The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » Depends on the instance, but yes, quite likely.
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.
Pherekydes wrote: » I presume you'd feel the same about white women, born within days of each other and representing a much, much smaller population?
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » Part of the problem is the old innocent until proven guilty process which is fine for general society where the overwhelming majority are innocent. But n eleite athletics that doesnt apply. Anything at all suscpicious in tests, even a 1 in a 1000000 chance should have some one turfed out of it. Some collateral damage with innocent athletes. Sure. I would have sympathy for the. But would be OK for that. Much better than the whole sport disappearing down the sewer as it has been for the last 40+ years. Any detected anomalies. Out. For life.
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » 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...
walshb wrote: » That's just it. You drawing lines....That's just life? Yet you want to limit it... Within reason, and with guidelines for health and safety. No issue there, but the blanket ban on PEDs is wrong. That is what is against human nature.
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » I wouldnt be looking for an even field. Facilities, money, coaches, early develpoment and access to elite competition. Thats just life. PEDs are where the line must be drawn for all. People are not lab rats.
walshb wrote: » It's still a uneven field no matter what way you look at it. Athletes who have access to the best facilities and doctors and technology already have a clear advantage over those who do not. Some countries have a clear advantage over others. Why then limit them by banning PEDs? If PEDs were legal then the filed I believe would even out much more. EPO/HGH and anabolic steroids are more attainable for less well off countries and federations thaN some of the state of the art facilities and amenities that wealthy federations and countries have access to.
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » There is a clear difference between altering your body to perform at it best using PEDs and using training techniques.
walshb wrote: » I would allow PEDs within reason. No 'mechanical' aids. Everything stays the same. I am not saying a free for all. I am saying that athletes making a conscious and adult choice, with medical guidance and guidelines, that PEDs use should be allowed. I am not advocating strapping on jet packs, or bionic limbs etc. Like I have said, the playing is already hugely uneven by "legal" means. Why is altitude training permitted, and altitude tents etc, when EPO is banned? There are many athletes who cannot avail of altitude training, or afford state of the art equipment and facilities to help them.
The Rape of Lucretia wrote: » 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.
TRR_the_turd wrote: » What's your stance on bionic limbs. Let's say in the morning that it was possible to fit a robotic leg that was 20% more efficient than a human leg? Legalising PEDs is the lazy option IMO and will never happen. I'll give this to you walshie, you really do love a good debate!
walshb wrote: » 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.
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.
walshb wrote: » Would you ban athletes with asthma?
average_runner wrote: » But all you said above is still happening in sport and will always happen
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?
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?
walshb wrote: » Silly response, Chivito!
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.
Chivito550 wrote: » Well it does explain why you idolise Carl Lewis. Everything has become so much clearer.
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.
bring in threshold levels for a list of PEDs
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.
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.
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.
