# BNBF (Natty testing!)



## Omen (Mar 26, 2009)

Hi All,

I understand the whole idea of testing the finalists in this Federation, but have a question.

If John Smith was thinking of competing for this Fed, would he have had to be known to be 100% natural for 100% of his bodybuilding career?

Or worded another way... If John Smith came off AAS/GH's pre competition, would this still be acceptable? If so - how long would it take for the tests to show up negative?

Thanks in advance.

Joe


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

They test and use a lie detector on all winners.

However, both can be fooled if you knwo what you're doing, but why bother as someone with Muscle who is ripped to shreds and a lot bigger should be in a different federation anyway


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Omen said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I understand the whole idea of testing the finalists in this Federation, but have a question.
> 
> ...


the BNBF have a ten year clean status so those in the past can compete with them but after a certain duration

at a qualifier they only urine test, so if someone was wanting to cheat they could just ensure they are clear in time for the urine test depending upon what they have taken

at the finals every single person is polygraphed before they are allowed to set foot on stage and the question is wording to ensure you havent used anything on the prohibited list for the ten years stipulated.

anyone who qualifies, causes suspicion and refuses to do the finals polygraph would be banned until they where willing to do the poly (as far as i am aware this applies to a few people who have avoided the finals at present)


----------



## Omen (Mar 26, 2009)

Thanks Si.

The BNBF site isn't the most helpful!


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

Why 10 years? why not indefinitley? As in never used gear in life time?


----------



## Omen (Mar 26, 2009)

Thanks Glen! Very helpful.

Oh and for the record - I'm *not* thinking of competing in this Fed and trying to cheat!

Cheers


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Omen said:


> Thanks Si.
> 
> The BNBF site isn't the most helpful!


on the front page their is a tab stating rules

http://www.bnbf.co.uk/rules.html

the rules are also stated on the entry forms and membership forms

http://www.bnbf.co.uk/membership_app.doc

http://www.bnbf.co.uk/entryforms2010.doc


----------



## Omen (Mar 26, 2009)

Thanks again Glen - reps for that!


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

SK-XO said:


> Why 10 years? why not indefinitley? As in never used gear in life time?


thats the stance of the NPA which is a natural for life organisation

the BNBf have taken the route of some people may have done a cycle and realised its not for them but still train and eat right for years on end - after ten years its questionable whether one cycle or dabbling abit would offer any form of advantage (those who heavily used would they want to compete in a natural fed????)

its about offering an avenue for competion - some have made choices in the past but for all intense purposes are 'clean' bodybuilders - should an indescretion ten years ago mean you have to copmpete with those taking anything under the sun?


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

to be fair to someone who has waited ten years he deserves another chance


----------



## jasonbarnett (Sep 27, 2008)

There are ways to get through a polygraph test so its inconclusive but if you know certain methods which can help you to pass, in all likelihood the testers who with the BNBF, have over 20 yrs experience, also know every trick in the book and will cotton on to what you are doing in order to avoid just taking the test normally. I'd have thought part of getting the thumbs up to compete would be to demonstrate to the tester that you are able to take the test without looking as if you're aiming to be deceptive.Remember the test is to decide whether you should be allowed on a natural stage at the testers discretion. So unlike a murder trial, I don't think there has to be 100% proof you're not natural before action is taken, as after all The promoters have the right to decide who competes on stage for whatever reason.

The moral of the story for any one is. If you have to think about going to the lengths of spending more time on prepping for the polygraph than actually competing then you need to take a long hard look at what you are looking to achieve for yourself by being in a Natural Finals.


----------



## Compton (Aug 13, 2009)

Do they really urine test at the qualifiers????

If its such a big deal getting on a Natural Finals stage why do they not blood test?


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Excellent post Jason!

Compton, blood testing is being looked at but it does cost a lot. The BNBF carry out off season testing as well. Some previous competitors have been caught out this way. One in particular had qualified for the finals but passed the urine test but as it is such a small world, word got out from a turstworthy source that this person was not natural and was tested before the finals and caught out.

Merve, exactly, some people make mistakes or take decisions when they're younger that they regret. The BNBF offer a second chance for them.


----------



## jonb19 (Jan 14, 2010)

Yeh, thanks for the post :thumb:


----------



## Bulkamania (Feb 16, 2009)

IMO if you're competing in a natural comp, you should always be natural. None of this taking gear for 5 years or so then coming off and competing naturally, that's not fair IMO. If you want to compete naturally then stay natural, if you decide to juice then compete in other comps. JMO.


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

Bulkamania said:


> IMO if you're competing in a natural comp, you should always be natural. None of this taking gear for 5 years or so then coming off and competing naturally, that's not fair IMO. If you want to compete naturally then stay natural, if you decide to juice then compete in other comps. JMO.


Some people make mistakes or decide not to continue down the assisted route.

The BNBF enables competitors who have done so in the past the opportunity to compete.

People make mistakes end of IMO


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Linny said:


> Some people make mistakes or decide not to continue down the assisted route.
> 
> The BNBF enables competitors who have done so in the past the opportunity to compete.
> 
> People make mistakes end of IMO


Exactly....there is a complete natural fed, The NPA but as i stated how can you not give someone a second chance after staying clean for 7 years that is a commitment in itself

good post


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Anyone cheats in a natural fed is a fcuking cnut. The lowest of the low, jackass scum!!

I mean, what do they hope to achieve from this????


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

B|GJOE said:


> Anyone cheats in a natural fed is a fcuking cnut. The lowest of the low, jackass scum!!
> 
> I mean, what do they hope to achieve from this????


A trophy that they may not have achieved in a non tested fed?


----------



## ParaManiac (Mar 20, 2007)

Linny said:


> A trophy that they may not have achieved in a non tested fed?


An empty achievement given the circumstance


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

ParaManiac said:


> An empty achievement given the circumstance


Maybe some people just don't care as long as they win?


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

Linny said:


> Maybe some people just don't care as long as they win?


Agreed, but 99% of people who are decent and not a scrote wouldn't even dream of doing it.

I pity them tbh. Must lead a very sad life cheating their way to victories.

JW007's entering the Southern BNBF  :lol:


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

B|GJOE said:


> Anyone cheats in a natural fed is a fcuking cnut. The lowest of the low, jackass scum!!
> 
> I mean, what do they hope to achieve from this????


 Completely agree joe but the sad thing is there are people who do a good thing is they are getting caught there was a write up on the npa site naming some too, like you state what do you get from it.... a tropyh...hollow victory. natural should mean natural but unfortunately that is not the case always as youl always get cheaters.


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

chrisj22 said:


> Agreed, but 99% of people who are decent and not a scrote wouldn't even dream of doing it.
> 
> I pity them tbh. Must lead a very sad life cheating their way to victories.
> 
> JW007's entering the Southern BNBF  :lol:


:laugh::laugh:Joe's un-nattiness would vaporise everyone within a 20 mile radius, that would be better than any lie detector tbh, anyone left standing is clearly not natty:lol:


----------



## -SJD (Apr 14, 2009)

Quick question... if you had taken ephedrine a couple of times for recreational uses a year or two ago (not for fat burning use) before you even started bodybuilding, would this still count against you?


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

B|GJOE said:


> Anyone cheats in a natural fed is a fcuking cnut. The lowest of the low, jackass scum!!
> 
> I mean, what do they hope to achieve from this????


true, BUT i KNOW for a FACT loads of the competitors are far from 'natural' 

not gonna name names but personally know one of the southern competitors has a liking for GH and slin


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Linny said:


> A trophy that they may not have achieved in a non tested fed?


They don't always get the trophy though and me thinks the person you're repsonding to didn't read the rest of the thread:rolleyes:



-SJD said:


> Quick question... if you had taken ephedrine a couple of times for recreational uses a year or two ago (not for fat burning use) before you even started bodybuilding, would this still count against you?


This would be dealt with on an individual basis and all details would need to be submitted to the drug officer for assessment and verification of validity to enter a show.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Testaholic said:


> true, BUT i KNOW for a FACT loads of the competitors are far from 'natural'
> 
> not gonna name names but personally know one of the southern competitors has a liking for GH and slin


Here we go again.

And have you personally seen LOADS of competitors taking stuff? How can you say FACT if not?!! It pees me off that so many say things like this yet are not prepared to do anything about it and then continue to mock the natural side of the sport. How about you help us keep it natural.


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Testaholic said:


> true, BUT i KNOW for a FACT loads of the competitors are far from 'natural'
> 
> not gonna name names but personally know one of the southern competitors has a liking for GH and slin


 Im not gona name names? why say it? this sort of post just ****es people off.


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

Dawn said:


> Here we go again.
> 
> And have you personally seen LOADS of competitors taking stuff? How can you say FACT if not?!! It pees me off that so many say things like this yet are not prepared to do anything about it and then continue to mock the natural side of the sport. How about you help us keep it natural.


no i havent personally seen LOADS but i know a few for sure, i could name names but wont, yes it would rid from the fed but what about any others that do cheat and i dont know of, why should they be allowed to continue and these guys not? And judging by their placement in shows its not suprising. Im sorry but anyone who thinks these shows are purely natural are very naive, it is a shame its like that but human ego dictates people will do whatever it takes to win, look at the olympics, meant to be drug free yet how many winners are now being caught and disqualified!!!


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

merve500 said:


> Im not gona name names? why say it? this sort of post just ****es people off.


because its making a point about the 'natural' status of these shows. as ive said in my above post, why should i name them. theyre obviously passing all the 'tests' anyway, just like anyone else whos cheating so why pick on them??


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

at the end of the day all this may be true but it is a hollow victory and a sad one at that,you ought to be saying look what ur doing is morally wrong, i know it pays ur bills but i bet you feel great when a guy you preped won through cheating,natural should be natural end of story,but saying im not naming names just makes people think if they came second 3rd ect and also puts people off thinking well if there are people taking x y z why not hey....


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

dutch_scott said:


> why is he saying it cos its true iv prepped nattys in uk whov won and they are not natural,
> 
> test suspension, t3, slin 3 types, gh, igf,
> 
> ...


Thanks for that info:thumbup1:


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

dutch_scott said:


> why is he saying it cos its true iv prepped nattys in uk whov won and they are not natural,
> 
> test suspension, t3, slin 3 types, gh, igf,
> 
> ...


tests can be cheated obviously and I have my doubts about some people in the past

BUT its truly sad as unlike the olympics etc bodybuilding and powerlifting are the only sports where you have a choice - if you want to use compete here, if you dont compete here

its utterly sad that these people think so low of there own abilities that they have to choose to cheat as they cant face choosing the correct fed for their own lifestyle choice

surely scott as a trainer you should be morally obliged to guide these people towards the correct fed - what if what you do as a coach doesnt work and they end up getting caught and there own effort of dieting, training etc for months on end result in nothing but humiliation of being branded a cheat?


----------



## ah24 (Jun 25, 2006)

glen danbury said:


> BUT its truly sad as unlike the olympics etc bodybuilding and powerlifting are the only sports where you have a choice - if you want to use compete here, if you dont compete here


That's whats annoying here is as you say - you are allowed to use in the right feds. So no need to cheat at all.


----------



## MJP (May 1, 2009)

The comments by Testaholic and Dutch Scott are what we are up against when we all try to promote Natural BB, Glen and Dawn. The ones who help others cheat, like Dutch Scott for example, are just as bad as the cheats themselves, I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror, so to speak...There will always be people knocking what the Nat associations do, its a waste of time even trying to explain that we are trying to promote the sport as it should be. Just carry on doing what you do, Glen and Dawn, there's many out there who appreciate it.


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

dutch_scott said:


> your forgetting morals dont enter society which is why i tell people to compete for these reasons
> 
> FOR THEMSELVES,
> 
> ...


your as bad as them because you should be turning them to the rite feds not encouraging them people work dam hard NATURALLY to be ****ed over by cheaters and what ur saying is ok mate pay me X amount and its not a prob, VERY SAD


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

merve500 said:


> your as bad as them because you should be turning them to the rite feds not encouraging them people work dam hard NATURALLY to be ****ed over by cheaters and what ur saying is ok mate pay me X amount and its not a prob, VERY SAD


I dont think that's what he's saying.

More a case of someone wanting to compete in a natty fed and then finding a coach to help them do the best they can and wanting to use peds to achieve this, not seeking out a coach to direct them down the correct moral path.

In this case dutch can either take them on and coach them (thus doing a job to provide for his family) or tell them that it is morally wrong and would only coach them if they competed untested. To which said person will find a different coach who will work with him on what he is trying to achieve.

I dont agree with using peds in natty feds in PL/BBing but would do the same thing in dutch's position tbh.

Thats what i took his post to mean anyway.


----------



## SK-XO (Aug 6, 2009)

Tbh I do agree partly with dutch_scott. Point being it's his job as a trainer, if he doesn't do it then someone else will. He can't direct someone to a different fed if they don't want to, they will just tell him to get to fk and get someone else to prep them for natural show.... It's not right at all but it's reality. I think a lot of people would change their mind when money comes into play, if it puts food on your table and feeds your kids etc im pretty sure you'd do it.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

dutch_scott said:


> your forgetting morals dont enter society which is why i tell people to compete for these reasons
> 
> FOR THEMSELVES,
> 
> ...


I can see your point of view and to be honest fair on you - people pay you to do a job and so you do - considering they come and pay you to do X, Y,Z I can see you have a moral obligation to them to keep you mouth shut and not tell a fed to a degree as thats what there paying you to do

but its damn sad this is the case - ''hello there I am not good enough to win in the fed which allows me to use this - as such can you help me win the fed which doesnt allow it as i am happy to achieve something which is a lie as long as i get a trophy at the end of it''

very sad


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

glen danbury said:


> I can see your point of view and to be honest fair on you - people pay you to do a job and so you do - considering they come and pay you to do X, Y,Z I can see you have a moral obligation to them to keep you mouth shut and not tell a fed to a degree as thats what there paying you to do
> 
> but its damn sad this is the case - *''hello there I am not good enough to win in the fed which allows me to use this - as such can you help me win the fed which doesnt allow it as i am happy to achieve something which is a lie as long as i get a trophy at the end of it''*
> 
> *very sad*


totally agree with that also


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

What's the big deal??

I myself personally know nattys in BBing and powerlifting and athletics thatvare not nattys.

As far as bbing goes, who gives a fck, not exactly important in scheme of life.

As for testing in the olympics and GB teams, the powers that be turn blind eyes and in fact design tests with loopholes on purpose.

I would do same if i was ducth, all he's doing us supplying info,

you going to feed his fckin daughter if he takes moral high ground???

Besides IMO, information is out there, Do sone research and take care of your own business ie finding correct ways to test cheats properly...

Oh wait, that costs money, but better to come out of dutchs pocket than yours eh?


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

yep very sad - but if people like testoholic etc keep on indicating cheats are definately out there then maybe the feds will step up the out off season testing and catch more of them


----------



## whackedout (Sep 10, 2009)

Glen, I agree whole heartedly the problem is many and individual will rationalise their behavior to the point that there is no right or wrong, no black nor white. Dutch is right in a lot of his statements and I for one appreciate his candor, however I wouldn't recommend his appointment to any ethics committee in a hurry.

I am natty and the case at this moment in time is that I couldn't justify to myself taking some of the supplements on sale at this moment in time and consider competing. There would be a strong case for saying that test / insulin and GH are far more natural than most of the synthetic pro hormones / designer steroids that are readily available! Most individuals using such substances won't fail a polygraph as they think that if they can buy it with no restrictions from a "reputable" company it must make them fully compliant.

Anyone wanting to have a pop at Dutch should consider that there are companies marketing and selling products to "natural" athletes and making no attempt to warn them that taking such supplements renders them ineligible to compete in x,y,z federation, and give them an unfair advantage over other competitors if they were to do so.

Can we blame people for ignorance and looking the other way? The more intelligent among us might say that you should know what you are putting into your body, but if you think how many people go through life eating processed foods without any consideration as to the chemicals that may be in them, you might think differently.


----------



## Testoholic (Jun 13, 2009)

dutch_scott said:


> why is he saying it cos its true iv prepped nattys in uk whov won and they are not natural,
> 
> test suspension, t3, slin 3 types, gh, igf,
> 
> ...


thankyou scott, my comments wernt meant to slate the BNBF or any 'natty' federation just pointing out this does happen and not on a minority scale either IMO. i wasnt aware myself about the valium and polygraph test but makes sense, and its not totally accurte anyway. i do genuinley feel sorry for those that play by the 'rules' but i agree with dutch again i think a fairer fed would be drug free not 'natural'. now this in my opinion is a very fine line anyway, whey, creatine, caffeine as fat loss adid ect..why should they be ok but slin, t3 ect not? they are at least natural to the body anyway? i watched a natty bodybuilder on tv other day, name was Ben Agboke, well built black guy, says he doesnt even use protein powders or creatine just food and nothing else...perhaps that is the only fair way forward??



MJP said:


> The comments by Testaholic and Dutch Scott are what we are up against when we all try to promote Natural BB, Glen and Dawn. The ones who help others cheat, like Dutch Scott for example, are just as bad as the cheats themselves, I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror, so to speak...There will always be people knocking what the Nat associations do, its a waste of time even trying to explain that we are trying to promote the sport as it should be. Just carry on doing what you do, Glen and Dawn, there's many out there who appreciate it.


you mean the honest realistic comments? supply and demand mate, if he didnt do it someone else would, its the competitors fault not his.


----------



## whackedout (Sep 10, 2009)

*"As for testing in the olympics and GB teams, the powers that be turn blind eyes and in fact design tests with loopholes on purpose."*

Worse so in other sports, look at the lack of action from the boxing councils when Pretty Boy asked for federally approved drugs tests for his Manny Pacquiao fight that never happened! Nobody jumped in and said "why not, that makes sure everything is above board" there was silence. Some organisations know that if they are too stringent with drug testing they lose their biggest stars and the revenue they generate. Where there is something to gain there are people that will look to exploit any possible opportunity, yes, that is sad but true nonetheless.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

whackedout said:


> Glen, I agree whole heartedly the problem is many and individual will rationalise their behavior to the point that there is no right or wrong, no black nor white. Dutch is right in a lot of his statements and I for one appreciate his candor, however I wouldn't recommend his appointment to any ethics committee in a hurry.
> 
> I am natty and the case at this moment in time is that I couldn't justify to myself taking some of the supplements on sale at this moment in time and consider competing. There would be a strong case for saying that test / insulin and GH are far more natural than most of the synthetic pro hormones / designer steroids that are readily available! Most individuals using such substances won't fail a polygraph as they think that if they can buy it with no restrictions from a "reputable" company it must make them fully compliant.
> 
> ...


no one forces someone to compete in a natural fed - its the athletes responsibility to ensure they comply with the rules and what they take - the poly is worded that anything on the banned list - which you are made aware of is asked so it clears up 'not knowing'


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Testaholic said:


> thankyou scott, my comments wernt meant to slate the BNBF or any 'natty' federation just pointing out this does happen and not on a minority scale either IMO. i wasnt aware myself about the valium and polygraph test but makes sense, and its not totally accurte anyway. i do genuinley feel sorry for those that play by the 'rules' but i agree with dutch again i think a fairer fed would be drug free not 'natural'. now this in my opinion is a very fine line anyway, whey, creatine, caffeine as fat loss adid ect..why should they be ok but slin, t3 ect not? they are at least natural to the body anyway? i watched a natty bodybuilder on tv other day, name was Ben Agboke, well built black guy, says he doesnt even use protein powders or creatine just food and nothing else...perhaps that is the only fair way forward??
> 
> you mean the honest realistic comments? supply and demand mate, if he didnt do it someone else would, its the competitors fault not his.


your just playing with nomenclature - we all know it applies to those things listed on the WADA list as highlighted in the forms - maybe the word natural isnt the best term but its whats used - if it makes it better for you drug free, clean etc etc but it doesnt change the situation

if you want to use - great go ahead but compete in nabba, ukbff etc etc


----------



## whackedout (Sep 10, 2009)

agreed but do you not think there are people that have no knoweldge that what they are doing is outside of the rules, how often do people sign forms that they have neither read or fully understood. People assume they are in the right with no further thought. My point is that there are a lot of people that would consider themself natural when indeed they are not, this may be ignorant but people often are.


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

Interesting read From Dutch Scott and how silly is the fela attacking him for not having the morals to turn away folk wh o are gonna compete natty when assisted.

Maybe in an idea world where money was no object but we all have a mortgage to pay and mouths to feed and its no life or death sittuation ffs..its a hobby for 99%

Perhaps if Dutch Scott was advertising for "natty" guys to come to him for prep and he would giude them round it but thats not the case from what i have read

Gotta appreciate that honesty


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Team1 said:


> Interesting read From Dutch Scott and how silly is the fela attacking him for not having the morals to turn away folk wh o are gonna compete natty when assisted.
> 
> Maybe in an idea world where money was no object but we all have a mortgage to pay and mouths to feed and its no life or death sittuation ffs..its a hobby for 99%
> 
> ...


BUT that kind of honesty wil on this public forum give the impression to some that its ok to cheat as others are


----------



## Baz R (Jun 16, 2010)

stop being a pussy glen youre moaning aint gonna stop anyone from cheating is it.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Baz R said:


> stop being a pussy glen youre moaning aint gonna stop anyone from cheating is it.


that did make me chuckle lol


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Baz R said:


> stop being a pussy glen youre moaning aint gonna stop anyone from cheating is it.


