As similar as you CAN make it sound, the analogy doesn't work BI. I'm on my way out the door so I'll try to explain myself later.
I find it interesting that so many are fine with PED's but aren't ok with the idea of equipment. So many say that those who wear the suits and everything wouldn't be able to perform their lifts without them but could those who use PED's perform their lifts without their supps?
Again, I agree with SAD. The analogy doesn't work. When using PEDs you are making your body stronger, but its still YOUR body lifting the weights. With equipment you are putting a lot of the stress on the gear and not the body. If you can't repeat the same lift naked don't tell me the equipment makes little or no difference. Kinda like the functional strength thread. Who is going to have gloves, wraps, bench shirt, special shoes, weight belt, straps ect. should they need to move weight is every day life?
Here are two reasons BIs analogy doesn't work.
1) With PEDs YOU ARE USING YOUR OWN BODY! With equipment you are not.
2) You are limited with PEDs. If I bench 500 with a gram a week of test, does this mean I'll bench 1,000 on two grams? No. At some point my body will reach a limit, no matter what the amount of drugs I'm taking. With equipment there is no limit how far it could be taken. What if someone invents a special bench shirt that allows users to add 300+ to their best bench? Should it be allowed? If not then why? By your logic it doesn't matter. What if I start using ropes and pulleys and cables? Is that cheating? If so, Why? There is no theoretical limit how much you could lift with devices and equipment. There is a limit how much the body alone will take.
Lets take both to their ultimate stupid extreme. You have a 400 pound guy on 5 grams of test per week, 2 grams of tren, 300mg or drol per day and eating Halo tabs like skittles. He benches 1200. Bring in the equipment lifter with his exoskeleton suit and watch him do 15,000. My point is, where does it end? How far does it go before its the equipment doing the lift and not the lifter? Do we put the limit at a 100 pound advantage? 200? Where do you draw the line if you are going to say some equipment is ok but not others whats the criteria?
SAD said:Bottom line? Both are aids, but one is doing work FOR you while the other is helping YOU do more work. I've heard the argument a million times that the equipment doesn't "lift the weight for you". Well, no, not all of it. But hundreds of pounds is certainly coming straight from the equipment, period. It can't be denied. If the guy benches 600 raw, and 1000 geared, then the gear is doing 400+ pounds of work, PERIOD. If that guy benches 1000+lbs a million times over two years in a bench shirt, when he takes the shirt off he'll be a damn 600 pound bencher again, MAYBE (he probably got significantly weaker by relying on the gear for so long, I've seen that happen too). If a guy is a 400lb raw bencher, and then blasts test/tren for two years until he's a 600lb bencher, when he stops blasting and has completely normal hormone levels (not crashed, normal), he'll very likely be a 500+lb bencher still. In the very least he certainly will not have gotten weaker by RELYING on the AAS.
If I'm not doing a good job of explaining this, please tell me. It seems so simple in my head, and then I start to explain it and I can't get the point across.
BrotherIron said:You forget that the person's body still has to support the weight they're going to attempt to squat, bench, and deadlift. Contrary to what you believe the equipment doesn't perform the work for you.
BrotherIron said:an ENHANCED version of yourself, to perform the lifts.
The distinction that one is increasing your body's ability from inside out (over time, with hard work), while the other is increasing your body's ability externally and INSTANTLY, is all the difference that I need to point out.
But I'll take it much further. When I develop X amount of strength while on cycle, and then drop down to TRT dose, my strength goes down very slightly and then levels out. The big drop in strength that people see is from going from on-cycle to a brutal crash and then PCT. But once they get back to a decent natty test level, the strength goes back up close to where it was on cycle. I've seen that back when I cycled, and I can give you four great examples of guys from this board who have hit huge PRs while blasting, and then drop down to TRT and lose VERY LITTLE strength. Myself, MJR, Halo, and POB have all seen drops in strength when going from a blast to a cruise, but all of us have kept the vast majority of strength earned while lifting on blast.
On the flip side of that, equipped lifters IMMEDIATELY get extra "strength" out of there external gear, and IMMEDIATELY lose ALL of it the second they take it off. Can't argue that at all. The first time I ever put a shirt on, I crushed a 500 pound bench and would've never dreamed of touching 500 raw. The second I took the shirt off, I was back to my "original" strength.
With gear, that simply does not happen. Did y'all know that just one cycle can, and usually does, PERMANENTLY increase your genetic thresholds of strength and muscle mass? There is a legitimate study that proves it, but I haven't seen it in a few years. It surfaced over at Meso back in the day and it changed my opinion of the long term efficacy of cycling, assuming the person planned on returning eventually to completely natural training. They have actually used the results of this study to try to permanently ban athletes that have used PEDs.
Bottom line? Both are aids, but one is doing work FOR you while the other is helping YOU do more work. I've heard the argument a million times that the equipment doesn't "lift the weight for you". Well, no, not all of it. But hundreds of pounds is certainly coming straight from the equipment, period. It can't be denied. If the guy benches 600 raw, and 1000 geared, then the gear is doing 400+ pounds of work, PERIOD. If that guy benches 1000+lbs a million times over two years in a bench shirt, when he takes the shirt off he'll be a damn 600 pound bencher again, MAYBE (he probably got significantly weaker by relying on the gear for so long, I've seen that happen too). If a guy is a 400lb raw bencher, and then blasts test/tren for two years until he's a 600lb bencher, when he stops blasting and has completely normal hormone levels (not crashed, normal), he'll very likely be a 500+lb bencher still. In the very least he certainly will not have gotten WEAKER by "relying" on the AAS.
If I'm not doing a good job of explaining this, please tell me. It seems so simple in my head, and then I start to explain it and I can't get the point across.
There are currently 0 members watching this topic