T Nation

The Athlete's Choice

Why, if the new prosteroids and prohormones work so well, do pro athletes still rely on anabolic steroids for performance enhancement and strength gain? I realize that pro bodybuilders like Coleman, Cutler and Levrone need anabolic steroids because they use so much for rapid gains (and get so damn fat in their off-season) that prohormones would be of no use to them, but what about a pro athlete? How about a baseball, hockey or football player, training in the off-season, trying to put 5, 10 or 15 lbs. of muscle on his frame in four or five months? Why risk suspension (in the NFL’s case) or embarrassment (in MLB’s case) by using illegal substances when there are legal substances that work just as well? I’m not doubting the strength of the current popular prosteroids (the Mag-10’s, 1-AD’s, T-100’s, ONE+‘s, etc.), but one would think that if these products work so well, the pro athlete would turn to them instead of illegal substances. Anyone have any input on this? I’d really appreciate Bill Roberts’ view on this subject.

  1. Most athletes do not know about things like MAG-10 and 4-AD-EC. 2) They assume that something legal can’t possibly work. Very false, as everyone whose tried both will agree that MD6 or ECA is better than clenbuterol. And as I’ve stated before, MAG-10 worked better than my last “real” steroid cycle of tren and winnie. Which has led me to not use “real” steroids since.

    Also keep in mind that many of the first prohormones (the original pill form andro) sucked. Some will never try them again despite the new types and new delivery systems.

Way to go TEK!!!

I agree. There are also issues I’m sure
of wanting to stick with what’s more proven, and probably also of liking to stick with things that have “mystique” to them.

Also there can be very practical reasons. Now, the last few years MLB players probably really have wanted to have larger muscular size and strength as they’ve seen the advantages of that, but some years back the main use really was not that: it was being able to make it through the tremendous amount of wear and tear that comes with playing almost every day throughout the season, 160 games total with very little break. A lot of players could not make it without the steroids but could make it with them. If a particular pharmaceutical steroid has worked well in that regard for a specific player and his specific problems, why would he switch? I wouldn’t except at gunpoint! :slight_smile:

Mag 10 better then tren and winnie???
damn im 18…when should i start taking mag-10???

im not critizising anyone… but is it possible for a prohormone\post steriod work better then real sauce??

I know I didn’t say MAG-10 was better than trenbolone and Winstrol at appropriate doses (say 50 mg/day each.) It is better for mass gain than many typical moderate steroid cycles however, for example it will generally easily outperform say 500 mg/week Sustanon. I don’t know of anyone claiming in the first two weeks of such Sustanon usage the gains typical in two weeks of MAG-10 usage and
there have been quite a few 500 mg/week Sustanon (or other testosterone ester) cycles that I’ve been aware of.

you totally miss the ball jcbart. I would put my money on an 8 week 500mg sust cycle with front loading, over an 8 week mag10 cycle anyday. SOrry bill. Plus if major leaguers are gonna affect their hormonal profiles, they would most likely take a bunch of test, due to the fact that the metabolites arent foreign to the body. PHs will screw up the t:epit raito in the same way as roids. Consequently pros have no incentive to use prohormones over roids.

By the way, I was referring to injected trenbolone and Winstrol. TEK, were you using oral Winstrol, and if you would, could you tell us the dosages? Thanks!