How accurate would you say the following statement is:

How accurate would you say the following statement is:

Virtually every strength, speed, or endurance athlete competing at a professional, Olympic, or world-class level is on one or more performance enhancement drugs.

That is 100% accurate.

not to mention there are plenty of legal peds such as caffeine.

100% incorrect.

Every single college level, semi-pro and pro athlete in every single sport you can fathom is or has been on one or more performance enhancing drug of one type or the other.

That is a fact.

You have never at any point in your entire life seen a natural pro-athlete of any level in any sport.

I would go so far as to say this includes sports where you wouldn't expect it as much: basketball, tennis, etc.

How do Venus and Serena get away with it?

Because it is what the crowd wants

Cause as bad as American Athletes are with peds, euros are worse. Noone wants a serious Fifa level inquisition into athlete substance abuse cause many celebrated athletes would be disgraced.

100% true
think about it: in the 50s only russians had steroids, and they were dominating; when others got access to them, the playing field got equalised
now, russia's olympic team got caught using steroids, but their performance wasn't exceptional, only comparable to other countries'. what does that make you think?

100% accurate

Former college athlete here. Please tell me what drugs I took.

>I would go so far as to say this includes sports where you wouldn't expect it as much: basketball, tennis, etc.

you poor naive child

Well... what kind of athlete were you?

>Says they're a former college athlete
>Never says what sport they were in or their sex

You can go away now.

My bad. I'm a dude. I played soccer.

Almost completely accurate. Some of them don't even think of it as juicing. Pic related was the "best natural bodybuilder in the world" while using grams of prohormones and legal steroids like Superdrol (which is still legal in America, iirc). I mean obviously all pro athletes are juicing their asses off but I genuinely believe they delude themselves into thinking that the gear they use accounts for less than one percent of their success. In reality, most athletes have no chance of even turning pro without taking something.

There are certain positions in highly position oriented sports that probably allow someone to get away with being natty or mostly natty. For instance, I don't know that you NEED to be on gear to be the back up kicker for a low ranking NFL team. But then again, maybe you do.

took weed

Took acting classes

uh huh..

If that counts as performance enhancing I guess. But only like 3 times in the off-season spring semester. Never during regular season and never regularly.

Lel

What?

No, no you're obviously not a lying faggot.

I remember listening to something along the lines of "in football, are even the quarterbacks taking stuff?"

The short answer was yes because it enables faster recovery, more practice, stronger, faster throws, etc.

I'd imagine the same applies to a backup kicker. Have you ever tried to kick a 50 yr field goal? Good luck.

I'm not. IDK how to prove to you that I'm not lying though.. I played college soccer. It was D3 though. Managed to become a 2 time regional all-American, close to full All-American my senior year. I played right back. Played in the ncaa tournament 3 times. Never made it past the sweet 16 though.

Took music theory
fuck me, right?

uh huh...

It's not a bad thing to be sceptical, but I have no reason to lie right.

>Athlete

Were you serious about it and actually good? Were you trying to go pro? If not then shut the fuck up. If yes than you are an outlier

>I din't do it so it's not true!!
Yea doesn't work like that