Lance Armstrong Cheated to Win. Why is that Wrong? - Reason Magazine

[Darryl Webster]

But why don't the riders take that approach? It's not only theft, but riders themselves usually have to bear the very expensive costs of the dope.

Because enough riders/ DS,s ( x Riders) doctors, sponsors, etc are corrupt that the easiest route, if you want a lucrative career, is " if ya cant beet em , join em". And the more powerful the drugs work the more that "choice" is made for ya.
Pro sports history shows the crime is not the cheating its the getting caught.
To the cheats go the spoils.
Sadly thats true in most every walk of life. Ultimately its a " what price my integrity" issue and most peoples has a price.

 

[Tinman]

Because enough riders/ DS,s ( x Riders) doctors, sponsors, etc are corrupt that the easiest route, if you want a lucrative career, is " if ya cant beet em , join em". And the more powerful the drugs work the more that "choice" is made for ya.
Pro sports history shows the crime is not the cheating its the getting caught.
To the cheats go the spoils.
Sadly thats true in most every walk of life. Ultimately its a " what price my integrity" issue and most peoples has a price.

Ain't that the truth. But more than anything shows the need for high(er) integrity leadership.

 

[shades1]

Some deep thoughts there.

sometimes you dont need to write 1OOO word paragraphs and essays to just say it how it is .

 

[blackcat]

Forget all this crap about " level playing fields"..theres no such thing..never was , never will be.
But what there is..at the sharp end of clean elite sport is a very narrow variance in ability such that superior psychological strength ( dealing with pressures) and tactical nounce might trump physical superiority and thus even up what is in reality a very narrow variance ( perhaps 1..2%) in terms of physical capacity.
Add doping to the mix that variance might go out to 5%..10% maybe even 15%.
Thus doping trumps all other variances to such a degree the clean competitor is not in the same game.
Call doping out for what it is. Theft, plain and simple.

rounding error.

but pharmaceuticals entered the trade nigh half a century ago, so it is nigh time to question how elite sport has been redefined in this period and evolution. Its about performance, winning, and commerce.

But the sport ideals that were drummed into as schoolkids, seem to me to be little variance on the Hitler Youth. It was indoctrination, with little validity, and perhaps something completely different in consumption of national and pro level sport.

 

[ustabe]

This talk about the financial feasibility or availability of doping (cheating) is losing me completely.

Pardon me for usurping this forum to spout, but shouldn't doping be wrong simply because it's against the rules of the sport? And in the spectrum of all human activity, sport being trivial and inconsequential, no moral justifications for superseding the rules exist. Therefore, if you call yourself a sportsman, you participate according to the rules.

 

[MarkvW]

This talk about the financial feasibility or availability of doping (cheating) is losing me completely.

Pardon me for usurping this forum to spout, but shouldn't doping be wrong simply because it's against the rules of the sport? And in the spectrum of all human activity, sport being trivial and inconsequential, no moral justifications for superseding the rules exist. Therefore, if you call yourself a sportsman, you participate according to the rules.

All quite true. And all completely disregarded by a very substantial proportion of pro peloton.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

This talk about the financial feasibility or availability of doping (cheating) is losing me completely.

Pardon me for usurping this forum to spout, but shouldn't doping be wrong simply because it's against the rules of the sport? And in the spectrum of all human activity, sport being trivial and inconsequential, no moral justifications for superseding the rules exist. Therefore, if you call yourself a sportsman, you participate according to the rules.

Yes, indeed, it should be wrong because it's against the rules.

It stopped becoming trivial when the number of 0s involved hit around 6 or so, and money became the primary motivator, over sporting excellence, enjoyment or athletic endeavour.

 

[ustabe]

It stopped becoming trivial when the number of 0s involved hit around 6 or so, and money became the primary motivator, over sporting excellence, enjoyment or athletic endeavour.

Yeah, money changes a lot, don't it?

 

[Ninety5rpm]

It seems obvious to me that UCI's 'see-no-evil' antidoping posture is bad for business. So many sponsors (I assume) are repelled by the dirty nature of the sport. Gerolsteiner comes to mind. I can't figure out why the UCI's leadership structure doesn't get that.

They get it. What do you think the reason is for all the effort to make it appear that they fight doping and that cycling is the cleanest sport?

What they don't seem to get is that appearances aren't enough.

 

[MarkvW]

They get it. What do you think the reason is for all the effort to make it appear that they fight doping and that cycling is the cleanest sport?

What they don't seem to get is that appearances aren't enough.

I don't think they do. They whitewash like they always have, and the whitewash washes away like it always has. They know that their past attempts to "preserve appearances" have failed, but they keep making the same futile whitewashing gestures. The UCI is incompetent at preserving appearances.

 

[silverrocket]

Yeah, money changes a lot, don't it?

They might have really been onto something back when sports were the sole preserve of amateurs, and any involvement of money was considered dirty.

Wasn't that long ago when the Olympics was only for amateurs, and the Olympic spirit actually meant something.

 

[BroDeal]

They might have really been onto something back when sports were the sole preserve of amateurs, and any involvement of money was considered dirty.

Wasn't that long ago when the Olympics was only for amateurs, and the Olympic spirit actually meant something.

The Olympic spirit never meant anything. It was always phony. Requiring amateur status was a way to keep the lower classes out of the games.

 

[blackcat]

The Olympic spirit never meant anything. It was always phony. Requiring amateur status was a way to keep the lower classes out of the games.

@Chariots of Fire

naked Oxbridge students on a beach riding horses. What goes on in English Oxbridge colleges, will stay shtum, like mutes in Vegas.

 

[silverrocket]

The Olympic spirit never meant anything. It was always phony. Requiring amateur status was a way to keep the lower classes out of the games.

Yeah, it was a class thing for a long time, but they got past that long before the Olympics went all-pro. 1960s runners from the "3rd world" nations, for example.

Also, even when it was just competition for elitists, those elitists still had the olympic spirit. Like when mountaineering was just for gentleman hiring local guides, they were still climbing out of the purity of the pursuit. They didn't have to do it for money, since they were firmly in the rich upper classes.

 

[Checkov]

The "he was the best cheater, he still deserved his victories, go Lance!" argument falls apart quickly when you realize that those who argue this never come to terms with the fact that he was caught and lost his victories. If it's all about this cowboy mentality then you can't complain if his victories are arbitrarily taken away also. I see this so often, it's such backwards logic: cheating is fair, but punishing cheaters is unfair.

It reminds me of objectivist types who cheer on wall street magnates because they managed to be successful, and then claim it's unfair when those same plutocrats are targeted for increased taxes. Apparently using every little trick to get rich on other people's expenses is okay, but God forbid you impede them in any way. (suddenly it doesn't seem like a level playing field anymore) I think the idea is that you sympathize with one group, so you are okay with that group having agency, but the other group is the enemy so you want to deny them agency. Some people like wall street types, some people like Lance Armstrong, for them a fair system is a system that supports their idols.