This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Cheating in sports
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Squishalot
"The definition of cheat is to gain an advantage on a rival or foe. I didn't view it that way. I viewed it as a level playing field."
-
Lance Armstrong
What are your thoughts? Now that all has been said and done in the Lance Armstrong saga, he's now come out and admitted using performance enhancing drugs. However, is he justified?
Post by
Sas148
So, people who were naturally that good had the advantage and he took the drugs to "level the playing field"?
Ummm... how about you just don't compete? I'm not sure I understand the rational.(##RESPBREAK##)12##DELIM##Sas148##DELIM##
Post by
Adamsm
When you cheat to win, you don't really win.
Or at least, that's what it's suppose to mean, but considering the juicing scandals and all the rest that run rampant through out the North American continent across all of the major sports, guess it's just an 'expected' part of the games now a day.
Of course, Lance Armstrong is a smug bastard anyways, so meh to him.
Post by
Sas148
Oh, I suppose he could have meant that, in his experience/opinion, everyone he was competing against was "juicing" so he decided to do so as well as to "level the playing field." If the problem is that rampant than something needs to be done (assuming Lance isn't just paranoid).
Post by
Squishalot
Oh, I suppose he could have meant that, in his experience/opinion, everyone he was competing against was "juicing" so he decided to do so as well as to "level the playing field."
That was my interpretation. There was a comment that he didn't believe it was possible to win the Tour de France without taking drugs.
Post by
Magician22773
Oh, I suppose he could have meant that, in his experience/opinion, everyone he was competing against was "juicing" so he decided to do so as well as to "level the playing field."
That was my interpretation. There was a comment that he didn't believe it was possible to win the Tour de France without taking drugs.
I read that the same. If
everyone
is doping, then doping is not gaining an advantage.
I have participated for many years in probably what is the most "corrupt" sport in the world....auto racing.
We have a very specific set of guidelines that are given to us regarding what equipment we can have in our cars, and literally every single car on the track violates those rules at every possible opportunity.
We are required to run cast iron intake manifolds...no aluminum allowed. This is checked during inspection by a magnet......so every aluminum intake is now covered in paint that is filled with metal flakes.
We are limited to the total displacement of our engines, so everyone runs "pop-up" pistons. These pistons compress while the engine is running, thus increasing displacement, and expand when the engine is stopped, so it passes a volume test during inspection.
We soak our tires in chemicals to make them softer, but the chemicals are designed to burn off during a race so the tires will pass tech.
We are required to use a "stock" carburetor on our cars. We send our carbs out to have every single internal piece modified, but leave the external (visable) case intact.
My first year in racing, I bought a car, and built it perfectly as the rules demanded. I used quality parts, tweaked and tuned the engine to run at peak performance.....and I never finished a race on the lead lap. Hell, I looked like I was standing still compared to the other cars out there. It did not take me to long to realize that if I wanted to compete, I had to "cheat".
The tech crew also has rules about exactly how they tech. Lets take the "iron" intakes. They could simply scrape a little paint off, and see the shiny silver aluminum...but their rules say, if a magnet sticks, it passes. The same goes for every other rule we "bend" while building our cars. The tech crew knows what we are doing, and we know what they are going to look for.
So if every (competitive) car on the track is running the same illegal setup, is it really "cheating" to run the same?
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Here's another take on it. Doping is really bad for you- it can kill you. It can lead to problems later in life that will kill you or severely affect your life. If there are no rules about drug use, then people who want to compete are expected to put themselves in harms way (more than the normal competition of the sport would demand) in order to play against everyone else. The rules exist, because the governing bodies recognize that they should not create an environment that encourages people to poison themselves to compete in a game.
The fact that doping is widespread is what the rules are trying to combat, so why should that be a reason they shouldn't exist? The point of enforcing them is to get the sport to a point where taking drugs isn't leveling the playing field because not everyone is doing it. If they don't enforce the rules, then there it becomes accepted that people should poison themselves, or use unsafe equipment, to compete in the sport. Every time some major figure in sports loses everything, though, because they were caught breaking the rules, it validates all the players who don't feel that they should shorten their lifespan to compete. And it may make the next generation of athletes more likely to avoid the drugs because they know that it can cost you everything it helps you win in the first place.
