WSJ: How to fix doping for under $100 million

WADA corruption wrote:

I'm pretty sure doping is already fixed.

There was no doping problem to begin with.

rojo wrote:

...

2) I'm not convinced they need Fifa to pay for it although $100 million a year would be a lot for the IOC. Does anyone know there (sic) yearly revnenues? I do think the MLBs and NFLs of the world should 100% be mandated by congress to be part of WADA. If you receive government subsidies for your stadium, then you join WADA and let's make them tough.

Performance enhancement is far too ingrained in our society to be eradicated. You may as well try to ban water. The amount of high school, college, professional and weekend-warrior athletes using performance enhancing drugs and testosterone replacement numbers in the millions worldwide. Millions! How many are caught annually? 1,000? 5,000?

The war on drugs is a huge waste of money.

I understand your oft repeated rallying cry that allowing drugs would ruin many women's sport at the top levels. And I completely agree that it would. So what do you tell a woman who doesn't want to look like a man? You tell them they aren't going to earn any money competing. That's what they ought to be hearing anyway! Compete for the love of it. If they want to be part of the circus act, well then that's their call.

At some point resistance will truly be futile. With the way genetics and nanotech are evolving, I'd say we aren't far off from actually embracing performance enhancement.

The BroJoe stance / solution while well meaning leads to an Orwellian nightmare scenario.

----------------------

Why make things complicated.

Why spend a ton of money the sport cannot afford?

Why do you want government involved in your sport?

Why involve / invoke bureaucracy?

Why do you want the big brother and the drug police coming to your property at 2 am three times to harass you, make you pee, take your blood, like a criminal?

Why do you want your medical passport in the hands of dodgy to very dodgy people?

------------------------------

LEGALIZE PEDs under prescription.

Basically, this is what you have with an Al Sal or a Radcliffe all ready.

So why not call a spade a spade, enough of the BS and fantasy solutions.

-----------------------------

why not test everyone? wrote:

At some point resistance will truly be futile. With the way genetics and nanotech are evolving, I'd say we aren't far off from actually embracing performance enhancement.

This I agree with. As genetics continues to grow rapidly (exponentially) in terms of our analysis and databases and as better technology and techniques come along...it's not going to be too long before we start manipulating our own genetics.

It will take some time before it has mainstream acceptance, but I have no doubts it will become common practice. If you can be guaranteed to not have genetic diseases, able to consume tremendous calories without weight gain, not experience age related decline, be able to run 10:00 for 5k without needing much training, etc....well most people are going to take that option.

I think at that point, athletics will fade away. It might first go the way of being interesting purely from the perspective of "what can be engineer people to be", but there are probably limits to what you can do given a general "human structure" within which to work.

The fundamental premise of athletics has always been "Who, working within the confines of their genetics, can be the fastest/strongest person in a given activity". The second you start altering the genome, that goes out the window.

Soccer Guy wrote:

rojo wrote:

You don't think being fitter, faster and stronger is a huge advantage in soccer?

Not necessarily. The greatest soccer player of our times, Lionel Messi, does not look particularly "fit" and "strong" to me. He is also not really fast, he's just really good at dribbling and has this thing called intuition - anticipation of the next move.

Seriously, here's a picture of him without a shirt:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MV2Ug-3PI3g/URFm52ezIQI/AAAAAAAAS_g/jpLhNTtqc2M/s1600/1341676256008.jpg

Damn youre an idiot. Im sorry, but you are. Or letting your emotional blur your thinking. Soccer does definitely gets huge advantages from doping. Huge. Not like track and field blablabla we all know that.

Juventus won the Champions League (For all you americans: The biggest international cup for club teams, extremely hard to win) with a team full of PEDs.

Everyone in Europe knows Eufemiano Fuentes helped soccer team to improve with PEDs. Everyone with a brain.

Manchester United (one of the best teams in the world) again and again wins games the last 10minues. Its not just fitness but having that extra advantage over other teams is huge. Im not saying they dope, very unlikely considering how they win and play, Im just explaining how it could be huge. Its like counting cards, you get that small 1% advantage (and in soccer it could be more if you play against a team without PEDs) and thats huge. Tired people make mistakes. You dont think counter-attacks over a long field against a tired team is far easier if your team have better fitness?

Example 2: Rosenborg. This small norwegian club who won the national championships 11 (!) times in a row, a lot because of an amazing coach, had a fitness level among the best in europe. The combination of an amazing coach, great tactics AND great fitness made them beat some of the top teams in Europe several times.

WSJ is right. It is silly to expect countries third world countries to have a sophisticated anti-doping effort when they struggle to provide basic infrastructure and national defense. Countries with better resources, but little to no government transparency or a free press are also not places where you can expect to find effective anti-doping. Even in Western democracies, anti-doping efforts are hindered by the piles of money in pro sports making the major leagues highly resistant to real anti-doping efforts (just imagine if the NFL had the biological passport) and pro athletes are very good at getting penalties minimized thanks to sophisticated defense strategies mounted by high priced legal counsel. Thus, Justin Gatlin, who should have been banned for life, and Tyson Gay, who should have had a career ending lengthy ban, are competing today.

An International anti-doping authority is only one step. Each national athletic association and sport federation should be required to be bound by the international anti-doping authority's decisions and should have to surrender sanctions authority to the international anti-doping authority.

I agree that we are heading in that direction, but I don't agree that athletics will fade away. I think all sports will take on some aspects of the NASCAR appeal, where specific rules limit some qualities of the athletes (such as a height limit of 8 feet) but scientists are allowed to experiment and optimize within other areas (such as reaction time or V02 max).

WADA corruption wrote:

I'm pretty sure doping is already fixed.

Vladimir Putin The Real One wrote:

There was no doping problem to begin with.

Right, but we created and fixed it.

longjack wrote:

The BroJoe stance / solution while well meaning leads to an Orwellian nightmare scenario.

To be sure, I'd like to say it sucks that we have to worry about drug use. I feel like I Iost out on being able to compete professionally because of it. I didn't even know it at the time, but I'm OK with it now.

It seems that we are in a transition phase between pure sport with no enhancement and entertainment sport with massive amounts of enhancement. Will the best competitors of the future be cyborgs? Will they even have human consciousness? Who knows.

In the meantime I feel like more lives are being disrupted by not allowing PEDs. That isn't to say more people should be using them either, but if more people were aware it was essentially a requirement to use them then at least they wouldn't be disillusioned and wonder how people they were beating easily a year or two previously are suddenly untouchable.

By making PEDs illegal we hurt the people who think they aren't needed to be at the top. They are chasing an illusion.

Juventus lost against Barca. But Buffon is the best goalkeeper in the world. Considering he is 37 years old. Better at his prime than Neuer. Best positioning ever. That's what you call skill.

I feel like Bayern uses PEDs. Just a hunch.

why not test everyone? wrote:

To be sure, I'd like to say it sucks that we have to worry about drug use. I feel like I Iost out on being able to compete professionally because of it. I didn't even know it at the time, but I'm OK with it now.

That's too bad you lost out due to worrying.

Easy solution: don't worry about drug use, and just run.

Soccer Guy wrote:

rojo wrote:

I liked it and here are the key points.

So? FIFA doesn't have a doping problem, T&F does. The teams of countries where there are no doping controls (Kenya, Ethiopia, etc, never make it to the World Cup) and the dominant teams (Germany, Italy, Spain) have some of the strictest doping controls.

Also, you can't dope to get a great skill set, dribbling and tactics. Soccer isn't a sport that benefits from doping.

So, why should FIFA pay for T&F's problems?

You are joking right!

Any sport that involves speed, power, endurance, prestige, money and human being, will have doping. Heck, there is even doping in dog and horse racing. There is even doping in crossfit, skit shooting and fencing...why would you believe soccer is any different.

Check out Gareth Bale after leaving England for Spain...

http://www.the42.ie/gareth-bale-muscle-1620494-Aug2014/

You could also check out Ronaldo after leaving England for Spain...

Oh, they both play for Real Mardid, hmmm.

Snake oil wrote:

why not test everyone? wrote:

To be sure, I'd like to say it sucks that we have to worry about drug use. I feel like I Iost out on being able to compete professionally because of it. I didn't even know it at the time, but I'm OK with it now.

That's too bad you lost out due to worrying.

Easy solution: don't worry about drug use, and just run.

I wasn't worried at the time. I didn't think anybody around me was actually doping. Now I know better. Still not worried about it. When I said "we have to worry about drug use" I was talking about society and athletes as a whole.

Soccer Guy wrote:

So, why should FIFA pay for T&F's problems?

Because FIFA is a WADA signatory subject to the same abuses in integrity the IAAF and Cycling.

And no, you can't assume a Western country's anti-doping integrity (the authority/priviledge belongs to the sports federation) is any better than anywhere else in the world.

Fun fact, until recently, Sep Blatter was a permanent voting member of WADA's management committee.

Once again, the sports federations run WADA. I'm not sure why so few have bothered to visit WADA's site for themselves.

Okay, I could see that as a definite possibility, with that stipulation about limitations on certain qualites. At some point you could hypothetically start "making" things that don't even seem human.

Definitely at that point the focus of the entertainment would have shifted though from interest to see what potential in humans is, versus what potential in genetic engineering is.

Put a bullet in the head of every NOPer, radcliffe and coe. That will go a long way towards solving the doping problem for less than $20.

If you told me that I could guarantee the sport be 100% clean for the rest of human history for 100 million dollars, there's no way I would do it; it would be an inexcusable waste of money.