Doping Cases and Bans in 2023

[OlympicsFan 860]

  On 3/16/2023 at 9:42 AM, Grassmarket said:

Yeah, you're right, just corrected my post.  Obviously the 18 months instead of the standard 24 is to allow just that. 

Expand  

That is the problem as long as every nation can do whatever they want. As long as that doesn’t change, they might as well allow doping. Allowing doping would lead to more fairness than the current system. 

[ChandlerMne 1,097]

I guess she will keep her medal from Tokyo...

This punishment is a joke, btw

[Olympian1010 8,073]

  On 3/16/2023 at 12:01 PM, OlympicsFan said:

That is the problem as long as every nation can do whatever they want. As long as that doesn’t change, they might as well allow doping. Allowing doping would lead to more fairness than the current system. 

Expand  

Not really. We’d probably just see a disparity in access to drugs like we see with the disparity in technology in sports where that matters. 

[OlympicsFan 860]

  On 3/16/2023 at 4:58 PM, Olympian1010 said:

Not really. We’d probably just see a disparity in access to drugs like we see with the disparity in technology in sports where that matters. 

Expand  

Wrong. We already see that athletes from poor countries (Kenya, Ethiopia) have access to "modern" drugs, thanks to their managers who hope to earn money with them. The difference would be that nations that don't even bother trying to fight doping wouldn't have an advantage anymore. The following might also work:

Athletes are only allowed to compete if they have been tested at least X times in the past year. All athletes that achieve certain marks automatically enter the testing pool. WADA does all the tests and if an athlete misses one test, he is immediately banned. If more than Y athletes from a certain country are caught, then that country will be banned from all international competitions. Athletes that were caught once will never again be allowed to compete (Yes, i know that this will cause legal problems).

 

- Allowing athletes to miss multiple tests before they get banned is crazy. The likelihood that a doped athlete gets tested at a time when it is still possible to find something is already extremely low and by allowing that athlete to avoid getting caught that easily (By just claiming that he wasn't there), you are basically making sure that only extremely unlucky/stupid athletes get caught.

- Athletes that are banned for missing tests should be treated the same way as dopers. I find it extremely difficult to believe that an athlete would just "forget" to correctly state his whereabouts (multiple times), when his livelihood depends on being allowed to compete.

- Most countries will only seriously start fighting doping once they can't afford to "not care" anymore. So you have to make sure that the costs (Having all their athletes banned from international competitions) outweigh the benefits (Not spending money on catching dopers). The only way to effectively fight doping is to not make it worth it (athletes have to repay all their prize money + dividends, nations with more than X caught athletes are banned). The majority of people won't stop doping because it is "wrong" and WADA will never be able to detect the large majortiy of forbidden substances that are available at a certain time. When i look at most/almost all the recent american doping cases, i have to assume that for most of them doping was "worth it" (given that their bans weren't very long/inconvenient (forcing them to miss the olympics) and that they were allowed back as if nothing had happened).

 

I think there are two main problems with this discussion:

1) Most/All organizations don't really care about doping. They don't want bad publicity, but actually they prefer historic performances by doped athletes over "normal" performances by clean athletes.

2) People always/often think that a new system that is unfair is worse than a system that is objectively more unfair, but already in place. People have gotten used to (stopped seeing) everything that is unfair about the current system and only agree with a new system if it is 100 % fair (which is pretty much impossible). The goal shouldn't/can't be a system that is perfectly fair, but a system that is less unfair than the system that is currently in place.

[Olympian1010 8,073]

I mean…what? 

These stories only get better as the years go on.

[heywoodu 15,353]

  On 3/22/2023 at 1:44 AM, Olympian1010 said:

I mean…what? 

These stories only get better as the years go on.

Expand  

Don't forget Sara Errani's "my mom's cancer medicin fell in the pasta sauce and that's why I was caught", Erik Dekker's "it's because the thing around my arm was too tight and so the blood values got higher" and Alex Schwazer's "it's just that everyone is conspiring against me"  

Edited March 22, 2023 by heywoodu

[phelps 7,847]

  On 3/22/2023 at 7:59 AM, heywoodu said:

Don't forget Sara Errani's "my mom's cancer medicin fell in the pasta sauce and that's why I was caught", Erik Dekker's "it's because the thing around my arm was too tight and so the blood values got higher" and Alex Schwazer's "it's just that everyone is conspiring against me"  

Expand  

well, that's true, well explained in a real trial court.

 

if WADA, WA, IOC and CAS are totally corrupted and of course deny their plot, that's another story 

[Dragon 1,898]

There was a French runner who claimed her positive test was the result of running through puddles of water near a factory that produced chemicals...

[heywoodu 15,353]

  On 3/22/2023 at 12:25 PM, Dragon said:

There was a French runner who claimed her positive test was the result of running through puddles of water near a factory that produced chemicals...

Expand  

The world of doping excuses is a lovely one to read for entertainment  

 

You know, unless you're the one athlete with the highly improbable excuse that you know is actually true, but yeah....generally these are not very likely  

[hckošice 15,122]

  On 3/22/2023 at 2:43 PM, heywoodu said:

unless you're the one athlete with the highly improbable excuse that you know is actually true, but yeah....generally these are not very likely  

Expand  

right, just like that lipstick story