Cheating in sports

[gumpzilla]

There's a really interesting article on Salon right now. King Kaufman interviews Derek Zumsteg, author of "The Cheaters Guide to Baseball." Here's a link. One excerpt from the interview:

[ QUOTE ]

One of the things that baseball's going to have to face is the same thing the Olympics have had to face, and every other competitive sport. It's that the advances in training and medicine technology allow players to do things that they would not be able to do normally, and in some cases you say they're good, like Tommy John surgery.

But players using HGH [human growth hormone], for instance, is considered performance-enhancing drugs and cheating. But then you're just replacing the normal level of hormones that decrease over time. That's clearly a little strange.

[/ QUOTE ]

This captures a lot of how I feel these days about things like steroids and so forth; it just seems like a relatively arbitary line drawn between what types of technology/nutrition are going to be accepted, and what aren't.

Anyway, mostly I just thought it was a read people would enjoy , but I'm curious if anybody else has similar attitudes.

[kolotoure]

If athletes want to shorten there life by taking steroids let them

[ThaSaltCracka]

I am actually curious to see what sports are like in 20 years. My guess is they won't resemble sports today at all. The NFL is pretty much way beyond anything normal as it is.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Maury Wills provides a great example. When he was in his prime and stealing bases like crazy, teams would water the base paths, they would put sand out there so he couldn't get a good jump, they'd do anything they could to make it harder for Maury Wills to run.

[/ QUOTE ]

First for some reason this kind of reminds me of when the Masters lengthened the course to try and handicap Tiger. Unfortunately they were ignorant and forgot that if they lengthened it for Tiger they lengthened it for the rest of the field therefore it didn't work. They should have just put in a "Tiger tee box."


Here's a question: If some players are taking HGH/Steroids and some aren't it is obviously cheating b/c the playing field isn't level, this is clear. So if everyone, 100% of the league uses HGH/Steroids is it now cheating?

*note* I am not condoning anything, its just a question.

[tuq]

[ QUOTE ]
I am actually curious to see what sports are like in 20 years. My guess is they won't resemble sports today at all. The NFL is pretty much way beyond anything normal as it is.

[/ QUOTE ]
Am I, a relatively passive observer when it comes to most sports (just don't care enough to make a lot of wagers, crunch stats, etc.), accurate in assuming that the staggering growth of athletes is going to become an increasingly big issue, particularly in high contact sports like football? What I mean is, these players are getting bigger, stronger, faster, hitting harder, etc., but their ankles and joints aren't really getting any more durable. Is this accurate? If so this is really bad news for the NFL.

[Jack of Arcades]

I don't imagine players will be getting much bigger than they are currently. Maybe taller.

[BreakfastBurrito]

[ QUOTE ]
This captures a lot of how I feel these days about things like steroids and so forth; it just seems like a relatively arbitary line drawn between what types of technology/nutrition are going to be accepted, and what aren't.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've felt this way for a long time and am still not entirely clear on why steroids are considered cheating. Is it something about the mechanisms they target to transform the bodies of the athletes that is considered cheating, or just the fact that they have harmful side effects? If more research was done and it was shown that steroids could be safely administered would they be legalized?

Isn't the whole concept of a natural level playing field kind of ridiculous anyway? Most of us accept that the majority of world class athletes in any sport are genetically superior freaks. All doping rules do is maintain their naturally unfair advantage. If anything, swinging the door wide open to any and all supplements or genetic treatments seems like the best way to level the playing field.

[droopy0021]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I, a relatively passive observer when it comes to most sports (just don't care enough to make a lot of wagers, crunch stats, etc.), accurate in assuming that the staggering growth of athletes is going to become an increasingly big issue, particularly in high contact sports like football? What I mean is, these players are getting bigger, stronger, faster, hitting harder, etc., but their ankles and joints aren't really getting any more durable. Is this accurate? If so this is really bad news for the NFL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Health post-NFL has been an issue and will continue to be. And not just knees/joints.

NFL Mortality

[tdarko]

My Burrito Brother,

The whole level playing field train of thought is an extremely fine line to begin with. If you are basing steroids as wrong b/c of this and only this then you have only some argument b/c level playing field is only "some" of the problem. The reason is that the entire goal of an athlete in the offseason is to unlevel the playing field so to speak. Of course naturally and w/o cheating. The way you become great in athletics is by figuring out ways to get yourself ready for the season in ways that others aren't. Once you are at the level many of these athletes are at there isn't much talent separating them and it becomes the little things that does. Many have chosen illegal ways to separate themselves and this is when you have a problem.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Once you are at the level many of these athletes are at there isn't much talent separating them and it becomes the little things that does. Many have chosen illegal ways to separate themselves and this is when you have a problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

The entire argument, in my opinion, is about why those things should be illegal in the first place (by the rules of the game, that is; steroids as real-life illegal complicates things a bit). What makes training for several hours a day and taking crazy nutritional supplements more acceptable than taking steroids? Both seem, in some sense, unnatural, at least to me anyway. Again, another good example from the Salon article was creatine. Zumsteg points out that you could get the same amount of creatine in normal supplements by eating several pounds of meat a day. Does that make creatine supplements natural, or unnatural, and should they be legal or not?