Thread: New doping allegations on Lance Armstrong

I think that part of the problem however is that as time goes on newer methods are thought of to enhance performance.

So what IS an illegal performance enhancer.


1) Injecting your own blood?
2) Eating a piece of fruit at the right time?
3) taking a pill that helps you focus?
4) Drinking extra coffee during a game?

The edge is pretty foggy as far as I can tell.

Originally Posted by LX_Emergency

Actually...the playing field IS level because most all of them do it.

Exactly, thanks for pointing it out.

I hate to say it, guys, but, chances are, your favorite athlete is either most likely using or has used in the past.

Face it: ergonomic aids are here to stay. Practically any sport that relies on endurance, strength or speed is riddled with either steroids or other performance enhancers.

Is it "cheating"? Well, that's up for you to decide.

Many public speakers and professional musicians use beta blockers to inhibit anxiety during a performance. Is that "cheating"? After all, someone not taking those things would likely have a much more difficult time performing than those who did.

If a sports player drinks or takes caffeine pills, a substance that can substantially increase cognition, mental acuity and stamina, does that mean that he has a better advantage, and is therefore "cheating" as opposed to another team's player that didn't take it?

All these things are obviously subjective, but I personally don't feel you can demonize one substance whilst supporting another; several "accepted" compounds out there can have a dramatic effect on ones' performance in any given sport or skill.

So, the question is: what is "cheating" and what's not? Does perceived legality of a substance, ala steroids; prohormones; fat burners; etc., have any effect on how someone views "accepted" and "legal" substances?

What if certain legal compounds have a much better performance-enhancing effect on a given individual than do "illegal" or "restricted" substances? Should those things be illegal for that person? After all, everyone is different and different things work for different people.

I know that all my comments are rhetorical. My point is that, in my opinion, "doping" legislation in professional sports is a sham.

While taking steroids isn't going to enable everyone to hit 60+ home runs in a season it may enhance the ability of someone who couldn't otherwise do it. For Babe Ruth it seems to have been something in the beer, hot dogs or cigars that did the trick. I wonder if McGuire or Sosa could have broken the records without the performance enhancing drugs ?

I recall that Floyd Landis in his tour "win" was more or less out of the running after a really bad day. The following day he came back like gangbusters in the mountain stages and left everyone in the dust. At the close of that day's race people found it incredible that he could have performed at that level drug free and of course it turned out he was indeed "on" something. So maybe I'm one of those "born every minute" but I give Lance the benefit of the doubt. If it turns out that he was "dirty" I'll feel as I did when I found out there isn't a Santa Claus after all.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

While taking steroids isn't going to enable everyone to hit 60+ home runs in a season it may enhance the ability of someone who couldn't otherwise do it. For Babe Ruth it seems to have been something in the beer, hot dogs or cigars that did the trick. I wonder if McGuire or Sosa could have broken the records without the performance enhancing drugs ?

I recall that Floyd Landis in his tour "win" was more or less out of the running after a really bad day. The following day he came back like gangbusters in the mountain stages and left everyone in the dust. At the close of that day's race people found it incredible that he could have performed at that level drug free and of course it turned out he was indeed "on" something. So maybe I'm one of those "born every minute" but I give Lance the benefit of the doubt. If it turns out that he was "dirty" I'll feel as I did when I found out there isn't a Santa Claus after all.

Armstrong is probably the only athlete that I give that benefit to. He has been accused of this for years and has passed all drug tests both before and after the allegations.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out he was taking something. Cheating has existed for as long as competition in one form or another, and we've heard so many great athletes deny taking drugs (e.g. Marion Jones) up until the point where it's proven that they actually did.

Originally Posted by commiecat

Armstrong is probably the only athlete that I give that benefit to. He has been accused of this for years and has passed all drug tests both before and after the allegations.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out he was taking something. Cheating has existed for as long as competition in one form or another, and we've heard so many great athletes deny taking drugs (e.g. Marion Jones) up until the point where it's proven that they actually did.

Well I agree and wouldn't be surprised either but I hope it ain't so. One thing on the plus side. I've read that the French and other European competing nations are somewhat perturbed that an American not only won the tour, but won it seven times. They have gone to extremes to prove that Lance was doping and had no success. If they could prove it one time that would negate his record so if he is/was doping he was doing it smart.

My wife and I watched the downtown Modesto leg of this race. As always all of these racers are just amazing atheletes. I certainly hope Lance just passes whatever tests they throw at him and I agree the animosity from some of the europeans is uncalled for.

Originally Posted by Allen

anotherSo, the question is: what is "cheating" and what's not? Does perceived legality of a substance, ala steroids; prohormones; fat burners; etc., have any effect on how someone views "accepted" and "legal" substances?

Anything which breaks the rules is cheating. Even the allowable
amount of caffeine in the body is strictly regulated by the IOC.
The athletes know the rules. If they don't like the rules, then they shouldn't compete.

I'm a motorsport Scrutineer (Tech Inspector in the US) I find that most of the comptetitors are scrupulous in sticking to the rules, but there are some that will cheat if they think it will give them a competitive edge.

Often a cheat, when caught will say, everyone does it. I'm no psychologist, but I sometimes wonder if some compulsive cheats have to convince themselves that all the others are cheating in order to validate their success.

Now the federal government is investigating Landis's allegations with the intention of bringing charges of fraud against Lance if the allegations can be proved. NY Times breaking news here .

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Now the federal government is investigating Landis's allegations with the intention of bringing charges of fraud against Lance if the allegations can be proved. NY Times breaking news here .

I am not a fan of the feds digging into a sport that has
rules, regulation and testing of its own. Unlike the Feds
the reach of the sport regulations are international.

In passing I have met some professional cycle folk and
their family. Cheating is not in the nature of any of the
people I have met.

Originally Posted by exarcher

The only bad thing found on a regular basis is more frequent acne.
.....but the fact is that safe and effective use is possible.

sorry but i don't agree with the first sentence i quoted here. but i do agree with the second part. i myself have never taken steroids or any performance enhancing drugs as i never saw the point, if i had been dedicated enough and talented enough to have a shot at making a sport my career i can't say that my opinion might not have changed.

the problem i have with the first sentence is that i have had many friends that tried the "juice" and described the bad side of them, as in mood swings and the down time once you stop using them when your body has to start making regular amounts of testosterone again. also there is the argument on whether testosterone that isn't made by your body can react differently in the long term. on the other hand if used responsibly in a safe way you shouldn't be using them for long periods and there are natural herbs that help rebalance your hormones (and are very effective). and really if we are talking about taking them in a safe manner there are a lot less negative aspects to steroids, so i guess i don't totally disagree with the first statement.