Is Rich Froning the next Lance Armstrong?

[Cooper Mitchell]

I just read this article this morning. I'm a big Froning supporter, I think he's propelled the sport of CrossFit much quicker and farther than it could have gone without him. That being said, I have a hard time believing with the amount of money on the line that him or many other people at the games aren't juicing.

What are your guys thoughts on drug use in the sport of CrossFit?

http://www.borderland-news.com/the-n...nce-armstrong/

[Jacob Burns]

More than likely rampant.

[Alex Burden]

no is the answer to your thread title.

But CFHQ sends all of it's tests to WADA...

And not mediocre testing agencies as they point out!

[Cooper Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Alex Burden

no is the answer to your thread title.

But CFHQ sends all of it's tests to WADA...

And not mediocre testing agencies as they point out!

I didn't know they sent test results to WADA. I think that's great. However, I think one of the main points brought up is Lance Armstrong was one of the most tested athletes of all time, yet he wasn't caught. The Europeans hated that he came over and smoked them in their own race and would have loved to catch him using PED's, yet he still got by. Could Rich Froning or any other CrossFit athlete not get by as well?

[Luke Sirakos]

Originally Posted by Cooper Mitchell

I didn't know they sent test results to WADA. I think that's great. However, I think one of the main points brought up is Lance Armstrong was one of the most tested athletes of all time, yet he wasn't caught. The Europeans hated that he came over and smoked them in their own race and would have loved to catch him using PED's, yet he still got by. Could Rich Froning or any other CrossFit athlete not get by as well?

Of course someone COULD get by, there is not a method of testing that would be 100% effective. However, attaching someone's name to such a broad accusation is not very ethical in my eyes. Just because someone is better than the field and just because someone could use PED's and not get caught does not equate to that person uses/used PED's.

[Cooper Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Luke Sirakos

Of course someone COULD get by, there is not a method of testing that would be 100% effective. However, attaching someone's name to such a broad accusation is not very ethical in my eyes. Just because someone is better than the field and just because someone could use PED's and not get caught does not equate to that person uses/used PED's.

I see what you're saying about it being unethical to attach the name of someone to the accusation however, Froning is the face of CrossFit. He's the 4-time champ. Just like in any other sport, the cream of the crop will be accused more often than the rest. And, if he is clean, that makes the story that much better. When you're in the spotlight these kinds of accusations are expected and they should have no matter to someone who is not cheating.

[Michael Cook]

My understanding of one of the reasons why Lance Armstrong was able to pass so many tests was because he was primarily using EPO and doing blood doping. These methods increase the body's ability to absorb oxygen in the bloodstream, and therefore increase your endurance - something really important to bicycle racing. EPO and blood doping are really difficult to detect and mostly rely on a comparison between an individual's known biological passport and a blood test sample.

The article accuses Froning of PED based in part on his increase in strength and mass from 2010 to 2012. The EPO and blood doping that Armstrong used are not going to help someone increase strength and mass.

I don't think Froning is a doper. I think he works out harder and more frequently, and has a better ability to recover than other Games competitors. That's why he has been untouchable on the last day of the Games.

[Struan Potter]

Originally Posted by Michael Cook

I don't think Froning is a doper. I think he works out harder and more frequently, and has a better ability to recover than other Games competitors. That's why he has been untouchable on the last day of the Games.

You do realise that being able to train harder and more frequently, and recovery quicker are all giveaways of PED use? At his level? It wouldn't surprise me if he is using.

[Tighe Crovetti]

I have lots of problems with this whole premise, but I'm going to point this out first:

Over a 2 year period his weight ballooned from 185 to 195lbs

Right off the bat, this is telling me they are in this for melodrama, attention, emotion, etc... A guy in the prime of his athletic prime putting on 10#, 5% of his body weight, is an absolute NO-CONCERN. I started Crossfit at the age of 40, in "good shape" by normal standards, and at last BodPod test, it showed I had put on 14# of lean muscle, lost 1# of body fat, for a net increase of 13#. I assure you.....I'm not on any PEDs, LOL.

Next:

If you compare Froning's physique to that of elite lifters, at 195lbs, 5'9" and 6-8% body fat he is carrying almost 20lbs more muscle than a similarly proportioned bodybuilder from an era rife with steroid abuse.

I think everyone on this board can agree, Froning is NOWHERE near 6-8% body fat. I'm not even sure Spealler is that low. Troyan (my coach, who I see with no shirt working out somewhat often) is freakishly ripped; I bet he may only be touching that level.

My biggest general problem is, they didn't start with any actual evidence of PED use. They started with an environment which they feel is conducive to it, and seem to be assembling things (maybe not even factual things) that support that hypothesis. You could look at any corporation in the world and say, "with all those revenues, there's an incentive to manipulate your books," and then just point out, "well....look how much their profits went up in two years, that could be cheating!" "Look how much this CEO makes, surely he would cheat to keep that salary!"

This article is completely dishonest in its purpose, and seemingly dishonest in its actual content.

[Cooper Mitchell]

Originally Posted by Tighe Crovetti

I have lots of problems with this whole premise, but I'm going to point this out first:



Right off the bat, this is telling me they are in this for melodrama, attention, emotion, etc... A guy in the prime of his athletic prime putting on 10#, 5% of his body weight, is an absolute NO-CONCERN. I started Crossfit at the age of 40, in "good shape" by normal standards, and at last BodPod test, it showed I had put on 14# of lean muscle, lost 1# of body fat, for a net increase of 13#. I assure you.....I'm not on any PEDs, LOL.

You're comparing yourself, a 40 year old in "good shape" by normal standards to an elite athlete at the prime of his career in regards to muscle mass gained. Putting on 10 lbs of lean muscle tissue when you're already at the level he was at and in such a short time definitely raises red flags.