400
While interesting, I'm not convinced it would stop pressure from an athlete's home country. Just increases the personal conflict against those pressures.
Consider a 4 year ban for the country instead. Make it a serious offense.
If you have a situation like Russia where there is a provable government doping program, agreed. But if an athlete makes the personal decision to use performance enhancers that happen to slip through the initial screening but then get caught by the Olympic testers, I wouldn't hold that against the rest of the athletes from that country.
I would. Well not against the individual athletes but against their country of origin. Countries screening would need to be better than the IOC ones or en par.
The basic framing is: "your boss fucked up, you're part of the fallout".
An alternative would be to allow all doping.
But at the moment the approach is to reward the smartest cheaters and at least for me removed all interest for most sport events.
Just keep in mind, a lot of countries are not the US/Europe/China. There are small island nations and city states sending a number of athletes you can count with one hand. They many not have the technical/financial resources to pre-screen and rely only on the Olympics' own testing process.
That is a very good point which I haven't considered!
Thanks :)
load more comments
(2 replies)
How about lifetime for the athlete, 4 year for the country.
Make it 20 years, but only if it proven to be a team issue and not individual.
While we're over-hauling doping punishments, we have to confront the deeply broken doping testing system and widespread contaminations of many foods and medications. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and its country-level entities (UKADA, USADA, etc.) don't like to talk about how laughably bad their systems are, and how often the pop false positives. It wasn't as well known until cyclist Lizzy Banks challenged a false positive last year and spent €40,000 in legal fees and testing fees to get a "no fault or negligence" ruling. And that wouldn't have been possible at all if Banks didn't have a medical background (she went pro just before finishing a medical degree) and was able to read the faulty reports herself and challenge the claims of UKADA. Thanks to her, we now know that WAY more common foods and over-the-counter medications have contaminations with banned substances, which produces positive results with trace-amounts of banned substances.
I'm all for cracking down on dopers and cheaters, so long as we fix the system so it doesn't create false-positives.
The entire system is deeply corrupt beyond false positives.
We know for a fact that Russia was systematically cheating testing and the grand sum of the punishment they faced for it was having to compete as "Olympic Athletes from Russia" for two years.
Not only should they get a lifetime ban, but every athlete should be tested 100% of the time. There is no reason why something as huge and prestigious as the Olympics, with the kind of money it brings in, should not be doing this.
Also randomly along the year when they are training and having to tell exacty where they are at all times (so no hiding away doping & flushing them out) , as cyclists are.
Cyclism went so bad but now they're tested really hard and often.
What was that videogame, where if they caught you hacking, they wouldn't ban you, they'd just put you in lobbies with other hackers?
Imagine having an olympics where all the caught dopers compete against each other.
But they'd probably, like, die or some shit. I'll have to rethink this when I'm in my morning zone.
Northern Lights is a great strain yall
I don't care about the Olympics themselves (I think they're important, I am just not personally interested in catching more than highlights), but I would watch the shit out of the Dope Olympics. Dude on steroids and cocaine throwing a javelin ten miles? I'd pay to watch that.
Of course I'd also watch the Pitch-O-Mat 5000 fire balls at Wireless Joe Jackson, so I'm not anyone's target audience except possibly Futurama's from 20-odd years ago.
load more comments
(7 replies)
What was that videogame, where if they caught you hacking, they wouldn't ban you, they'd just put you in lobbies with other hackers?
Many games do that but GTA is easily the most popular/famous to do so. Though it hasn't done that in a long, long time, that is how it worked at launch. You also got a little dunce hat, so you knew you fucked up.
It would be highly unethical, but I do wonder how much faster you could go if you were allowed to take absolutely anything.
See somebody run 100m in 8 seconds before their heart explodes. Watch a man lift a whole car before he shits his entire digestive system out of his body.
Those are called the Enhanced Games.
Ugh, sponsored of course by Peter Thiel, the fascist transhumanist.
If they over-dope to compete in the dopers olympics and die as a result, that's not any different than driving without a seatbelt or motorcycling without a helmet and dying as a result. If you don't want to risk death you can just not be stupid.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Fine and well, but coming from a gear-doping genetic freak created in a lab run by fish...
I don't really have an end to that, I just wanted to call him a gear-doping genetic freak created in a lab run by fish.
I believe in the Sun Tzu method. You are allowed to fuck up once. Fuck up again, off with the head (well, or a lifetime ban in this case). One and done would ruin too many careers with false positives or people that made a youthful fuck up.
Not that I think it should be, but isn't cannabis a banned substance? If so, doesn't that apply to him?
Isn’t the idea of banning doping in the Olympics to deal with people using banned substances while actively competing? That is to say, even though Phelps uses weed, has he tested positive during an active competition for being on weed (or any other substance)?
What competitors do in their off time is fine as far as I’m concerned. But if they’re using right before or during actively competing, then I can see where it’s a problem. No?
load more comments
(14 replies)
Y'all know that doping usually refers to performance enhancing drugs right?
Wrong.
Doping refers to deliberate use of compounds or procedures explicity banned by WADA, in some clearly-defined window around a competition.
Pot is still on the list. End of story.
I think they were joking, but that's a good clarification.
But it’s called Dope!
/s
I'd imagine microdosing cannabis could be performance enhancing in shooting sports, for example.
Sort of... CBD isn't, and anyway I imagine the exclusion of cannabis won't be around much longer. There are many studies that show it has no impact on athletic performance.
CBD was unfortunately on the ban list when he got in trouble. It was only just removed a decade later in 2019.
It's also one of the few chemicals in cannabis that can affect performance, unlike THC which just bugs me. Like they are almost picking and choosing, purely to just be finicky
I think the window for the testing is what matters more. Whatever they do off-season is their business, as long as its not in their system during training and competition
load more comments
(3 replies)
This sports stuff is expensive and controversial. Just ban sports competition. Solves the drugs shit and the trans stuff.
Don't ban the competition, ban doping being illegal.
The ratings would be through the roof to watch some freak with more drugs than blood run a sub 8 second 100m right before his heart explodes.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Its russian medicine not doping /s
Absolutely. Yes.
Ehhhh I think there might be place for a little more subtlety. Someone who's admitted to doing so probably doesn't deserve to be banned from participating in a sport they probably love. And a hard line might encourage people to take the denial till death approach which can make things annoying
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
400 points (96.3% liked)
News
23284 readers
3508 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS