Reactive Training Systems

JordanLinteris · Senior Member

Lifetime suspensions.

Date: Jul 1, 2009

Normally I would be all gung-ho and say that you should not use if competing in a "drug-free" federation, but this is kind of a gray area...

Almost all the olympic weightlifters I know are on something. They consider "passing the test" as a part of the sport, just as we try to get the most out of our gear, cut depth and hope the judges pass it, pull the bench belt really low so the belly benching is less noticeable (for you single ply guys), put stickum so our butt appears to stay on the bench, etc.

When it comes to top-level IPF competition, some guys view AAS the same way. If I were to go to the IPF, there is no way I could be competitive at high levels without some serious drug use; not all of us are blessed with tremendous genetics like Mike T! But on the other hand, the IPF and affiliates are supposed to be a safe haven for those who do not want to use, so why should they be forced to compete against users? There are plenty of untested feds, go there if you want to use!

Again, I am not trying to justify their use, just want to stimulate discussion! Regardless, best of luck to Melanichev, Belyaev, et all, in whatever they decide to do!

JordanLinteris · Senior Member

I have to go completely against you on this one, Kyle. Equipment, cutting depth and all of the other things are all legit parts of the sport. That is what judging is about. If you cut depth a little too much, than red lights are supposed to be thrown your way. If you belly bench, than same thing. I think IPF judging is strict enough that people who aren't trying to cut corners still have a hell of a time getting lifts passed. Doing steroids to compete takes things to a whole new level. Everything listed above is approved, gear isn't. I really have a hard time thinking that it is some coincedence that the guys that got lifetime suspensions just happen to be genetically gifted, with a little bit of assistance. I believe (from seeing steroids used first hand in the gym) that the gains are INSANE, the recovery is insane and the mindset to lift big things is there. I disagree that this is a grey area. I think that this is outright cheating.

On a side note, I think those guys are going to be a force to be reckoned with when, or if they go to a multiply. Malinichev in multiply gear, with breifs and a monolift. HOLY CRAP. Might as well write some new records for him already.

briangodsen · Senior Member

"If you had to take a drug with the known side effects of anabolic steroids to keep your job and support your family, would you do it?"

-Bigger, Stronger, Faster

Maybe the banned Russians faced this question. Then again, maybe they didn't and they just wanted an edge to compete. Because powerlifting is just a hobby for me, I'm glad I don't ever have to ever ask myself that question.

TRON · Senior Member

If you compete in a non-tested federation, then more power to you. When the time comes you can be a man (or a he\she woman), and face any legal or physical consequences that may (or may not) be in store for you. I will enjoy watching you lift the big numbers.

With all of the options out there, and you choose to compete in a drug tested federation while using drugs, that is another story. You should probably seek psychological therapy to work out your feelings of inadequacy for why your father did not have any balls that he could have passed down to you.

JordanLinteris · Senior Member

"If you had to take a drug with the known side effects of anabolic steroids to keep your job and support your family, would you do it?"

I have a hard time believing that the Russians will pay their own athletes to do steroids to outlift everyone, than drug test the same athletes and publicly humiliate them in front of the world. If they were paid athletes then there would be absolutely no way that the Russians would test the athletes they were feeding steroids too in the first place.

A lot of people on powerliftingwatch complain on the forum about how sad of a day it is in powerlifting. They should give their head a shake. It is actually sad that so many people who potentially might be drugfree have come second too cheaters.... that is what is sad.

"With all of the options out there, and you choose to compete in a drug tested federation while using drugs, that is another story. You should probably seek psychological therapy to work out your feelings of inadequacy for why your father did not have any balls that he could have passed down to you."---couldnt agree with you more man.

MikeGagne · Senior Member

I dont think theres any such thing as "Drug-free meets". Drug tested maybe but not drug free. There is no test to detect human growth hormone accurately yet. Also there are steroids so advanced they cannot be detected yet. I really have no respect for lifters who compete in drug free federations who are cheating.

Date: Jul 2, 2009

My views on this are rather complicated (at least I think so). I'm even somewhat hesitant to share, but I guess I should anyway.

First of all, I don't think there's a grey area at all. The rules state that you shouldn't use banned substances. Using them is in direct violation of the rules and is by definition cheating. There's no other way it can be. By that same token, spraying stickum on your singlet so you can get away with a little butt-raise is cheating also. Regardless of how you rationalize it -- saying beating the test is part of the sport, etc -- it's still cheating. And if cheating is part of the sport, then there are bigger issues than only a few people breaking rules.

Kyle, one thing you said was, "If I were to go to the IPF, there is no way I could be competitive at high levels without some serious drug use; not all of us are blessed with tremendous genetics like Mike T!" I realize you also validated the counter-argument, so I recognize that this one snipet doesn't capture your whole stance.
If you (not "you" specifically) can't compete at a high level without cheating, maybe you shouldn't compete at a high level. That will sound harsh among the "let's all be winners" crowd and the "I am more important than anyone else" crowd, but it's the harsh truth. I have no business playing basketball from a talent standpoint, so if I find myself in a game, I need to keep my raw abilities in perspective. Even if I want to be a really good basketball player, that doesn't justify cheating.
Your statement really juxtaposes two emotions that things like this stir in me. On the one hand, I'm sad to see guys like this go. Cheating or not, they were strong competition and that serves to make everyone better. It's a driving force behind a lot of guy's training. Also, I've beaten guys (Jr Worlds '06) who were admittedly on (they even tried to get a friend of mine to be a dealer). Beating a cheater thru the use of hard work and fair play is very satisfying.

But on the other hand, these guys were taking the spotlight from those who really deserved it. If you get rid of cheaters, you see who the best is among competitors following a standard set of rules. And that's the point and the nature of fair play. I should qualify that statement as well. Just because I have those two emotions doesn't mean I'm conflicted over the right/wrong issue of it -- right and wrong has nothing to do with how we feel.

Just a little side note: I have a friend who grew up in communist Romania. He was a very good soccer player and he explained to me the way someone got paid for playing thier sport. It's not quite how we percieve it in the west. It's not like, "take drugs to feed your family or go hungry". It would be similar to playing on the company softball team. If you were really good, the company would pay you to compete, but when you passed your prime / got dethroned / got tired of competition / whatever, you picked your job back up with the company. If you were really good, they would often try to hook you up with a cush job. In the way it was explained to me, it's not like, "if I don't win this meet, my children will go hungry." Not at all.

KyleThompson · Veteran Member

Mike Tuchscherer wrote:

My views on this are rather complicated (at least I think so). I'm even somewhat hesitant to share, but I guess I should anyway.
First of all, I don't think there's a grey area at all. The rules state that you shouldn't use banned substances. Using them is in direct violation of the rules and is by definition cheating. There's no other way it can be. By that same token, spraying stickum on your singlet so you can get away with a little butt-raise is cheating also. Regardless of how you rationalize it -- saying beating the test is part of the sport, etc -- it's still cheating. And if cheating is part of the sport, then there are bigger issues than only a few people breaking rules.
Kyle, one thing you said was, "If I were to go to the IPF, there is no way I could be competitive at high levels without some serious drug use; not all of us are blessed with tremendous genetics like Mike T!" I realize you also validated the counter-argument, so I recognize that this one snipet doesn't capture your whole stance.
If you (not "you" specifically) can't compete at a high level without cheating, maybe you shouldn't compete at a high level. That will sound harsh among the "let's all be winners" crowd and the "I am more important than anyone else" crowd, but it's the harsh truth. I have no business playing basketball from a talent standpoint, so if I find myself in a game, I need to keep my raw abilities in perspective. Even if I want to be a really good basketball player, that doesn't justify cheating.
Your statement really juxtaposes two emotions that things like this stir in me. On the one hand, I'm sad to see guys like this go. Cheating or not, they were strong competition and that serves to make everyone better. It's a driving force behind a lot of guy's training. Also, I've beaten guys (Jr Worlds '06) who were admittedly on (they even tried to get a friend of mine to be a dealer). Beating a cheater thru the use of hard work and fair play is very satisfying.
But on the other hand, these guys were taking the spotlight from those who really deserved it. If you get rid of cheaters, you see who the best is among competitors following a standard set of rules. And that's the point and the nature of fair play. I should qualify that statement as well. Just because I have those two emotions doesn't mean I'm conflicted over the right/wrong issue of it -- right and wrong has nothing to do with how we feel.
Just a little side note: I have a friend who grew up in communist Romania. He was a very good soccer player and he explained to me the way someone got paid for playing thier sport. It's not quite how we percieve it in the west. It's not like, "take drugs to feed your family or go hungry". It would be similar to playing on the company softball team. If you were really good, the company would pay you to compete, but when you passed your prime / got dethroned / got tired of competition / whatever, you picked your job back up with the company. If you were really good, they would often try to hook you up with a cush job. In the way it was explained to me, it's not like, "if I don't win this meet, my children will go hungry." Not at all.

Mike- I don't know if you have ever read Wittgenstein (I am a former philosophy major; studied his work extensively), but talks of life being "composed of games", and the goal of each game is to win. "winning" is subjective, for some it may be to stay in the game (longetivity in powerlifting), others may be to reach a high level of competition (making it to and/or winning Worlds), while still others have an unachievable objective (total 3000 at 308), yet they will use any means to get them closer to that goal, including BREAKING the rules, which turns into a "minigame" in itself. I think this is precisely what we are seeing with many of the users in the IPF, and is what I meant when I said "passing the test is part of the game".

Also, I take no offense at my genetic inferiority! haha I try my hardest and try to refine my training methods to bring myself to my full genetic potential, but what do I do when I hit that "wall"? Call it quits? Or do I do anything within my means to keep getting better? I have a lot of respect for guys like you that have achieve so much and played by the "rules", but I don't blame anybody for breaking the "rules" (whether they are some organization's rules or legal rules) in an effort to better themselves (which is my goal: continual improvement). That being said, if I were on the gas, I would still not compete in a drug-free fed, because it takes away the meaning of whatever I accomplish. On the other hand, I could care less if I break the government's "rules", because "they" never gave me a choice like there is in PL, I can't just "move to another fed that allows" it.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts Mike!

Date: Jul 3, 2009

Mike- I don't know if you have ever read Wittgenstein (I am a former philosophy major; studied his work extensively), but talks of life being "composed of games", and the goal of each game is to win. "winning" is subjective, for some it may be to stay in the game (longetivity in powerlifting), others may be to reach a high level of competition (making it to and/or winning Worlds), while still others have an unachievable objective (total 3000 at 308), yet they will use any means to get them closer to that goal, including BREAKING the rules, which turns into a "minigame" in itself. I think this is precisely what we are seeing with many of the users in the IPF, and is what I meant when I said "passing the test is part of the game".

Also, I take no offense at my genetic inferiority! haha I try my hardest and try to refine my training methods to bring myself to my full genetic potential, but what do I do when I hit that "wall"? Call it quits? Or do I do anything within my means to keep getting better? I have a lot of respect for guys like you that have achieve so much and played by the "rules", but I don't blame anybody for breaking the "rules" (whether they are some organization's rules or legal rules) in an effort to better themselves (which is my goal: continual improvement). That being said, if I were on the gas, I would still not compete in a drug-free fed, because it takes away the meaning of whatever I accomplish. On the other hand, I could care less if I break the government's "rules", because "they" never gave me a choice like there is in PL, I can't just "move to another fed that allows" it.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts Mike!

This is just some well written philosophical b.s to make cheating sound legit. The rules states that steroids are not to be used whatsoever. BOTTOM LINE. Cheaters screw up the sport. As Mike how he would feel if he found out that Shepil Oleksandr was found to be postive for his career, after Mike took second to him. I know if i was Mike I would feel absolutely robbed! If you wanna use steroids, go to a steroids fed.

Tom Harrier · Member

Regarding steroid users competing in drug-tested federations, cheating has become a part of the sport. In fact, there is at least federation where testing is a complete joke. As a previous poster stated, HGH is hard to detect and there are masking agents, Epitestosterone boosters, etc. that make the standard test easier to beat. Now here's what's interesting; many lifters who post unrealistic numbers in "drug-tested" meets, refuse to compete in those federations that use VSA or polygraph testing. They'll give you all kinds of excuses as to why they won't; I just heard those same excuses two weeks ago at a meet in Florida where the VSA was used. The real reason is, it's much, much harder to beat the VSA or Polygraph than it is to beat a urine test. A true drug-free lifter will not hesitate to be tested by any means required, be it urine, blood, VSA or polygraph. I've been competing in meets since 1988 that used those methods and I've never known of one single lifter who was drug-free that was wronglfully disqualified. I have known of many that were because they were not drug-free, which has created great fear among the drug-users.

One federation brags about their "drug-testing" and yet, every single one of their #1 benchers up through the 275 lb class has hit a triple-bodyweight or greater-than-triple bodyweight bench press in a single-ply shirt; something I find difficult to believe is possible drug-free. Why don't I see any of those lifters competing in AAU or WNPF? Pass a IOC drug-screen test or a VSA test from a qualified examiner and I may reconsider. Let's not forget that some of the greatest powerlifters in the world over the years passed several IOC tests, before finally getting caught. There is so much knowledge out there now on how to beat the urine testing, it is no longer even close to being reliable as the VSA or polygraph, in my opinion.

