Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: BayGBM on May 10, 2015, 03:15:33 PM
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" for anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I am missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
-
If Lance Armstrong was a fitness competitor, what Tier would he be? 1, 2, or 3?
Id put him at least Tier 2, until he packed on a few more pounds.
-
I think that when such large amounts of money are at stake on the professional (or future pro / high level amateur) major sports level, it's not at all hard to understand that people will do whatever they can to win and be the best. And many successful people competing on such high levels in sports, business, etc are so highly competitive by nature anyway.
Have you ever spoken ill of your professional competitors to a prospective client in an attempt to win their business? I sure as hell have. I'd do just about anything short of doing things that are criminal or that are specifically barred by my profession in order to get / keep what I want / need.
What I have a harder time understanding is why some will sacrifice health, promising careers, dignity, and so much more doing "whatever it takes" in activities / occupations that are far less rewarding than major sports or successful business endeavors. Striving to be a jobless pro bber rather than just a recreational lifter with a good career who treats lifting as a serious hobby (but still just a hobby) comes to mind.
-
People are always willing to cross the line in life (think Phil Heath at the Olympia).
I really don't think sports are different than other aspects of life, they just mirror the culture; people are willing to do whatever it takes for whatever it is they want. The end justifies the means (think of all the ponzi schemes).
-
Tom Brady
Fuck off, nothings been proven.
Probable this, probable that. Probable defamation lawsuit.
-
Other observers noticed that Ruiz was not panting or coated in sweat, and her thighs were much flabbier and fatter than would be expected
:D
-
Fuck off, nothings been proven.
Probable this, probable that. Probable defamation lawsuit.
Let me first say I could care less, deflated balls didn't win or lose any games. But come on dude, you really think Brady knew nothing, and had no part in it? The ball boys just took it upon themselves to deflate the balls? For what reasons?
Also the investigation isn't being handled like a prosecuting attorney would have to collect evidence to determine guilt, it's being handled via the NFL's discipline procedures; which it should be mentioned that Brady refused to cooperate with by not turning over emails and text records, which he is required to via league policy.
Nonetheless in convinced this stuff happens all the time AND the NFL is the one who has botched this whole issue.
-
I have to disagree with Marion Jones. She was doing what everybody else was. It's just the American mentality of "we don't use", very naive. She was thrown under the bus by her (ex) husband if I remember correctly.
But, I agree with you on what you are saying.
-
I have to disagree with Marion Jones. She was doing what everybody else was. It's just the American mentality of "we don't use", very naive. She was thrown under the bus by her (ex) husband if I remember correctly.
But, I agree with you on what you are saying.
Parker what she did was no different than Armstrong, Floyd Landis was the one who messed up the whole cycling program by testing positive. I'm convinced, more then ever, that to become elite (or even very good), at anything, people are willing to pay whatever price is necessary; this doesn't mean all will resort to drugs but many will, and many more will toe the line of what is considered "ethical".
The question we are asking is why? The answer is (imho) culturally we promote a win at all costs attitude. We glorify winners, 2nd place is the first loser, blah blah blah.
-
People in general are lazy. They want it all without ever having to give it their all. Never more so when their all is obviously never going to be enough to be a champion.
Perhaps the only thing worth cheating is death. And that doesn't happen often or if it does, for very long.
Instead these people cheat life. Their own and in doing so that of other competitors. There are those that say "If everyone's doing it, it's not really cheating!"
Yes it is. And why do these people make such a claim?
There is little (if any) honor among athletes, thieves and politicians. To that we can now add "any one".
Really? These top level athletes are far from lazy. They do what it takes to compete at the highest level. Get a clue, everyone is using.
-
It's only 'cheating' if you're the only one..
-
It's only 'cheating' if you're the only one..
This.
I'm sure the money and fame play a part. But there is also an element of gamesmanship. If the majority of players are cheating or at least looking for an edge, which history has proven is a reality, then you are perfectly justified in doing the same. I'd even go so far as to say that it can be a point of pride knowing that you better than the next at that element of the game.
-
Money/greed, and nothing else.
-
Winning at any cost means more to some than having a guilty conscience I guess.
-
Parker what she did was no different than Armstrong, Floyd Landis was the one who messed up the whole cycling program by testing positive. I'm convinced, more then ever, that to become elite (or even very good), at anything, people are willing to pay whatever price is necessary; this doesn't mean all will resort to drugs but many will, and many more will toe the line of what is considered "ethical".
The question we are asking is why? The answer is (imho) culturally we promote a win at all costs attitude. We glorify winners, 2nd place is the first loser, blah blah blah.
When she admitted to it, then it all came tumbling down for her. She should have kept denying it.
The American public needs to get over their holier than thou mentality of "our athletes don't use PEDs".
-
Fuck off, nothings been proven.
Probable this, probable that. Probable defamation lawsuit.
To the non-lawyer, the money quotes from the Ted Wells report suggest a mere probability that cheating occurred. But the specific terminology used by Wells actually indicates a belief that the evidence satisfies one of the most common standards used in a court of law.
“More probable than not” equates to a “preponderance of the evidence,” the standard that applies in most civil lawsuits. It means that the evidence makes it more likely than not, in the opinion of the investigator, that “New England Patriots personnel participated in violations of the Playing Rules and were involved in a deliberate effort to circumvent the rules,” and that “Tom Brady . . . was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities.”
That’s a standard perhaps even higher than the one that applies to players accused of violating the Personal Conduct Policy, where “credible corroborating evidence” (even without cooperation from the alleged victim) can result in a significant suspension. Regardless, it’s enough proof on which the NFL can base punishment of a team.
“Too often, competitive violations have gone unpunished because conclusive proof of the violation was lacking,” Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote to the NFL’s Competition Committee in 2008, after the last game-integrity infraction involving the Patriots. “I believe we should reconsider the standard of proof to be applied in such cases, and make it easier for a competitive violation to be established.”
-
oP is assuming that PED is actually cheating. Its subjective what "cheating" is. How is lasik surgery not as "cheating" as Manipulating hormone levels? Its opinion based rules
-
Other observers noticed that Ruiz was not panting or coated in sweat, and her thighs were much flabbier and fatter than would be expected
:D
I know, right? What kind of loser do you have to be to cheat to win a marathon? For all but the most elite runners, the point of running 26.2 miles is to prove to yourself that you have the stamina and will to simply make it to the finish line. Yet here she comes with her flabby fat legs wanting the wear the winner's wreath on her head knowing full well that she didn't have what it took to run a marathon much less win. I actually feel sorry for her; she was a loser at a depth that just makes you shake your head. It is as if she has a mental illness or something. :'(
-
oP is assuming that PED is actually cheating. Its subjective what "cheating" is. How is lasik surgery not as "cheating" as Manipulating hormone levels? Its opinion based rules
It's not subjective when there's a rule book.
-
my FB buddies are still in complete denial.
"brady doesn't need to cheat" became "Brady would never do that!"
"They can't PROVE Brady cheated!" has moved into "Everybody cheats!"
Teddy Bruschi is the only person left in the USA who actually believes Brady. Anyone hear him kneepadding ol' Tommy Boy with the "tom has integrity, and men with integrity don't cheat". Honestly, I think he was trolling Tom. Like, "only a piece of dog shit would cheat and lie about it, and we all know Tom isn't a piece of dog shit" when there is plain evidence Tom knew ball pressure, and tom participated in cover/up.
-
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I a missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me?
Playing sports as a kid is way different than playing sports at an elite level. I played football from little league through college and by the time I was a freshman in college, it was clear that "cheating" just meant getting caught. You don't even have to be an athlete, just watch professional sports to see calculated rule-breaking is par for the course. It's not some new phenomenon and it's not concentrated among a few bad apples.
-
my FB buddies are still in complete denial.
"brady doesn't need to cheat" became "Brady would never do that!"
"They can't PROVE Brady cheated!" has moved into "Everybody cheats!"
Teddy Bruschi is the only person left in the USA who actually believes Brady. Anyone hear him kneepadding ol' Tommy Boy with the "tom has integrity, and men with integrity don't cheat". Honestly, I think he was trolling Tom. Like, "only a piece of dog shit would cheat and lie about it, and we all know Tom isn't a piece of dog shit" when there is plain evidence Tom knew ball pressure, and tom participated in cover/up.
The best is they talk themselves into a corner:
"It doesn't make a difference in the outcome"
"Everyone does it anyway"
It doesn't make a difference, but all teams do it?
-
Let me first say I could care less, deflated balls didn't win or lose any games. But come on dude, you really think Brady knew nothing, and had no part in it? The ball boys just took it upon themselves to deflate the balls? For what reasons?
Also the investigation isn't being handled like a prosecuting attorney would have to collect evidence to determine guilt, it's being handled via the NFL's discipline procedures; which it should be mentioned that Brady refused to cooperate with by not turning over emails and text records, which he is required to via league policy.
Nonetheless in convinced this stuff happens all the time AND the NFL is the one who has botched this whole issue.
People like Sokolsky enable the cheaters. They perform mental cartwheels to try it make it seem like the guy was not cheating. I remember on another board back in 2013 when Aaron Hernandez was initially arrested, I laid out a simple fact pattern based on news reports and one of the posters (I think it was Squadfather) tired to excuse it all as media hype and people being jealous of Aaron's NFL contract. Um, yeah. Well, we now know how that line of thinking worked out. ::)
-
I have to disagree with Marion Jones. She was doing what everybody else was. It's just the American mentality of "we don't use", very naive. She was thrown under the bus by her (ex) husband if I remember correctly.
But, I agree with you on what you are saying.
What exactly are you disagreeing with? Marion Jones was cheating plain and simple. When she was called out her defense was not "I'm doing what everyone else is doing..." She denied it with her penultimate breath. Only after being boxed in and humiliated in a legal proceeding did she tearfully admit to cheating and apologize.
-
I have to give this guy (and his attorney) credit for balls. He gets hauled before Congress to testify about his cheating and his spoon fed line is "I'm not here to talk about the past...." Remember that BS? ::)
-
A rule that can't be enforced can't and won't be taken seriously. The drug ban
can't be enforced effectively, therefore it should be scrapped.
Everyone knows this rule will be broken by someone, and once someone breaks
it the rest follow by necessity. After that the only crime is in being caught.
Drug use is banned by the IFBB. Are all the bodybuilders cheating? No, the scumbags
are the IFBB. Same with the IOC and all the other sports orgs.
-
The 10 Greatest Sports Cheaters of All Time
These men and women are true game changers - in the worst possible ways.
1. OH, CANADA
Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson was disqualified from the 100-meter race at the 1988 Seoul Games after the post-race drug test revealed he'd been using steroids. As far as we can tell, Canada hasn't been allowed back in the Games since.
2. PATRIOT GAMES
In 2007, New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick was caught videotaping the New York Jets' defensive coaching signals. "Spygate" set off a media frenzy and tarnished the Pats' record; still, there are worse things you can do with a camera in the NFL--right, Brett?
