Armstronglivs wrote:
That drugs enhance performance is not a tautology but a fact - but one you have denied again and again on so many threads. It is also not my argument as to why I think Nadal dopes. But dancing around your mulberry bush is a pointless exercise. I will leave you to it.
You are trying to pull a bait and switch.
You said "performance enhancing drugs" before, and now you just say "drugs".
I confirm and repeat my conviction that all performance enhancing drugs enhance performance.
Likewise, all non-performance enhancing drugs do not enhance performance.
There is no in between.
If performance enhancing drugs did not enhance performance, this instantly leads to the absurd conclusion that that drug is both performance enhancing and not performance enhancing.
If non-performance enhancing drugs enhanced performance, we arrive at the same illogical absurdity.
In sports, when we talk about doping, we talked about a subset of drugs that appear on WADA's pre-determined list. Some of these can be performance enhancing, and some are not. This determination might vary by sport, or by athlete, or by athlete's fitness, and a host of other factors.
A reminder of the gaps. You have failed to show:
- That Nadal doped
- That Nadal's performance indicates doping
- That doping can explain Nadal's performance
- That only doping can explain Nadal's performance
Prevalence does not show any of these things.
Suspicions of anti-doping experts and other players do not show these things.
Viagra in the bedroom does not show any of these things.
To be clear, I make no claim about Nadal, tennis or doping here, but I make a claim about your thread and your logic and knowledge gaps in your discussion that force you to make faith based conclusions.