Lots of comments on how doping would ruin the sport. If everyone is cheating it for sure would be #badforthesport but definitely would NOT ruin it. Just brings the pros to a new level. Like superspikes that only the pros could wear.
We are pretty much already there at the top of sport.
The question might be rephrased: how can we be confident anyone isn't doping?
A few uncomfortable facts:
- As far back as 1996 it was estimated that up to 80% of participants at Atlanta would be doped. (There was also no test for EPO then, so it would have been present in running).
- Only 1-2% of tests produce a positive. Confidential athlete surveys have proven that doping far exceeds the numbers caught. Ergo, most dopers are not caught. In the words of a former WADA head, "only the dumb and the careless are caught".
- In the words of another former WADA head, David Howman, "doping is more sophisticated than antidoping". Hence, doping remains ahead of antidoping.
- It is found in all sports. According to antidoping expert Renee Ann Shirley, "doping is present in all sports in all countries at elite levels, with the frequent collusion of sports governance bodies". It has been found in championship darts, curling and chess.
- Doping is not confined to elites and professionals. It is known to be present in schools and colleges.
- The question every athlete is faced with today is whether they are prepared to use everything available to them to succeed - which, for many, includes doping. They will know that many of their competitors will dope. In some countries we have seen that doping is about 99% at the top - as in Russia, where it is state-sponsored. How many athletes are prepared to lose to those they believe are dopers?
Since those are just some of the factors that indicate the likely prevalence of doping today, the question remains - how confident can you be that any athlete (and especially your favorite) isn't?
This looks like a solid foundation for a lot of myths.
- I thought I already corrected your 1996 "estimate" from a lawyer. The 80% "estimate" was a lawyer's own personal speculation for "power sports" (e.g. weightlifting) in the 1988 Seoul Olympics. Makes for a great quote in a BBC documentary laying more foundation for myths.
- 1-2% positive means 1-2% knowledge and 98-99% ignorance. Fertile ground for myths. Some of those 1-2% who test positive are intentional cheats.
- A former WADA Head is going to express opinions which will bring more money and power to world anti-doping. It's not clear what he really knows (see above: 98-99% ignorance) about athlete doping prevelance.
- Doping is "present" in all sports and at all levels because belief that doping can help performance is widespread and deep and even goes to the top.
- Maybe some athletes will look at Russia, with their 99% doping, and say, for all that doping, they weren't ever really that great, except for a few women in middle distance and power events.
The question might be rephrased: how can we be confident anyone isn't doping?
A few uncomfortable facts:
- As far back as 1996 it was estimated that up to 80% of participants at Atlanta would be doped. (There was also no test for EPO then, so it would have been present in running).
- Only 1-2% of tests produce a positive. Confidential athlete surveys have proven that doping far exceeds the numbers caught. Ergo, most dopers are not caught. In the words of a former WADA head, "only the dumb and the careless are caught".
- In the words of another former WADA head, David Howman, "doping is more sophisticated than antidoping". Hence, doping remains ahead of antidoping.
- It is found in all sports. According to antidoping expert Renee Ann Shirley, "doping is present in all sports in all countries at elite levels, with the frequent collusion of sports governance bodies". It has been found in championship darts, curling and chess.
- Doping is not confined to elites and professionals. It is known to be present in schools and colleges.
- The question every athlete is faced with today is whether they are prepared to use everything available to them to succeed - which, for many, includes doping. They will know that many of their competitors will dope. In some countries we have seen that doping is about 99% at the top - as in Russia, where it is state-sponsored. How many athletes are prepared to lose to those they believe are dopers?
Since those are just some of the factors that indicate the likely prevalence of doping today, the question remains - how confident can you be that any athlete (and especially your favorite) isn't?
This looks like a solid foundation for a lot of myths.
- I thought I already corrected your 1996 "estimate" from a lawyer. The 80% "estimate" was a lawyer's own personal speculation for "power sports" (e.g. weightlifting) in the 1988 Seoul Olympics. Makes for a great quote in a BBC documentary laying more foundation for myths.
- 1-2% positive means 1-2% knowledge and 98-99% ignorance. Fertile ground for myths. Some of those 1-2% who test positive are intentional cheats.
- A former WADA Head is going to express opinions which will bring more money and power to world anti-doping. It's not clear what he really knows (see above: 98-99% ignorance) about athlete doping prevelance.
- Doping is "present" in all sports and at all levels because belief that doping can help performance is widespread and deep and even goes to the top.
- Maybe some athletes will look at Russia, with their 99% doping, and say, for all that doping, they weren't ever really that great, except for a few women in middle distance and power events.
So many idiot athletes and coaches who, for generations now, believe doping improves performances, whose own experiences would prove that to them - and antidoping experts who believe the same on the evidence available to them, that doping gives advantage. All wrong - according to you. And this from someone with no experience of doping, who knows no athletes who have doped and who has never used it himself. Convictions formed without experience and completely disregarding the views of those who do have such experience. I don't think there could be a more compelling definition of stupidity.
The headline of the thread is also in the present tense, and the last time I checked my calendar, it was 2022, ie. 26 years after the 1996 Summer Olympics.
I ran in college. Decent D1 runner. The FB players were openly taking steroids. Back then I didn't know anything about doping in track but if I had been exposed or someone would have approached me I am about 90% sure that I and my teammates would have doped. Maybe 100%? So.. that's my baseline on whether athletes dope
This isn't doping but related to testing athletes. When I was a freshman in college two of my roommates were on the basketball team. The entire basketball team would come to my room to smoke weed lol. It got to the point where other teams would come over to participate. They were never tested thankfully.
The headline of the thread is also in the present tense, and the last time I checked my calendar, it was 2022, ie. 26 years after the 1996 Summer Olympics.
So doping stopped 26 years ago? That's about as stupid and as ignorant an observation on the topic as I've read. You should tell WADA their job is done - nothing for them to worry about now. That's possibly because you aren't informed on anything in the "present tense".
I believe that the GRAY AREA that most pros, elites, "the best in the world" are operating in are injectable vitamins/ IV's. This is how they are running so fast without getting caught. You cannot get banned for having sky-high Zinc levels, or B12.
This looks like a solid foundation for a lot of myths.
- I thought I already corrected your 1996 "estimate" from a lawyer. The 80% "estimate" was a lawyer's own personal speculation for "power sports" (e.g. weightlifting) in the 1988 Seoul Olympics. Makes for a great quote in a BBC documentary laying more foundation for myths.
- 1-2% positive means 1-2% knowledge and 98-99% ignorance. Fertile ground for myths. Some of those 1-2% who test positive are intentional cheats.
- A former WADA Head is going to express opinions which will bring more money and power to world anti-doping. It's not clear what he really knows (see above: 98-99% ignorance) about athlete doping prevelance.
- Doping is "present" in all sports and at all levels because belief that doping can help performance is widespread and deep and even goes to the top.
- Maybe some athletes will look at Russia, with their 99% doping, and say, for all that doping, they weren't ever really that great, except for a few women in middle distance and power events.
So many idiot athletes and coaches who, for generations now, believe doping improves performances, whose own experiences would prove that to them - and antidoping experts who believe the same on the evidence available to them, that doping gives advantage. All wrong - according to you. And this from someone with no experience of doping, who knows no athletes who have doped and who has never used it himself. Convictions formed without experience and completely disregarding the views of those who do have such experience. I don't think there could be a more compelling definition of stupidity.
My strongest conviction is that the estimated 98-99% ignorance leaves plenty of room and fertile ground and solid foundation to invent and propogate myths, as they contradictory knowledge is virtually non-existent. You are simply one of many spokesmen speculating what can be projected from the solid basis of 98-99% ignorance. This nearly 100 percent magnitude of ignorance explains why there are so many different, often contradictory, personal pet hypotheses of what the alleged relation of doping and best performances looks like.
I note that your initial set of "uncomfortable facts" didn't include any facts at all coming from "athletes and coaches" "for generations", nor their beliefs, nor their documented experiences. Maybe they are right or wrong, but they aren't the ones here, or anywhere, telling us about their proven experiences -- these alleged experiences only come from anonymous nobodies like you "with no experience of doping, who knows no athletes who have doped and who has never used it himself".
Instead, your "uncomfortable facts (sic)" you chose to open with: a speculative "estimate" from a lawyer (Richard Armstrong) about "power events" from the 1988 Seoul Olympics; summary statistics from WADA lab results essentially conceding 98-99% ignorance regarding the doping status of those tested, not to mention 100% ignorance of all of the remaining athletes never tested; a reference to a self-reported undetectably unreliable survey from one event in 2011, before any deterrent impacts of the ABP, and before any changes arising from the Diack/Russian scandal; a quote from another lawyer (David Howman); a quote from Economics major/MBA/financial consultant/management consultant (Renee Anne Shirley); a meaningless statement that doping is present generally everywhere; and then your own personal but baseless conjecture about the state of mind of every athlete.
None of these sources or facts seem to be qualified to speak on behalf of any athletes and coaches for generations. Hard for me to judge if they are right or wrong if they themselves have never expressed their actual experience.
Yeah thats the point !!! What amazes me is that while in cycling over the years we have seen every type of champion involved in some kind of doping scandal and we have seen many times police doing big investigation (like Operation puerto , or the Festina scandal at tour 98, or police that enter at night in a hotel at Giro d ' Italia were Marco Pantani and his team were sleeping and everybody jumped out of the windows throwing in the dustbins the forbidden products they had and so on many other cases. ) In running it was only after a german tv reportage on Doping in Kenya ( that even great coach discredited) that many positive cases were found. But after that not really big police operations. I mean if you consider the doping like a criminal offense like it was made in cycling so you need police to investigate to follow athletes, listen to conversation, using a special police force that trace all the movements like they did in cycling Of course the big problem is Who can do this in Ethiopia or in Kenya or Uganda??? Not easy ehhh . So we have just some positive cases from time to time where some mistakes happens. Like they dont tell the day of the OUC control , or maybe you dont pay the right bribe to the right person. Only a very low percentage of doped athletes are found positive. If we dont consider this point every other talk is useless
The question might be rephrased: how can we be confident anyone isn't doping?
A few uncomfortable facts:
- As far back as 1996 it was estimated that up to 80% of participants at Atlanta would be doped. (There was also no test for EPO then, so it would have been present in running).
- Only 1-2% of tests produce a positive. Confidential athlete surveys have proven that doping far exceeds the numbers caught. Ergo, most dopers are not caught. In the words of a former WADA head, "only the dumb and the careless are caught".
- In the words of another former WADA head, David Howman, "doping is more sophisticated than antidoping". Hence, doping remains ahead of antidoping.
- It is found in all sports. According to antidoping expert Renee Ann Shirley, "doping is present in all sports in all countries at elite levels, with the frequent collusion of sports governance bodies". It has been found in championship darts, curling and chess.
- Doping is not confined to elites and professionals. It is known to be present in schools and colleges.
- The question every athlete is faced with today is whether they are prepared to use everything available to them to succeed - which, for many, includes doping. They will know that many of their competitors will dope. In some countries we have seen that doping is about 99% at the top - as in Russia, where it is state-sponsored. How many athletes are prepared to lose to those they believe are dopers?
Since those are just some of the factors that indicate the likely prevalence of doping today, the question remains - how confident can you be that any athlete (and especially your favorite) isn't?
This is the thinking of a person who thinks that the is part of the digestive system and that Asprin have no known side effects.
Not worth any debate with a person at such a low level of intellectual development.
See people still listening to his low level drivel.
I believe that the GRAY AREA that most pros, elites, "the best in the world" are operating in are injectable vitamins/ IV's. This is how they are running so fast without getting caught. You cannot get banned for having sky-high Zinc levels, or B12.