I agree with several of you. If you want to use steroids, the health and legal consequences are your choice. Just choose to compete in the non-tested federations where you belong; not the drug-free federations. What self-satisfaction can there be from knowing you beat a drug-free lifter while you were using? You're a cheater if you do; nothing less.

TRON · Senior Member

Hey Tom
I have always wondered about Polygraph or VSA tests and thought that would be an interesting idea. I am not educated at all on them whatsoever, but one thing I do know is it would probably be a hell of a lot more cost effective than urine or blood tests. And one thing I do know is that cost is a major inhibitor to the number of urine tests that are done. It is one story if the sport has government sponsorship etc, but in most cases powerlifting does not and each fed has to foot their own bill.

In a court of law, are polygraphs and VSA's legally incriminating? If they are not it might be why they are not as widely used???

I guess the real kicker would be if someone tried to challenge the result of a Polygraph or VSA (and the resulting expulsion from that fed) in a court of law. I am presuming that such an instance could really come close to bancrupting a fed if it ever happened.

One thing I have always thought is that a polygraph could be given to everyone, and then if a person fails that test, they could be specifically targetted for a urine test.

Date: Jul 5, 2009

Kyle,
I hear what you're saying. I'm not familiar with Wittgenstein, but I am reasonably read in Game Theory. I don't know anything about Wittgenstein or his philosophy other than what you wrote. It sounds a lot like Game Theory, which is a good model for describing human behavior, but is ill-equipped and not intended to allow people to make moral judgements on behavior. Some may see passing the test as part of a game, but that has no bearing on whether it's right or wrong. In my opinion, the point of a philosophical code is to provide people with a gauge to measure morality -- a "moral compass" if you will. Simply stating that winning is the objective and life is composed of games does not provide any moral direction. And an "ends justifies the means" mentality is Machiavellian philosophy -- which I personally reject as well. I'm sure that's not really an education for a philosophy major, but I'll state my case anyway! :)

By the way, I get the feeling you're playing devil's advocate here, which is fine with me. I just wanted to verbalize that so others might see it too.

Tom,
I hear what you're saying about testing methods. I agree with you that a truly drug free athlete wouldn't avoid any testing tool in principle. But I haven't competed in the AAU or the WNPF. It's not because I'm avoiding the testing protocols -- it's because those meets don't interest me at the moment.

Warning -- rant to follow
Although I'm sure that many people do beat drug testing protocols, I can't help but also feel like it's conspiracy theorist suspcicion. My new favorite question as of late seems to be, "how do you know?" So, how do we know people beat the test? Outside of a few that have admitted cheating to "friends of friends", we have nothing. It's just an assumption. We do know that we certainly catch a lot of high-profile lifters. And if it was so easy to beat a test, I'm inclined to believe these guys would learn. I'm sure some will think, "C'mon, Mike! It's just obvious who's using!" Well, it's not obvious and I'm not about to challenge anyone's character (which is a hell of a lot more important that winning a powerlifting meet) over some blind guesses that I made.

And here's another complaint. And this isn't necessarily directed at Tom, but just at people in general. I feel as if I have a pretty good rapport around here. I feel like people generally believe that I am a clean lifter through and through. And if you don't feel that way, it's the truth, so you can either believe it or wage war on reality. Now follow me on this: Yarambash set an IPF world record total at 275 with 2408. Then he failed a second drug test and was banned for life. Jon Kuc, who deadlifted 858 at 275, admits to using steroids in his book. It's no secret that I'm closing on both of these marks, which we can say beyond a reasonable doubt, were set by athletes using banned substances. How is that possible? Regardless of whether it's talent, hard work, dumb luck, whatever, it is 100% within the rules of the IPF. As for me, I would never just tell everyone about that for my own glorification. I say that to illustrate a point. We have no idea what the limits of human potential are. We don't know what we can achieve if we truly dedicate ourselves to the cause. So why is it that for many, if there is a lifter with above-average strength, they are considered "users"? Many even like to put a number on it. "You can't lift X without drugs!" How would anyone be so arrogant as to make that assumption?
I remember reading an interview with a Russian throws coach. He was asked if his athletes took steroids. He said, "Yes, but so did everybody. But people often miss the larger picture. When we put a thrower on drugs, he typically gained 7 meters on his throw. But if we put him on a cycle of B-12 injections, he would typically gain 4 meters." I estimate the distances because I don't remember them exactly, but the proportions are there. So, take what you want from that story, but what it said to me was that there are a TON of inefficiencies in our training. If you get rid of all of those inefficiencies and give it your best effort (not just say it's your best but your actual no-**** best effort), you can make up a hell of a lot of ground that you may have missed otherwise. And if you make up that ground and your competition doesn't, you can beat a cheater with fair play. And that's pretty dang satisfying if you ask me.

