Another rant...

Let's stirr this a bid up.
In Holland we have free law's dealing with drug's, abortions and euthanasia. I know this is hard to understand for a lot of people, but it has all to do with beeing an individual person. This is " real " freedom to choose your own way. you can agree or not, but is a different way of thinking. In Holland the opinion is that good education on school's on these subject's are far more effective then idea's from the dark age's. The result is that we have the lowest amound of hard drug addictive's and minor pregnancies around.
This is not the discussion that I am willing to take to this board, but it show's that there are different way's to deal with problems, and not all of them are bad, just different.

But everybody here that competed in any sport at a certain level knows that you get nothing for free. There will be somebody better somewhere. So you have to train and give ALL you have to win. Unless you have competed in a toplevel sport, you have no idea what it takes to get to the top.
The big problem though, is the big money. As soon as big sponsors are coming in, and winning is a way to make big money rules will change in any sport. And there are we. Sitting behind our big TV screens watching the games, expecting that our famous overpaid hero's will win. And oh oh, If they don't coaches and trainers will fired. Hero's go to zero's overnight whatever they had acomplished in the past.

So in my opinon the problem is not with the sportsman, but with the audiance, media and big sponsor money. There is much to much at stake. As long as we as a country set goals like how many gold medals " we " as TV audiance will win during olympics, it is not the sport that is importand anymore, but the national pride. We all hate Vettel because of his finger, but he is a great racer whatever finger he use.

I don't like soccer. Stupid, it is the national game. But sometimes I watch an importand game. In that case I don't care who will win. The best will win, and I will see a nice game.

So my humble opinion? There are two way's to deal with this. Or we do what we did for years, put a lot of pressure on our sports man. pay them a lot of money to win. you can sit behind your TV with a 180 BPM and blame your hero, and close your eye's if they use drug's like they did since there have been sports. The Romans and Greeks used quad and cocain like stuff during their games. EPO will help you a bid, but all the work and pain will still be there. It is not a gold medal in a needle.......
Or we back off. Take all the big money out of sports, and leave our hero's alone. No more big sponsors, or expectations in the way of more medals. No more gossips and rumors. We have to give our ice hockey player a big hug if he fail to score in the big final.... Sports will be boring that way.

So I agree with David. There are drugs in every sport. It is like the normal drugs. You can double the lawenforcement, but it will not help. But as long as we put the amound of pressure on our hero's like we all do, we have to accept they use EPO's to keep up with our expectations.


But what if good old bernie allow Fernando to use a bigger engine then Vettel next year.... That would never happen, would it?

I believe in following rules. If they are there, people should follow them.
I also dont have a problem with sports having no rules. All out competition. Awesome.
But if there are rules, follow them or join a league where there aren't any.
I remember a bunch of us went go-karting way back when. There were a large number of people. The session started by the operator telling us there was no "bumping". Most followed the rules except for one fellow. He was passing everyone by pushing every kart out of his way.
After the first heat, I asked the operator about it and he did nothing to make the guy play as the others were.
So for the second heat, I played just like him, except I "rubbed" alot harder. And put him off the track.The operator came over and tried to give me shit. I asked him to "define rubbing".
Either make it "no rules" or "follow the rules". People always try to bend them.
Will

I agree,

Rules will be bend. He who bend the most will win !
We like games and sports because there are rules, in contrast to normal live. Because of the rules you can plan a strategy in witch the other reacts within the rules.

Point is I will never know who is cheating and who is not. Most of them are, so stop watching? I think all top sportsman will do anything to win. And we expect them to do. Me for myself I would never put a needle in my body to improve my game.
It will never make you a winner, It might help you to win, be open aboud it, so I will where I am looking at.

BTW I don't like drugs and EPO's at all, but that will not make them go away.

I will know what I am looking at, forgot the know in the last message

I'm for playing within the rules, going outside is cheating (and admitting that you're not good enough to win on a level playing field, right?). Bending and testing rules is OK, like Smokey Yunick did. I like Lance, and think that a case against him hasen't been proved, but maybe that's naive. For sure, everybody including sponsors are washing their hands now, a bit embarrassing to look at.

Would you like your son to cheat at sports or exams? I wouldn't. But it would be hard to tell him not to, with any kind of credibility, if you cheat yourself. Like parents jaywalking and telling their kids not to. Doesn't work.

Someone said that integrity, that's what you do when nobody's watching.

Just my $0.02

A long time ago an American race car driver named Mark Donahue wrote a book called "The Unfair Advantage".

What it comes down to is that for the winner, whatever there was different on his car...maybe a reflective racing stripe and he was the only one who had it, was an unfair advantage to the losers.

No matter what it is, they will complain about it because they didn't win, and bottom line, they the losers are a bunch of crybabies.

The biggest crybaby of all time was old man
Ferrari. He bitched about the 427 Fords so much to the rules makers in Europe that they reduced the maximum legal racing displacement to 5 liters...and the 5 liter Fords in the Gulf's STILL KICKED his wimpy crybaby ass.

Was that all about money? Sure...on both sides...that was Henery Ford's personal money. I think he got his satisfaction though. Was it worth the money? I don't care, I enjoyed it.

Ferrari also wouldn't sell Lamborghini a car because he built tractors and that made him a pion in his eyes.

As a fan of all of this, I have nothing to say, just like with Lance and to me, this is all a bunch of very silly games played by some very rich people and I either ignore it entirely or just enjoy the scenario that all of the scandal creates.

Doesn't matter what I think or do, I am not the catalyst that creates it.

Complaining about Armstrong is just sour grapes. It's like taking away Jim Thorpes medals because he played one season of pro-ball...and that was against the rules. Certainly an "Unfair Advantage" for sure?

I suppose this is all predictable and the real danger to everyone is this blind enforcement of the rules to the letter of the law.

There is inherent danger in any of that in my eyes. I once heard a story that long ago there was this situation in Europe where one country (who shall go unnamed) made being Jewish against the rules, and told it's beaurocrats to enforce the rules they made. As a result, something like 13 million people went up in smoke.

All just depends on ones perspective about rules and enforcing them I suppose?

"No matter what it is, they will complain about it because they didn't win, and bottom line, they the losers are a bunch of crybabies."

Fantastic and true.
Second place is the first loser...

First, I think Lance rocks. Seven wins cannot be undone, even though they may try. They're all cheating and using drugs and blood doping and looking for every possible way to get an edge on the competition. Part and parcel with being a professional athlete, some just do it better than others. Steroids, EPO, transfusions, oxygen, beta adrenergic agonists, various forms of speed and a bunch of other stuff the general public knows nothing about. Mainstream media loves the gossip and it gives Joe Public a distraction while some part of the world is being blown up. On top of it all, Lance beat cancer to keep riding (and winning) with only one testicle.

Another rant indeed!

I actually think that the suggestion that how the athletes attempt to bend the rules to their advantage without "getting caught" is very similar to automobile racing.

Interpretation of those rules, even in law, is where the issues come in.

It isn't like Armstrong sabotaged anyone's bike, or hit 70 home runs in a major league season.

This all reminds me of watching an Italian League Football (soccer game). When the referee turns his back, they take shots at each others heads with elbows. Then when they get caught because one guy is profusely bleeding from his eye, the other guy claims innocence, "swearing on his dead mothers grave" that he didn't do it. Sure pal, ah hah, sure! Yeh, right.

It's all a bunch of crap. Why bother to get excited about it? You'll wind up being like the fans and the players in a Roma vs. Parmalat game.

OK, in your time of need (for an argument), I'm here for you David.

The Oxford Dictionary defines freedom as: "the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants". I think that (generally) most of us would agree that we enjoy a relatively high level of freedom.

Oxford defines anarchy as: "a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of authority or other controlling systems". Again, I'm presumptuous in thinking that probably MOST of us here would prefer not to live in a state of anarchy (and particularly while driving our Panteras).

Freedom without rules is anarchy. Freedom with rules is civilization.

If all people exhibited good judgement, we'd need a lot fewer rules and I'm sure all of us would prefer that scenario. But people are people, and too many are self-focused, unrestrained and undisciplined to go without any rules. Rules (laws and those that enforce them) allow us to sleep at night knowing there's a reasonable chance our Panteras (lives, and other possessions) will still be there in the morning.

As for Lance Armstrong, he is an astounding athlete — with or without the drugs (as yet unproven but since he isn't defending, likely WITH). If you want sports without rules then tune in to UFC. If you want sports where skill and ability rule the day, then rules are going to be a part of it. IMHO, the rule-laden 2012 Formula 1 season was one of the most exciting in ages. Lance may not have won 7 titles without the drugs, but he would still have been extremely successful. Would others who didn't dope (and there must have been a few) have won instead? We'll never know.

I cherish the freedoms that we do have, and I thank all of those who fought for us to have them, and continue to protect them. I also appreciate the efforts of those who push limits and boundaries as well as those that try to reduce the number of stupid rules so we can continue to have what many of us call freedom.

Mark

Good points but lets not confuse the issue. Some have taken this the wrong way.

I am not discussing the rule of law - how modern societies survive democracy. Nor am I talking about autosport, which while it requires very athletic drivers, is basically an engineering competition which requires absolute rules to define it.

My rant is about the failure of any efforts to control the use of drugs as a means to improve athletic performance and is strictly related to individuals in an Olympic or other "professional" athletic sporting competitions.

quote:

Originally posted by David B:
It's called freedom. And we need it everywhere – not just in sports. Freedom to do whatever we want - even if it kills us. As long as we don’t hurt anyone else. That’s where the great performers in all walks of life come from. By having the freedom to chase their dreams and work as hard as they want to get there. Business, sport, politics and life - it has never been and will never be a level playing field.

So just open it up and let people be free.

Well, it's easy to see how people could get confused in thinking you were taking this beyond sports.

The basic problem with too much freedom (and no rules) is people rarely consider that things they THINK will only hurt themselves can (and often do) unintentionally hurt others.

Mark

True. The last paragraph. A small closing thought on freedom going deeper than stupid drug testing witch hunts.

Rules and laws are solidly in place to protect personal freedom from interfering with others' rights. Unfortunately, political correctness and misplaced fears have caused us to try to restrict non conformers rather than give them the liberty to try new things and raise the bar - a possible improvement to constantly trying to lower the bar to match the lowest common denominator. Dumbing down the masses will keep on until we are but simple lemmings to follow whatever our 'leaders' say.

There have been rules that have been put into place in the past that have been attempts at moral definition.

Prohibition in the US for example. An attempt to enforce an unenforceable moral code of anti-alcoholism by such a small minority of the population that in retrospect now makes me wonder how that amendment to the Constitution ever found enough political support at all.

In present day you have in the US a majority of 55% enforcing anti pot laws on a minority of 45% of the population.

In both these instances this was and is done to protect the healthy well being of the populace, theoretically.

In sport like Armstrong' we have an unknown group, i.e., not know if they are majority or minority, blowing the whistle on Armstrong.

It isn't an admission of guilt by him, it is "suspension of disbelief" that he gave up fighting the accusations.

Personally, having some experience with these "Mr. Referee, he did it not me" actions from the Italian League soccer.

In so many cases you have "Jack the Ripper" professing total innocence in the hope that this one time the wrong guy will get blamed for it, get a red card, and be eliminated as the head competition.

When we were kids here, we had the position that, "the one that smelt it, dealt it".

Unfortunately for Lance, his giving up defending himself played right into the hands of the #2 guy".

What purpose exactly this all has is beyond me. He will ALWAYS be #2. All he can do is piss and moan and only now to himself justify (to himself) as an also ran.

Armstrong is and will always be the 7 time (?) champ TO ME, regardless of whether or not Cheryl Crow cares. She's a skank anyway if you ask me.

No degree of halo polishing will ever convince me of any moral superiority but then again I don't need to rub anyone else's nose in anything, My Pantera, and Shelby's already do that for me by just being in existance.

"They" can ALL go screw themselves...and they're going to have to, because no other human being will want to any way.

If he didn't dope, the tests would not have come back against him. Where there's smoke .....
Btw, there is no time limit for people to come through with the truth, IMO.You play by the boss' rules if you want to be part of the team.
We wouldn't be discussing this if:
1) athletes followed the rules or
2) there were no rules

Where is Ben Johnson these days, anyways?

quote:

Where is Ben Johnson these days, anyways?

Markham.

I think he's doing some pubic speaking gigs?

quote:

Originally posted by 4NHOTROD:
I think he's doing some pubic speaking gigs?

Yeah. Along with (if you can believe it...) COACHING. Plus he did his biography last year, I think.

I watched a new documentary called "9.79" which came out in August. You should watch it. It's the story of Ben Johnson, doping and the Seoul Olympics in 1988.

The story is based on really great interviews with all of the field that ran that race. It was probably the fastest 100 race ever. Ben Johnson was eliminated as we know so well. But recent testing of the original samples taken in 1988 showed that 7 of the 8 runners were on drugs.

Watching that documentary solidified my feelings and hence my rant - especially after watching Lance get hammered.

Since most elite athletes at the very top level of sport will (and probably should) try anything; and since any testing will always be irregular and unlikely to provide a fair interpretation of who's doing what; we should not insert unfair rules that we can't regulate, and simply open up the competition and forget about drug testing.

Sounds great.

At least until some kid (Olympic athletes start as young as 16) is forced (pressured, coerced, misled...) by his/her country to take dangerous drugs (almost certainly without understanding the true implications — both legally and health-wise) in order to assert the dominant superiority of their "motherland" and dies as a result.

I'll stick with the imperfect rule-based system. A playing field without rules is no more level (farther, in my opinion) than one WITH rules. By your last post, you indeed validate that even when people are breaking the rules, MOST are doing the same, so it's level. Lance is still an amazing athlete and has done great fundraising for the cancer machine, but I bet even he would agree that "no rules" would be far more dangerous as cyclists would have strokes and heart attacks mid-race causing massive wipeouts and unintended harm to others, as previously mentioned.

Mark