LOL

its true but its a forum for discussion is it not?


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

glen danbury said:


> BUT that kind of honesty wil on this public forum give the impression to some that its ok to cheat as others are


Why are you bothered about impressions???

I certainly am not that impressionable, as I hope many "normal" adults are not

if you think that a few nattys Reading this are then going to decide to juice, perhaps you better look at quality of your members eh?


----------



## Unit_69 (Jul 9, 2009)

Think there needs to be a clear differentiation between bodybuidling and other sports. There is not a non-tested boxing or athletic federation, but there is in bodybuilding. So the use of steroids and other substances I think needs to be considered different between the two areas.

An athlete may suspect all his competitors are using PEDs, therefore with a family and money to think about it is understandable (although not condonable in my view) that they would also use.

In bodybuilding though a non drug tested federation represents a level playing field, there is no "cheating" as such, as PED use is only one of several components that can be manipulated along with training and diet to obtain a winning package.

Therefore, to me, anyone who chooses to use PED and then compete in natural federations are firstly idiots, but secondly morally wrong. They have an alternative avenue to compete without issue, but choose instead to cheat a system and gain an unfair advantage over others who have chosen to perform their hobby in a different way. This is why I get so annoyed over this situation, and can understand the discussion of morals for this

I agree with Glen that the situation is really sad, and I wish that people that do have information would name and shame. I think both tested and non-tested bodybuilding is superb, I have so much admiration for both groups of athletes but just wish cheating drug tests was not something we needed to be even discussing


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> BUT that kind of honesty wil on this public forum give the impression to some that its ok to cheat as others are


Naw..that kind of honesty lets people know the reality of the sittuation in natural bodybuilding mate, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and not having it voiced in public

Dont be silly...its not gonna give any impression to anyone either way. IF you are inclined to be so low and sad as to do a natural show when assisted then someone posting a bit of home truths isnt gonna make a blind bit of difference.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Team1 said:


> Naw..that kind of honesty lets people know the reality of the sittuation in natural bodybuilding mate, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and not having it voiced in public
> 
> Dont be silly...its not gonna give any impression to anyone either way. IF you are inclined to be so low and sad as to do a natural show when assisted then someone posting a bit of home truths isnt gonna make a blind bit of difference.


 but then that invalidates the arguments so many on here wish to use all the time - ''I use because everyone else does''

I have considered whether i could be bothered with this whole natural thing many times due to all the suspicion and whether it would be just easier tio compete with the ukbff and stay natural anyway - at least i know what i am up against - but then why should i its the only sport which gives choice and its not only sad that people opt to do this but that many seem to think its OK as well


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Team1 said:


> Naw..that kind of honesty lets people know the reality of the sittuation in natural bodybuilding mate, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and not having it voiced in public
> 
> Dont be silly...its not gonna give any impression to anyone either way. IF you are inclined to be so low and sad as to do a natural show when assisted then someone posting a bit of home truths isnt gonna make a blind bit of difference.


Yeh but its still being swept under the carpet by saying im not naming names



dutch_scott said:


> ok NEVER did i say i agree,
> 
> never, quote me, my candor is becuase im sick of hypocricy and blindfolded attitude,
> 
> ...


So scott when ur guy comes up to you and says i won the weekend what do you say? "well done mate you worked real hard...deserved to win even though ur a cheating ****er and compete against guys who have taken nothing"

what you are doing is corrupt, yes it is paying ur bills but robbing someone of a trophy whohas done it the natural way,well sorry your thoughts are differen to mine


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Scott, have you actually approached the feds to offer your help? We already have some well known assisted people who help out in various aspects and if you genuinely think you have something of value to add then why not make the move.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

I do agree Stim, Ped, AAS and pep free. These items are indeed banned but whether an individual attempts to use and compete, does not mean the feds are allowing it.

Maybe you have not approached the right people as I'm sure any info would be greatly received but I do look forward to you making the right noises once your project is done.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Out of season testing is in place but obviously there are timing and manpower requirements.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

I can see all your points and its true that probably more does need to be done to ensure its a total level playing field

but its a sad case as these people are just draining the natural feds - think of the costs involved in drug testing etc etc which the untested feds dont have to have that burden

and you have scummy people who have viable choices as to where they can compete knowing their status yet choose to try and rob someone else who is clean

for what? a tin cup and a title which means nothing outside of a niche within a niche sport

then when the feds do something about someone (i.e are informed and act upon the information) the person starts threatening legal action

you are right theres no point bitching about it and the natural feds will just need to do more to try and ensure that those who use are pushed out to go and compete in the right fed for them - and people appreciate your honesty dutch_scott (often by out of season that can mean running up to a show so the terminology isn't like other sports, but rather just not on show day is whats meant by out of season)

I think the better ioption would be out of season polygraph - turn up to your work without notice - strap you in and do the test there and then without the chance to pop anything, would make your work colleagues gossip at least


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

i agree with scott with regards to morals and sport ethics....

bollocks, i'd do anything to win and i'd i'm sure all of my competition is thinking the same. If they are not then they don't gain any new respect from me as such, only a sense of why are they doing all of this dieting/cardio/AAS just to 'take part'

its not about taking part, its about winning, while i do not advocate cheating, i can see why some do.

win at all costs....

no such thing as a level playing field in any sport and the more money/adulation involved, the worse it gets.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

IB, are you saying you would cheat? (You're not coming to my house again:tongue

Scott, thank you for that. I personally don't get involved in the drug testing side of the game and will admit to being pretty much niave on what products there are and what they do:confused1:. I know we have previously caught people between qualifiers and finals and we do seem to have a good network of people that help out but no doubt some do slip through the net. Don't forget it's also a very small world out there.

The poly itself is a good deterant and has filtered out people in the past. There is also the rule that you may still be called for the polygraph even if you decide not to enter the finals and unless you take it if requested under such circumstances then you can't step foot on the BNBF stage until completed.

We do our best with the funds available and regarding your comment about getting sponsors, CNP very kindly fund our drug testing. Kerry is a huge supporter of bodybuilding be it natural or not and we are grateful that he helps out in this way although I'm sure he'd rather be able to use that money elsewhere if people were more honest.......just think all those cheats that cause us to have to test could be doing someone out of a decent sponsorship deal.


----------



## jonb19 (Jan 14, 2010)

People will;

Break the rules.

Do whatever it takes to win.

Have no remorse if cheating when they win.

And say 'others do it' when there caught.

Ive spent a long time competing in other sports and these points are universal, its a shame but the way things are.

Prob explains why i hardly ever got on the rostrum and mainly made up the numbers .

But, as long as i had fun doing it for me then F'it.


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

dutch_scott said:


> prove those guys have taken nothing?
> 
> careful here pal cos u run risk of looking a prize [email protected] like those in brit athletics who put linford "100times over the limit" christie on every god damn anti doping steroid say not to drugs poster and ralley for 10 years..
> 
> ...


Im not trying to slate you what my point is being natural that it should be kept natural i understand you have bills to pay ect but you got to see my point "people work dam hard and honestly to get knocked down by a person who has CHEATED!"

ian munro is seriously debating never to compete again due to coming second to a guy who failed a drug test.as he said i may have won but on the day i was beaten

as


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Incredible Bulk said:


> i agree with scott with regards to morals and sport ethics....
> 
> bollocks, i'd do anything to win and i'd i'm sure all of my competition is thinking the same. If they are not then they don't gain any new respect from me as such, only a sense of why are they doing all of this dieting/cardio/AAS just to 'take part'
> 
> ...


 Yeh thats rite but ur not trying to compete in a natural thread are you


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

there will always be cheats - its just sad in this little niche sport - unlike athletics and other sports which people keep on bringing up - people have a choice nabba/ukbff or BNBF/NPA - its up to you on your lifestyle choice

there isnt a natural or run as fast as **** on everything olympics to choose from and consideirng theres money involved in these sports (in BB theres on cash for the elite drug users really) you will get cheats no doubt

but it doesnt have to be this way - if more people where willing to come forward the ukbff would benefit as you would potentially get more heading over to the classic class etc, the natural feds would stay clean and everyone would be happy


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

Incredible Bulk said:


> i do not advocate cheating, i can see why some do.





Dawn said:


> IB, are you saying you would cheat? (You're not coming to my house again:tongue


 :confused1: :lol:

you'd set your giant guard dogs on me eh? :lol:


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

Team1 said:


> IF you are inclined to be so low and sad as to do a natural show when assisted then someone posting a bit of home truths isnt gonna make a blind bit of difference.


I like this quote Rab.

I think that you are a lowest of the low if you compete in a Natural Bodybuilding Comp and you're assisted.

You have the option to compete in other feds, but you're just a lowlife

sh!tebag for doing that.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Incredible Bulk said:


> :confused1: :lol:
> 
> you'd set your giant guard dogs on me eh? :lol:


She'd eat you alive (or lick you to death would be more like it:laugh


----------



## Compton (Aug 13, 2009)

IMO, all athletes that compete in a natural competition should be tested whether they win or not.

Why do the athletes have to pay to get polygraphed at the finals? Why does the federation not pick up the cost for this?


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

The BNBF partly fund the polygraph so the competitors only have to pay a small portion of £20. With just short of 100 entries usually at the finals even this extra cost would take a huge chunk out of the funds. Competitors know before they enter that they will have to pay for this.


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

There is no point in testinge very competitor if a guy who has taken anything comes 3rd 4th ect whats it matter that is actually good for natural bodybuilding showing that gear is not everything,its when the winner does get caught ect


----------



## Compton (Aug 13, 2009)

merve500 said:


> There is no point in testinge very competitor if a guy who has taken anything comes 3rd 4th ect whats it matter that is actually good for natural bodybuilding showing that gear is not everything,its when the winner does get caught ect


So as a natural bodybuilder? you don't mind competing against un-natural bodybuilders. As long as you beat them :confused1:


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

Couldnt i compete in the BNBF but not be eligable to win anything if say....i was to stop taking anything (for all ive taken anyway) for a year or two....just be able to compete for the buzz? I know theres the ten year rule!


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Compton said:


> So as a natural bodybuilder? you don't mind competing against un-natural bodybuilders. As long as you beat them :confused1:


 if i beat someone who had taken gear and knew it it would put a big smile on my face, and im sure it would leave them thinking that what they have done was not even worth it and how clever they really were.

but my veiws are if they are on gear they should not be entering.if they had taken gear and did not crack top 3 whats it matter the guys who won are natural and oviously better bodybuilders on the day the gear has done the assisted guy no favors


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

merve500 said:


> if i beat someone who had taken gear and knew it it would put a big smile on my face, and im sure it would leave them thinking that what they have done was not even worth it and how clever they really were.
> 
> but my veiws are if they are on gear they should not be entering.if they had taken gear and did not crack top 3 whats it matter the guys who won are natural and oviously better bodybuilders on the day the gear has done the assisted guy no favors


How can you say the gear had done the guy no favours?

Some people have gifted genetics and do well, some crap and will only ever be average even with a bit of assistance...place in the natty show they are in

Thats one of the stupid things you hear....oh...so and so is bigger than him and he takes gear..must be doing him no good :lol: .


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Team1 said:


> Couldnt i compete in the BNBF but not be eligable to win anything if say....i was to stop taking anything (for all ive taken anyway) for a year or two....just be able to compete for the buzz? I know theres the ten year rule!


No, cos, I know who you are now :tongue:



dutch_scott said:


> ill state again id be willing to help the bnbf weed out cheats,
> 
> tbh it be my pleasure as i know other guys who think they can never be caught
> 
> ...


Cheers mate, I shall pass on your offer to the relevant parties:thumbup1:


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

Dawn said:


> No, cos, I know who you are now :tongue:


LOL but thats the whole point...being up front about it prior...so you know anyway :lol:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

At least you're honest


----------



## rs007 (May 28, 2007)

fvck it, I am doing the BNBF next year, everything I have ever said on here has been fictional and purely for entertainment purposes, and since I am confident I could pass most tests I'll be fine 

Plus I look like a natty anyway

:whistling:


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Having read the posts, it makes me laugh that winning by using peds is classed as a hollow victory??? Lol

An analogy I like is playing monopoly 

We have all played it, sure its satisfying winning without any "help"

but can be a long hard slog on the way.....

Nothing better than being "banker" and stashing away a good few k to make victory all the more imminent.

I mean, yeah, you know you cheated, but winning still feels great as long as no one cottons on to the stashed "500s" and makes the journey all the less stressfull knowing you pretty much have it in bag.

Well, that's my experience of monopoly anyway


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

jw007 said:


> Having read the posts, it makes me laugh that winning by using peds is classed as a hollow victory??? Lol
> 
> An analogy I like is playing monopoly
> 
> ...


lmao funny you should say that as im pretty much banned from any kind of board game by mates and family, cant help grabbing a couple of extra letters if playing scrabble or sitting on a couple of aces if playing cards :lol:

cant seem to help myself doing it- im a cnut when it comes to winning meaningless games


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Dig said:


> lmao funny you should say that as im pretty much banned from any kind of board game by mates and family, cant help grabbing a couple of extra letters if playing scrabble or sitting on a couple of aces if playing cards :lol:
> 
> cant seem to help myself doing it- im a cnut when it comes to winning meaningless games


Lmfao, yep pretty much same as far board games go 

in any case, usually find at least one fcker has been cheating thebwhokw while, especially my family and freinds

Not too sure how Nattys will take their comps as being akin to "meaningless. Games"

I personally take my monopolage seriously lol


----------



## Dig (Aug 28, 2007)

jw007 said:


> Lmfao, yep pretty much same as far board games go
> 
> in any case, usually find at least one fcker has been cheating thebwhokw while, especially my family and freinds
> 
> ...


Lol if i was a fly on the wall when you have ruby why do i think it would look something like this


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

I wondered when JW would pipe up:rolleyes:

RS, you wouldn't get away with it, we know who you are:thumb:


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

jw007 said:


> Lmfao, yep pretty much same as far board games go
> 
> in any case, usually find at least one fcker has been cheating thebwhokw while, especially my family and freinds
> 
> ...


LOL - as stated before its a tin cup and title which means very little outside of a niche within a niche - most compete because they want to be better than you where in the past - considering that whether you win or lose has nothing to do with performance like a true sport and its judged by others you may lose even if you maybe better in the eyes of others

so in the end the whole 'sport' is built around self accomplishment and the personal sense of achievement - which is why i cant understand the cheating mentality as this totally erodes this whole point

at the end of the day there will be cheats - I just have to trust that the fed does what they can to stop it

it would just be nice if others would chip in rather than just state they 'know' competitors who cheat


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

jw007 said:


> Having read the posts, it makes me laugh that winning by using peds is classed as a hollow victory??? Lol


Joe

I disagree there. Winning using peds in a natural comp is just wrong. If you're on peds go find some proper competition rather than cheating.


----------



## merve500 (Sep 10, 2008)

Simon m said:


> Joe
> 
> I disagree there. Winning using peds in a natural comp is just wrong. If you're on peds go find some proper competition rather than cheating.


top man xactly


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Tbh,

I would/could name names, but won't for 3 reasons

1) I don't really give a sh1t 

2) if I did, would incriminate personal friends, the person/persons are highly regarded in natty community and have passed all tests and would be vouched for by many, I would be villified

3) altho I know where certain compounds went, havevi actually seen them ingested personally?? No.

So would not even stand up in court as all hearsay

so what's point??



glen danbury said:


> LOL - as stated before its a tin cup and title which means very little outside of a niche within a niche - most compete because they want to be better than you where in the past - considering that whether you win or lose has nothing to do with performance like a true sport and its judged by others you may lose even if you maybe better in the eyes of others
> 
> so in the end the whole 'sport' is built around self accomplishment and the personal sense of achievement - which is why i cant understand the cheating mentality as this totally erodes this whole point
> 
> ...


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Simon m said:


> Joe
> 
> I disagree there. Winning using peds in a natural comp is just wrong. If you're on peds go find some proper competition rather than cheating.


In one foul swoop you have belittled all my "hollow" monopoly victories.

Sure, I cheated, but gained nothing more than zooming round room doing the airplane, firing imaginary pistols in air and gloating while shouting "losers" to fellow competitors.

Did I better myself??? No

but I had a bloody good time lmfao


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

jw007 said:


> Tbh,
> 
> I would/could name names, but won't for 3 reasons
> 
> ...


can see your point

I am probably being more ****y than normal because i am only one week out from competing so not only am i grouchy because i am dieting but also would potentially be personally affected by it


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

I can clearly appreciate that people do not want to divulge information and the reasons JW gives are pretty valid. What does frustrates me is by knowing this info it is then often assumed by many that the majority of naturals use something and therefore makes a mockery out of it all.

There will be genetically gifted and freaks out there. Not saying my hubbie is one but he grows like a weed, 19.5" biceps and has the crappiest diet ever and doesn't train arms all that much!! Most don't believe he's natty.

Surely there's nothing wrong in the natty feds asking for help to keep it clean!?

Glen....that's no excuse


----------



## Baz R (Jun 16, 2010)

Yeah love but you forgot to add that your hubbys 19.5 inch guns are submerged in 5 inches of pure natty FAT LOL

jks


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

LOL, he certainly does have some bodyfat, that I am not denying but they are pretty solid and vascular when he trains and you can certainly see the split in the bicep head and long head of the tricep so not a lot of fat there....now ask about his **** and that's a different matter 

Edit :The **** above is nothing to do with penis!! It's his bum I was referring to.


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

jw007 said:


> In one foul swoop you have belittled all my "hollow" monopoly victories.
> 
> Sure, I cheated, but gained nothing more than zooming round room doing the airplane, firing imaginary pistols in air and gloating while shouting "losers" to fellow competitors.
> 
> ...


It's "Fell Swoop":tongue:


----------



## Baz R (Jun 16, 2010)

Dawn said:


> LOL, he certainly does have some bodyfat, that I am not denying but they are pretty solid and vascular when he trains and you can certainly see the split in the bicep head and long head of the tricep so not a lot of fat there....now ask about his **** and that's a different matter
> 
> Edit :The **** above is nothing to do with penis!! It's his bum I was referring to.


lol im the exact same all my fat seems to be on my ass haha.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

OK

I know I p1ss take nattys etc etc

But I do have a serious point to make now, in defending some nattys that are maybe "not natty"

A lot of you have posted about "hollow" victories and cheating blah blah and all for a plastic cup etc etc

Well sometimes its not as simple as that..

What *should* be most important priority in life????

Well I would say family, agreed????

So,

Lets say Natty dude (ND) is a genuine stand up guy, ethical and all that bollox

For the most part he has complied with rules, done well, won plastic trophies etc etc

On back of that he has made his living from sponsership, PT training, supp companys you get the picture

So hes doing ok, paying his mortgage, looking after his kids, a real family man lets say..

Remember, your only as good as your last comp

Suppose competition improves, he gets injured, personal problems in way, everyday life sh1t... Something beyond his control...

Now Not placing top 3 would poss lose him his sponsership, supps and clients might go elsewhere, profile drops, as clearly he does not know his stuff...

You know how fickle people are

Suddenly the prospect of losing his income, not providing for his kids and wife are very real...

ND knows others are doing it, but cant prove it...

But if ND just takes a bit of this and a bit of that he can retain his title and his living..

Or he can take moral high ground and lose and not have means to support family..

Just think about that, I dont want any alternatives added, or ifs and butts etc

If it was you

Family suported = hollow victory

family on street = morals intact

Well, i know what the fck I would do..

Those with children it should not even be a choice IMO


----------



## iain1668 (Apr 30, 2006)

jw007 said:


> OK
> 
> I know I p1ss take nattys etc etc
> 
> ...


Do yourself a favour and apply for the role of story maker on Corrie....

never read so much **** in all my life.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

iain1668 said:


> Do yourself a favour and apply for the role of story maker on Corrie....
> 
> never read so much **** in all my life.


dont read much then do you

As happens "might be true story":whistling:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

JW, I don't know anyone who has a sponshorship that would provide them with that level of support. Maybe there are in untested feds where the guys are the top pros and are internationally well known. I am sponsored (musclefinesse.com) which is fabulous for my supplements on a monthly basis but should I lose this it would not mean financial hardship to the point that I would consider cheating to maintain my pro status. I'd also like to think that any companies that sponsor a natural athlete would not be too happy if their sponsee was banned for 'cheating', surely it could discredit them as a company too!


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

jw007 said:


> OK
> 
> I know I p1ss take nattys etc etc
> 
> ...


F off, thats pure rationalization crap - sponsorship doesnt feed your family unless your baby weens on pro peptide

if they have a title and are scared of losing - live off past glories, does it matter as a PT whether your title came in '09 or 04 for marketing yourself as all you state is British/universe etc champion

that truly is just making excuses for your choices and trying to blame your family on your own ego for doing whatever it takes to win


----------



## whackedout (Sep 10, 2009)

Great story JW, what about fraud?

Ok so you have rationalised that claiming you are natural when not and your family has needs allows you to maintain your earnings through sponsorship deals undeservedly, have you thought about what happens if you get busted and your sponsor takes you to court for damaging their reputation? What if the fed wants their prize money back? What about your great rep when you are proclaimed a cheat a liar and technically a thief? Maybe people that would have otherwise placed in comps might try going after you for money they felt they would have earned, if it hadn't been for your deceit! Surely your family could be worse off financially and socially, they must have known you were a cheat, shame on them!

Just my thoughts.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

whackedout said:


> Great story JW, what about fraud?
> 
> Ok so you have rationalised that claiming you are natural when not and your family has needs allows you to maintain your earnings through sponsorship deals undeservedly, have you thought about what happens if you get busted and your sponsor takes you to court for damaging their reputation? What if the fed wants their prize money back? What about your great rep when you are proclaimed a cheat a liar and technically a thief? Surely your family could be worse off financially and socially, they must have known you were a cheat, shame on them!
> 
> Just my thoughts.


Not rationalised it, saying what could happen

And remember Im not natty, everyone knows that, But I bet I could beat the tests:thumbup1:

Yes, sure you take the risk, and would certainly have to take the hit

Look at Dwaine Chambers, he certainly paid for his "crme", scapegoat or what

However despite stringent drug testing, he was not caught but grassed up..

Wheras Carl Lewis (yes I digress sports) but he has been tested positive on numerous occasions, been covered up and still was an anti drug campaigner..

In any case if your high enough profile, you can make money by then sellig out your competitors and lifting lid on rest of them lol..

I dont really care one way or other, Im just saying t as it is....

Im sure there are plenty that follow the rules, prob majority, I dont know everybody

But seems to be some sort of school of thought that nattys are somehow more "honerable" than non nattys

Well at least what non nattys do is open and above board and not hidden

If you were all so squeaky clean, why would you even need testing????


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

jw007 said:


> Not rationalised it, saying what could happen
> 
> And remember Im not natty, everyone knows that, But I bet I could beat the tests:thumbup1:


Hah, I always thought you were natural :lol:



> But seems to be some sort of school of thought that nattys are somehow more "honerable" than non nattys
> 
> Well at least what non nattys do is open and above board and not hidden
> 
> If you were all so squeaky clean, why would you even need testing????


I agree that some do seem to get on the bandwagon but the majority are fine as like me they have friends from both sectors. I think those who openly admit to using are fine and to be respected for that at least it is pretty much more in the open than it used to be.

I would say that someone who uses and denies it whether they compete or not are the ones who make many think that it's easy to grow muscle naturally, and this is pretty much evident in the female side (you show me a woman who is not into weight training that thinks they won't grow a beard when they pick up weights!!)

It's not the naturals who cause a need for the testing it's the liars! As far as I'm concerned they are disrespecting both camps.


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

Dawn said:


> Hah, I always thought you were natural :lol:
> 
> I agree that some do seem to get on the bandwagon but the majority are fine as like me they have friends from both sectors. I think those who openly admit to using are fine and to be respected for that at least it is pretty much more in the open than it used to be.
> 
> ...


nice post:thumbup1:


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

jw007 said:


> Not rationalised it, saying what could happen
> 
> And remember Im not natty, everyone knows that, But I bet I could beat the tests:thumbup1:
> 
> ...


far from it - I think the assisted/non tested side probably deserves somehwat more respect as they run more risks to achieve what we all want - bigger leaner musculature

at the end of the day it was the assisted bodybuilders which got me into this sport and I still look to them for inspiration (heath, gaspari et still drive me on right now)

but as stated its a endevour (going to stop calling it a sport to be honest) which gives option which some cheating sod need to opt to cheat still baffles me


----------



## whackedout (Sep 10, 2009)

Even weirder why people cheat when there are so many different classes as well. You truly are competing against your peers when there are junior, novice, intermediate, masters over 40, masters over 50, lightweight, middleweight, heavyweight, classic, height classses etc. throughout the feds (assisted and natty). You would think that there is room for everyone to compete without the need to cheat, even stranger when you consider the financial rewards and profile of bodybuilding is relatively low compared to most sports. You still have cheats in the assisted feds where diuretics are banned and diuretics are being used. Guess it is just what it is.

I do agree that assisted is more complex and perhaps harder due to the additional considerations.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

dutch_scott said:


> i say natty harder..
> 
> drugs may allow more mass but its simply non debatable its easier to hold mass, easier to burn fat..
> 
> ...


Reps for that my friend:thumbup1:

Having never done it the other way I don't know how hard it is doing it natural versus not but I would certainly love not to have to do upto 2 hours cardio a day everyday for almost 20 weeks.....there again that's also my fault for enjoying food too much out of season:whistling:


----------



## jw007 (Apr 12, 2007)

dutch_scott said:


> i say natty harder..
> 
> drugs may allow more mass but its simply non debatable its easier to hold mass, easier to burn fat..
> 
> ...


I have competed natty in tested feds

IMO of course getting in shape while holding muscle is harder for nattys

Speaking from experience (will prob get flamed by roider competitors) I got ripped for one show with zero cardio and half ar5ed diet but upped the stims and sh1t

I did train my t1ts off tho..

one thing I do correctly is train hard lol

But thats just me (before scarby comes on and says how hard is for others







)


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

dutch_scott said:


> i say natty harder..
> 
> drugs may allow more mass but its simply non debatable its easier to hold mass, easier to burn fat..
> 
> ...


becarefull which version as isn't one banned :lol:

whilst i am not totally ripped yet I think i have lost very little 'actual' muscle - water, fat and bulk yes but strength seems to indicate actual muscle is still there

hardness of task is self percieved anyway - some find dieting easy some find it hard - the respect comes from the end result - just dont stand on the wrong bloody stage displaying it :cursing: :lol:


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

I wonder how many guys who have posted in this thread who have or do compete in the BNBF have used soemthing they shouldnt have in their time? Fess up


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Team1 said:


> I wonder how many guys who have posted in this thread who have or do compete in the BNBF have used soemthing they shouldnt have in their time? Fess up


When I competed in the 80s I was given aldactone to take :whistling:

I was young and niave and thought it was a safe product to take. I also used to diet by eating only 3 meals a day consisting of 50g cod each meal....and that was it:confused1: I was also told I didn't need protein powder as that would bulk me up:rolleyes:

Oh how things have changed for me now:bounce:


----------



## Team1 (Apr 3, 2008)

Knew it!!!!

Dawn I'm disgusted

What if someone had say 2 years ago used ephedrin...nothing else....then realised the wanted to compete with the bnbf. Would they be aloud?


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

LOL, thought you'd like that one!!

Ephedrine is a strange one and I would say to contact the drug officer to discuss your case for each individual. Don't quote me but I think as long as you've not taken it for 6 months prior to membership you're ok.


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

Dawn said:


> LOL, thought you'd like that one!!
> 
> Ephedrine is a strange one and I would say to contact the drug officer to discuss your case for each individual. Don't quote me but I think *as long as you've not taken it for 6 months prior to membership you're ok*.


That is what I was told when I was going to join the BNBF, I have the email some where. x


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Oh they were the day Linny:whistling: :thumb:


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

Dawn said:


> Oh they were the day Linny:whistling: :thumb:


  does seem a lonnnnnnnng time ago when I was going to compete with the BNBF now my breathe may vaporise people if I walk in the building :laugh:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Yes I shall have to be careful of hugging you now in case you contaminate me


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

LOLOL yes good thinking cross contamination & you'll fail all tests :laugh:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

It's a wonder it's not already happened 

Popping into your place on Wednesday morning if you're about....I'm too fat and need a kick up the **** from Paul!