3. ROSIES ARE RED-HANDED
In 1980, Rosie Ruiz won (asterisk) the Boston Marathon in the female category in 2.5 hours. It was later revealed that she disappeared into the crowd, then showed up on the course half a mile from the finish. Oh, and to qualify for Boston, she ran (re: took the subway during) the NYC Marathon. Disqualified, perhaps, but not forgotten.
4. YELLOW-JERSEYED COWARD
When it was revealed last year that Lance Armstrong had been doping the entire time he'd been on a bike (all while denying it), the cyclist had to surrender his bright yellow jersey. Sadly, this makes it harder to find the guy and punch him in the nut.
5. SPANISH TREATMENT
We thought the guys behind South Park made it up, but no: A group of totally healthy, non-handicapped Spanish basketball players infiltrated the 2000 Special Olympics to win gold. How does that plan end well?
6. BREAK A LEG
In sports, cheating usually happens on the field of play--or on the ice, depending on which sports we're talking about. For figure skater Tonya Harding, it happened the night before the 1994 U.S. Figure Skating Championships in Detriot. We can't tell you what she was thinking, but we can tell you what she did, which was hire someone to break rival Nancy Kerrigan's leg with a baton. Such a graceful sport.
7. BARRY JUICE
Considered one of the greatest baseball players of all time (asterisk), Barry Bonds is now known mostly for his serial steroid use and his perjury and obstuction-of-justice charges. The Giants won't let him go, though, occassionally employing his roid-enlarged forehead as an outfield target during batting practice.
8. HAND BALL
In the second half of a 1986 World Cup soccer match against England, Argentina's Diego Maradona performed perhaps the ballsiest act of cheating in the history of sports. Going up for a header, the player caught the ball in one hand and swiftly drove it straight into England's goal. The ref didn't see it, players and spectators were outraged--and Americans everywhere asked what the big deal was.
9. "DISONISCHENKO"
In fencing, points are signaled by a light that indicated weapon-to-body contact. So when Boris Onischenko's light went off without explanation during the fencing portion of the modern pentathalon at the 1976 Olympic Games, something wasn't right. It turned out the Soviet had Macguyvered his épée's grip to activate the light manually. Unsurprisingly, the Soviets have "no recollection" of the event.
10. DIRTY SOX
Lefty Williams, Chick Gandil, and Happy Felsch aren't characters in a Guy Ritchie film. They're three of the eight Chicago White Sox caught accepting money to lose to the Cincinnati Reds in the 1919 World Series. Not convicted but banned from America's pastime, they went on to open an investment bank, or so we heard.
-
Cross Ben Johnson off that list!!!
Like any Amercian sprinter who won was clean, lol... C'mon!
Very interesting article on t-nation about Johnson's story and all. It's bullshit man,, the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded. anybody could have tampered with them.
-
Why is it so hard to understand ???
(http://img5.visualizeus.com/thumbs/cf/32/moneysuccess,lyrics-cf32e8c1867ae8ce73496da948e26318_h.jpg?ts=93246)
I don't understand juiced bodybuilders that cheat , competing in a natural show just to win a plastic trophy.
(http://cdn.simplyshredded.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Sidechest2.jpg)
-
Cross Ben Johnson off that list!!!
Like any Amercian sprinter who won was clean, lol... C'mon!
Very interesting article on t-nation about Johnson's story and all. It's bullshit man,, the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded. anybody could have tampered with them.
Stop making a fool of yourself! What does that have to do with anything? Are you suggesting he wasn't on steroids? Whom are you trying to convince? Johnson himself talked about his cheating in interviews. He even talked about it in Bigger Faster Stronger. And here you come 27 years later to tell us that there is no there there because "the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded". ::)
-
Stop making a fool of yourself! What does that have to do with anything? Are you suggesting he wasn't on steroids? Whom are you trying to convince? Johnson himself talked about his cheating in interviews. He even talked about it in Bigger Faster Stronger. And here you come 27 years later to tell us that there is no there there because "the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded". ::)
these guys have dudes to tell them when to get off and beat the tests or whatnot. Of course they use, off season and was told they're faster off the drugs.
-
Stop making a fool of yourself! What does that have to do with anything? Are you suggesting he wasn't on steroids? Whom are you trying to convince? Johnson himself talked about his cheating in interviews. He even talked about it in Bigger Faster Stronger. And here you come 27 years later to tell us that there is no there there because "the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded". ::)
Do you think justice was served when Ben got caught? I think Ben's crime wasn't cheating, it was getting caught, as I would argue there is a concensus among those in the know that everyone in that field had doped. Like I said, a rule that can't be enforced uniformly and effectively is useless and perhaps immoral.
-
(http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2012/cbb/blog/121224/tom-brady-240x320.jpg)
-
People like Sokolsky enable the cheaters. They perform mental cartwheels to try it make it seem like the guy was not cheating. I remember on another board back in 2013 when Aaron Hernandez was initially arrested, I laid out a simple fact pattern based on news reports and one of the posters (I think it was Squadfather) tired to excuse it all as media hype and people being jealous of Aaron's NFL contract. Um, yeah. Well, we now know how that line of thinking worked out. ::)
Fuck off, by your logic we could similarly conclude that since you probably love the cock, in the absence of conclusive evidence, you mostlikely are sucking down a 10 incher right now. See how that works?
The only thing the investigation concluded was that Brady probably knew. Did he know? Possibly. Do we know for sure? No. Unless there's irrefutable proof, he's clear of any wrongdoing. That's how it works in the free-world. In the meanwhile dumbfucks like Jon Stewart should be hung by the balls whilst forced to listen to their fake as fuck laughter audiotapes, feel free to join him.
-
Stop making a fool of yourself! What does that have to do with anything? Are you suggesting he wasn't on steroids? Whom are you trying to convince? Johnson himself talked about his cheating in interviews. He even talked about it in Bigger Faster Stronger. And here you come 27 years later to tell us that there is no there there because "the piss samples were in a room that was not even guarded". ::)
If I recall correctly Johnson said that he did use substances but not the one, or likes of them, that they caught him for.
-
Drug use isn't seen as cheating,sadly you do it so your not disadvantaged by not doing it.
-
Rosie Ruiz. LOL. How anyone thought even for 5 minutes that this bloated pasty pig won the NYC Marathon is insane. I love the fake grimace and fat filled thighs.
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" or anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I a missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
I think cheating has always been rampant in professional sports. I just think its much much easier to expose them now. Look at the abuse of "greenies" in baseball for decades. That was most definitely PED abuse... Its just one example but illustrates the point.. Steroids were absolutely in every NFL lockerroom in the 70's and 80's and Jerry Rice has admitted to using "stick-em"...
I do get what you are saying about being " old fashioned" and I do wish things would move that direction
-
I have to give this guy (and his attorney) credit for balls. He gets hauled before Congress to testify about his cheating and his spoon fed line is "I'm not here to talk about the past...." Remember that BS? ::)
No matter whats said here, what reasoning there is, you're going to call it "cheating". Do you think that they're the only ones "cheating"? It's an even playing field. The only thing that differs is most were targeted and eventually caught. This is for almost any sport. Baseball for example, is dying again because of testing, Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire saved baseball, Ratings for cycling have dropped because Armstrong isn't around but the reality is his whole team and other teams are doing the same the same thing. Welcome to the world of semi-professional and professional sports.
Saying you played sports is all well and good, most of us have. I played baseball in minor leagues for two years. But here's the thing. Mentally, the elites players at any level are light years ahead of us. Work ethic, genetics the whole nine yards. They would have made it with or without drugs. Most are on a level very few will understand. Thats a fact. ANYONE who is successful is on another level. I trained Mark McGwire from 2002-2004, even in retirement he still trained as if he were still playing. Bay, again. These athletes are on another level. They will do what ever it takes to be the best. If you had a $150mil I guaranfuckingtee you'd do the same thing.
McGwire, Bonds, Rose all deserve to be first round ballot picks for the HOF. If they're not then remove Babe Ruth and everyone else during that era because it was sure as fuck just as dirty back then as it is now. That goes for Football as well.
-
No matter whats said here, what reasoning there is, you're going to call it "cheating". Do you think that they're the only ones "cheating"? It's an even playing field.
Actually, most of the teams in the NFL had legally-inflated balls. I don't get the assumption that "it's an even playing field".
Where in the world do you get that? Why make that assumption? Brady had an advantage, the NE RBs had an advantage, Gronk had an advantage with 1-handed catches. And the other teams did not.
We saw good players become incredible with steroids, but we cannot deny 2 things
1) steroids made them better
2) not everyone did steroids
It's cheating, and it's not a playing field.
-
Why is it so hard to understand ???
(http://img5.visualizeus.com/thumbs/cf/32/moneysuccess,lyrics-cf32e8c1867ae8ce73496da948e26318_h.jpg?ts=93246)
I don't understand juiced bodybuilders that cheat , competing in a natural show just to win a plastic trophy.
(http://cdn.simplyshredded.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Sidechest2.jpg)
Clearly and completely all natty!
::)
-
Actually, most of the teams in the NFL had legally-inflated balls. I don't get the assumption that "it's an even playing field".
Where in the world do you get that? Why make that assumption? Brady had an advantage, the NE RBs had an advantage, Gronk had an advantage with 1-handed catches. And the other teams did not.
We saw good players become incredible with steroids, but we cannot deny 2 things
1) steroids made them better
2) not everyone did steroids
It's cheating, and it's not a playing field.
When you have the majority of players doing it, it's not cheating. Yes, and again, steroids made them better. They can now hit the ball 450ft instead of 420 while recovering faster. Either you're homerun hitter or you're not.
-
Even Playing Field of Peace.
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" or anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I a missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
Simple, because they all do... They all cheat some more some less, some smarter some not, some get caught some not... It is hard to live with, it is trust me ;) not easy... You just move on with your life, it becomes part of you and it is not necessarily wrong it's just part of the game - elite, talented athletes are all on drugs.
All records are set on PEDs - welcome to reality.
P.s. My records are still not beaten ;) guess why...
-
cheaters are the best.
they show that they not only got a great body, athletic ability etc but also a great mind.
it takes a lot of thinking to come up with clever cheating and getting away with it.
they also got a lot of balls as there's high risks for getting caught and for losing their health.
i salute the cheaters of the world! the ben johnsons! the lance armstrongs!
the jock at school who knew he couldnt keep up with the little bookworms so he had to cheat to pass!
and to finish off my soon legendary post i'd like to quote the great house of pain:
It ain't a crime if you don't get caught
It ain't a sale if it don't get bought
It ain't a show if I don't get paid
She ain't a hoe if you don't get laid
-
Is Bay genuinely an idiot or just trying to seem like one?
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" or anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I a missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
1-it's not about winning or beating the other guy, it's about being the best, no matter what, making things normal humans can't do with only genetics, training and mental force.
