The Student Room Group
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

should multiple doping athletes be allowed?

I saw today Justin Gatlin is competing in the Olympics while I accept that one violation can be passed off as a mistake (Remember Alan Baxter) surely people who have 2 doping violations shouldn't be allowed to compete.

what do you think should it be an international life time ban for more than one violation or not?

Scroll to see replies

It's unrealistic to think that someone can be a dominant number one world class athlete in a sport, competing against other world class athletes who are taking PEDs, and not also be taking something. Everyone at that level is genetically gifted and works insanely hard. They also care so much about winning that they would inject fermented cat piss into their eyeballs 3x a day if it gave them an edge. I doubt there has been a single medal winner in the past 20 years that hasn't used multiple banned steroids.
Absolutely not. IMO anyone caught doping should be permenantly banned
Original post by Bananapeeler
It's unrealistic to think that someone can be a dominant number one world class athlete in a sport, competing against other world class athletes who are taking PEDs, and not also be taking something. Everyone at that level is genetically gifted and works insanely hard. They also care so much about winning that they would inject fermented cat piss into their eyeballs 3x a day if it gave them an edge. I doubt there has been a single medal winner in the past 20 years that hasn't used multiple banned steroids.


I'm pretty sure there have been many who are clean like Adam Peaty but I agree there are probably a lot who aren't picked up really there should be a drug test right after the race before they do anything else.
All dopers should be banned. There's a lot of research showing the long term benefits of these drugs, so even if you've not taken them in a couple of years you might still have an unfair advantage.
Reply 5
Avatar for inhuman
inhuman
2
No.

Dope once = banned for life.

Would end all this discussion as well. Of course you might not catch everyone. But those you don't know about are talked about less and make less controversy than those that get to compete with a prior doping offence.

But then again people like Hosszu are doped for sure and she wasn't caught. Change coach and suddenly not only does she compete at more races at every meet, but wins them dominantly. Yea right. On German TV they had a short piece on doping last night, they interviewed a sports medicine professor. According to him there are currently testosterones out there that you cannot detect in a test. And his working group has analyzed the number of records and found a clear link to new PEDs being discovered by pharma companies.
Original post by inhuman
No.

Dope once = banned for life.

Would end all this discussion as well. Of course you might not catch everyone. But those you don't know about are talked about less and make less controversy than those that get to compete with a prior doping offence.

But then again people like Hosszu are doped for sure and she wasn't caught. Change coach and suddenly not only does she compete at more races at every meet, but wins them dominantly. Yea right. On German TV they had a short piece on doping last night, they interviewed a sports medicine professor. According to him there are currently testosterones out there that you cannot detect in a test. And his working group has analyzed the number of records and found a clear link to new PEDs being discovered by pharma companies.


What about the situation with Alan Baxter got a bronze in Downhill Skiing in Salt Lake but he lost the medal because the nose spray he used in England had a different formula than in the USA and included crack or cannibis cant remember which one.

Surely in situations like that a life time ban is a bit draconian but when it's done more than once at that point it is beyond reasonable doubt and then I think a lifetime ban is warranted like in the situation in my op
Reply 7
Avatar for inhuman
inhuman
2
Original post by jonathanemptage
What about the situation with Alan Baxter got a bronze in Downhill Skiing in Salt Lake but he lost the medal because the nose spray he used in England had a different formula than in the USA and included crack or cannibis cant remember which one.

Surely in situations like that a life time ban is a bit draconian but when it's done more than once at that point it is beyond reasonable doubt and then I think a lifetime ban is warranted like in the situation in my op


In circumstances like that, the ban should be overturned even. If you can legitimately show there was a reason for the failed drug test, then don't get a ban to begin with.

But he wasn't caught with steroids or anabolica, or testosterone, or human growth hormone was he? Coz that stuff isn't in nose drops, is it?
Original post by inhuman
In circumstances like that, the ban should be overturned even. If you can legitimately show there was a reason for the failed drug test, then don't get a ban to begin with.

But he wasn't caught with steroids or anabolica, or testosterone, or human growth hormone was he? Coz that stuff isn't in nose drops, is it?


I feel like a lot of you are missing the point. These people trained their entire lives to become the best in a sport where the majority of people dope - they have no choice but to join them, otherwise their entire life's work is wasted. What about those using undetectable PEDs who continue to dominate? Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt, etc, etc. People look the other way because they're figureheads and the hypocrisy has ****ed up the entire industry imo
Reply 9
Avatar for Drewski
Drewski
19
Original post by Bananapeeler
I feel like a lot of you are missing the point. These people trained their entire lives to become the best in a sport where the majority of people dope - they have no choice but to join them, otherwise their entire life's work is wasted. What about those using undetectable PEDs who continue to dominate? Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt, etc, etc. People look the other way because they're figureheads and the hypocrisy has ****ed up the entire industry imo


Yeah, people look the other way with Armstrong, that's why he's had all his wins removed, has had multi million dollar lawsuits...

You can't simply say that because someone wins something against someone who once doped that they then, by default, must also be doping. To do so reeks of ignorance and stupidity.
Original post by Bananapeeler
I feel like a lot of you are missing the point. These people trained their entire lives to become the best in a sport where the majority of people dope - they have no choice but to join them, otherwise their entire life's work is wasted. What about those using undetectable PEDs who continue to dominate? Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt, etc, etc. People look the other way because they're figureheads and the hypocrisy has ****ed up the entire industry imo


The difference between Lance Armstrong and bolt is that Armstrong has been found to have doped and all his winnings have been removed whereas Bolt has been tested again and again and all show he is clesn
Original post by Drewski
Yeah, people look the other way with Armstrong, that's why he's had all his wins removed, has had multi million dollar lawsuits...

You can't simply say that because someone wins something against someone who once doped that they then, by default, must also be doping. To do so reeks of ignorance and stupidity.


I'm talking about at the time... an example of something 'too good to be true'. It's not like each case is ambiguous, just yesterday Almaz Ayana absolutely smashed the 10k record - set by a chinese steroid abuser 23 years ago. She set a 5km record (easily) with her SECOND 5k. The single greatest performance at the current olympics by a mile, and obviously juiced to the max. So is Michael Phelps and other top athletes where doping makes sense. Obviously I can't say with certainty, and I hope they aren't - but when you have lots of high probability cases, it's inevitable that many of them are on something. For someone claiming I'm ignorant, you have to be insane to pretend like this hasn't been commonplace for decades now..
Original post by Pinkberry_y
The difference between Lance Armstrong and bolt is that Armstrong has been found to have doped and all his winnings have been removed whereas Bolt has been tested again and again and all show he is clesn


Almost all major doping scandals are brought about by whistleblowers and journalists, not tests. Case in point being Armstrong of course. If we have to wait for a positive test we are going to be waiting a while. Tests are still not good enough, biological passport can't detect microdosing, even yesterday a Kenyan coach got caught trying to take a drugs test for his athlete.
Original post by Bananapeeler
It's unrealistic to think that someone can be a dominant number one world class athlete in a sport, competing against other world class athletes who are taking PEDs, and not also be taking something. Everyone at that level is genetically gifted and works insanely hard. They also care so much about winning that they would inject fermented cat piss into their eyeballs 3x a day if it gave them an edge. I doubt there has been a single medal winner in the past 20 years that hasn't used multiple banned steroids.


I don't think so.

Original post by Pinkberry_y
Absolutely not. IMO anyone caught doping should be permenantly banned


Agreed, but if someone is sorry and serves their time, like Dwain and comes back better than ever, especially getting higher times from when they did dope, then I think they should be forgiven and respected. No-one seems to care when you say 'sorry'

Original post by Bananapeeler
I feel like a lot of you are missing the point. These people trained their entire lives to become the best in a sport where the majority of people dope - they have no choice but to join them, otherwise their entire life's work is wasted. What about those using undetectable PEDs who continue to dominate? Lance Armstrong, Usain Bolt, etc, etc. People look the other way because they're figureheads and the hypocrisy has ****ed up the entire industry imo



Usain Bolt don't dope hun.
Original post by elmosandy


Usain Bolt don't dope hun.