----------



## Linny (Jun 23, 2009)

I can't get in until 5 onwards chuck....I'll boot yer up the orrice


----------



## Beklet (May 13, 2005)

Linny said:


> That is what I was told when I was going to join the BNBF, I have the email some where. x


Ah yes I remember asking you that as you naughty lady gave me a T5 to get over my hangover the second time I met you! :lol:

I notice pseudoephedrine is banned now too not sure if that's just during comp though as that's usually my decongestant of choice :sad:


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Beklet said:


> Ah yes I remember asking you that as you naughty lady gave me a T5 to get over my hangover the second time I met you! :lol:
> 
> I notice pseudoephedrine is banned now too not sure if that's just during comp though as that's usually my decongestant of choice :sad:




"***** *Pseudoephedrine *is prohibited when its concentration in urine is greater
​
than 150 micrograms per milliliter."

Taken from the WADA banned list 2010


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

MJP said:


> The comments by Testaholic and Dutch Scott are what we are up against when we all try to promote Natural BB, Glen and Dawn. The ones who help others cheat, like Dutch Scott for example, are just as bad as the cheats themselves, I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror, so to speak...There will always be people knocking what the Nat associations do, its a waste of time even trying to explain that we are trying to promote the sport as it should be. Just carry on doing what you do, Glen and Dawn, there's many out there who appreciate it.


MJP you really do make me laugh mate maybe when you get off your soap box you will realise that it is the individuals choice to compete in a natural federation, Dutch is a trainer that is his job this is what puts food on the table and pays the bills he does not advertise that he can get Natural BB through drug tests......

at the end of the day no one is niave to think that all Natural athletes are actually natural......to be fair by natural rules i think there is no rules banned GHRP and GNRH peptides or IGF, MGF etc so by rights someone could actually use all these peds and still be within the rules are they still cheats?

in 2006 i competed in a non tested Fed (NABBA) without any gear (due to trying for a child) and i will agree with the guys who have said about how much harder it was in fact i was thankful after my wife fell pregnant so i could use gear again  and although i do not like the bashing some naturals give those who have made the choice to use gear i do think that those who do use gear should try to get into show condition with no drugs i think they will have a respect then for those who are truly natural.....


----------



## MJP (May 1, 2009)

Glad I make you laugh, 'mate'. I have my views and you have yours, typical comments from you though, 'soapbox' etc...I stick by what I said, and wouldn't expect you to agree with me. There will always be cheats, and there will always it seems be others who help the cheats, both are as bad as each other. We all have a living to make, but that doesn't justify what some others do who have posted on this thread. That's it from me, I'll just try to do my bit promoting the sport as I think is right, and you do yours, Paul, end of.


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> cheats?
> 
> in 2006 i competed in a non tested Fed (NABBA) without any gear (due to trying for a child) and i will agree with the guys who have said about how much harder it was in fact i was thankful after my wife fell pregnant so i could use gear again  and although i do not like the bashing some naturals give those who have made the choice to use gear i do think that those who do use gear should try to get into show condition with no drugs i think they will have a respect then for those who are truly natural.....


Can you post the shots, would be interesting to see what you achieved without assistance


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

MJP said:


> Glad I make you laugh, 'mate'. I have my views and you have yours, typical comments from you though, 'soapbox' etc...I stick by what I said, and wouldn't expect you to agree with me. There will always be cheats, and there will always it seems be others who help the cheats, both are as bad as each other. We all have a living to make, but that doesn't justify what some others do who have posted on this thread. That's it from me, I'll just try to do my bit promoting the sport as I think is right, and you do yours, Paul, end of.


it is appropriate you use the word *typical *Michael as your response is just that "typical" you promote your side of the sport by slating others you pop up every now and again to preach about being natural but yet do not offer any constructive advice to any debate....you criticise Dutch for "helping" non natural athletes that compete as naturals yet the choice to compete is the individuals.....so Michael what are you and your federation doing about the increase in peptide use in the natural federations have these been included in the rules? if not why not? by not including them are you not helping the cheats to cheat?? maybe you spending your time doing this than criticising others and their choices then the natural federations maybe a more even playing field...... :thumb:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Simon m said:


> Can you post the shots, would be interesting to see what you achieved without assistance


yes mate i have them some where


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Pscarb said:


> it is appropriate you use the word *typical *Michael as your response is just that "typical" you promote your side of the sport by slating others you pop up every now and again to preach about being natural but yet do not offer any constructive advice to any debate....you criticise Dutch for "helping" non natural athletes that compete as naturals yet the choice to compete is the individuals.....so Michael what are you and your federation doing about the increase in peptide use in the natural federations have these been included in the rules? if not why not? by not including them are you not helping the cheats to cheat?? maybe you spending your time doing this than criticising others and their choices then the natural federations maybe a more even playing field...... :thumb:


are these peptides not included in the rules?

on the BNBF site entry form its states something like - any other related compounds which surely covers it?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

I am not sure Glen hence the question but the term "any other related compounds" could mean creatine...

i think you cannot truly call someone a cheat for using peptides like GHRP-6 and 2 if you do not name them


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

I would suggest that this could cover it



> *
> *
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

does this read that the title of S2 covers the items 1-4 ?? if it does then this does not take into account

IGF-1

MGF

pMGF

GSF

GHRP

GNRH

GNRH analogs....


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Pscarb said:


> does this read that the title of S2 covers the items 1-4 ?? if it does then this does not take into account
> 
> IGF-1
> 
> ...


I think its just examples and as such those you mentioned would fall under the same umbrella


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Would the "releasing factors" not include it.....personally I'm not aufait with the chemistry etc but for me that would be enough to stop me using the stuff 

I have only checked the WADA banned list for 2010 but the drug officer does have a more detailed document. The problem with the banned list is it does not cover everything which is why we insist that members contact the DO to get verification.


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Interestingly valium/diazepam is not on the list nor is it listed as prohibited on the globaldro site!!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

glen danbury said:


> I think its just examples and as such those you mentioned would fall under the same umbrella


not really Glen some might but some don't like GSF the problem i see is it is open to interpretation and this is dangerous when competing in a natural federation.....


----------



## Unit_69 (Jul 9, 2009)

dutch_scott said:


> ok dammit, was about to say...
> 
> *nor does it include the use of valium to be used in conjunction with detector methods*,
> 
> i feel natty feds need to massively tighten up even though the expense and ability to test and convict is still not there, these rules do seem massively floored.


it does say this about detector methods

"CHEMICALS/DRUGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECEIVING OR PASSING THE POLYGRAPH OR URINE TEST"


----------



## Dawn (Mar 6, 2008)

Certainly if used in that context then that would cover valium

Regarding IGF-1 (see picture)...and the fact the following statements are in place would mean a ban



"other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar
​
biological effect(s)."


----------



## Unit_69 (Jul 9, 2009)

Just to confirm, with ephedrine etc, as long as they have not been used within 6 months of the competition then you can gain membership and compete. Once you are a member it is treated as a banned substance and thought of the same way as anything else on the BNBF banned list


----------



## MrO2b (Aug 19, 2010)

How many cheats have been caught by the BNBF since its inception and for what? Also what's the split re qualifiers and finals for catching cheats?

cheers!


----------

