knowledge or inside information about doping. I'm just a fan, who comes here to learn, since there are some very knowledgeable and well informed people posting here, and the best threads are very informative. however, it's very frustrating when what's looking to be a good thread, is destroyed by some moron posting things he can't possibly believe in himself, over and over again. (Like, for instance, "epo doesn't work", and variations of this.) I strongly encourage the posters here who actually knows something about cycling and doping (you know who you are..) to keep posting, and for the other morons: i sincerely hope you lose your fingers and are forced to type with your nose.
...and then someone cuts off your nose, just for good measure. But don't bother with anesthetics -- they don't work!
 
filipo said:
...and then someone cuts off your nose, just for good measure. But don't bother with anesthetics -- they don't work!
He! considering the tenacity of some of these people, i'm sure they'll find some other way to type..
 
Sep 9, 2009
532
0
0
zapata said:
He! considering the tenacity of some of these people, i'm sure they'll find some other way to type..
Show him a pic of Armstrong in tights, and his pecker could hit a keyboard from 30 paces.
 

B.A.N.N.E.D

BANNED
Jul 26, 2010
10
0
0
Animal said:
No. "strength" (the amount of force that a rider can apply to pedals) is not a factor in road cycling.

Untrained people can apply the same force to pedals that an elite rider applies when climbing an alpine climb.

They just cannot continue to do so because they cannot supply the force producing muscles with the required oxygen to sustain the effort.
Troll........
 
Apr 28, 2009
493
0
0
Roland Rat said:
Wow. So you joined today and you've already read so much of the forum that you're back to threads that ended nearly 4 months ago? That's some reading. Well done.

One to keep an eye on methinks.
it's BPC making sure we all know he's back. I guess he got tired of 'playing nice' under his other aliases
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS