What a BOLT!!

Debbie said:
Do you imagine performance-enhancing "drugs" produced by pharmaceutical corps would be subject nation-state control?
Click to expand...

Yes, for a premium paid for by those who can afford it. I doubt it would remain that way but there is nothing stopping a Chinese pharma holding back the top performing drugs for their athletes whilst selling last year's stock at this year's prices...
 
I will not change my stance on this. Consider it being stubborn if you like, but the performance should be about the athletes, and not the drugs they are taking.

The one aspect that has not been brought up is the detrimental affect on athletes...
 
Debbie said:
Wrong. A truly level playing field would eliminate the space for any competition whatsoever.
Click to expand...

You introduced the word "truly". I just want everybody to be competing with the same or similar access to equipment and nutrition (and any other extrinsic factors that affect performance) so that what we are seeing is a contest between athletes.

I am not interested in a competition between pharmacists, neoprene-suit manufacturers etc. I want to see athletes competing.

And I'll be the first to admit that it's not at all easy to define what is a drug and what is just good nutrition, or whether that is a swimming suit or performance aid.
 
chiskop said:
WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) is a good start, prohibited list here.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links, very interesting subject this because the lines are so blurry.

To be honest, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I don't have a considered opinion, just unconsidered ones.

edit: I can't keep up in this thread
 
Debbie said:
Thanks for the links, very interesting subject this because the lines are so blurry.

To be honest, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I don't have a considered opinion, just unconsidered ones.

edit: I can't keep up in this thread
Click to expand...

Old age is a bitch - especially for fence sitters - time just flies twice as fast...
 
Debbie said:
Thanks for the links, very interesting subject this because the lines are so blurry.

To be honest, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I don't have a considered opinion, just unconsidered ones.
Click to expand...

Yeah I realised, it's a tricky subject. Maybe I'm naive/idealistic but I would hate to see sports become pharmaceutical contests. And I'm uneasy about all the swimming records being set in that new suit.

Debbie said:
edit: I can't keep up in this thread
Click to expand...

/offers debbie postwhorazonol - guaranteed to pep up your postwhoring muscles
 
The only solution to this should it become necessary would be that IAAF and Olympics competitors are screened and their 'doping' be controlled by a centralised body...
 
DJK said:
The only solution to this should it become necessary would be that IAAF and Olympics competitors are screened and their 'doping' be controlled by a centralised body...
Click to expand...

Not that is the problem right there.

We have all these rules, however One person knows another person who is doing the tests and bam, they are negative ;)

It leaves space for corruption. Make it a free for all and there is no space for anything of the sort
 
Last edited:
DJK said:
The only solution to this should it become necessary would be that IAAF and Olympics competitors are screened and their 'doping' be controlled by a centralised body...
Click to expand...

They are - it's called WADA. They control what is acceptable or not acceptable, for example caffeine is alright up to a point but illegal above a certain threshold, many drugs are illegal in any quantity.

(I realise that's not really what you were suggesting, but it's also not very different.)
 
Pitbull said:
Not that is the problem right there.

We have all these rules, however One person knows another person who is doing the tests and bam, they are negative ;)

It leave space for corruption. Make it a free for all and there is no space for anything of the sort
Click to expand...

But why would you want to test negative if it is legalized? Or are you saying one athlete taking "additional" drugs and testing negative for them? It will be decided by a panel - every panel member having complete access to test results. No need for non-disclosure if it is legal...
 
chiskop said:
They are - it's called WADA. They control what is acceptable or not acceptable, for example caffeine is alright up to a point but illegal above a certain threshold, many drugs are illegal in any quantity.

(I realise that's not really what you were suggesting, but it's also not very different.)
Click to expand...

Sure, the body is there to make the decisions, but there powers are limited or their ability to control certain 'substance abuse' is limited at least. Open up doping, set a threshold, and test using a representative panel with full disclosure.
 
DJK said:
But why would you want to test negative if it is legalized? Or are you saying one athlete taking "additional" drugs and testing negative for them? It will be decided by a panel - every panel member having complete access to test results. No need for non-disclosure if it is legal...
Click to expand...

No, i was highlighting the current problem.Do away with the Doping rules and there is no need for tests :rolleyes:
 
You guys better be watching at 16.20 this afternoon.
Thats what time the 200m final supposedly is. (Supposedly because thats if the olympics site is correct and my time conversion :D)
 
JK8 said:
Yay! Whats the 200m WR time?
Click to expand...

19.32.


This chart shows the twenty fastest 200m marks of all time. Each [-]row[/-] line represents a hundredth of a second. Eyeballing the chart would suggest that the cutting edge of human achievement in the 200m is anything sub-19.7. A 19.59 at Beijing would be phenomenal. Then you scroll down—way down—and you hit Johnson’s 19.32. Usain Bolt has his work cut out for him.

19.77 Michael Johnson (1996), Ato Boldon (1997)
19.76 Tyson Gay (2007), Usain Bolt (2008)
19.75 Carl Lewis (1983), Joe DeLoach (1988), Usain Bolt (2007)

19.73 Michael Marsh (1992)
19.72 A Pietro Mennea (1979)
19.71 A Michael Johnson (2000)
19.70 Tyson Gay (2006)
19.69 Walter Dix (2007)
19.68 Frank Fredericks (1996), Tyson Gay (2006)
19.67 Usain Bolt (2008)
19.66 Michael Johnson (1996)
19.65 Wallace Spearmon (2006)

19.63 Xavier Carter (2006)
19.62 Tyson Gay (2007)





























19.32 Michael Johnson (1996)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X