How could I possibly argue against such a watertight argument.
Original post by Bananapeeler
I'm talking about at the time... an example of something 'too good to be true'. It's not like each case is ambiguous, just yesterday Almaz Ayana absolutely smashed the 10k record - set by a chinese steroid abuser 23 years ago. She set a 5km record (easily) with her SECOND 5k. The single greatest performance at the current olympics by a mile, and obviously juiced to the max. So is Michael Phelps and other top athletes where doping makes sense. Obviously I can't say with certainty, and I hope they aren't - but when you have lots of high probability cases, it's inevitable that many of them are on something. For someone claiming I'm ignorant, you have to be insane to pretend like this hasn't been commonplace for decades now..


You're basically saying all the athletes are doping, if that's true then Michael Phelps and Lance Armstrong are the winners,.
Original post by Bananapeeler
How could I possibly argue against such a watertight argument.


Why am I arguing with someone who believes eery single athlete has doped otherwise lying. * besides, lance armstrong, one test did get caught, but said it was a chemical used for saddle sores in his cream or some other ******** lie, *
(edited 7 years ago)
My solution would be to allow doping, but that declarations must be made. If a drugs athlete comes 1st, 2nd.3rd, then another medal is awarded to the first non-drugs athlete as well. Anyone claiming to be clean, but is actually doping is given a life ban from all sports, no exceptions.

There's then no incentive to not declare, as you can openly dope and still win a medal. Equally, if you aren't taking drugs, you can win on a fair playing field - plus, you have the opportunity to beat doping athletes.
Original post by elmosandy
You're basically saying all the athletes are doping, if that's true then Michael Phelps and Lance Armstrong are the winners,.


Why am I arguing with someone who believes eery single athlete has doped otherwise lying.


...what? is there any substance to anything you say or do you just find synonyms for "im always right and you're wrong"
A fair few amount of athletes dope tbh, low chance of getting caught and can one medal can set them up for life financially so it makes sense from their perspectives, I like to adopt a clean until proven otherwise philosophy but in reality I think if we truly cleaned up the Olympics it would look rather empty


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Bananapeeler
...what? is there any substance to anything you say or do you just find synonyms for "im always right and you're wrong"


Original post by Bananapeeler
I'm talking about at the time... an example of something 'too good to be true'. I just yesterday Almaz Ayana absolutely smashed the 10k record - set by a chinese steroid abuser 23 years ago. She set a 5km record (easily) with her SECOND 5k. The single greatest performance at the current olympics by a mile, and obviously juiced to the max. So is Michael Phelps and other top athletes where doping makes sense. but when you have lots of high probability cases, it's inevitable that many of them are on something. For someone claiming I'm ignorant, you have to be insane to pretend like this hasn't been commonplace for decades now..


No hun it's what you're saying.

Like I said, Lance Armstrong did fail a test but dodged the consequences as he said it was a chemical in his saddle sore cream.

Why am I arguing with someone who believes every single athlete has doped otherwise lying. *
^^

Original post by Bananapeeler
So is Michael Phelps and other top athletes where doping makes sense. but when you have lots of high probability cases, it's inevitable that many of them are on something.
Original post by Bananapeeler
How could I possibly argue against such a watertight argument.



You're basically saying all the athletes are doping. This is what you are clinging on to believe. You will accept no argument. End of.
There you go, you want to argue against it, you won't accept no for an answer you want to believe they all are taking drugs. You've just said it okay/.

Original post by Bananapeeler
...what? is there any substance to anything you say


If all the athletes are doping, then Micheal Phelps and Lance Armstrong are the winners, because all the athletes are doping, so they're all taking the same performance enhancing drugs, but Lance, world class number one champions have won out of everyone who is taking the same drug, so he is the winner, even though he's a fraud,
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you