I told you my views on this were complicated.

Tom Harrier · Member

Tron, to the best of my knowlege, the polygraph was first introduced to powerlifting in 1981, when Brother Bennett founded the ADFPA. Since then, the polygraph and VSA testing has been used in thousands of meets and have never been successfully challenged in court. In fact, since 1988, Florida has used the polygraph and VSA in the annual Police and Fire Games for the powerlifting and bench press competition. It took about 5 years and several competitors being disqualified before the word got out and I'd like to think we now have a drug-free event. Two weeks ago, at that competition, I was the meet director and had 10 competitors tested via VSA. All 10 passed, as I expected them to. But then, there were no 700 or 800 benchers, either.

You're correct in stating that the results of a polygraph or VSA cannot be used as evidence against you in a criminal trial. It can, however, be used as evidence to help CLEAR you. Our judicial system puts so much emphasis on validity of testing (as it should), that if there is even the slightest chance for error, or a "reasoanble doubt", the court will weigh in on the side of the defendant. Civil trials and traffic court is much different, where there only need be a preponderance of evidence against the defendant, in order to be found guilty. That is the same viewpoint taken, both from a legal standpoint and from a moral standpoint, when utilizing the VSA or polygraph as a drug-testing method. No one is charged criminally; nor can they be charged criminally, based on the results of the testing. It is the right of the federation to determine the method of testing and it is the right of the lifter to lift at the meet, knowing that or, to not lift at the meet. There is no legal right to challenge it. And, you're correct that it is significantly more cost-effective. With the meet from two weeks ago, it was a package deal for us. $600 allowed us to test up to 15 lifters. Compare that to the cost of urinalysis and there really is no comparison.

Mike, you ask "How do you know"? We really don't, do we, unless that person is actually caught. However, going back to the preponderance of evidence approach, does it at least provide grounds to suspect that a lifter is using, if the lifter has made a lift 10-15 % higher than the nearest competitor in his weight class for that drug-free federation or, it's 15-20% higher than the median lift of the top 10 lifters in the weight class of that federation? Certainly it can and does. What then, can and should be done to reduce the chatter or finger-pointing? Here are my thoughts; take the top 10 lifters in each weight class, throw out the lowest and highest lift, then establish a median weight based on the average of the remaining 8. Any lift now performed over that by more than 10-12%, would require both a full IOC drug screen AND a VSA or polygraph test. This accomplishes several objectives; 1) It implements a more thorough and complete testing process. 2) It reduces the amount of testing, as only the top lifters are tested 3) It brings more credibility to the lifters who set records 4) It allows a testing method to weed out those who are using growth hormones, pro-hormones, masking agents, Epitestosterone boosters, etc. 5) It allows the lifter who sets a record and passes both tests to establish with a preponderance of evidence, that he or she is drug-free.

Again, I go back to personal knowledge of lifters who I knew were using, who would consistently pass urine tests but you wouldn't catch them ever competing in a meet where the VSA or polygraph test was used. They might be there helping out, but never competing. And yes, I KNEW they were using, as prior to steroids being outlawed in Florida, we had bought from the same person. I personally know of two lifters in Florida, who stopped competing in the Florida Police and Fire Games once VSA testing was implemented, but to this day, continue to set records in other "drug-free federations", where only urine testing is used.

You're right, Mike. Unless they're actually caught, we can only speculate, but there is adequate reason for much of that speculation and what I have proposed would go far to eliminate that specuatlion.

I appreciate your forum and I appreciate your input. You have several very enlighted members and I truly enjoy the informational exchange.

Mike Tuchscherer · Guru

I think the ideas you propose are pretty good, Tom! I'm no drug testing expert, and I don't really know much about the validity of polygraph or VSA (though I think it's pretty good). But from what I know, that sounds like a pretty effective protocol that you propose.