2-they lie because medias are filthy hypocrites. They have to do so to keep sponsors and co. and because ofc it's illegal. You don't bring a knife to a gun fight.
My 2 cents.
-
When they changed balls at half-time, Brady took them apart even worse.
Aaron Rogers said he likes his over-inflated.
Everyone tries for an edge in sports, from the curve on a hockey stick, to pine tar and scuffed baseballs, greenies in the 70's (speed) and roids in the 90's (and beyond) MLB.
Wine if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat...
It has and always will be part of sports, business, politics, etc...
-
why not cheat? If u do u can have it all, if u dont well go back to your 9-5 job :)
Why the hell on earth be honest and fair?
Sport these days have been taken so far I doubt u can make it natural...
-
99% of athletes will cheat if they think they can get away with it.
The rewards for winning are too great to ignore.
-
and the reward of being a natty is NOTHING!!!
...endof thread! ;D
-
Rosie Ruiz. LOL. How anyone thought even for 5 minutes that this bloated pasty pig won the NYC Marathon is insane. I love the fake grimace and fat filled thighs.
Rosie has one of the richer cheating stories. She "wins" the Boston marathon by surreptitiously exiting the race and reentering the race near the finish line. Boom! And she qualified for the Boston marathon by running the NYC marathon where she exited the race... rode the subway... and reentered the race near the finish line! Boom!
This is another strategy a lot of cheaters use: i got away with it once... so I'll do it again. ::)
-
When they changed balls at half-time, Brady took them apart even worse.
Aaron Rogers said he likes his over-inflated.
Everyone tries for an edge in sports, from the curve on a hockey stick, to pine tar and scuffed baseballs, greenies in the 70's (speed) and roids in the 90's (and beyond) MLB.
Wine if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat...
It has and always will be part of sports, business, politics, etc...
that's beautiful :'(
-
Simple, because they all do... They all cheat some more some less, some smarter some not, some get caught some not... It is hard to live with, it is trust me ;) not easy... You just move on with your life, it becomes part of you and it is not necessarily wrong it's just part of the game - elite, talented athletes are all on drugs.
All records are set on PEDs - welcome to reality.
P.s. My records are still not beaten ;) guess why...
You and several others (ritch, Coach, etc.) here have missed the point entirely. You have proven that by focusing on PED and whether or not it can be definitively proven, "everyone's doing it" or arguing that the samples were tainted. Why you have chosen to focus on this angle of it I don't know; perhaps you are feeling stung because of your own drug use? In any case, it is not about PED. It is about the mindset of a cheater. Cheating can come in many forms that have nothing to do with drugs--like secretly exiting a race and reentering near the finish line. Just a couple weeks ago a chess grandmaster was caught cheating during a tournament. He would run to the bathroom after almost every move and use his iphone to cheat.
Chess grandmaster cheats in tournament ... from the bathroom
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/sport/chess-championship-cheating-in-bathroom/
Did he have a huge windfall waiting for him if he won? Most cheaters are not doing it for cheers or a big payday.
-
1-it's not about winning or beating the other guy, it's about being the best, no matter what, making things normal humans can't do with only genetics, training and mental force.
2-they lie because medias are filthy hypocrites. They have to do so to keep sponsors and co. and because ofc it's illegal. You don't bring a knife to a gun fight.
My 2 cents.
You, too, have missed the point. People cheat in board games, card games, and other simple, meaningless endeavors where the stakes are low or there are really no stakes at all. And they are not doing it to be the best in the world or to demonstrate their training or mental force. Where is the satisfaction in "winning" when there is virtually nothing at stake?
-
maybe they need to win at all costs.
-
You and several others (ritch, Coach, etc.) here have missed the point entirely. You have proven that by focusing on PED and whether or not it can be definitively proven, "everyone's doing it" or arguing that the samples were tainted. Why you have chosen to focus on this angle of it I don't know; perhaps you are feeling stung because of your own drug use? In any case, it is not about PED. It is about the mindset of a cheater. Cheating can come in many forms that have nothing to do with drugs--like secretly exiting a race and reentering near the finish line. Just a couple weeks ago a chess grandmaster was caught cheating during a tournament. He would run to the bathroom after almost every move and use his iphone to cheat.
Chess grandmaster cheats in tournament ... from the bathroom
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/sport/chess-championship-cheating-in-bathroom/
Did he have a huge windfall waiting for him if he won? Most cheaters are not doing it for cheers or a big payday.
Being a chess master gives you enormous respect, at least in som circles, I would think. A chess master is seen as very intelligent, almost in a mystical sense maybe. I don't know about the pay.
Drug use is somewhat different I would say. Even in chess using smart-drugs I would think would be seen differently than using a computer program to win. I bet they are using drugs too, many brain drugs aren't even banned anywhere.
-
what if bodybuilders would take brain drugs too and not just the biggest but also the smartest :o :o :o
-
You, too, have missed the point.
LOL- 90% of your posts in this thread are telling people they're missing the point. They're not missing the point, obviously people have different reasons for cheating- or "cheating". There is no one size fits all answer. There is no standard "cheater's mindset". Just as people cheat in different ways, people have different reasons for cheating. Obviously, a professional athlete might be more concerned with money than some friends playing a board game who are just interested in bragging rights.
-
because winning while cheating is better than losing while playing by the rules
E
-
Honor is simply the morality of superior men.
H. L. Mencken
-
"Win... Lose... what's the difference."
-
Is Bay genuinely an idiot or just trying to seem like one?
;D ;D
-
You, too, have missed the point. People cheat in board games, card games, and other simple, meaningless endeavors where the stakes are low or there are really no stakes at all. And they are not doing it to be the best in the world or to demonstrate their training or mental force. Where is the satisfaction in "winning" when there is virtually nothing at stake?
Ahh, the mentality of a cheater? It's kinda like that of thief's. A thief will justify stealing from you, or anybody. And how they obtained the object, or the reasoning behind it, is always justified.
-
Ahh, the mentality of a cheater? It's kinda like that of thief's. A thief will justify stealing from you, or anybody. And how they obtained the object, or the reasoning behind it, is always justified.
Congratulations, my friend. You got it. It was never about PED or cheating to win a big payday. It is about the mental kernel that gives the green light to cheating (in all its forms) during a competition and how one can still find satisfaction or revel in doing something they know is dishonest.
Equally interesting are apologists for the cheater. We see them in the media and even see them in this thread. They bend over backwards to justify, explain, or excuse the cheater.
"It's not really cheating because everyone does it..."
"It's not really cheating because not doing it would put you at a disadvantage..."
"It's not really cheating because it's been happening for years..."
"It's not really cheating because he was my hero... I looked up to him..."
"It's not really cheating because blah blah blah..."
When all else fails, they resort to attacking the messenger. Anything to avoid facing the truth. It often seems as if there is an agreement between the cheater and his/her fans. The cheater perpetrates and the fan agrees to play dumb, play along, or deny the facts even when the truth comes out.... Pathetic. ::)
Parker your posts reminds me of Methyl Mike (GroinkTropin). Remember, he had credit card debt that he decided he no longer needed to pay simply because the debt was old. Yet he styled himself as a conservative with "morals." In his mind, the theft was totally justified.
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=309532.0
-
No matter whats said here, what reasoning there is, you're going to call it "cheating". Do you think that they're the only ones "cheating"? It's an even playing field. The only thing that differs is most were targeted and eventually caught. This is for almost any sport. Baseball for example, is dying again because of testing, Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire saved baseball, Ratings for cycling have dropped because Armstrong isn't around but the reality is his whole team and other teams are doing the same the same thing. Welcome to the world of semi-professional and professional sports.
Saying you played sports is all well and good, most of us have. I played baseball in minor leagues for two years. But here's the thing. Mentally, the elites players at any level are light years ahead of us. Work ethic, genetics the whole nine yards. They would have made it with or without drugs. Most are on a level very few will understand. Thats a fact. ANYONE who is successful is on another level. I trained Mark McGwire from 2002-2004, even in retirement he still trained as if he were still playing. Bay, again. These athletes are on another level. They will do what ever it takes to be the best. If you had a $150mil I guaranfuckingtee you'd do the same thing.
McGwire, Bonds, Rose all deserve to be first round ballot picks for the HOF. If they're not then remove Babe Ruth and everyone else during that era because it was sure as fuck just as dirty back then as it is now. That goes for Football as well.
Ruth cheated?
-
You and several others (ritch, Coach, etc.) here have missed the point entirely. You have proven that by focusing on PED and whether or not it can be definitively proven, "everyone's doing it" or arguing that the samples were tainted. Why you have chosen to focus on this angle of it I don't know; perhaps you are feeling stung because of your own drug use? In any case, it is not about PED. It is about the mindset of a cheater. Cheating can come in many forms that have nothing to do with drugs--like secretly exiting a race and reentering near the finish line. Just a couple weeks ago a chess grandmaster was caught cheating during a tournament. He would run to the bathroom after almost every move and use his iphone to cheat.
Chess grandmaster cheats in tournament ... from the bathroom
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/sport/chess-championship-cheating-in-bathroom/
Did he have a huge windfall waiting for him if he won? Most cheaters are not doing it for cheers or a big payday.
Did you notice that I included Pete Rose? Think about that.
-
Two things :
You are clearly not familiar with professional level sports
You do not grasp how it mentally and physically works up there
If you think professional sports are about fair play you areNAIVE
-
Two things :
You are clearly not familiar with professional level sports
You do not grasp how it mentally and physically works up there
If you think professional sports are about fair play you areNAIVE
Did you take steroids when you played tennis?
-
Congratulations, my friend. You got it. It was never about PED or cheating to win a big payday. It is about the mental kernel that gives the green light to cheating (in all its forms) during a competition and how one can still find satisfaction or revel in doing something they know is dishonest.
Equally interesting are apologists for the cheater. We see them in the media and even see them in this thread. They bend over backwards to justify, explain, or excuse the cheater.
"It's not really cheating because everyone does it..."
"It's not really cheating because not doing it would put you at a disadvantage..."
"It's not really cheating because it's been happening for years..."
"It's not really cheating because he was my hero... I looked up to him..."
"It's not really cheating because blah blah blah..."
When all else fails, they resort to attacking the messenger. Anything to avoid facing the truth. It often seems as if there is an agreement between the cheater and his/her fans. The cheater perpetrates and the fan agrees to play dumb, play along, or deny the facts even when the truth comes out.... Pathetic. ::)
Parker your posts reminds me of Methyl Mike (GroinkTropin). Remember, he had credit card debt that he decided he no longer needed to pay simply because the debt was old. Yet he styled himself as a conservative with "morals." In his mind, the theft was totally justified.
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=309532.0
I get what you're saying, I do. I would've liked to compete in powerlifting but I can't do it
since it's against the rules here and there's a culture of a pretty clean sport in this particular org and country. And I won't lie and say I'm against drug use when I'm clearly not.
