SHOW ME How roids are bad for boxing

[786]

They can give a fighter an advantage in certain areas, be that cutting weight, strength, stamina whatever it is. Now if one fighter is on them and the other isn't, it's an unfair advantage.

You'll probably say "show me" but what do you want to be shown? If they do not provide an advantage then why would fighters take them and risk a fine, ban etc?

Why is it bad for boxing? Again these fighters get certain advantages from PEDs and it's unfair on the fighters who are clean. If everyone was allowed to take them, it'd be an even playing field and we wouldn't be having these discussions.

There's a netflix documentary on the Conte scandal and there are certain athletes on there that benefited from it that are on the documentary talking about what advantages they got from PEDs and how they improved as a result. Some would break records and get to positions they would never be in without the PEDs. It's bad for sport if certain substances are banned and some athletes get those advantages while clean athletes don't.

Having loaded wraps may be more dangerous but it's similar in that one fighter has an unfair advantage over the other.

[TMLT87]

They're not. It would better if they were legal and it was a totally even and open playing field tbh. From a fans perspective PEDs mean you're getting a higher level of athleticism which in turn typically means a higher level of whatever sport you're watching. And from an athletes perspective it typically helps dealing with/staving off injuries and career longevity.

[Citizen Koba]

TS needs to define what he means by 'bad for boxing'... Different folks have different values and different reasons for watching or following the sport.

For me - aside from the well established health problems they cause - it's simply because any kind of PED has the potential to give an unfair advantage to one fighter or another. That isn't what I want to see. I want to see a match-up between two fighters based on their fitness, skill and will with extraneous influencing factors kept to a minimum.

Unless the TS is contending that PEDS do not provide any advantages (in which case they wouldn't be PEDS and no-one would bother taking them) then for me they make the sport worse because they make it potentially less fair, and, if taken to the logical extreme, could cause the sport to devolve largely into a compertiton over who could afford the best pharmacist.

Now understand that I'm not one of those who imagines for a moment thet PEDS of any kind can turn a mediocre boxer into an elite fighter, but when competition is tight and levels close and the difference between winning and losing is at the very margins, an extra microsecond of response time here or a fraction more stamina there undoubtedly PEDS can be difference between victory and loss, success and failure.

I don't want the fights I watched to be determined that way, simple as.

[TheProudLunatic]

They can give a fighter an advantage in certain areas, be that cutting weight, strength, stamina whatever it is. Now if one fighter is on them and the other isn't, it's an unfair advantage.

You'll probably say "show me" but what do you want to be shown? If they do not provide an advantage then why would fighters take them and risk a fine, ban etc?

Why is it bad for boxing? Again these fighters get certain advantages from PEDs and it's unfair on the fighters who are clean. If everyone was allowed to take them, it'd be an even playing field and we wouldn't be having these discussions.

There's a netflix documentary on the Conte scandal and there are certain athletes on there that benefited from it that are on the documentary talking about what advantages they got from PEDs and how they improved as a result. Some would break records and get to positions they would never be in without the PEDs. It's bad for sport if certain substances are banned and some athletes get those advantages while clean athletes don't.

Having loaded wraps may be more dangerous but it's similar in that one fighter has an unfair advantage over the other.

Of course I'm gonna "Show me" you...
It's in the damn title !

So many roid fights, so little to show

[TheProudLunatic]

"Just so you know, I'm going to roid up when we fight ."
" Do what you gotta do "

[TheProudLunatic]

They're not. It would better if they were legal and it was a totally even and open playing field tbh. From a fans perspective PEDs mean you're getting a higher level of athleticism which in turn typically means a higher level of whatever sport you're watching. And from an athletes perspective it typically helps dealing with/staving off injuries and career longevity.

How do you know roids are responsible for the so called increased athleticism ?
Is there a fight where the roider did anything special ???

Still waiting for people to SHOW ME how bad roids are for BOXING.

I posted a link that was quickly ignored -

Boxing related injuries.

Roids, doe.

[TheProudLunatic]

TS needs to define what he means by 'bad for boxing'... Different folks have different values and different reasons for watching or following the sport.

For me - aside from the well established health problems they cause - it's simply because any kind of PED has the potential to give an unfair advantage to one fighter or another. That isn't what I want to see. I want to see a match-up between two fighters based on their fitness, skill and will with extraneous influencing factors kept to a minimum.

Unless the TS is contending that PEDS do not provide any advantages (in which case they wouldn't be PEDS and no-one would bother taking them) then for me they make the sport worse because they make it potentially less fair, and, if taken to the logical extreme, could cause the sport to devolve largely into a compertiton over who could afford the best pharmacist.

Now understand that I'm not one of those who imagines for a moment thet PEDS of any kind can turn a mediocre boxer into an elite fighter, but when competition is tight and levels close and the difference between winning and losing is at the very margins, an extra microsecond of response time here or a fraction more stamina there undoubtedly PEDS can be difference between victory and loss, success and failure.

I don't want the fights I watched to be determined that way, simple as.

Sheesh....

"Well established health problems....."

Show me

[IAmABoxingGuru]

You should change your name to TheProudIdiot

[M312]

VLT7kbV3g6UWscYKKKnj3x39kswQZuNuIiN6ewgHKdc.png?auto=webp&s=e58cc94bf251995a12fb7d880d50e82636219317.png

Don't ask me to prove your point


(You made an edit, so I made one to reflect it)

And then you undid your edit .....

"If so, you're an idiot.

If not, then there just needs to be an equal playing field, otherwise its not good for boxing is it?

Pretty simple really."



Gets all name cally while not being able to prove his point

I didn't undo any edits.

I'm just genuinely confused what you are saying.

Are you saying roids do nothing? And you want a video to prove it does?

Have you ever been on YouTube?

[Smash]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EerSfnVw8dU

here ya go

ben johnson winning gold in 1988 seoul olympics

"He won the 100 metres at the 1987 World Championships in Athletics; and at the 1988 Summer Olympics, but was disqualified for doping and stripped of the gold medal; and later he also lost most of the other medals he had achieved while being doped - with anabolic steroids (since 1981 until caught the first time in 1988)"

dumb ass

roids increase speed and endurance both used for boxing, in fact a lot of boxing fights are won or lost in the championship rounds, whoever has the energy left often wins those rounds