Doping in basketball - Do you think there is any?

I am a huge cycling fan and have been for a long time. I've been following the Lance Armstrong stories for days now and it has really started to hit home how widespread the doping issue was in cycling for a long time. I've also been dismayed at how well they crafted scenarios to beat the system. It has got me to thinking about doping in other sports. I don't doubt that HGH has widespread use in baseball and especially football. But I don't know what to think about basketball. An 82 game season is a long duration that takes a huge physical toll on the body. So, do you think players juice to keep up with the grind? Would it give them any competitive advantage? Curious to see what others think.

Small, small % compared to baseball, football and hockey IMO. I'm a big track & field fan and I sadly assume that many are juicing, blood doping, HGH'ing, but not quite to the levels of cycling.

I am a bit jaded on this topic so take my opinion with a grain of salt, however I have 0 doubt that doping is happening in EVERY form of professional athletics, and probably a lot of minor league and major college programs to some extent. There is a reason athletes are running faster, jumping higher, hitting harder, hitting balls farther. It's a sad reality but its really hard to look at a lot of these athletes and all these records being set and not looking at it with a bit of a skeptical eye.

That being said as for the Lance Armstrong gig there was a lot of others doping in those races he won so its still pretty impressive given it was essentially a level playing field given lots of folks are cheating.

On Lance Armstrong I agree, half of those riders have admitted blood doping, so what, strip his wins and give it to the guy that finished 46th?? What is too bad about that is that Lance Armstrong was the best thing that happened to that sport, and also one of the best things that happened to raising money for cancer research. They have pretty much just killed their own sport because without Lance, the TV audience will simply not be there.

On to doping/juicing etc....

I really don't know about basketball. Football - they need to be big and strong so there will always be people trying to put on the muscle. Baseball - sure, they need the strength and bat speed. Juice will help. Basketball - I just don't know. yes guys are jumping higher, but you can point to the training these days. Perfect example is Jerel McNeal. When he got to MU he could barely dunk, but only with a running head start and no defenders. When he left he could throw down in traffic any time he wanted. Large in part because of how Todd Smith trains the guys. He trains them to be more athletic, not to be stronger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Ganzer, "IWB"

On Lance Armstrong I agree, half of those riders have admitted blood doping, so what, strip his wins and give it to the guy that finished 46th?? What is too bad about that is that Lance Armstrong was the best thing that happened to that sport, and also one of the best things that happened to raising money for cancer research. They have pretty much just killed their own sport because without Lance, the TV audience will simply not be there.

---

While I am glad that he raised a bunch of money for cancer, it really is too bad that the money didn't go to the American Cancer Society. This is very long, but a very good summary of what really is wrong about Livestrong.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor...-Lab-Rats.html

Now, has it helped in the "fight against cancer?" No doubt in some manner yes. But if people are truly interested in donating money, that will be used efficiently, to fund cancer research, Livestrong doesn't do that.

I really don't know about basketball. Football - they need to be big and strong so there will always be people trying to put on the muscle. Baseball - sure, they need the strength and bat speed. Juice will help. Basketball - I just don't know. yes guys are jumping higher, but you can point to the training these days. Perfect example is Jerel McNeal. When he got to MU he could barely dunk, but only with a running head start and no defenders. When he left he could throw down in traffic any time he wanted. Large in part because of how Todd Smith trains the guys. He trains them to be more athletic, not to be stronger.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind that the PED's/doping isn't just about building muscle mass. It allows one to have much more intense training sessions and allow their body to recover quicker from those workouts. So whether you are training to get bigger or stronger or you are training to be faster or jump higher, these drugs will help you.

I see what your saying Jim, but remember that cyclists were doping and they certainly don't want to be big and muscular. PEDs do far more than just build muscle as I was pointed out above. Look at a guy like Lebron too... I'm not accusing but that guy is a freak of nature. Maybe I am just jaded, but I wouldn't be surprised if every athelete in every sport was tested and it was honest results that we may all be shocked by the results.

I hear you, but when you are talking about the cyclists, Tour de France guys are riding rough courses with 95 mile days. That is several hours of constant riding every day. There are no timeouts, breaks for out of bounds, free throws, in between quarters - much different deal. When it comes to that type of blood doping, I would think it would be more common in marathon running or things of that nature as opposed to quick sprint sports like football, basketball and baseball.

Being a huge cycling fan (and triathlon too), now with LA's "conviction" the number is 90%+ of TDF podium winners from 1999-2006 that have tested positive for doping at one point or the other in their career. Not justification, just that EVERYONE was doing it. LA just happen to be the fastest of the dopers. Just a sad state of affairs all around though.

And the "doping" in cycling was more about inserting more red (not white) blood cells into your body. Red blood cells carry oxygen to muscles. The higher number of red blood cells that you have, the more oxygen your muscles get, the faster you go.

Take baseball. Right now the HGH type drugs are banned. Problem is, they are very difficult to identify in a test.
I'd like baseball to incorporate into their agreement with the players, that if in three years (for example) we find a great HGH test, we will then go back to the date it was determined that HGH was banned and we will again test every sample to determine if HGH was present.

Problem is baseball players (and other athletes) know that chemists are ahead of the game, so taking some banned drugs are not that much of a risk for detection. If there was concern on behalf of players that MLB could get a great HGH test in two years, and would go back and test samples, they may be less apt to take a chance on banned substances going forward beacuse they are tough to detect.

Probably a number of reasons why it wouldn't work, but without something like that, cheaters will likely be one step ahead of the testers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goose85

Take baseball. Right now the HGH type drugs are banned. Problem is, they are very difficult to identify in a test.
I'd like baseball to incorporate into their agreement with the players, that if in three years (for example) we find a great HGH test, we will then go back to the date it was determined that HGH was banned and we will again test every sample to determine if HGH was present.

Problem is baseball players (and other athletes) know that chemists are ahead of the game, so taking some banned drugs are not that much of a risk for detection. If there was concern on behalf of players that MLB could get a great HGH test in two years, and would go back and test samples, they may be less apt to take a chance on banned substances going forward beacuse they are tough to detect.

Probably a number of reasons why it wouldn't work, but without something like that, cheaters will likely be one step ahead of the testers.

---

Speaking of HGH, have any of you seen Barry Bonds latelty???

Attachment 303

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Djgoldnboy

Speaking of HGH, have any of you seen Barry Bonds latelty???

Attachment 303

---

Yes, and his head seems to be reverting to a more normal size as well.

[QUOTE=Jim Ganzer, "IWB";12329]On Lance Armstrong I agree, half of those riders have admitted blood doping, so what, strip his wins and give it to the guy that finished 46th?? What is too bad about that is that Lance Armstrong was the best thing that happened to that sport, and also one of the best things that happened to raising money for cancer research. They have pretty much just killed their own sport because without Lance, the TV audience will simply not be there."

I agree with this completely. I had a conversation about steroids in Baseball a few years back with a patient of mine who is a Major league pitcher and I told him that I would think that if Albert Pujols tested positive, they would throw away those results and nobody would ever hear about it. This was when Albert was Tearing MLB up and there were a lot of high profile steroid busts seemingly eveyday that was undermining the integrity of Baseball.....

My friend agreed with me. The pr nightmare that would have ensued would have cost the game Millions......

Same reason that Carl Lewis' positive PED test was overturned by the American Olympic committee before the LA games in 1984.....Like it or not, some athlets are bigger than the game.

Unfortunately for Lance, the Frenchies hate him. They were not going to let this die.....