We should allow drugs to be used
littleking02
Posts: 132
Now, this might be a very controversial topic but I believe we should allow sports enhancement drugs to be used. The angle am taking on this is that if we at least allow it there would be no cheating.
You can say you get more satisfaction knowing you did your best and you trained hard. We all training to bring the best of ourself and our potential. So drugs that improve our natural potential are against the spirit of the sport?
You can say you get more satisfaction knowing you did your best and you trained hard. We all training to bring the best of ourself and our potential. So drugs that improve our natural potential are against the spirit of the sport?
ITS BY DOING WHAT EVER, THAT YOU BECOME WHOEVER!
0
Comments
-
The drugs people use can, and have, casued in death or serious injury.
The stories of whole teams suddenly becoming very ill, even with doctor supervision, shows how dangerous it is.
Drugs are not designed to be performance enhancing. EPO certainly isn't, it just happens to be > too much of it, and you die.
Amateurs would copy pros, but less well, and probably do a lot of harm to themselves.
Finally, if you legalise it, it becomes more about what drugs people are on, and you get a drugs arms race, rather than talent.
You might as well watch big green cycling monsters and machines instead.
The way it is now isn't great, but it's better than the above.0 -
What Rick said.0
-
yep as stated in last 2 posts'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'0
-
I'd echo Rick's post and add one thing - it's well documented in scientific studies that some people respond better to certain drugs than others so even if they are all on drugs this idea that a level playing field is created is erroneous.0
-
andyp wrote:I'd echo Rick's post and add one thing - it's well documented in scientific studies that some people respond better to certain drugs than others so even if they are all on drugs this idea that a level playing field is created is erroneous.
I don't buy that.
If drugs were legal that'd just be another talent that made you quicker on the bike.0 -
Can you provide a peer reviewed study that disproves my statement?
Of course it's true, how do you account for some people suffering from side effects yet others don't? Or different drugs for the same ailment?0 -
andyp wrote:Can you provide a peer reviewed study that disproves my statement?
Of course it's true, how do you account for some people suffering from side effects yet others don't? Or different drugs for the same ailment?
No what I mean is, is that if doping was legalised for cycling, one's natural responsiveness to drugs would just be another required talent for cycling.
The rules are arbitrary.0 -
So having superior genetic, isn't that a unfair advantage?ITS BY DOING WHAT EVER, THAT YOU BECOME WHOEVER!0
-
Rick Chasey wrote:Amateurs would copy pros, but less well, and probably do a lot of harm to themselves.
Several years ago, there was a BBC documentary where they interviewed a Professor who advocated a doping free-for-all. A reviewer raised an interesting and valid question - if such as system was allowed, at what age should we start doping kids?Rick Chasey wrote:If drugs were legal that'd just be another talent that made you quicker on the bike.
In the words of C. Montgomery Burns: "If you can take advantage of a situation in some way, it's your duty as an American to do it. Why should the race always be to the swift, or the Jumble to the quick-witted? Should they be allowed to win merely because of the gifts God gave them? Well I say, "Cheating is the gift man gives himself."'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
Lance and Kohl are examples of people responding well to PEDs. Then you can find some people caught for drugs and you are like, well I have never heard of that person ever before, even in a PT team.
If you gave steroids to an ectomorph and steroids to an mesomorph, I doubt the effect would be the same.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Professsional Wrestling was a 'sport' where athletes were free to do what ever they like with whatever they like.
Death after sudden death after sudden death and finally a double murder suicide brought about through steriod abuse led them to do something about it. Since then no-one has died.
enough said0 -
I think they should all be given mind altering substances. Not likely to enhance performance, but would make an interesting spectacle.
Other than that: what Rick said.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:The drugs people use can, and have, casued in death or serious injury.
Amateurs would copy pros, but less well, and probably do a lot of harm to themselves.
Completely agree with your first statement.
As for the second I think it should read "Amateurs DO copy ........"
I also think that the claims of some posters that they CARE about the riders health are not
all that sincere. It just sounds good to them to say it. Makes it all warm and cuddly, yet they still manage to condemn the dopers to hell and back. But in a warm and cuddly way.
They CARE.0 -
Im not nornaly so blunt, but what a load of f**king bollox.! Legalise doping? Give me a brake! My thoughs echo Rick Chasey first post.
littleking02: are you dure that shouldnt be "littletroll02"??0 -
Karl2010 wrote:Im not nornaly so blunt, but what a load of f**king bollox.! Legalise doping? Give me a brake! My thoughs echo Rick Chasey first post.
littleking02: are you dure that shouldnt be "littletroll02"??
Agreed: Has to be a troll.......it has been discussed so many times previously, that I'm guessing the OP is just looking to start a flame war between the regulars of the Pro Race section.....I may be wrong, and in that case the OP is just a plain eejit :P0 -
lol no i am not. I have never took drugs and I wouldn't know where to being to get some. But I just thought I through my opinion out there and see what others think. That was all, i dont see the harm in that?ITS BY DOING WHAT EVER, THAT YOU BECOME WHOEVER!0
-
We should allow drugs to be used
Funny I it had been (well apart from between 2005 and 2008). perhaps the clampdown will start again after Jan 23rd0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Lance and Kohl are examples of people responding well to PEDs. Then you can find some people caught for drugs and you are like, well I have never heard of that person ever before, even in a PT team.
If you gave steroids to an ectomorph and steroids to an mesomorph, I doubt the effect would be the same.
Not sure how you can come to that conclusion. Armstrong was talented, dope or no dope, and the same probably goes for Kohl. The doping just adds to what is already a solid foundation.
For all we know, someone like Cristian Moreni may have responded extremely well to doping, the only problem being is he was really shite to start with.0 -
Armstrong was talented, dope or no dope
How do YOU know ? How do you know he wasn't taking PED's at 16 ?
You've only got to go on the CEM site to see posts from teenagers asking about PED's.....................shocking.
But them when you hear about blood bags, centrifuges, micro dosing etc etc...............
When I started (way back in the 70's ) Fishermens Friends were the thing.......................boy they were HOT !0 -
I've been doping for years (H &B mutli this and that).....never done me the slightest bit of good !0
-
Doping is so 20th century - GM riders are the way forward. Grow armies of perfectly engineered cyclists in petri dishes with perfect attributes (e.g. Speedplay cleat shaped footbones to do away with cleats, hairless bodies, Jim Rosenthal noses that slice through the air, arses made from Brooks saddle leather, 'The Stare' infused eyeballs, etc, etc).
Mmmmmmmm.... now that would be a sport I could believe in.0 -
itisaboutthebike wrote:Armstrong was talented, dope or no dope
How do YOU know ? How do you know he wasn't taking PED's at 16 ?
Maybe he was. It's not as if that is unheard of (Ricco). But even so, I still think you have to be naturally talented to win the Tour, regardless of drugs. You put a mid level domestique on the same doping programme US Postal were on in the early 2000s, would you get the same results? I doubt it.0 -
I still think you have to be naturally talented to win the Tour, regardless of drugs
Yes I agree to a point - but you still don't know if was taking PED's at 16 and what effect this would have had on his development over the years until he (ultimately ) won the Tour.
In Patrick Moore's words "we simply don't know" (well yet anyway)0 -
... I predict a posting from 'The Voice of the Peleton' - Dave_1...0
-
Littleking I'd have to say your idea is absolute rubbish. Now I'm the most freethinking, take on board your idea type of person ever but seriously , think of what you are saying.
You are advocating the use of substances that have killed professional cyclists in the past.
Cmon get real
Ive heard some crap but seriously.0 -
I actually agree with the legalisation of drugs in sport (all Sports) for the following reasons.
Human evolution
Genetic research
Cures for disease.
Currently the biggest area for research in sport and the medical community is DNA, both the synthesis and the adaptations of.
Now before some one thinks I want to start killing cyclists Im talking about making drugs safe. Which they now are. Not the steroid based stuff of the 80’s.
If Drugs were legalised I also think It would cut the cost of drugs because a lot of the cost goes into masking agents, also where do you draw the line? Are isotonic not types of drugs.
The cross over and trickle down would have more benefits for the general public and humans as a species then it would negatives for sport.
I want to see a 5 second 100m I also want to see man in space finding another habitable planet.
Think about curing cancer, re-growing limbs and living longer healthier lives…………..
When the picture becomes that big the ‘Moral’ argument shifts.0 -
afx237vi wrote:Maybe he was. It's not as if that is unheard of (Ricco). But even so, I still think you have to be naturally talented to win the Tour, regardless of drugs. You put a mid level domestique on the same doping programme US Postal were on in the early 2000s, would you get the same results? I doubt it.
The prosecution offers one Bjarne Riis as evidence against this argument. A fair to middling domestique who, once he got on a doping programme, turned into a latter day Merckx.0 -
Soviet block countries used to do it with some well documented and unpleasant consequences for the people who were selected at a young age for 'special' sports training. Female shot putters spring to mind as an example. Also where do you draw the line when someone says inject this substance or we throw you out of the team? When money is involved (as it now always is in sport) the pressure inevitably increases so the rules must by crystal clear.
Nasty slippery slope in my view.0 -
I think we can safely say the suggestion has been shot down in flames.0
