The steroid-friendly coach on stage condition
In part III of this interview, a steroid-friendly coach talks about women’s competition condition, stage standards and the risks that are often only discussed in whispers. This is not a recommendation to use any substances, but an honest look at what has been seen around top-level fitness and what choices athletes sometimes make.
The steroid-friendly coach and women’s competition condition
The conversation starts with a simple observation: over the years, female fitness competitors have become drier and more muscular. Many used to look softer on stage. Now, especially at the top level of competition, you see extreme dryness, strong shoulders and a very precisely sculpted physique.
According to the coach, this doesn’t come only from athletes wanting to be bigger and drier. The judges play a major part too. When the people scoring have a bodybuilding background, that inevitably shapes which physique is considered better on stage. If points are awarded for muscularity and a sharp look, preparation moves in that direction too.
The question many people don’t want to ask out loud is a simple one: how widespread is the use of performance-enhancing substances at the top level? The answer is blunt. In the coach’s estimate, everyone uses fat burners, whether that means well-known legal supplements or black-market products. Clenbuterol and Cytomel, also known as T3, come up as well.
On anabolic steroids, the coach says that at “National Pro Qualifier” level, an estimated 25–40% of the girls use Anavar. The coach has also heard of Equipoise and testosterone propionate being used, but has not seen it personally. For a fairly large share of competitors, the coach mentions Anavar and Winstrol.
A clear line needs to be drawn here. The coach stresses that they don’t put anyone on anything. According to the coach, the conversation is about the options, the risks, the cost and what you actually face at competitions of that level. In the end, the athlete makes the decision.
How are choices made in the steroid-friendly world?
If a woman who wanted to compete at a high level came to the coach, they would talk about a low dose of Anavar and, less often, Winstrol. For the coach, Winstrol is already a bridge toward the more extreme end. Because Winstrol is a DHT derivative, you have to allow for stronger side effects.
In preparation, the coach also mentions rotating fat burners: 2 weeks of yohimbe with caffeine, 2 weeks of ephedrine with caffeine and 2 weeks of clenbuterol. If needed, T3 comes up too. This describes what the coach says is used, not health advice for the reader.
The coach keeps women away from testosterone. They say they have never recommended testosterone to a woman. The only exception they could imagine is if the client were competing for a top 5 place at a very large bodybuilding competition. In general, the position stays the same: Anavar, Winstrol and Proviron may be on the table, testosterone not.
Why the difference? In the coach’s view, testosterone’s side effects in women tip too easily toward harm. The simple truth is that a woman’s body doesn’t respond to these substances in the same way a man’s body does.
On Anavar, the coach says that for men, 10 mg a day may not mean anything special. In women, the same amount can, in the coach’s experience, produce a very big visual change. The coach describes more muscular shoulders, a thinner layer of fat and firmer glutes. At the same time, the coach stresses that no substance does anything if training and nutrition are a mess.
The coach even compares this with men who take 1 gram of testosterone a week. The point is not that this should be an example to follow. Rather, the coach wants to show how different the response to the same logic can be in men and women.
The steroid-friendly coach on side effects
When it comes to side effects, the tone of the interview is provocative. The coach claims that, in their experience, 10 mg of Anavar a day doesn’t yet mean dramatic masculinization in women. That said, you shouldn’t draw the simple conclusion that there is no risk. Risk depends on the substance, the dose, the duration, the person and how honestly health is monitored.
With Winstrol, the coach’s assessment is much more cautious. They say Winstrol can make women more masculine far more easily. The effect is individual and depends on the dose, but in the coach’s own order of preference, Winstrol is more of a second choice.
The coach also says women ask them about steroids all the time. Backstage, they often hear other athletes’ stories: one takes this, another takes that. After a competition, someone turns up saying let’s try to get me in shape like that too. According to the coach, their role is to give the most honest information possible, rather than let the athlete decide on the basis of half-baked rumors.
The coach considers the worst situation to be one where a woman is advised by her “mountain of muscle” boyfriend. Many such men consider themselves steroid specialists, even though in reality the coach has to explain more to them than to their girlfriends.
