Leaked IAAf report on doping

The Rape of Lucretia · 14-08-2015 01:25PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Yeh I'd be the same. I think Coe was clean, but I have no strong basis for that belief, and wouldn't bother trying to argue a case for why I think so, as my belief is only based on a hunch. I'd be very confident Cram is clean listening to him talk about doping, though that's no guarantee either.

Those guys culd have a lot of leeway to be very economical with the truth. If they were ahead of the curve in using PEDs, which three white guys setting the pace and performaces that do stick out as anomolous (one guy possbly, three guys? From the same country ? The wrong race ? Against known dopers ?), then stuff that was not banned at the time, gives them plenty of scope to be anti-banned substances in their statements now. Murky.

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 01:36PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Those guys culd have a lot of leeway to be very economical with the truth. If they were ahead of the curve in using PEDs, which three white guys setting the pace and performaces that do stick out as anomolous (one guy possbly, three guys? From the same country ? The wrong race ? Against known dopers ?), then stuff that was not banned at the time, gives them plenty of scope to be anti-banned substances in their statements now. Murky.

What's your obsession with skin colour? This is the late 70s, early to mid 80s we are talking about. Most distance events were won by white people back then. You are applying today's athletics environment (East Africans dominating) to 30 years ago, which is frankly clueless.

oldrunner · 14-08-2015 02:00PM

I guess the rules on speculation about individuals doping has been dropped. At least 11 footballers and several athletes all being openly speculated about.

walshb · 14-08-2015 02:02PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Those guys culd have a lot of leeway to be very economical with the truth. If they were ahead of the curve in using PEDs, which three white guys setting the pace and performaces that do stick out as anomolous (one guy possbly, three guys? From the same country ? The wrong race ? Against known dopers ?), then stuff that was not banned at the time, gives them plenty of scope to be anti-banned substances in their statements now. Murky.

As mentioned, or alluded to, back in the 70s and earlier 80s the white men were the ones leading the way in middle distance running.

shels4ever · 14-08-2015 02:04PM

walshb wrote: »

As mentioned, or alluded to, back in the 70s and earlier 80s the white men were the ones leading the way in doping.

Yep I agree

walshb · 14-08-2015 02:14PM

shels4ever wrote: »

Yep I agree

Legal blood doping!

shels4ever · 14-08-2015 02:55PM

walshb wrote: »

Legal blood doping!

Should do what was done in javlin a few years back, scrap all old records and start again.

walshb · 14-08-2015 02:57PM

shels4ever wrote: »

Should do what was done in javlin a few years back, scrap all old records and start again.

Or simply ban banning PEDs.....It's become a joke.

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 03:13PM

walshb wrote: »

Or simply ban banning PEDs.....It's become a joke.

walshb · 14-08-2015 03:19PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Let them at it. Maybe bring in threshold levels for a list of PEDs. Man will always strive to progress. Why hold back the tide? It happens in F1, and other sports too use money and technology to be better than their competitors. May actually see a more level playing field if the authorities simply allow humans to compete in T&F.

Notwork Error · 14-08-2015 03:20PM

walshb wrote: »

Let them at it. Maybe bring in threshold levels for a list of PEDs. Man will always strive to progress. Why hold back the tide? It happens in F1, and other sports too use money and technology to be better than their competitors. May actually see a more level playing field if the authorities simply allow humans to compete in T&F.

No.

walshb · 14-08-2015 03:32PM

Notwork Error wrote: »

No.

Banning PEDs or aids or technology or anything else that allows us to possibly improve goes completely against human nature.

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 03:37PM

walshb wrote: »

Let them at it. Maybe bring in threshold levels for a list of PEDs. Man will always strive to progress. Why hold back the tide? It happens in F1, and other sports too use money and technology to be better than their competitors. May actually see a more level playing field if the authorities simply allow humans to compete in T&F.

0/10

1) This is dangerous for one's health, and basically tells kids that in order to succeed in the sport, you have to dope, and risk your long term health.

2) It would never be a level playing field, and those with the most money, best contacts etc, would get access to the best drugs.

walshb · 14-08-2015 03:46PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

0/10

1) This is dangerous for one's health, and basically tells kids that in order to succeed in the sport, you have to dope, and risk your long term health.

2) It would never be a level playing field, and those with the most money, best contacts etc, would get access to the best drugs.

It would be a lot more level than it is now with the OTT convoluted drugs bans in place. It's a joke.

Regarding the kids. Nobody is telling them anything. Adults in sport or whatever should be allowed the choice and chance to improve.

Sport, at least some sports at the highest level are a health risk. Adults and elites should be allowed use reason and judgment and choice. That's what makes us human.

Yes, those with the best money would have the best access to the best aids. How is that different to the field today? There are countries with a lot more money and potential and facilities than others. Do we need to ban or reign this in? There are athletes with a lot more facilities and money and access to improvements than others. Are they cheating? I'd say it's no different to an athlete using technology (PEDs/aids) to improve.

Limiting humans in what they can do as mature adults is against the spirit of sport. Judgment and reasoning are two things what makes us humans.

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 03:50PM

walshb wrote: »

It would be a lot more level than it is now with the OTT convoluted drugs bans in place. It's a joke.

Regarding the kids. Nobody is telling them anything. Adults in sport or whatever should be allowed the choice and chance to improve.

Sport, at least some sports at the highest level are a health risk. Adults and elites should be allowed use reason and judgment and choice. That's what makes us human.

Yes, those with the best money would have the best access to the best aids. How is that different to the field today? There are countries with a lot more money and potential and facilities than others. There are athletes with a lot more facilities and money and access to improvements than others.

Limiting humans in what they can do as mature adults is against the spirit of sport. Judgment and reasoning are two things what makes us humans.

LOL. You truly are a funny man.

May as well allow shotguns during 800m races too while you're at it. Hang back at the back of the field, and pick one off one by one.

walshb · 14-08-2015 03:56PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

LOL. You truly are a funny man.

May as well allow shotguns during 800m races too while you're at it. Hang back at the back of the field, and pick one off one by one.

No, that's silly. I am not claiming this.

There is "cheating" going on by virtue of genetic make up as we speak. I don't see it as cheating. Humans should be allowed use whatever is available to them to improve their performance, within reason of course. The event stays the same. Man runs or jumps or throws as he/she is. No mechanical aids or equipment additions etc. Like it or not there is a lot of cheating happening that is legal and allowed. Should we ban it? I am not alone in this view. Maybe here I am firmly in the minority, but I am sure there are many people who would argue for allowing humans to improve and progress without limiting them.

Legal blood doping was allowed until 1986. There was nothing wrong with it, and it led to EPO being its replacement. Just because some federations or countries could not get it or master it doesn't mean that it should have been banned. There are many athletes out there who have an "advantage, or a perceived advantage" over their competitors through whatever means. Look at Ireland in rugby. For years it was a case of us being amateurs meeting professional players in England and Wales. Same with boxers. Carruth was holding down a full time job whilst his Cuban counterparts were semi professional. Is that cheating?

By limiting what humans are allowed to do, within reason, is going against what we are as human!

RayCun · 14-08-2015 03:59PM

bring in threshold levels for a list of PEDs

The crazy thing about this idea is
At the moment we have a threshold level for PEDs (0). We test athletes to make sure they don't exceed it, and people say "oh, the more corrupt athletes/countries can get around the tests, the tests are useless"

If we set the threshold level at X > 0, we would still have to test athletes to make sure they didn't exceed that level. And the more corrupt athletes/countries could still get around the tests. So nothing has been simplified at all, it's just now everyone is on PEDs.

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 04:00PM

walshb wrote: »

No, that's silly. I am not claiming this.

There is "cheating" going on by virtue of genetic make up as we speak. I don't see it as cheating. Humans should be allowed use whatever is available to them to improve their performance, within reason of course. The event stays the same. Man runs or jumps or throws as he/she is. No mechanical aids or equipment additions etc. Like it or not there is a lot of cheating happening that is legal and allowed. Should we ban it? I am not alone in this view. Maybe here I am firmly in the minority, but I am sure there are many people who would argue for allowing humans to improve and progress without limiting them.

Well it does explain why you idolise Carl Lewis. Everything has become so much clearer.

walshb · 14-08-2015 04:02PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Well it does explain why you idolise Carl Lewis. Everything has become so much clearer.

Silly response, Chivito! You need to let Carl Lewis live in peace!:)

Notwork Error · 14-08-2015 04:04PM

walshb wrote: »

It would be a lot more level than it is now with the OTT convoluted drugs bans in place. It's a joke.

Regarding the kids. Nobody is telling them anything. Adults in sport or whatever should be allowed the choice and chance to improve.

Sport, at least some sports at the highest level are a health risk. Adults and elites should be allowed use reason and judgment and choice. That's what makes us human.

Yes, those with the best money would have the best access to the best aids. How is that different to the field today? There are countries with a lot more money and potential and facilities than others. Do we need to ban or reign this in? There are athletes with a lot more facilities and money and access to improvements than others. Are they cheating? I'd say it's no different to an athlete using technology (PEDs/aids) to improve.

Limiting humans in what they can do as mature adults is against the spirit of sport. Judgment and reasoning are two things what makes us humans.

Before EPO was banned in sport and in widespread use without limits, at least 19 cyclists died from strokes because it has thickened their blood to such an extent that the heart couldn't pump it anymore. The same could be said about amphetamine before as countless athletes lost their lives.

Even if sport was fairer without bans (which it wouldn't be as you would take away other people's genetic advantages while simultaneously strengthening others weaknesses), I would rather see an unfair sport than see athletes die because they felt they had to take drugs to compete in what is essentially a game. As much as you would like to believe that judgement is part of human nature, the vast majority of athletes have no idea what these drugs do to their health.

Legalising doping would just lead to a race of who can take the most drugs just like the 90's in cycling and lead to countless unnecessary deaths again. Do you really want to repeat history?

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 04:04PM

walshb wrote: »

Silly response, Chivito!

Think about it. You have tended to assume everyone who is great, is doing so by natural means. You have said you believe Lewis was 100% natural. You think the same about Bolt. So if you think this, why would you now be advocating the use of PEDs?

walshb · 14-08-2015 04:06PM

Notwork Error wrote: »

Before EPO was banned in sport and in widespread use without limits, at least 19 cyclists died from strokes because it has thickened their blood to such an extent that the heart couldn't pump it anymore. The same could be said about amphetamine before as countless athletes lost their lives.

Even if sport was fairer without bans (which it wouldn't be as you would take away other people's genetic advantages while simultaneously strengthening others weaknesses), I would rather see an unfair sport than see athletes die because they felt they had to take drugs to compete in what is essentially a game. As much as you would like to believe that judgement is part of human nature, the vast majority of athletes have no idea what these drugs do to their health.

Legalising doping would just lead to a race of who can take the most drugs just like the 90's in cycling and lead to countless unnecessary deaths again. Do you really want to repeat history?

Were all the deaths confirmed and proven to have resulted from them using PEDs?

Would you ban altitude training? Altitude training can push the PCV (packed cell volume) to dangerous, even fatal, levels.

http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/6/666.full

Like I said, at the elite level in certain sports there are health risks. Banning humans from making a conscious and reasoned and informed and mature and adult decision goes against what we are as human.

walshb · 14-08-2015 04:08PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Think about it. You have tended to assume everyone who is great, is doing so by natural means. You have said you believe Lewis was 100% natural. You think the same about Bolt. So if you think this, why would you now be advocating the use of PEDs?

Me believing that they were/are clean, and me thinking that PEDs should be allowed are two separate issues. You do realize this, no?

I believe Lewis and Bolt ran without using drugs. I also happen to believe that we should ban banning PEDs. Nothing wrong, nor contradictory/illogical there with those two beliefs.

average_runner · 14-08-2015 04:28PM

Notwork Error wrote: »

Before EPO was banned in sport and in widespread use without limits, at least 19 cyclists died from strokes because it has thickened their blood to such an extent that the heart couldn't pump it anymore. The same could be said about amphetamine before as countless athletes lost their lives.

Even if sport was fairer without bans (which it wouldn't be as you would take away other people's genetic advantages while simultaneously strengthening others weaknesses), I would rather see an unfair sport than see athletes die because they felt they had to take drugs to compete in what is essentially a game. As much as you would like to believe that judgement is part of human nature, the vast majority of athletes have no idea what these drugs do to their health.

Legalising doping would just lead to a race of who can take the most drugs just like the 90's in cycling and lead to countless unnecessary deaths again. Do you really want to repeat history?

But all you said above is still happening in sport and will always happen

Chivito550 · 14-08-2015 04:35PM

average_runner wrote: »

But all you said above is still happening in sport and will always happen

Yes, but it is happening to those who know they are breaking the rules, so it is their own fault. If doping was legal, it would happen on a much grander scale.

After all this talk, I've packed my "Say No to Doping" t-shirt into my suitcase for Beijing, and shall wear it in the press conferences.

walshb · 14-08-2015 04:39PM

Testing for health and safety should be the goal and the norm, not testing for PEDs. If the athlete is tested and signed off as being healthy then away he goes. Surely in the 21st century we can implement this?

As it stands the concept/belief/want that everyone has the same chance in sport is ridiculous. The playing field is already uneven, and always will be. Allowing PEDs simply allows humans to create an even greater spectacle, and to reach new heights. They are already achieving sublime performances through aids and technology. Limiting this by banning PEDs is counterproductive.

Notwork Error · 14-08-2015 05:41PM

average_runner wrote: »

But all you said above is still happening in sport and will always happen

No, it's not. There are limits to how much drugs an athlete can take now and while it hasn't stomped out cheats, it's much healthier now because of testing. When the 50 haemocrite threshold came into play, it meant an athlete couldn't dope up to a 70 odd percent RBC count like they did before. When the EPO test came into play, It meant athletes couldn't take as much EPO and when the BP came, it meant athletes could only take less again. Say what you like about the accruacy of all the above tests but they have had a serious positive contribution to the health of athletes and have levelled the playing field. It may not be level now but the tests have definitely been a step in the right direction.

Legalise PED's and we will be back to days of athletes taking huge doses of these drugs to squeak out any advantage possible where haemocrite will be back into frankly ridiculous numbers. Athletes who dope will always try and squeeze out that extra inch and if there is no limit, that inch could mean death whereas now, that inch is most likely only going to mean a positive test because of testing.

walshb · 14-08-2015 05:55PM

Would you ban athletes with asthma?

Notwork Error · 14-08-2015 06:02PM

walshb wrote: »

Would you ban athletes with asthma?

I'm not a pharmocologist. The TUE system definitely needs an overhaul imo but I haven't got a clue about how they could go about it.

The Rape of Lucretia · 14-08-2015 07:16PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

What's your obsession with skin colour? This is the late 70s, early to mid 80s we are talking about. Most distance events were won by white people back then. You are applying today's athletics environment (East Africans dominating) to 30 years ago, which is frankly clueless.

No obsession.

And the point is not trivial : Coe, Ovett, and Cram, running times for one country, in the same era, 30 years ago, that almost havent even been equalled by white men since, let alone improved on as one might expect (yes, Willis recently is in the zone), and rank with the Africans who completely dominate since and today.
Strip out African runners from the all time list which disguises them to some degree. They are a huge anomaly.

Leaked IAAf report on doping

Comments