Reinstated dopers have not paid their dues until they repay those they cheated out of money!

Which marathon? Dallas? Did they not also mention that the winner was a drug cheat?

I totally agree.

Somebody should test this out in court.

The perfect plaintiff would be someone who came 4th at a US championship behind a drug cheat and missed out on:

- direct winnings (prize differential between 3rd and 4th)

- sponsor bonus for making WC or Olympics

- future sponsorship (even better if he got dropped from his sponsor for not making the US team)...

The cheater should pay for this himself.

Even if the cheater no longer has any money to pay, the jurisprudence would make for a very nice detergent for the future.

One cheater would certainly owe money to dozens or even hundreds of people.

I don't think that the money should go to the race organizers (unless they paid for a performance bonus that only the cheat would have received). The money should go to the "wronged" athletes.

I've posted on other "doping" threads here that I think dopers should have to pay hefty fines before they're allowed to compete again because most of the motive for doping is financially driven and because the people running the sport are ambivalent at the very best about banning doped high profile athletes who sell tickets and TV deals. Fining them and then allowing them to compete addresses that ambivalence and negates the primary reward for doping.

But paying back prize money that they've won to those "cheated" out of the money is a tricky business. As much as we believe that A would have beaten B had B not been using PEDs, that's speculation. And we have to consider that while chasing B, A was pulled clear of the rest of the field and if B hadn't been there, doped and unnaturally faster, A would have hung back with the rest of the pack and been out kicked by C and D. A fine does nothing to restore money that clean athletes have lost to dopers but that money could go into a fund that distributes money to support athletes in general.

Jcsdhhjbjhcsdhjbcsd wrote:

I totally agree.

Somebody should test this out in court.

The perfect plaintiff would be someone who came 4th at a US championship behind a drug cheat and missed out on:

If someone at that championship was caught as a drug cheat then 4th place moves up and gets all of those opportunities.

If someone finished 4th behind someone who later was caught as a drug cheat it just isn't hard evidence that they cheated before that.

There are instances where awards have been retroactively taken away - Ben Johnson and Marion Jones.

If they could get the old money they would.

I am sure it's already been tested in court.

Does paying back prize money have to be a tricky business?

Could athletes be required to sign a contract defining what they have to do if they are caught?

Once someone was caught the first time, the contract they would have to sign to race again would have to include paying to have extra testing. Whatever testing the event wanted to impose.

pao0934i wrote:

Does paying back prize money have to be a tricky business?

...

Not talking about "paying back" prize money, but remitting it to the person who should have received it in the first place.

The plaintiff here would not be the race organizer, but the other athletes who placed behind the cheat.

Has this already been tested? Has an athlete successfully (or not) been able to be awarded lost prize money from the cheater in the past?

Not so easy. Prize money is taxed by the Government. The "assumed" clean losers would get a reduced "repay" amount. I don't see the Government allowing a prior "doper" to claim the "repaid" amount as a special tax credit, such that the losers can be paid in full, and that they can then pay the Government the required taxes.

Tax laws trump legal rights? Not...

Any lawyers on this site?

Let's say I win money at a 10k race where I run a doped 30:10 and the second place guy ran 31:20. That gap is so big that it's hard to claim that I stole money from the other runners by doping because even clean I would likely have won handily. You could simplify things by saying that I have to give my prize money to the second place guy anyway no matter how far behind me he was. I'm DQed and that's that.

But let's say the race and prize were pretty small, say $500 which is no big deal to pay back. And let's say I failed a test given a day or so before I won that race. And let's say that a couple weeks before that I hit it big, let's say $10,000, at another race that I ran before I failed my test. It's hard to believe that I was clean before that big payday and then started doping. But really, I cannot be forced to make restitution for that $10,000 because there is no evidence that I was doped when I won the money. But if there is a hefty fine that I have to pay to compete again I still can be hit in the wallet for cheating.

They should pay by having fans jeer at them every time they compete for the rest of their careers. Fans are way too polite.

Next time you see a doper compete, jeer. Let them know you're not a fan.

Star wrote:

[quote]Jcsdhhjbjhcsdhjbcsd wrote:

I totally agree.

Somebody should test this out in court.

The perfect plaintiff would be someone who came 4th at a US championship behind a drug cheat and missed out on:

If someone at that championship was caught as a drug cheat then 4th place moves up and gets all of those opportunities.

If someone finished 4th behind someone who later was caught as a drug cheat it just isn't hard evidence that they cheated before that.

There are instances where awards have been retroactively taken away - Ben Johnson and Marion Jones.

If they could get the old money they would.

I am sure it's already been tested in court.[/quote

This is why dopers should have to pay back all the prize money and the differential between them and the next best place for races for the past 2 years

Yes, we don't know for sure when they started but they could have been doping 5 years back, and if they were just recently doping they still need to pay for the past 2 years, yeah it's more money, but they should have thought about that before they doped

And what legal right does a loser have?

"Tax laws trump legal rights? Not..."

the runner who lost out should go after the race director and not the doped runner. this should be part of the agreement for usatf certification of the directors course as well. if you want a big race that is certified you must be accountable for who you allow to run in the race. lets go after the real problem! the people who run the show who benefit from lookiing the other way. a great race with a new record is in the moment, that is all the race cares about.

Hayduke wrote:

the runner who lost out should go after the race director and not the doped runner. this should be part of the agreement for usatf certification of the directors course as well. if you want a big race that is certified you must be accountable for who you allow to run in the race. lets go after the real problem! the people who run the show who benefit from lookiing the other way. a great race with a new record is in the moment, that is all the race cares about.

That would be a dumb move. Why organize a race anymore? Too risky... The athletes should be accountable for their actions. Is that too hard to understand. Nobody else put anything in their mouth or their veins.

Gee...