On dependence, the coach distinguishes between men and women. They talk about men who start with an innocent cycle and end up on back-to-back cycles lasting 10–12 years. As an example, the coach cites a guy who injects 1 gram of testosterone a week together with Anadrol, gains 12–13 of water weight in 6 weeks and loses 8–9 kg of it by the end of the cycle. The coach’s verdict: the wise don’t rush.
With women, the coach considers this problem close to nonexistent. In their words, it’s easier to make clear to women that using substances before a contest is temporary and tied to a specific stage condition. This is their experience, not a universal guarantee.
Training, diet and the practical side of stage condition
Asked about preparing naturally, the coach answers: of course. At the same time, they remind us that contest condition depends on the judging standards. If the judges want to see a certain type of physique on stage, coaches prepare athletes accordingly. That doesn’t automatically make the choice right, but it explains why the system pushes athletes in a certain direction.
Of other coaches, they say that some are more aggressive and some are not. In their view, the problem arises when former bodybuilders start preparing women with the same mindset they used to train men. When they see that muscularity scores points on stage, they start pushing the doses up.
They don’t think much of anti-estrogens such as Nolvadex and Clomid for women. Some use them with the idea of reducing water retention and helping fat come off the legs and glutes. The coach prefers to deal with water through diet. In their words, deadlifts, lunges and squats do more for a saggy backside.
Growth hormone comes up too. Believe it or not, at national level it is, according to the coach, quite common among women. They don’t use it on the girls they coach themselves, although they say it works for fat burning. Especially when it’s combined with T3 and clen.
Under horror stories, the coach talks about extreme diets and confusing cycles. Some meals consist of nothing but a few hundred grams of broccoli. Some cycles are so complicated that you’d almost need a master’s degree in chemistry to understand them.
One specific case involved a girl who was put on a high dose of T3 for six months. She never went below 75 mcg a day, ate very little and did several cardio sessions a day. When she finally came off the cycle, her body weight came back many times over and her thyroid gland was wrecked.
For the coach, the biggest stupidity is women doing insane amounts of cardio and barely eating. They say outright that 3 hours of cardio a day on just 900 kilocalories is far more harmful to a woman’s metabolism than 10 mg of Anavar a day. It’s a harsh statement, but the point is clear: starving yourself is not smart preparation.
If a woman wants to compete completely without substances, there is still hope for her, according to the coach. But those who reach the top are mostly the ones with exceptionally good genetics. That applies to both men and women.
When it comes to training, the coach has a simple principle: many women don’t train hard enough. Their girls do heavy basic lifts, such as pull-ups, presses on parallel bars, deadlifts and classic lifts. They say that all the girls they train do sets of deadlifts with their own bodyweight, and their backs show it.
The coach is fairly relaxed about CrossFit. For ordinary women, they like that CrossFit makes you push yourself. At the same time, they don’t see anything completely new or revolutionary in it.
The steroid-friendly coach FAQ
Does this interview recommend using steroids?
No. The text describes one coach’s view of what goes on behind the scenes in competitive fitness. Using substances can bring health risks, and it shouldn’t be done on the basis of hearsay, backstage talk or someone’s boyfriend’s recommendation.
Can a woman compete naturally?
Yes, she can. The coach also says that preparing naturally is possible. The result, however, depends on the class, the judging standards, training, nutrition and genetics.
What is the most practical lesson from this story?
Before any cycles, you need to ask whether your training and nutrition are in place at all. If they aren’t, a substance is not the solution. Also think about why you want to compete: to measure yourself against others, or to prove something to yourself?
Ronnie, Dorian, Monica and Dexter reached the top not only through work but also thanks to genetics. If a woman naturally has broad shoulders and a narrow waist and hips, she has an advantage on stage. If a man has broad shoulders, narrow hips, slender joints, muscular legs and striking muscularity, he has an advantage too. Anyone can get better, but big-time competitive sport is a world of its own.
Source: here
Translated by Janar Rückenberg
Come and train! ArtGym