However, things can get murky. Sometimes drug use may be against the rules but at the same time condoned. Like my example of pro bodybuilding. IFBB says it follows the WADA code, a very strict anti-doping code. I don't think juicing in bb is cheating though. Do you?
-
I get what you're saying, I do. I would've liked to compete in powerlifting but I can't do it
since it's against the rules here and there's a culture of a pretty clean sport in this particular org and country. And I won't lie and say I'm against drug use when I'm clearly not.
However, things can get murky. Sometimes drug use may be against the rules but at the same time condoned. Like my example of pro bodybuilding. IFBB says it follows the WADA code, a very strict anti-doping code. I don't think juicing in bb is cheating though. Do you?
No. But I don't think it is a sport or a real competition either... so it's all good. If I had to filter this through the world of bodybuilding I would point to the guys who compete in "natural" shows when they are obviously not natural. Where is the satisfaction in "winning" a show like that? I admit I don't get the natural circuit. Nor do I understand guys who say they hate steroids yet hang out (for years) in bodybuilding forums.
-
61-year-old runner caught cheating in Marine Corps Marathon
By Rick Maese and Kelyn Soong
An anonymous person logged on to a popular running message board last week to report a crime against fair play. The person had been searching for a name on a database of Marine Corps Marathon finishers and unwittingly came across something suspicious.
“I think I have found a serial cheater,” the message board user typed on LetsRun.com.
It was around that same time that race organizers were doing some authenticating of their own. On Oct. 25, more than 23,000 runners weaved through Washington and Northern Virginia, but when organizers combed through the times of the top finishers, the results of one man drew a bright red flag.
For 50 minutes late in the race, the 61-year-old experienced runner from Washington left no record of his progress, but he reappeared at some point and ran at least the final five to six miles.
“We don’t know where he was,” said Rick Nealis, the race director. “He was sitting on a park bench or going in the Air and Space Museum. He’s doing something for 50 minutes, but I know he’s not running the race.”
Gregory Price finished second in his age group last month with a time of 3 hours 17 minutes 47 seconds. Nealis was so certain that Price cheated that this week he purged the result from the race logs and issued a rare lifetime ban.
“You won’t see him running in the Marine Corps Marathon again,” Nealis said Thursday.
In a brief telephone interview Friday afternoon, Price admitted to shortening his marathon route in recent years and said he never entered a race with the intention of cheating.
“I messed up. There’s no reason to do that,” he said. “There’s really nothing else to say. There’s not a good explanation. I apologize to all the other runners.”
Price said he called Nealis on Friday to offer an apology. He said he had been a runner for most of his adult life, but in recent years, as his body struggled to make it 26.2 miles, he still fancied himself a marathon runner.
“I feel bad,” he said. “There’s no great back story to it. It’s just wrong. I haven’t been feeling that well, didn’t do the proper training. Now, at the end of the day, what do I have? Nothing.”
Runners train for months for a marathon, and many suffer through several failed attempts before successfully completing the grueling race. To cheat in a marathon is considered one of the sport’s most egregious sins. Perhaps most famously, a runner named Rosie Ruiz was the top woman finisher in the 1980 Boston Marathon but later was stripped of her title when race officials ruled that she didn’t complete the entire course. More recently, runners Mike Rossi and Kip Litton have been subjected to intense Internet sleuthing and scrutiny over their marathon results.
“A lot of running is about integrity and being yourself,” said Jim Hage, a two-time Marine Corps Marathon winner and a member of the race’s Hall of Fame. “The cliche is that there are no shortcuts to a marathon, and to have someone manufacture a shortcut is surprising. . . . I suppose non-runners might think it’s sort of funny and a quirky thing. Runners might take more offense because we understand more what the sport’s about, and it ain’t about shortcuts.”
In the weeks following the Marine Corps Marathon each year, race officials usually begin scouring the database and scrutinizing times posted by the top finishers, often cross-checking split times with photos that are taken along the course.
“In this case, you click on the photo, yeah, looks like a runner — 61 years old, fit, healthy black male,” Nealis said. “But then you look at the times, and you see he’s missing two mats.”
Every five kilometers and at 13.1 miles, race officials position wide rubber timing mats that register when a chip embedded on each runner’s bib passes by. So a runner who finishes the race should have nine split times between the start and the finish. Price, though, was missing times from the 25-kilometer mark, near the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial, and again at 30 kilometers, near the U.S. Botanic Garden.
But the mat at the 35-kilometer mark, not far from the Pentagon, showed that Price had resurfaced on the race course and, according to the clock, apparently had been running much faster than at any other point of the race. Jeff Gilliland, 51, crossed the finish line shortly after Price and said he had to run around Price, who was standing calmly at the finish.
“I do remember thinking it was kind of strange,” Gilliland said. “At that point, you’re pretty gassed if you’ve been running a marathon at that pace. . . . I just thought it was weird there was a guy standing there like he had just walked across the line.”
The race director explained the mats sometimes miss the chip, and it’s possible race officials would have believed the fishy finish had this been Price’s first transgression. Price, though, had competed in the Marine Corps Marathon 13 times since 1998, and his past five races in particular included suspicious results. He had competed in the race every year since 2011, and each time the mat failed to register him at the 25-kilometer and 30-kilometer marks.
“You’re telling me the chip doesn’t work in the same spot only for this guy? Every year?” Nealis said. “Either there’s some spaceship that’s beaming down something just on him or something is up.”
The race director said that from 2004 to 2009, Price also had recorded suspect results, missing a chip mat in four of the six races.
In typical years, race officials throw out 125 to 250 suspicious results. Nealis said they’re usually more casual runners chasing a bucket-list goal: either completing a marathon or qualifying for the Boston Marathon. It’s rare that officials catch a serial cheat. Nealis can remember just a couple of other cases and says he has issued just five lifetime bans and a handful of one-year suspensions. Perhaps most memorably, in 2005, about eight runners from a Toronto-based running group took a shortcut and shaved four miles off the marathon route, each earning temporary bans.
Race records indicate Price has completed — in one fashion or another — at least 20 marathons. Nealis believes Price has run 20 miles in his each of his most recent Marine Corps attempts but never the full 26.2.
The Marine Corps race doesn’t award prize money and is not among the nation’s most prestigious marathons. Nealis sees only one compelling reason for an experienced runner to cheat here: The race serves as a qualifier for the Boston Marathon. The Boston race only accepts runners who qualify with specific times in other marathons or who raise money for charity. Nealis calls the race the “holy grail of running.”
Price said he wasn’t particularly aware of his time while on the course and wasn’t specifically trying to sneak his way into the Boston Marathon, but by virtue of his 2014 Marine Corps finish, Price was entered in this year’s Boston Marathon in April. Nealis said he sent a letter this week to Boston race officials explaining the situation, and Price’s name no longer appears on a list of this year’s entrants. Boston Marathon records indicate that Price has completed the race four times since 2001.
“You never like to hear someone of being a cheater,” said Tom Grilk, executive director of the Boston Athletic Association since 2011. “It’s a situation that I don’t have any personal familiarity with, but there’s no one I respect more than Rick Nealis and all the people down there. So I have every confidence they were very careful and made the right choice.”
Nealis said Price’s recent results have been wiped from the Marine Corps record books, and he also was booted from the Marine Corps Marathon Runners Club, an honor for having completed five races. The third-place finisher in last month’s race, Wayne Lundy, has been elevated to second and David Wild to third. They both will be honored at a ceremony next month, along with the other top finishers in each age bracket.
Lundy, a 60-year-old College Park resident, said the ban was important for maintaining the sport’s values.
“I knew what my time was. [Price’s ban] doesn’t change my time. But I think it’s valid that he be banned,” Lundy said. “Running is personal improvement and personal integrity, and when someone does something like that, he cheated in the race. A lot of runners take it personally because the individual has violated something a runner may consider a sacred thing. This is something we all love doing, and you just took a dump on it.”
-
The 1988 100 meter final had at least 5 known PED users.
Carl Lewis shouldn't have been at the games because he failed 3 drug tests during the US trials.
"The sceptics felt vindicated when it was revealed in 2003 that Lewis had failed three drugs tests for stimulants during the 1988 Olympic trials."
"Under the rules of the time, he should have been banned from the Games, but the results were covered up by the United States Olympic Committee after it accepted his plea that he had innocently taken a herbal supplement."
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" for anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I a missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
Well, winning while so called cheating sure beats the rest of the field who didn't win and were still cheating also. I suppose if you are going to cheat, which most athletes do, it is better to win than come second place while doing so.
-
fame and money?
I think that's motivating enough to cheat.
-
"Gamesmanship" ::)
-
61-year-old runner caught cheating in Marine Corps Marathon
By Rick Maese and Kelyn Soong
---
Fair play in the army? Not a single war has been won with this concept..
-
Is it cheating if everyone else you are competing against is using as well?
-
What exactly are you disagreeing with? Marion Jones was cheating plain and simple. When she was called out her defense was not "I'm doing what everyone else is doing..." She denied it with her penultimate breath. Only after being boxed in and humiliated in a legal proceeding did she tearfully admit to cheating and apologize.
And she's still lying about it....Say's she only took em for a limited time etc...
-
You and several others (ritch, Coach, etc.) here have missed the point entirely. You have proven that by focusing on PED and whether or not it can be definitively proven, "everyone's doing it" or arguing that the samples were tainted. Why you have chosen to focus on this angle of it I don't know; perhaps you are feeling stung because of your own drug use? In any case, it is not about PED. It is about the mindset of a cheater. Cheating can come in many forms that have nothing to do with drugs--like secretly exiting a race and reentering near the finish line. Just a couple weeks ago a chess grandmaster was caught cheating during a tournament. He would run to the bathroom after almost every move and use his iphone to cheat.
Chess grandmaster cheats in tournament ... from the bathroom
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/13/sport/chess-championship-cheating-in-bathroom/
Did he have a huge windfall waiting for him if he won? Most cheaters are not doing it for cheers or a big payday.
Humans need recognition, peer approval. These are ways of getting that. To use a nonhuman example, do you think beta males in any species don't 'cheat' to climb the social ladder? They just don't delude themselves into complacency by rationalising their lack of effort, they unconsciously know that all means to an end should be used, and that there is nothing noble in making things harder and less effective than necessary.
-
Femke Van den Driessche denies using motor at cyclo-cross World Championships
Belgian says bike belongs to a friend
by Cycling News
“I didn’t know anything about it. I don’t know how that bike got there. I was surprised to see that bike standing there. It’s not my bike. There’s been a mistake,” she told the Belgian broadcaster Sporza. “There was nothing in the bike that I used at the start of the race. I train hard for it too, you know. Then it’s no fun to be accused like this.
“If I would’ve been on a bike like that I would’ve been more consistent. I’ve always peaked towards those moments. I worked really hard for it. I haven’t got anything to say about it but it’s really terrible.”
The 19-year-old Van den Driessche found herself at the centre of a storm after the inaugural women’s under 23 race when the UCI found a motor inside the frame of her bike during routine checks. The Belgian press reported the finding of electrical cables in the seat post and a motor in the bottom bracket. She now faces at least a six-month ban and 20,000 Swiss franc fine, although the punishment could be much more severe than that.
“I hope they see the truth,” she said crying.
“I don’t know how it got there. I’m focused on myself on that day. I took care of myself. I was in front. At the back, the mechanics made a mistake,” Van den Driessche continued to profess her innocence. “They can check everything: all my cross bikes, all my road bikes. They will not find anything. I’m 100 per cent sure about it."
As Belgian and European under 23 champion, Van den Driessche had gone into the race as one of the favourites. Beset, perhaps ironically, by mechanical issues she didn’t play a part in it and was eventually forced to cross the line on foot because of them. Van den Driessche is also a former mountain bike junior national champion. When asked if this could spell the end of her young career Van den Driessche said, “yes, I think so.”
Van den Driessche offered up a potential reason for the bike’s presence, saying that it was owned by someone she’d been training with. “That bike belongs to a friend of mine,” she said. “He trains along with us. He joined my brothers and my father. That friend joined my brother at the reconnaissance and he placed the bike against the truck but it’s identical to mine. Last year he bought it from me. My mechanics have cleaned the bike and put it in the truck. They must’ve thought that it was my bike. I don’t know how it happened.”
She added when questioned if she would ever consider doing it. “I would never do it. It’s a sport I love very much.”
-
Not buying it. Any serious rider knows her own bike: the weight, the seating position, handle bars, even the pedals are all adjusted to fit your specific level of comfort for maximum performance. The minute you get on a bike that isn't yours you know it. And if a motor is hidden inside the frame, you'd probably notice that too.
She is just another cheater... and the crocodile tears do not help. ::)
-
Baseball players took speed for YEARS. That isnt cheating? You think the Steelers and Raiders of the 70s were natural? They are not giving back those Super Bowl rings!
-
Baseball players took speed for YEARS. That isnt cheating? You think the Steelers and Raiders of the 70s were natural? They are not giving back those Super Bowl rings!
Like the "golden era of bb'ing" people love to hide drug use of past athletes to not downplay their achievements. Today, everyone is quick to shit on how guys use. Well, it's been going on much longer than "today's crop" we just openly know about it now.
-
Not buying it. Any serious rider knows her own bike: the weight, the seating position, handle bars, even the pedals are all adjusted to fit your specific level of comfort for maximum performance. The minute you get on a bike that isn't yours you know it. And if a motor is hidden inside the frame, you'd probably notice that too.
She is just another cheater... and the crocodile tears do not help. ::)
WYHI?
-
WYHI?
Maybe. Yes. No. :D
-
Bay seems to be focusing on those that were caught out. Everyone uses. Anyone natural even with amazing genetics isn't competiting at top level sports anymore except maybe things like Tennis or a few others. That's reality. The ability of what was able to be accomplished naturally was surpassed years ago. Focusing on someone like Ben Johnson who trained smarter and obviously had better genetics than the rest of his field is insane, they were all on gear just because they didn't get caught means nothing.
-
The use of the term 'cheaters' is soooo gay....
oh wait :D
-
EVERYBODY is on some performance enhancing agent in the majority of todays professional sports.
To believe otherwise would simply make one naive.
-
No. But I don't think it is a sport or a real competition either... so it's all good. If I had to filter this through the world of bodybuilding I would point to the guys who compete in "natural" shows when they are obviously not natural. Where is the satisfaction in "winning" a show like that? I admit I don't get the natural circuit. Nor do I understand guys who say they hate steroids yet hang out (for years) in bodybuilding forums.
So there u have it, since u don't think pro bbing is a real sport or competition it isn't cheating in your own mind and is justified :D
-
EVERYBODY is on some performance enhancing agent in the majority of todays professional sports.
To believe otherwise would simply make one naive.
I don't take kindly to disrespect. not on the internet, not in person, not in a grocery store parking lot, not in like at walmart, not in a restaurant, not at the beach, not at the dry cleaners... anywhere.
blahdy blah, blahdy blah, blahdy blah...
...the guy who's willing to go the furthest, wins. if you're not willing to go all the way, it's best you keep your mouth shut and move on, and make it to the next day....
-
Baseball players took speed for YEARS. That isnt cheating? You think the Steelers and Raiders of the 70s were natural? They are not giving back those Super Bowl rings!
Baseball players?
Athletes in general.
Even in "modern" times Pat Riley has mentioned in interviews to taking greenies as an athlete. You just "suck it up" and play.
The best of the best are usually super competitors. People with talent don't seem to be in the elite unless they are hungry for "more."
-
...
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I am missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it?
I am quite sure the rationale is that they believe their competitors also cheated, hence it was fair.
NN
-
Look at people like Lance Armstrong. After watching one documentary you just get the feeling the guy would do absolutely anything to win. If he were a businessman he would be Bernie Madoff.
-
Look at people like Lance Armstrong. After watching one documentary you just get the feeling the guy would do absolutely anything to win. If he were a businessman he would be Bernie Madoff.
Lance has the ultimate winners mentality. This video shows what a beast he was, at no point does he even consider failure:
-
Lance has the ultimate winners mentality. This video shows what a beast he was, at no point does he even consider failure:
Fuck the haters. Lance is an absolute legend.
-
Cheaters: no guts, no glory, no character, no honesty whatsoever...
-
Athletes in general.
The best of the best are usually super competitors. People with talent don't seem to be in the elite unless they are hungry for "more."
x1000.
It's always why I laugh when people romanticize the past players as "playing for the love of the game". They were super competitive too, and would have taken all the stuff they have today had it been available.
-
Captain Kirk cheated. Captain Kirk always wins.
-
This is the reason why I built my body without drugs.
-
This is the reason why I built my body without drugs.
It's also the reason you look like shit.
-
This is cheating:
(http://nattyornot.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/phil-heath-stepping-over-the-line-2012.jpg)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSlgnefOQA2RTYxZAh5MUhkjEAMoNPAPT-Ck8lBrRGrXsvOOm0Adg)
And yes, this is disgusting.
-
People are always willing to cross the line in life (think Phil Heath at the Olympia).
I really don't think sports are different than other aspects of life, they just mirror the culture; people are willing to do whatever it takes for whatever it is they want. The end justifies the means (think of all the ponzi schemes).
True !
Plus , the cheaters of old didn't get caught like today.
Consider that the old east German female track team set several world records in the 1970's -80's .
Later , official state documents revealed the proof of the systemic doping of their athletes.
BUT< they avoided getting busted along with plenty other juicers in many other sports.
The cheaters always existed and it's only recently we had the means to bust 'em and the extensive media to let everyone know.
-
True !
Plus , the cheaters of old didn't get caught like today.
Consider that the old east German female track team set several world records in the 1970's -80's .
Later , official state documents revealed the proof of the systemic doping of their athletes.
BUT< they avoided getting busted along with plenty other juicers in many other sports.
The cheaters always existed and it's only recently we had the means to bust 'em and the extensive media to let everyone know.
some of the old DDR athletes are now claiming they never knew what they were given...OK given that most were young and maybe under pressure... who knows.
-
I don't take kindly to disrespect. not on the internet, not in person, not in a grocery store parking lot, not in like at walmart, not in a restaurant, not at the beach, not at the dry cleaners... anywhere.
blahdy blah, blahdy blah, blahdy blah...
...the guy who's willing to go the furthest, wins. if you're not willing to go all the way, it's best you keep your mouth shut and move on, and make it to the next day....
You nut!! LOL ;D
-
BAY, I haven't had the chance to read beyond the first page of this topic, but we recently had the need to do some 'background research' about cheating in sports and discovered the following article someplace on the net which may be of interest to you and other GetBiggerrs who read this stuff .....
I hope you find it to be of interest .... (Sorry for the length of this article though.)
We live, for better or for worse, in a competition-driven world. Rivalry powers our economy, sparks technological innovation and encourages academic discovery. But it also compels people to manipulate the system and commit crimes. Some figure it’s just easier—and even acceptable—to cheat.
But what if instead of examining how people behave in a competitive setting, we wanted to understand the consequences of competition on their everyday behavior?
That is exactly what Amos Schurr, a business and management professor at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, and Ilana Ritov, a psychologist at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, discuss in a study in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“How can it be,” Schurr asks, “that successful, distinguished people—take [former New York State Gov.] Eliot Spitzer, who I think was a true civil servant when he started out his career with good intentions—turn corrupt?
At the same time, you have other successful people, like Mother Theresa, who don’t become corrupt.
What distinguishes between these two types of successful people?”
Schurr and Ritov found that when people win a competition in which success is measured by social comparison rather than by a fixed standard, they are more likely to engage in unrelated unethical behavior—in the case of this study, to cheat their peers out of money.
“We are the first to ask what happens to contestants and their behavior after a competition ends,” Schurr says, “and we found that competitions have long-lasting effects.”
The researchers performed a series of experiments to test these effects.
For the initial competition, they had groups of students take part in an estimation task.
The students were told that those who performed best at estimating the number of signs that flashed across a computer screen would be considered “winners”—and given a pair of earbuds as a prize.
In reality, however, winners were randomly assigned in order to avoid selection bias.
The students were then assigned another task, with a different payoff.
They were randomly split into pairs: one student was given two dice and a cup with a hole in the bottom, the other was told to simply watch.
The pair then played a game over 12 shekels (the equivalent of 12 quarters), in which the first student put the cup over the dice and shook it so that only he could see the results of the roll.
His outcome, between two and 12, would dictate how many shekels he could take; his partner would receive the remaining amount.
No one except Schurr and Ritov knew who had won or lost the initial competition.
Compared with a control group, in which the claimed payout was approximately seven, or the expected value (halfway between two and 12), students who had previously won the competition overclaimed the outcomes of their rolls and took in an average of 8.75 shekels.
“You should note that they’re not stealing from me, the researcher,” Schurr says. “They’re taking from their fellow students, from their friends.”
Schurr and Ritov repeated the dice-under-a-cup game after students participated in a number of other tasks in which “winning” was defined by different parameters.
The researchers found that competitive settings determine behavior.
“You have two types of success,” Schurr says. “One involves social comparison [as in the case of being a better estimator] and the other does not.
And when you measure success in terms of ‘how good am I’ in reference to other people, that’s when people may turn corrupt.”
For instance, participants were asked to recall either an experience in which they won a competition or a situation in which they met a specified goal.
The students who recalled winning a competition cheated in the subsequent dice-under-a-cup game whereas the students who recalled meeting a goal did not.
Similarly, participants who had simply won a lottery did not end up cheating when they reported the outcome of the dice roll but participants who had outplayed their peers in a trivia competition (again, controlled for selection bias) did later overclaim their winnings.
“When we win in competition, in particular when we establish we are above others in rank, we will feel more powerful,” says Dacher Keltner, a psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley who did not take part in the research.
“And dozens of studies have found that the simple feeling of power makes people feel above the scrutiny of others and act in impulsive, self-gratifying and unethical ways. Feelings of power, whether it comes from wealth, a person’s position in a hierarchical structure or in this case competition, can indeed lead to various abuses like lying and stealing.”
Schurr and Ritov attribute the cheating that occurred in their study to a number of possible psychological mechanisms, particularly entitlement.
Their study “ties into recent work that relates to the influence of social-economic status and its influence on ethical behavior,” says Shaul Shalvi, a behavioral economist at the University of Amsterdam who was not part of this study.
“People who are of higher status would break the rules more often.
So, for example, you’re more likely to see a very fancy car ignoring the red traffic light compared to the guy in the normal car because they apparently feel entitled. So it’s nice that this study links to that, because people of high status have probably had the experience of winning.”
Schurr plans to continue his line of research. “We could look at the other side of the coin and see how much competition winners contribute to society as a whole,” he says. “Instead of doing bad things, will people do good things after the competition ends?”
He also mentioned the possibility of better understanding gender differences in winner behavior. And it would no doubt be valuable to analyze real-world competitions.
“There’s always a trade-off between experimental control, which was high in this study, and the ability to generalize the findings,” Shalvi says. “So these experiments are very important and telling in clarifying underlying psychological mechanisms of the dark or dangerous consequences of competition.
But what still remains to be seen is whether these effects cannot also be seen when analyzing data from sport competitions and business-related competitions.
”If confirmed by such analyses, the research suggests that discouraging social comparisons and focusing instead on fixed goals might be a good way for organizations—from sport teams to businesses to governments—to reduce corruption.
(BAY, IF YOU GOT THIS FAR, I HOPE IT HELPED!)
IN A NUTSHELL IT SEEMS TO PROBE THAT POWER CORRUPTS!
-
It's also the reason you look like shit.
1+1=2 ;D
-
Fuck the haters. Lance is an absolute legend.
Did you see his interview with Joe Rogan? Its well worth a watch.
-
It's also the reason you look like shit.
Hahaha ;D
-
Did you see his interview with Joe Rogan? Its well worth a watch.
I watch almost every Joe Rogan podcast, with the exception of when he gets his mates on a regular basis. And yes, the Lance podcast was awesome. I hate the moralists and do-gooders, so someone like Lance is a hero to me.
-
It's also the reason you look like shit.
How can you take pride in what you have developed when you know it's dependent on drugs you inject in your butt every week? Don't you feel like a phony?
-
How can you take pride in what you have developed when you know it's dependent on drugs you inject in your butt every week? Don't you feel like a phony?
I've never used, but I'm guessing being stronger, leaner, looking better, and having the opportunity for copious amounts of pussy outweigh the small feelings of guilt.
-
I've never used, but I'm guessing being stronger, leaner, looking better, and having the opportunity for copious amounts of pussy outweigh the small feelings of guilt.
I have used, and confirm this 100%. Minus the guilt. Don't see the need in playing life on Hard Mode. Not getting an extra life because of it, so no guilt at all.
-
As a somewhat serious addendum: When 'on' your goals can also be inhuman. Unnaturally high hormones can be used for unnaturally high achievement.
-
How can you take pride in what you have developed when you know it's dependent on drugs you inject in your butt every week? Don't you feel like a phony?
I don't know, do women feel like phoneys when they colour their hair, wear makeup and jewelry and get silicone implants. Do men feel like phonies when they buy sports cars, wear power suits and stuff a sock down their pants. Everybody is an illusion in some way, we use clothes to highlight strengths and hide weaknesses, we groom ourselves to distract others from the fact we are filthy animals who defecate. I think you get the point, not only that, you can keep some of the gains you made on gear, it can change your body permanently in some ways. I mean you would tell an athlete who drank a bunch of coffee and ate healthy food to run faster that the extra speed he gained was fake. People are just looking for ways to sell their particular illusion to the world, steroids just happens to be another one of those ways.
-
I don't know, do women feel like phoneys when they colour their hair, wear makeup and jewelry and get silicone implants. Do men feel like phonies when they buy sports cars, wear power suits and stuff a sock down their pants. Everybody is an illusion in some way, we use clothes to highlight strengths and hide weaknesses, we groom ourselves to distract others from the fact we are filthy animals who defecate. I think you get the point, not only that, you can keep some of the gains you made on gear, it can change your body permanently in some ways. I mean you would tell an athlete who drank a bunch of coffee and ate healthy food to run faster that the extra speed he gained was fake. People are just looking for ways to sell their particular illusion to the world, steroids just happens to be another one of those ways.
Yada..Yada...rationaliza tions....
-
Yada..Yada...rationaliza tions....
This.
Pretty sad.
-
Yada..Yada...rationaliza tions....
Being rational is the only way forward. I have not seen a single rational argument against using steroids. The best (and only) argument the PED opposers can manage is 'it is against a completely arbitrary social construct'.
-
Being rational is the only way forward. I have not seen a single rational argument against using steroids. The best (and only) argument the PED opposers can manage is 'it is against a completely arbitrary social construct'.
As someone with genetically high cholesterol, I'm fearful of the blood thickening component.
-
I am not yet an old fossil, but when I look at people like Rosie Ruiz, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcgwire (google them) and now Tom Brady, I feel as if I am from another era. I know this sounds hopelessly old fashioned, but where is the satisfaction in “winning” if you know you cheated? How can that feel good or make you feel as if you have accomplished anything? Never mind the fans, the media, the investigative authorities, etc. You know you cheated! To make matters worse, when confronted instead of hanging their heads in shame and immediately taking responsibility these cheaters will stand in front of microphones indignant and lie with their last breath to insist they did not cheat. Only when exposed with hard, irrefutable evidence do they “confess” and admit to it all. It is not a confession if you were exposed. And you are certainly not "sorry" for anything other than getting caught.
I played many sports while growing up, but maybe I am missing some sports minded gene that allows these folks to rationalize their cheating. Do you understand it? Can you explain it to me? Some people even cheat in sports where there is no big contract or payday waiting for them. They cheat just to "beat" the other guy... even if it means winning dishonestly. Where is the satisfaction in that? ???
It's not cheating because the MAJORITY are doing the same thing and you have no chance
without PED's. The blanks that are there when Armstrong won his titles are filled with 2-10 placed guys who did exactly the same thing. There was a reason most of the track guys of the 1980's were getting braces mid-20's...cause the HGH of that time would spread your teeth apart; ect, ect...
-
It's not cheating because the MAJORITY are doing the same thing and you have no chance
without PED's.
Bullshit.
Cheating is cheating.
No matter how many ppl are doing it.
Lame excuse...
-
Its a poor argument to say that its not cheating because the majority of people are all using steroids or other types of PEDs.
The only way this would not be considered cheating is if every competitor took the same EXACT amount of PED's. Thus, the playing field would be equal.
The equivalent would be to give one bodybuilder competitor one type of PED, and another bodybuilder 5 different types of PEDs. Sure, both are using, but one clearly has the advantage over the other due to the amounts he/she is using.
As such, then it just becomes a competition of who could afford the best and most drugs, and who could ingest the most without dropping dead.
Conclusions:
The fact that the majority use PED's does not make it an equal playing field, nor does it negate the fact that they still may be cheating. As stated above, the only way to make this a nonissue is to provide all players with the same amount of illegal substances. Obviously, this cannot be accomplished.
-
Its a poor argument to say that its not cheating because the majority of people are all using steroids or other types of PEDs.
The only way this would not be considered cheating is if every competitor took the same EXACT amount of PED's. Thus, the playing field would be equal.
The equivalent would be to give one bodybuilder competitor one type of PED, and another bodybuilder 5 different types of PEDs. Sure, both are using, but one clearly has the advantage over the other due to the amounts he/she is using.
As such, then it just becomes a competition of who could afford the best and most drugs, and who could ingest the most without dropping dead.
Conclusions:
The fact that the majority use PED's does not make it an equal playing field, nor does it negate the fact that they still may be cheating. As stated above, the only way to make this a nonissue is to provide all players with the same amount of illegal substances. Obviously, this cannot be accomplished.
There is no such thing as a level playing field. Remove drugs and the guy who still wins, wins because he has some advantage over the competition, whether it be strategic, intellectual, physical, genetic etc. Nobody calls the tallest basketballers cheats because they have an unfair advantage, that's just the way the world works. The fact is the majority of people are losers, that's why there's so much noise about cheating, as losers they identify with being bullied and beaten and throw a hissy fit whenever they see winners.
-
As someone with genetically high cholesterol, I'm fearful of the blood thickening component.
From a health perspective that may be a valid concern. But clearly we are not discussing health here.
-
There is no such thing as a level playing field. Remove drugs and the guy who still wins, wins because he has some advantage over the competition, whether it be strategic, intellectual, physical, genetic etc. Nobody calls the tallest basketballers cheats because they have an unfair advantage, that's just the way the world works. The fact is the majority of people are losers, that's why there's so much noise about cheating, as losers they identify with being bullied and beaten and throw a hissy fit whenever they see winners.
You're right, but at least those attributes are all natural ones. You can't help that. Further, I am reluctant to agree that someone would still win if you removed PEDs. Clearly, PED's gives one an advantage over another person, especially if one is natural and the other is juicing, or one is taking A LOT more than the other one.
However, you can help how much one competitor sticks PED's into their body when compared to another competitor.
You can't control EVERY variable to level the playing field. Thus, you try to control what variables you can control, which are PED's.
Its the same thing with research. Researchers are always trying to control for extraneous variables that may limit the validity/reliability of their study/results. Similarly, you try to control any extraneous variables (PEDs) that may interfere with generalizing the results to pure talent alone.
Its not a perfect system, but it is what it is.
-
From a health perspective that may be a valid concern. But clearly we are not discussing health here.
I hear you, but no getbig topic stays on point after a few pages.....
-
I hear you, but no getbig topic stays on point after a few pages.....
I blame the hebrews. Also islam is a cancer. Socialism is murder. Nasser should have won the Olympia.
;)
-
You're right, but at least those attributes are all natural ones. You can't help that. Further, I am reluctant to agree that someone would still win if you removed PEDs. Clearly, PED's gives one an advantage over another person, especially if one is natural and the other is juicing, or one is taking A LOT more than the other one.
However, you can help how much one competitor sticks PED's into their body when compared to another competitor.
You can't control EVERY variable to level the playing field. Thus, you try to control what variables you can control, which are PED's.
Its the same thing with research. Researchers are always trying to control for extraneous variables that may limit the validity/reliability of their study/results. Similarly, you try to control any extraneous variables (PEDs) that may interfere with generalizing the results to pure talent alone.
Its not a perfect system, but it is what it is.
'Natural' is a slippery slope. What about selective breeding of athletes? Could be done all natural, yet could still be considered tampering.
-
'Natural' is a slippery slope. What about selective breeding of athletes? Could be done all natural, yet could still be considered tampering.
Like I said, you can't control for EVERY extraneous variable that may arise in competition that tips the advantage for some athletes compared to another athlete.
But the one thing you can control for is whether or not an athlete is taking PED's. They control this, so no one athlete is given an edge over another athlete. And its obvious that PEDs gives people advantages.
And in many sports, they do control for extraneous variables, such as weight and height. Which is why in boxing there are different weight classes, to control for height and weight, which is probably correlated with strength and power. This is why someone who weighs 130 pounds doesn't fight someone who is 250 pounds.
These variables are controlled for in order to level the playing field. And this is why PEDs are banned.
-
I thought they all used drugs, the 'cheaters' are just the one's who get caught ???
-
Being rational is the only way forward. I have not seen a single rational argument against using steroids. The best (and only) argument the PED opposers can manage is 'it is against a completely arbitrary social construct'.
This x2.
Well said.
Cheating - Man trying to find ways to improve -
Let's all revert back to 1st men on the planet times
And then we can stop this cheating - improving - advancing.
It is human nature that is why we are where we are now
( for good or bad ) and it will continue as long as there are
Humans.
-
Being rational is the only way forward. I have not seen a single rational argument against using steroids. The best (and only) argument the PED opposers can manage is 'it is against a completely arbitrary social construct'.
Like all drug prohibitions it's the moralists that impose their will on others. There is something deeply perverse about those who seek to dictate what other adults can and cannot ingest into their own bodies. The moralists have fucked the world, this is why I say the do-gooders are the most dangerous people on the planet. I am reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis
-
Like all drug prohibitions it's the moralists that impose their will on others. There is something deeply perverse about those who seek to dictate what other adults can and cannot ingest into their own bodies. The moralists have fucked the world, this is why I say the do-gooders are the most dangerous people on the planet. I am reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis
Yet another great answer.
That's such a good & truthful quote.
-
Like all drug prohibitions it's the moralists that impose their will on others. There is something deeply perverse about those who seek to dictate what other adults can and cannot ingest into their own bodies. The moralists have fucked the world, this is why I say the do-gooders are the most dangerous people on the planet. I am reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis
I don't think he was referring to drug cheats..Not taking steroids is tyranny?...lol
-
I don't think he was referring to drug cheats..Not taking steroids is tyranny?...lol
You aren't too bright are you? Not taking anything is never a tyranny, punishing adults for choosing what they can and can't put in their body is. :o
And I can't help but think of this old cliche when i read your posts.
"There is no fool like an OLD fool"
And he was referring to ALL Do-Gooders in whatever form they take.
-
Like I said, you can't control for EVERY extraneous variable that may arise in competition that tips the advantage for some athletes compared to another athlete.
But the one thing you can control for is whether or not an athlete is taking PED's. They control this, so no one athlete is given an edge over another athlete. And its obvious that PEDs gives people advantages.
And in many sports, they do control for extraneous variables, such as weight and height. Which is why in boxing there are different weight classes, to control for height and weight, which is probably correlated with strength and power. This is why someone who weighs 130 pounds doesn't fight someone who is 250 pounds.
These variables are controlled for in order to level the playing field. And this is why PEDs are banned.
Your argument is based on a false premise, i.e. that drug testing works. It doesn't, and quite demonstrably so. You also skirt by the genetic aspect of breeding for improved performance. This could easily affect fiber type distribution, tendon attachments, limb length, VO2max, etc., all making your weight class statement irrelevant.
-
Like all drug prohibitions it's the moralists that impose their will on others. There is something deeply perverse about those who seek to dictate what other adults can and cannot ingest into their own bodies. The moralists have fucked the world, this is why I say the do-gooders are the most dangerous people on the planet. I am reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis
Well said. At least my conscience is clean: I have been pro choice even when I competed against users. It is their choice to do so, and it should be my choice whether it is worth it to me to level the playing field or not.
-
Swim, Bike, Cheat?
by Sarah Lyall
SQUAMISH, British Columbia — The race was tough and the conditions dreadful — 2.4 miles of swimming, 112 miles of cycling and 26.2 miles of running, mostly in freezing rain — but Susanne Davis crossed the Ironman Canada finish line last July certain that she had won her category, women aged 40-44.
Davis, who comes from Carlsbad, Calif., and is one of the top triathletes in her age group in the world, had been first out of the water and first off her bike — she was sure of it. Spectators using a mobile phone race app that shows competitors’ relative positions called out encouragement, telling her she was ahead by a comfortable 10 minutes. As she ran, Davis looked out for rivals, asking the age of every woman she passed or who passed her, and encountered none from her age group.
Yet there she was, accepting the medal for second place at the awards ceremony the next day, five minutes behind a Canadian triathlete named Julie Miller who seemed to have materialized from nowhere and somehow won the race.
Miller, the mother of two young daughters, is a mental-health counselor specializing in body-image disorders here in Squamish. She is also a serious triathlete with a long record of success. Before last year’s race, in Whistler, she had also won her division in the 2013 Ironman Canada, the 2014 Vancouver Triathlon and the 2014 Long Course World Championships in Weihai, China, where she competed for Canada and where her win briefly made her the world champion for her age group.
Davis knew none of that. All she knew was that in more than three hours of hyperconscious running, she had not seen Miller once.
The winners were announced: Julie Miller first, Susanne Davis second. “She didn’t come down and shake our hands,” said Davis, speaking of Miller. “In my entire 20 years of racing, I’ve never had that happen. That’s when I looked at her and said, ‘Gosh, I didn’t see you. Where did you pass me?’”
Miller replied that she had been easily recognizable in her bright green socks and then all but ran off the awards stage, Davis said, telling Davis that she would see her at the world championships in Kona, Hawaii.
Davis compared notes with the third- and fourth-place finishers. They, too, were mystified. They had not seen Miller on the course, either.
This odd series of events eventually touched off an extraordinary feat of forensic detective work by a group of athletes who were convinced that Miller had committed what they consider the triathlon’s worst possible transgression. They believed she had deliberately cut the course and then lied about it.
Dissatisfied with the response of race officials, they methodically gathered evidence from the minutiae of her record — official race photographs, timing data, photographs from spectators along the routes, the accounts of other competitors and volunteers who saw, or did not see, Miller at various points. Much of it suggested that Miller simply could not have completed some segments of the race in the times she claimed, and all of it raised grave questions about the integrity of her results at Whistler and other races.
Miller, they concluded, was triathlon’s version of Rosie Ruiz, the infamous runner who won the 1980 Boston Marathon in a stunningly fast time but was later found to have run only a fraction of the race. Just as Ruiz did back then, Miller has repeatedly insisted that she completed the course fairly, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Three weeks after winning Ironman Canada, Miller was disqualified from the race, her time erased, her first-place finish voided. Soon after, she was disqualified from two previous races that she had also won. Officials are investigating her 2014 victory in China. Triathlon Canada has barred her from competing for the next two years, citing “repeated rule violations,” while Ironman has barred her indefinitely from its competitions.
“We can’t prove what happened on the course in Ironman Canada in 2015, or what her intent was,” the regional director for Ironman, Keats McGonigal, said in an interview. “People can make their own judgments and decisions. But what we can prove is that it would have been impossible for her to be at specific points at specific times and still get to the finish line when she did.”
Miller denies it all, in the most emphatic tones. She says that she is the victim of a smear campaign by envious, spiteful athletes who cannot cope with her success and high profile and that the only thing she did wrong, besides winning too often, was to lose her timing chip in a couple of races.
“I did not cheat in the Whistler Ironman competition,” she said in an email, “nor would I ever cheat or have I ever cheated in any competition.”
There are a lot of ways to cheat in sports, of course, and the most notorious is probably doping, whose methods become ever more subtle and complex even as officials devise ever more sophisticated ways to spot them. But runners and long-distance competitors — marathoners, cyclists, triathletes — reserve a special circle of contempt, and feel a special sort of outrage, for athletes who deliberately cut courses, covering only part of the distance while claiming they covered it all.
“My readers think that doping is reprehensible, but that cutting the course is worse, almost incomprehensible,” said Dan Empfield, a triathlete who runs Slowtwitch, a company whose website includes an influential web forum for triathletes. “At least if you dope, you’re still trying to win the race by actually completing it.”
For weeks last fall, Miller’s case was topic No. 1 on the Slowtwitch forum. At times the conversation became so vicious and angry that Empfield had to take down posts and instruct contributors not to make personal attacks.
“They’re emotionally and financially invested in this sport,” Empfield said of triathletes. “When someone cuts a course, they feel highly violated. From their point of view, it’s tearing at the fabric of trust required to have a sport at all.”
Since Ruiz, there have been other prominent examples of athletes cheating their way through races. In Britain, for instance, the man who took third place in the 2011 Kielder Marathon, Rob Sloan, did not run the entire distance, but took the bus part of the way. “Witnesses reported seeing him hide behind a tree until the first and second placed runners went past,” The Daily Telegraph reported, “then rejoining the race behind them.”
In the United States, perhaps the most egregious case in recent years was that of Kip Litton. Litton, a Michigan dentist in his 40s, was a champion marathon runner who claimed to regularly run marathons in under three hours and who was, he said, setting some sort of record by completing marathons in all 50 states. Neither assertion was correct, but give him points for effort. Once, he went so far as to invent a fake marathon in Wyoming, complete with a fake website, fake competitors, fake race officials and a fake winner (himself).
(He, too, has always claimed that he finished all the courses fairly.)
Whatever the circumstances, such stories inevitably leave many questions unanswered. What motivates athletes who seem to cheat systematically, with forethought and planning, rather than, say, indulging in one-off opportunistic lapses? How can they justify it to themselves? And how, exactly, did they pull it off?
“It doesn’t really make any sense,” said Claire Young, of Kelowna, B.C., who, after Miller was ultimately disqualified, took second place in Ironman Canada. “Most of us are essentially racing against ourselves. There’s no money and no glory. It’s just a hobby, and if you cheat, who are you cheating? You’re only cheating yourself.”
The difference between cheating in 1980 and cheating today is that it’s much harder to get away with now. What trips up contemporary cheaters, Empfield said, is their false assumption that the only thing they have to worry about is their timing chip, the device they wear that records their time at various points along a course.
But the use of additional technology — especially the ubiquitous course photos taken by spectators and professional photographers, which provide a wealth of information about athletes’ positions and times throughout a race — makes it difficult for people to cover their tracks after the fact.
“What these people don’t understand is that the photos contain so much data — they don’t know that this exists,” Empfield said of cheaters. “They think that if they hide in the bushes and re-emerge or take the chip off or whatever, they’re in the clear. But the problem is that people can now forensically recreate your race.”
Ruiz was unknown in the marathon world, possibly troubled and motivated by reasons that are still obscure. She apparently made no real effort to run the race she claimed to have won, other than spontaneously emerging toward the end of the course to cross the finish line first. But Miller is a serious athlete with many years of competing behind her, and a long and, until now, distinguished record of turning in competitive and even winning times, not just in triathlons but also in mountain bike races and other events.
“If she’s really guilty of these acts, she was especially good at this, because she was doing it for years,” Empfield said.
Here in Squamish, a city whose spectacular natural beauty makes it a mecca for athletes and whose small size ensures that people know one another’s business, Miller is considered an outgoing, upbeat person and a passionate sportswoman who has made competing central to her life.
Miller has never been a professional triathlete, and at the time of Ironman Canada last summer she wasn’t particularly well known in the greater triathlon world. But with her many responsibilities — she also runs a company that helps new parents deal with babies’ sleep problems — Miller had established herself as a minor celebrity in town, an inspirational, warm, sympathetic woman who could apparently handle it all: work, motherhood, training and high-level sports competition.
“There was a crowd of girls who almost hero-worshiped her,” said Sheena Harris, a triathlete in Squamish. “She had a full-time job, ran her own business, trained full time — she was always killing it.”
With the help of PowHERhouse, a brand-building website that promotes female athletes, Miller had elevated her profile, establishing herself as a prominent local role model. (In 2014, PowHERhouse called her “an emerging rockstar in the world of triathlons.”) Local businesses sponsored her and gave her discounts on equipment; she set up a Facebook page to raise air miles for her ticket to China in 2014; she spread a public message of positivity and determination for other women.
Emotions here are still so raw on the subject of Miller that many people interviewed — other athletes, race volunteers and spectators, social acquaintances — refused to allow their names to be used in this article. Some said they were afraid of running into Miller in town; others said that Miller had responded to criticism so aggressively that they were leery of being bad-mouthed or even sued if they raised questions about her conduct. Even people who feel sympathetic toward her said they did not want to be seen speaking publicly about a subject so fraught.
“As a person, she’s really great — she’s a really nice person,” said a cyclist who knows her from their informal cycling training group, 100 or so people who ride together once a week. “She’s a strong rider, a little firecracker, and she was really positive and got a lot of people interested in the sport.”
The friend said that when the revelations came out, they divided the community as people debated whether something so grave could possibly be true. A lot of people turned against Miller, he said, gossiping and using the opportunity “to crucify her, to spread a lot of information about her, whether true or not, that was harmful and hurtful.”
Since last fall, Miller has not come riding with the other bikers in the group, he said, leaving them mystified about what exactly she did, confused about her state of mind and deeply frustrated. She has, he said, never offered a plausible explanation of what happened.
Questions swirled around Miller’s performance as soon as she crossed the finish line at Ironman Canada, on July 26, 2015. The race was held in Whistler, a site of the 2010 Winter Olympics just north of Squamish. The day had begun with heavy, freezing rain, and many athletes had dropped out, defeated by the conditions.
But Miller stayed, finishing in 10 hours 49 minutes 3 seconds, a time recorded manually by an official positioned at the finish line and confirmed by photographs and video images of her crossing it.
There was a problem, though: she was missing her timing chip.
Ironman athletes are required to wear timing chips, affixed to Velcro straps they usually wrap around their ankles. The chips are recognized electronically at timing mats positioned along the course, recording an athlete’s time at those points (the interim times are known as splits). Although the Velcro straps sometimes come off, it is practically unheard of for the chip to become dislodged from the strap.
But Miller’s somehow did.
Miller said that the chip had come off as she changed her clothes during the bike-to-run transition, when, apparently, she took off the Velcro strap and then put it back on over her socks. Race records show that, indeed, her chip had recorded a time of 7:17:50 at the end of the bike ride, before going silent.
According to Ironman rules, no chip means no time. Miller was on the verge of being disqualified.
After the triathlon, Claire Young went to a coffee shop in Whistler with her husband, James, also an Ironman athlete. She had finished the race in 11:06:24, right behind Susanne Davis. As far as she had been told, Miller had beaten them both. The Youngs were discussing how odd this seemed when they were interrupted by a woman at a nearby table.
“She said, ‘Are you talking about Julie Miller?’” James Young said in an interview. “‘I’m from the same town as her, and there’s no way she won that race.’”
Later that night, the official results, posted online, showed that Miller had been disqualified. Word got out that she had had some kind of issue with her timing chip. “It didn’t even cross our minds that there might be foul play,” James Young said.
But athletes can plead for reinstatement under special circumstances. That’s what Miller did the next morning, hours before the official awards ceremony. In a confrontation with McGonigal, the Ironman regional director, she argued that losing her chip had been an unfortunate accident that should not disqualify her from the race. He believed her, he said in an interview, because she seemed so sympathetic, and because parts of her story checked out.
For one thing, he said, volunteers at aid stations along the course confirmed Miller’s claim that she had mentioned the missing chip to them when she ran by. Also, when he examined her winning times in two previous races — Ironman Canada in 2013, and the 2014 long-course world championships in China — he found them to be consistent with her 2015 finish.
“Based on previous results, could this athlete have completed the course in 10 hours 49 minutes?” McGonigal said he asked himself. He concluded that she could.
“So based on all of that, I made the decision to insert her in the results,” he explained. That meant she won her age group and, more important, qualified for the world championships in Kona.
The awards ceremony took place at Whistler’s Olympic Plaza, and three women — Susanne Davis, Claire Young and Marla Zucht — arrived believing that they had taken the first three spots in their division. No one had told them that Miller had successfully argued her way back into first place.
The winners were announced, in reverse order. “Fifth place, fourth place,” James Young recalled, “and then they say, ‘Third place, Claire Young; second place, Susanne Davis; first place … Julie Miller.’”
Puzzled, Young, Davis, and Zucht accepted their awards. “Julie didn’t say anything or shake anyone’s hand — she literally ran off the stage,” James Young said. That’s when Davis confronted her. “Susanne grabbed her shoulder and said, ‘Where did you pass me? I was looking for everyone in the age group and I would have seen you.’
“For a triathlete to say that to another triathlete is a very serious thing,” he continued, “and it’s what made me think that there’s more to this than meets the eye.”
Indeed, few people who had been paying close attention seemed to think that Miller had legitimately won the race the day before. As they replayed the race in their minds, they found things that did not add up. Some spectators and volunteers said in interviews, for instance, said they had seen Miller running slowly, outpaced by speedier runners, near the start of the marathon, and wondered how she could have made up for all that lost time.
The marathon course covers varied terrain – woods, a beach, a residential neighborhood – and comprises two distinct parts, a loop and then an out-and-back section in which athletes retrace their steps. Each athlete runs the whole thing twice. Some spectators who said they were specifically looking for Squamish athletes to cheer on said that in places where they would have expected to see Miller several times, they had seen her just once.
A few days later, people connected to the race began receiving emails from an anonymous sender identified as “Honest Athlete.” The messages cast doubt on Miller’s performance and cited evidence that seemed to suggest something was awry. Other athletes, including James Young, began to investigate further, digging deep into the record.
Among other things, Young studied the images taken by cameras positioned along the course and posted on race websites. They proved to be invaluable, because they showed where various athletes were in relation to each other at particular times in the race.
He found startling anomalies.
Because Miller had no timing chip, there was no official record of her marathon split times, which would have shown her progress in the race. But some of the photographs showed her running near other athletes who did have timing chips, providing contemporaneous evidence for what time she reached various points in the race.
One series of photographs Young found had been taken at a timing mat that athletes crossed on the first lap of the marathon, at about the 1.4-mile mark, and again on the second lap, at the 13.8-mile mark.
The photos showed that Miller and four other athletes, all men, had reached the spot at about the same time, between 8:43:33 and 8:44:07 into the race.
Timing chip records show that two of the men were on the first lap of the marathon and the other two were already running their second lap, having completed the swim and the bike portions much more quickly and started the marathon sooner. But what about Miller? Was she crossing that point in the marathon course for the first or second time? In other words, was she 1.4 miles or 13.8 miles into the course?
Miller’s last official time, recorded when she was still wearing her timing chip, showed that she finished the bike portion 7:17:50 into the race. Allowing her an additional three minutes to change into her running gear, that indicated that she had begun the marathon at a time of about 7:20:50.
Miller, then, had reached the spot where the photos were taken about 1 hour 27 minutes into her run. If she had run 1.4 miles in that time, it would have been at an absurdly slow pace, slower than a casual stroll. If she had run 13.8 miles, it would have been at a prohibitively swift pace, faster even than most professional men. (The overall race winner, Viktor Zyemtsev, ran the same distance in 1:30:13, the fastest recorded run split that day.)
“It’s a ridiculous, beyond-male-professional, world-class, winning-the-world-championship pace,” James Young said.
In interviews, competitors and volunteers said that as they looked back on past races, they recalled things that had made them suspicious about Miller’s performances. But they had never said anything, they explained, because they had not wanted to make such a grave accusation against a fellow athlete.
An aid-station volunteer from Squamish who was cheering on local athletes in the 2013 Ironman Canada race, for instance, said that based on her position and the number of times she saw Miller, it looked as if Miller had failed to complete all the laps. She thought she might be mistaken. But it happened again in 2015 — she saw Miller just once, when she would have expected to see her twice.
“I thought, ‘Twice in a row?’” the volunteer said. She submitted a report to Ironman officials.
Back in Squamish, Sheena Harris, who had raced against Miller before and had occasionally been with her in groups that trained together, was also experiencing serious doubts.
Miller had beaten Harris in the Ironman in 2013 under what seemed at the time to be dubious circumstances. Miller had apparently started one of the out-and-back sections of the course ahead of Harris, but Harris, who knew she was gaining on Miller because of what spectators told her, had not seen her anywhere.
“It was just a feeling; I had no proof,” Harris said. “‘I went to my coach and she said, ‘Sheena, zip it.’”
As a spectator in the 2015 race, Harris had looked out for Miller and other Squamish athletes, and she, too, suspected that Miller had not completed all the laps. She saw everyone else when she would have expected to see them, but she did not see Miller. “Nothing added up,” she said.
Angry that Miller’s win had denied another athlete a spot at the world championships in Kona, Harris was one of the athletes who contacted race officials and told them of her suspicions.
“I wanted to know how they could give someone a first spot in Kona who should have been disqualified,” she said. “It’s about fairness in the sport, and there was no way for me to say nothing. I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that she had cheated...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/sports/julie-miller-ironman-triathlon-cheat.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
-
scum.
-
scum.
But... but... but!!! Aw, shucks! >:(
-
people who win don't sit around feeling guilty about it. nor do they care how the losers feel about it. if they did they wouldn't be winners.
-
Lost timing chip of peace
The "body image specialist" (::)) looks much too fat to win a race like that.