casual obsever wrote:
Speaking of history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Olympic_Games#1980_MoscowThough no athletes were caught doping at the 1980 Summer Olympics, it has been revealed that athletes had begun using testosterone and other drugs for which tests had not been yet developed. A 1989 report by a committee of the Australian Senate claimed that "there is hardly a medal winner at the Moscow Games, certainly not a gold medal winner...who is not on one sort of drug or another: usually several kinds. The Moscow Games might well have been called the Chemists' Games"
I have seen this before and it simply represents one person’s opinion. How on earth can such a sweeping generalised conclusion be made without having personally examined and found irregularities in each medalist’s sample? He is pi**ing in the wind.
Now we know that Russia has been caught red handed, having tampered with drug samples and covered up positive test results from their own athletes. I have no doubt that they were doing the same in Moscow 1980, not just for their athletes but for all their comrades in the Eastern block. We know that the GDR was doping their athletes from Stasi files, but the fact that their women were so much better than women from elsewhere, is enough to prove to any knowledgeable observer that this was the case. It is ridiculous to think that such a small country (population) could win more medals in all sports than pretty much the rest of the non communist world put together!
Of course the lack of any positive tests from Moscow 80 is a nonsense, but it was completely down to the Russians and is not evidence that those from outside the Iron Curtain were all doping too.
Moreover, surely the Russians would have loved the scenario of catching a big western name and revealing it to the world’s media, thus reinforcing the superiority of communism over free market ideology! They would surely have tested and scrutinised the likes of Coe’s and Ovett’s samples and seized upon any irregularities.