Post by
Tenjen
pulling the meaning out of the dictionary.
its a tactic racists and bigots use too to justify their %^&* or say its not what it is.
if you cheat, you've not proven your worth. Which is what sports if about. You're weaker than the others, thus you needed leverage and cheating.
Post by
Sagramor
Technically, what Mr. Armstrong said is not wrong. I mean, think about it, we all know he was at least 50% chemicals when he won, but he didn't come in a broad first. The difference between #1 and #2 was a seconds sometimes; same for #2 and #3 and so forth. So, either Mr. Armstrong
sucks
at biking and got doped up to win by inches, or the other players were also talking drugs, making the playing field leveled, and his medal earned.Nothing will change just someone will get caught, someone won't.
In games like basketball and football, the possibility to commit a faulty move is a part of the game, to be used by players at their discretion and awareness of the consequences.
However, when it comes to doping, it technically
could
change - it's not that complex a thing to be accomplished. But it requires money and time, and who will suffer those losses? The state? Should we use the Public's money to properly regulate sports? If not, then should the responsibility fall on private entities? Wouldn't that only further damage the credibility of the sport?
Post by
OverZealous
I'm torn about this. On one hand, I find it disgusting that people would stand and receive prize money and the audience's applause, knowing that they did not win the prize themselves, but with the aid of illegal drugs.
On the other hand, everyone knows that most if not all the top contenders in the sport were using illegal performance enhancing drugs. Armstrong was the one the USADA (and most of everyone else, too) went after because he was at the forefront - the most famous, the one you'd see the most. That he got caught and very few others have does not mean that everyone else is clean and that Armstrong alone used performance enhancers.
It's kind of against what I want to think I stand for - but I still support Armstrong. I would have hoped that he was clean after all, but he is still somewhat of a victim. Once everyone else in the sport gets caught and more efficient ways of detecting performance enhancing drugs are put in place;
then
I might stop. But until then, Armstrong is still the guy that has to take the fall for doing what everyone else was doing as well.
pulling the meaning out of the dictionary.
its a tactic racists and bigots use too to justify their %^&* or say its not what it is.
if you cheat, you've not proven your worth. Which is what sports if about. You're weaker than the others, thus you needed leverage and cheating.
But if everyone cheats, in the same way, what then?
Post by
gamerunknown
Here
was the previous thread on the topic (before recent revelations), for anyone interested. Refusal to fight is still not admission of guilt, but the perspectives are interesting.
Post by
Magician22773
All the memories of the great races I saw and records being broken were all thrown away because I don't know wether they were drug-fuelled or not.
If your memories are from anytime in the last 20 years or so.....chances are they were.
When science surpassed skill, professional sports pretty much went down the drain.
Post by
Sagramor
All the memories of the great races I saw and records being broken were all thrown away because I don't know wether they were drug-fuelled or not.
If your memories are from anytime in the last 20 years or so.....chances are they were.
When science surpassed skill, professional sports pretty much went down the drain.
Not true if they
all
do drugs. They still have to excel beyond the normal limit, which is the whole point of sports: to reach perfection among equals, and then gloat about it.
Post by
Tenjen
artificial enhancements are cheap ways to gain improvement. The task of acheiving growth through hard work and effort has a stabilising and growing effect on the persons pyschy. They're better people for it compared to those who achieve it easy. Not for moral reasons but because of the temperance achieved through experience. Those who achieve things the easy way are way more likely to screw things up in RL cause they're value systems are mishapen and contorted by the drugs doing most of the effort during their training, being dependent on them rather than their own minds and bodies.
ofcourse this is just in general but one could argue how this matters in a sports events, which is some may argue that arguements of life functioning does not apply. Thing is, these events are supposed to show us the skill, finesse, strength and stamina of the human race. Artificial enhancement can skew this view and have long term repurcussions on our culture. Inserting an artificially supported set of values into a natural order (whether it be events, culture shift or nature) ALWAYS causes unforeseen consequences especially if they try to run contrary to what the natural order supports and enforces.
and if everyone is doing drugs, then they're ALL wrong and undeserving and the entire thing is a sham.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.