WOW... Marquez with suspect ACNE all over chest [WEIGH IN]

[MBE]

what's the big deal?

At 40 years old when muscle mass, testosterone and other hormonal levels are depleting, a guy shows up with the same symptoms of steroid abuse having never shown it in his adult life, all while working with a convicted doper.

Coincidence?

[CubanGuyNYC]

The naivety of this board is startling.

They are ALL juicing. All the p4pers are on that ****. And everyone below them too.

Some are dumb enough to get caught (Peterson, Rios, Berto etc). Some are not very good at hiding su****ion (Marquez, Pacquiao, RJJ). Some can't hide the numerous red flags and common sense perspective when it comes to evaluating whether they are on PEDs (Mayweather, Hopkins).

Everyone is on it. Why do you think Pacquaio, unlike his fans, never complained about a fairly-obviously juiced-up JMM knocking him out? Cos he knew what was up. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

My favorite post so far. Yes, most fans are incredibly naive when it comes to this issue. While I don't necessarily agree that everyone is juicing, I do believe that many, perhaps most, are or have been using PEDs. It's a rampant problem in most sports. PEDs improve athletic performance. It's a fact. Why wouldn't an athlete, competing for great sums of money, fame and adulation not consider using them, especially if they suspect many of their peers are?

[salitap4p#1]

Because clearly he is also injecting high doses of test right into his blood stream, but for what? Doesn't do any good if he isn't fighting anyone.

Because if you used your brain for a moment, you would realise the pictures of him with back acne date from when he was fighting.

[Boxing Goat]

Ha, JMM on testosterone again.

[CubanGuyNYC]

At 40 years old when muscle mass, testosterone and other hormonal levels are depleting, a guy shows up with the same symptoms of steroid abuse having never shown it in his adult life, all while working with a convicted doper.

Coincidence?

Another good post. Like they say, never underestimate the power of denial. People will overlook the obvious when they simply don't like what it spells.

[Dr Rumack]

My favorite post so far. Yes, most fans are incredibly naive when it comes to this issue. While I don't necessarily agree that everyone is juicing, I do believe that many, perhaps most, are or have been using PEDs. It's a rampant problem in most sports. PEDs improve athletic performance. It's a fact. Why wouldn't an athlete, competing for great sums of money, fame and adulation not consider using them, especially if they suspect many of their peers are?

When talking about 'everyone doing it', it's important to distinguish between different levels of doping I think. There's popping test caps to speed up recovery from an injury, and then there's entire training programs built around steroid cycles.

Conflating the two is dangerous, as you get guys who tested positive for some relatively mild stimulant placed in the same category as a high-end systematic doper. It's like the difference between a habitual crack user and someone who smokes weed every now and then.

[Weebler I]

I hope Alvarado beats him out of the sport.

[New England]

what's the big deal?

acne is often a product of excess test production.

marquez is 40 years old, and works with a guy who has a documented involvement with high level ped use in sprinters

[CubanGuyNYC]

When talking about 'everyone doing it', it's important to distinguish between different levels of doping I think. There's popping test caps to speed up recovery from an injury, and then there's entire training programs built around steroid cycles.

Good post, Doc. I agree. It's something I've alluded to in previous posts.

Conflating the two is dangerous, as you get guys who tested positive for some relatively mild stimulant placed in the same category as a high-end systematic doper. It's like the difference between a habitual crack user and someone who smokes weed every now and then.

On this, I agree to an extent. On the one hand, we can agree that there are degrees; on the other, cheating is cheating. Cheating "a little bit" is like being a little bit pregnant. While I wouldn't view someone who used a mild stimulant in the same light as a steroid abuser, the fact would remain that they cheated. Banned substances are such because they give, in the eyes of a governing body, an unfair advantage. Is a small unfair advantage not to be condemned? Where do we draw the line? It's clear the line was drawn when the rules were written. When you go beyond that, subjectivity, prejudice and favoritism enter the equation. There's only one way to eliminate that: strict adherence to the written rules. Want to make mild stimulants okay to use? Change the rules. It's that simple.

[Dr Rumack]

Good post, Doc. I agree. It's something I've alluded to in previous posts.



On this, I agree to an extent. On the one hand, we can agree that there are degrees; on the other, cheating is cheating. Cheating "a little bit" is like being a little bit pregnant. While I wouldn't view someone who used a mild stimulant in the same light as a steroid abuser, the fact would remain that they cheated. Banned substances are such because they give, in the eyes of a governing body, an unfair advantage. Is a small unfair advantage not to be condemned? Where do we draw the line? It's clear the line was drawn when the rules were written. When you go beyond that, subjectivity, prejudice and favoritism enter the equation. There's only one way to eliminate that: strict adherence to the written rules. Want to make mild stimulants okay to use? Change the rules. It's that simple.

I just think the scale of the cheating could be considered.

As for where we draw the line? That's like asking why Puerto Ricans keep punching people in the balls. No one knows.