The Student Room Group

should multiple doping athletes be allowed?

Scroll to see replies

Why ban them? I want to see them compete in their own games. 9.58 seconds to do the 100m? Meh, what about 5?
Original post by Drewski
Except for all those who don't cheat.

Even in the bad old days of cycling there was still a good proportion of the peloton who didn't do drugs. And it's been the same for athletics, for swimming, etc.

There will always be cheats, but there will always be honest athletes too.
It doesn't matter when the cheats are caught, just so long as they are caught.


Yeah I agree.

Nah i'm just saying if everyone cheats then you're still a winner, because everyone has cheated. That's all
Original post by elmosandy
Yeah I agree.

Nah i'm just saying if everyone cheats then you're still a winner, because everyone has cheated. That's all


Yeah. But not everyone cheats, so the point is moot.

And the anti doping agencies are getting better (and getting better funding) so the numbers who will cheat will reduce and get found out sooner.

There's also a far greater stigma now. The court of public opinion damns them forever.

Hell, even people who miss tests (despite passing tests the very next day) are given a hard time - just ask Lizzie Armitstead.
Original post by Drewski
Yeah. But not everyone cheats, so the point is moot.

And the anti doping agencies are getting better (and getting better funding) so the numbers who will cheat will reduce and get found out sooner.

There's also a far greater stigma now. The court of public opinion damns them forever.

Hell, even people who miss tests (despite passing tests the very next day) are given a hard time - just ask Lizzie Armitstead.


I didn't say everyone cheats, I'm just saying if the whole field was to cheat, like Lance Armstrong, who admitted, if there were 40 cyclists only about 5% of them weren't cheating, in tour de france. So he really is actually the winner. ( despite the 5% who didn't cheat.)
Reply 44
Original post by Drewski
Yeah. But not everyone cheats, so the point is moot.

And the anti doping agencies are getting better (and getting better funding) so the numbers who will cheat will reduce and get found out sooner.

There's also a far greater stigma now. The court of public opinion damns them forever.

Hell, even people who miss tests (despite passing tests the very next day) are given a hard time - just ask Lizzie Armitstead.


Ask her what?

Why the **** did you miss three doping tests? You are a professional athlete, it's part of the deal, you surely want to stand for a clean sport, and yet after missing the first, and then the second, you don't do everything possible not to miss one again?

Not saying she did or does dope, but that that is all on her.
Reply 45
Original post by elmosandy
I didn't say everyone cheats, I'm just saying if the whole field was to cheat, like Lance Armstrong, who admitted, if there were 40 cyclists only about 5% of them weren't cheating, in tour de france. So he really is actually the winner. ( despite the 5% who didn't cheat.)


Not true.

He may have a better doping programme, he may use more, he may use it throughout the year including at the tour and the others just for some parts of training, etc.

Just not a true statement.
Reply 46
Once a cheat always a cheat in my eyes. Russia shouldn't have been allowed an appeal as well.
Original post by inhuman
Ask her what?

Why the **** did you miss three doping tests? You are a professional athlete, it's part of the deal, you surely want to stand for a clean sport, and yet after missing the first, and then the second, you don't do everything possible not to miss one again?

Not saying she did or does dope, but that that is all on her.


Given that one of them was written off due to extenuating circumstances, clearly the officials didn't agree.

Yes, she shouldn't have missed them, but she also shouldn't be treated as a doper, especially given that she passed a test the day after one of those missed tests.
To clarify, I never stated that I thought every single competitor was on drugs and I don't know where you got that from. However, given the highly competitive nature of the sports industry and the vast array of methods to bypass drug screenings, I would be surprised if the majority of them weren't.
Original post by inhuman
Not true.

He may have a better doping programme, he may use more, he may use it throughout the year including at the tour and the others just for some parts of training, etc.

Just not a true statement.


Hmm, i've already answered this above, bye:smile:

Original post by Bananapeeler
To clarify, I never stated that I thought every single competitor was on drugs and I don't know where you got that from. However, given the highly competitive nature of the sports industry and the vast array of methods to bypass drug screenings, I would be surprised if the majority of them weren't.


But you think every single medal winner is on drugs. Its unfair to categorise everyone based on the actions of dopers.
Original post by elmosandy



But you think every single medal winner is on drugs. Its unfair to categorise everyone based on the actions of dopers.


I don't think my opinion matters much to those medal winners, lol. What's your point? The actions of dopers have opened up the entire pack to scepticism regardless of what I think...
Reply 51
Original post by elmosandy
Hmm, i've already answered this above, bye:smile:
.


Thanks, doesn't happen often someone on here admits they are wrong.
Original post by inhuman
Thanks, doesn't happen often someone on here admits they are wrong.


I haven't admitted i'm wrong it's just i've said my point above as someone said the same thing to me before on this thread above..
Reply 53
Original post by Drewski
Given that one of them was written off due to extenuating circumstances, clearly the officials didn't agree.

Yes, she shouldn't have missed them, but she also shouldn't be treated as a doper, especially given that she passed a test the day after one of those missed tests.


She only had that one challenged after she missed a third one and suddenly had three missed ones.

Again, not saying she doped, but she was very stupid.
Reply 54
Original post by elmosandy
I haven't admitted i'm wrong it's just i've said my point above as someone said the same thing to me before on this thread above..


No. You just repeatedly said "he doped, others dopes, so he was the best as all doped".

That is not an answer to my point, so you not adequately replying shows you have nothing to reply with.
Original post by inhuman
No. You just repeatedly said "he doped, others dopes, so he was the best as all doped".

That is not an answer to my point, so you not adequately replying shows you have nothing to reply with.


^ and when someone replied with what you said I said, hmm I agree, but whether, better or worse, drugs are drugs, so I will think Lance is the winner out of all the people who doped '/
Reply 56
Original post by elmosandy
^ and when someone replied with what you said I said, hmm I agree, but whether, better or worse, drugs are drugs, so I will think Lance is the winner out of all the people who doped '/


Except they are not. Drugs are not just drugs. And shows how little you actually know about the subject.
Original post by inhuman
Except they are not. Drugs are not just drugs. And shows how little you actually know about the subject.


i've already said my point on this issue, someone argued the same case, not arguing further, although I agree somewhat.
Original post by Bananapeeler
I don't think my opinion matters much to those medal winners, lol. What's your point? The actions of dopers have opened up the entire pack to scepticism regardless of what I think...


That it's a bit broad to say medal winners are doping, seriously. But enough of your negativity, seriously ignore the Olympics if you're so goddamn certain the olympics is corrupt refusing to believe medal winners are only capable of achieving 'unattainable standards' .
Original post by elmosandy
That it's a bit broad to say medal winners are doping, seriously. But enough of your negativity, seriously ignore the Olympics if you're so goddamn certain the olympics is corrupt refusing to believe medal winners are only capable of achieving 'unattainable standards' .


Chill out, I don't get how you can be emotionally invested in this. I just said what was on my mind, don't cut me down for it

Quick Reply