I put LOL because I actually laughing out loud. If you take the forum seriously, that is your choice. Be happy with it, and get on my case for making a different choice.
I am not denying that you can inject some steroids into your ass, train like a bodybuilder and look like Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime (depending on your genetics). I am not denying that you can inject some steroids into your ass, train like Usain Bolt, and improve your 40 yard dash from 10 seconds to 9.95 seconds.
The question I am asking how does looking like Arnold Schwarzenegger and having an improved 40 yard dash make you win more fights, hence a better fighter.
Fighting is not the Olympics, where you can say "I am better because my time has improved or I can throw the discus a little further and etc." The only way you can show you are a BETTER fighter is by WINING more fights.
Don't give that bullshit "baseline" argument. No fighter's baseline can be measured. You can measure Usain Bolts baseline, because he runs in a straight for 100M and he is timed.
In MMA, all types of things are possible. You don't have to be the best boxer, you don't have to be the best wrestler, you don't have to be the best at BJJ and etc.
So, how are you even going to measure a fighter's baseline in BJJ, wrestling, fight IQ, boxing and etc?
It is just a ridiculous argument. The only way you can say that steroids work, is if the fighters taking steroids are more likely to win than those who aren't.
So far, the record shows that steroid fighters and non-steroids fighters have about the same chance of winning fights. Until I see evidence that contradict this fact, and I am not changing my hypothesis that "steroids don't work in MMA." It is a pretty reasonable stance based on the best available evidence.
An improvement in benching ability doesn't mean an improvement in fighting ability.
