Ive often wondered this, while you have people "cheating" to gain an unfair advantage with all sorts of substances etc. Why dont we have a no hold barred free for all category in sports? like you can inject yourself with go juice on the start line? want to go harder faster, graft in a bigger heart or some other such atrocity type of thing.
I purely think it would be interesting to see what, if any, advances in medicine we would get from it.
Because there would always be enough folk willing to shorten their lifespans - considerably - for that wee bit of competitive advantage.
People dying on live TV is always a bit awkward - otherwise a Top Fuel category would be great
You might find this book interesting if you're pondering this question: https://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/book-review-spitting-in-the-soup/
Professional sports were once a no holds barred take what you like to win affair. Partly concerns about athlete welfare, and partly a broader societal 'war on drugs' shift changed that. I don't know that we'd see advances in medicine as much as we'd seen burnt out athletes if all the rules were lifted, but Spitting In The Soup is well worth reading to understand more on how many rules are based on politics/fashion/societal pressure/limited science. Alcohol and caffeine are fine, for example...
Dope category? That would be sick.
Because it would rely on people being honest enough to admit to the doping and then compete in the appropriate category. If they were honest enough to do that they'd not be competing doped now.
They do sort of have it in bodybuilding. Where you have "natural" vs not organising bodies.
Which links to scotroutes point about the shortening of lifespans.
Alcohol and caffeine are fine, for example…
I thought both were banned but looking at it both have been removed from the list.
Alcohol is still banned in some sports especially target based since in the right dose it can improve performance as it drops heartrate/breathing. Misjudge though and it quickly becomes a negative which probably explains why it isnt banned over all.
You'd be surprised by how many athletes state they're ok dying by 35 if it gets them a gold medal when surveyed.
A totally open category will be a medical disaster zone, and I doubt you'd learn much.
Alcohol and caffeine are fine, for example
I thought there was a limit on caffeine, something like the equivalent of 6 cups of coffee.
Basically, the problem is that allowing doping will make sports into something that is openly unhealthy. With limits on doping we can still pretend that sports is a good healthy past-time, which it is if you do it in moderation. In order to compete at the top levels, you have to be willing to push your body to the absolute limit, way past what is good for your long-term health. If you allow doping, anyone who wants to compete at the top level will have to dope, so then high-school athletes will be forced to dope so that they can peak when they are 20 or so. Sure, you can argue that this will be a special category and the real championships will be in the non-doping categories but in reality any serious athlete will need to dope, nobody wants to come second.
wouldn't the doping need start in childhood / puberty if they wanted to be word class by the time they were adults?
"At what age would you be happy for your daughter to take drugs that whilst they enhance her performance, will have some serious side effects to her long term health?"
At what age would you be happy for your daughter to take drugs that whilst they enhance her performance, will have some serious side effects to her long term health?
People send their kids to boarding schools from quite a young age...
Yeah, given all the side-effects of doping if you had a category for it you'd be opening a massive can of worms as you'deffectively be condoning and even promoting their use - not many companies would want their brand associated with that and any organisers would probably be sued into oblivion once people started dying as a result of competing in a doped-up category.
There's the ethical aspect of it, but there's also the fairness of it too.
One of the reasons that Formula 1 is so regulated is to try and get around the "biggest checkbook wins" aspect of competition.
If you had unlimited athletics you'd end up with Russia vs China vs America or similar, with everyone else as also rans, because they didn't have state backing.
<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #eeeeee;">People send their kids to boarding schools from quite a young age…</span>
OT, but never really understood why parents would want to be separated from their children during their most formative years. Or at all come to that.
Didn't they talk about this in one of the Red Dwarf books, where football goalkeepers were rectangles of flesh that took up the entire goal? I think it led onto the GELFs
Live pre-race preparations:
As well as all the good points made above... it would encourage the general public that it's 'ok to dope' and the subsequent increase in heart disease, all the mental health issues - the NHS doesn't have the resources as it is
Also, I'm old enough to remember the Lance and Big Mig era's and frankly the racing was boring - because the dope means that the handful of riders that respond to the drugs the best just dominate the races (and before anyone says it, remember the donkeys to racehorses principle, it doesn't mean that everyone improves equally )
I purely think it would be interesting to see what, if any, advances in medicine we would get from it.
I'm sure companies like Purdue Pharma would support this and we'd all be better off for their benevolence.
“At what age would you be happy for your daughter to take drugs that whilst they enhance her performance, will have some serious side effects to her long term health?”
There is an argument that if the supply was through the medical profession, involved having regular check up and blood tests etc that it is actually fairly safe. A lot of the problems arise through unregulated use, doses taken at levels way beyond what is effective and not understanding the effects. Also there is a big chunk of misinformation (the same as for recreational drugs) to discourage use.
HRT is common in post menopausal women, but not so much for aging men, even though many would benefit, the stigma around PED's is a contributing factor to that.
One of the reasons that Formula 1 is so regulated is to try and get around the “biggest checkbook wins” aspect of competition.
I personally miss this. Yes it ws boring but it meant that advances were always there to be made regardless of limitations. Allowing people to push the limits not work within them.
Interesting book recommendation. Thanks.
I just wonder that there is so much money in sport. If they could get a few extra years out of an athlete they've heavily invested in then it could have benefits for the wider population?
Maybe it would advance to a "grown human" in a lab for best performance in whatever they were doing. But some of the lessons would be transferable?
stuff of nightmares? or not? im not sure.
but never really understood why parents would want to be separated from their children
Have you ever met children?
no hold barred free for all category in sports? like you can inject yourself with go juice on the start line? want to go harder faster, graft in a bigger heart or some other such atrocity type of thing
People dying on live TV
medical disaster zone
Sounds awesome. Like a combination of a "Pimp My Athlete" freak show and the Hunger Games.
Should be marketed as such, clearly shown not to be "real sports", and then have at it.
Can also have a category for the medical teams, like the manufacturers in mtb/motor racing.
Crazy to think that alcohol in the right dose can work as a performance enhancer and that people used to drink it during before hitting TdFrance stages.
Sounds awesome. Like a combination of a “Pimp My Athlete” freak show and the Hunger Games.
Should be marketed as such, clearly shown not to be “real sports”, and then have at it.
Can also have a category for the medical teams, like the manufacturers in mtb/motor racing.
Laughed more than i should have at this 🙂
Easier to just let your son go through puberty and then get him to transition.
Just to emphasise that I'm being sardonic there. As the other thread makes clear there is nothing easy about transitioning.
They are trying but it either won't happen or you'll find that they aren't as fast as the current 100m runners because the actual best athletes will avoid it even if they currently dope and doping someone who isn't talented or trained to the extent of the best won't get them as fast IMO.
Can also have a category for the medical teams, like the manufacturers in mtb/motor racing.
Like horse racing, where the owners and trainers are recognised as much as the horse.
That assumes we have a clean category now. I think a more honest definition of the current category would be not proven or passed doping regulations rather than clean.
doping in sports. Why dont we have a “dope catagory”
I thought we had been there and decided it was boring as you knew who would win?
That assumes we have a clean category now. I think a more honest definition of the current category would be not proven or passed doping regulations rather than clean
I think that will always be the case. But with restrictions removed would we see a benefit for the human race or a freakshow? or both?
would we see a benefit for the human race or a freakshow? or both?
Gotta wonder how it wouldn't become a freakshow if sponsors and viewing figures (£££) are part of it because, people.. celebrity/reality TV, etc. It'd be The Running Man on bikes.
Medical research for human good prob just needs smart people, investment and time.
I thought we had been there and decided it was boring as you knew who would win?
Boring!? It was epic! 🙂
Why dont we have a no hold barred free for all category in sports?
Athletes and people in general are very poor judges of benefit-risk. Would you trade an Olympic Gold medal for ten years life expectancy? Some (likely many) would. But the rules exists to deter such ethical tensions. Cyclists dying of clotting due to dehydration, Sprinters dying from cardiovascular failure. Motorsports drivers crashing because they are all on speed. No thanks.
There is currently an interesting debate on the use of body fairings in TT after this weekend's National 10. Faired bikes are a no-no, but a bottle down the skin suit? +25 Watts? Yes please!
I am all for technical innovation, and the hour record is just such, but rules are needed. I'm not for Pharmacological innovation, and as many know, that is my day job.
the human race or a freakshow
I think you've used the wrong conjunction.
It’d be The Running Man on bikes.
Now you've got my attention...
wouldn’t the doping need start in childhood / puberty if they wanted to be word class by the time they were adults?
Go and check out the use of growth hormone in your local rugby club. It doesn't start when they are adults, and is widespread.
Crazy to think that alcohol in the right dose can work as a performance enhancer and that people used to drink it during before hitting TdFrance stages.
We all know how alcohol works, but there was a funny article in a motorbike mag years ago where they did a lap of a track, had an alcoholic drink, did a lap, had a drink, etc, and recorded times. Iirc, everyone was fastest after one drink, and then deteriorated at various rates after that until crashing point was reached.
Athletes and people in general are very poor judges of benefit-risk.
Young men, especially. How many of us on this thread when young drove like idiots, took stupid levels of drugs or alcohol, did physically perilous things for no reason other than to impress a girl*...
* who invariably wasn't impressed.
Would you trade an Olympic Gold medal for ten years life expectancy?
Plenty of us trade pub/pies/fags etc for ten years life expectancy - what's special about athletes?
It’d be The Running Man on bikes.
that would be, er, dope.
It’d be The Running Man on bikes.
Do you think dynamo would be stvzo compliant?
Can't imagine a massive amount of companies willing to sponsor an anything goes category so ultimately thats why it would fail. If its more profitable to enter the non-dope race then guess where people are going to head...
I reckon the Olympics should go one of three ways.
1) Athletes are allowed to use whatever they want to improve their performance, be it prosthetics, drugs or whatever. Let's see what the human body can really do.
2) None of that, and obviously they should be naked.
3) Everybody in every country competes in every event, from which a national average can be calculated. Logistically this would be quite challenging, but I think Scotland could do quite well being small but well-resourced. People with dual nationality should do everything twice, while those domiciled elsewhere for tax purposes can pay for the whole thing.
did physically perilous things for no reason other than to impress a girl*…
* who invariably wasn’t impressed.
I think we're all in with the first one, but not impressed? I disagree. I mean, they all said they weren't impressed in public but absolutely some are, because they confess in private.
Lets face it. Risky behaviour can be an aphrodisiac, it gets you noticed and it's likely part of the reason why boys and young men indulge so hard - because despite the obvious dangers it clearly gives you an evolutionary advantage, despite the risks.
<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #eeeeee;">There is an argument that if the supply was through the medical profession, involved having regular check up and blood tests etc that it is actually fairly safe.</span>
The evidence suggests the opposite.
There's the "nice" doping in the Stuart Stephens article from 2003 where he becomes a post middle-aged superman for the PBP.
Then there's the reality in the gym. Take something affordable like Clenbuterol which is just an asthma drug at it's standard dose, but taken at a higher dose for a short period is an incredibly potent fat loss medication. It's widely used because unlike most weight loss drugs it's muscle sparing. You can eat and and train as normal whilst the fat just evaporates. And as a result gets used by anyone from body builders, models, to ermmmmmmm cyclists! £35 from an online pharmacy, some luck in customs, and a lack of morals and you too could be a stone lighter by mid October. Downsides? Apparently, it's like living in a sauna 24/7. Sweating, electrolyte loss, debilitating cramps, and the subsequent of that on your body.
But hey, you'd be quicker in time for cross-season. And that's the affordable tip of the iceberg.
Then there’s the reality in the gym. Take something affordable like Clenbuterol which is just an asthma drug at it’s standard dose, but taken at a higher dose for a short period is an incredibly potent fat loss medication. It’s widely used because unlike most weight loss drugs it’s muscle sparing. You can eat and and train as normal whilst the fat just evaporates. And as a result gets used by anyone from body builders, models, to ermmmmmmm cyclists! £35 from an online pharmacy, some luck in customs, and a lack of morals and you too could be a stone lighter by mid October. Downsides? Apparently, it’s like living in a sauna 24/7. Sweating, electrolyte loss, debilitating cramps, and the subsequent of that on your body.
But hey, you’d be quicker in time for cross-season. And that’s the affordable tip of the iceberg
Any downsides ?
