I AM PROOF THAT THIS IS A PERFORMANCE ENHANCER.

DQ at Philly!  We have evidence!

The appropriate question is not, "would you cheat?"  The appropriate question is, "how high do the stakes need to be in order for you to cheat?"  If your life, or the life of your child was on the line, you'd cheat without blinking.  Thus, you would cheat.

 

I would cheat if not cheating meant a life in poverty and cheating meant I could make millions.  You might choose poverty (although you might think differently if you had grown up poor in a third world country).  My guess is that most people when faced with that choice will choose to cheat.  My guess is that an even higher percentage will cheat if they assume that their fellow competitors are cheating.  It is easier to be morally pure when your livelihood isn't on the line.

 

(I have a friend who left competitive body building specifically because he knew he couldn't be competitive at higher levels without taking drugs.  Mind you, this was back in the late 80's/early 90's when he made that decision and testing regimens were non-existent then.  I don't know about today).

When you said you'd cheat, I assumed you meant you, an American man living in the US. Not an African man from a poor village. I can understand why a poor man would want to risk his honor to improve the life of his family, but I'm not sure that this applies to anyone of us in North America. We all have a choice. We can't all be millionaires, but few of us are starving here... When an athlete cheats in America, he is stealing the prize money from the one competitor who did not cheat. It may not be the second best, or the third best. Maybe all top ten were cheaters, even. But somewhere down that ladder, there was an athlete who did not cheat. And he was robbed of his prize and livelihood...

I'll accept Lily's premise and I'd still cheat.

Let's assume I'm an American runner and I'm on the edge living with 4 other runners in a group home, eking out a living as a runner, maybe working part time in a running store and I have a few endorsements.  OTOH, I have a degree and when I decide to give this up, I'll make a decent living.  I'll never be rich but I won't starve either.  Then, someone gives me a choice.

I learn all about the testing protocols.  I know all of the weaknesses in the system and (just to make it equal with the Kenyans), the American anti-doping program isn't terribly robust in the first place.  I have the underlying talent but I haven't been willing to take the drugs yet.  If I do, here's the deal.  I'll probably make a million a year in appearance fees and prize winnings.  I'll make at least that much again in endorsements and motivational speaking.  I have the chance to make 8-10 million in the next 5 years.  There is, of course, a catch.

I stand roughly a 10% chance of getting caught each year.  Obviously, the longer I keep cheating, the more likely it is that I'll get caught.  Of course, the longer I keep cheating, the more money I'll make.  Still worth it.  I have the opportunity to ensure that, not only do my children never have to worry about paying for a college education or making the down payment on their first home, neither do my grandchildren.  I can protect that money in third party administered trusts for them.  I can ensure the financial stability of my family for at least two generations and maybe three generations if the trusts are administered well.

I'm probably the least sentimental person you'll ever meet but I have a profound belief that it is my responsibility to do everything I can to give my children every advantage I can give them in life.  If setting up my family in that way means that I'll be called a bunch of names by random strangers on the interwebs, meh, I can live with that every day of the week.

Would I take PED's to get my marathon time under 2:55 or to get my 5K under 17:00?  Nope.  Not a chance.  I recognize that those drugs have side effects to my health.  Beyond that, nobody  but me will ever give a rat's ass whether my marathon PR is 2:54:42 or 2:59:42.  Hell, my family doesn't even care.  I ecognize that taking PED's is cheating and I want whatever PR's I get to be honest.  I wouldn't take PED's anymore than I'd cut the course.  I still have to look at myself in the mirror and live with my choices.  But, if those choices involved ensuring the financial security of my family for a couple of generations, then I could look at myself and be content.

It's clear that both Lance and Rita only had two options:

1.  Cheat and make millions

2. Play by the rules and starve to death, while their children roam the streets begging for scraps.

Hummmm.  More trolling by the champion troll,

But Brad, didn't you think it was wrong to bandit in Boston? I don't know you very well, but something tells me that what you're saying here is all BS. You are a better man than you want to admit. You'd find another way to provide for your family if it came down to that. But hey... say what you want... If you want me to think of you as a would-be cheater, I will! (but I really won't )

Rewards vs. risks.  There are no rewards for cheating at Boston just to get on the course.  You're not even an official finisher.  The rewards for cutting a course are exceedingly minimal.  OK.  So I finish a few minutes faster.  Who cares?  Nobody.  Maybe I get an AG award.  Who cares?  Nobody.

The risks for a recreational athlete with PED's aren't that you'd get caught.  No one drug tests recreational athletes and I have run on more than a few courses where it would be easy to cut a block.  The risks for the recreational athlete, in terms of PED's are health risks.  But, we're not getting paid for this.  Getting an AG medal can, in no value system, be considered worth the health risks associated with PED's.  There are also risks involved with cutting the course as runners who do that sometimes get caught and banned from further competition.  In other words, the rewards for cheating at the recreational level range from minimal to non-existent.  The risks aren't terribly high but they are significant.  The professional level is different.

Athletes at the top of many sports make a shit ton of money.  The median salary of an MLB player is $1.1 million.  If the median is $1,1 million then, by definition, half of them make less than that.  Clayton Kershaw will make over $30 million.  A slew of players, including Alex Rodriguez, will make around $25 million.  If you look at performance differentials between the guys making $25 million and the guys making $1.1 million, it's probably around 5%.  That's it.  Perform 5% better and increase your salary by 2,000-3,000%.

Professional runners make nowhere near that kind of money.  The majority of "professional" runners are barely scraping by.  Many of them live in group homes and just survive.  However, the top runners in the world make six figures just from sponsors and that's in this country.  I'm sure in Kenya and Ethiopia, where distance runners are treated like baseball or football players in this country, they can make much more.  Regardless, a small percentage improvement in their performance, just as with baseball players, can equal a 500-1,000% increase in earnings.  Yes, you risk getting caught but the risk is fairly small.  Never forget that Lance Armstrong never had a positive test.  Never.  I don't think  A-Rod ever had a positive test either.

The bottom line is this.  If you told most athletes that they could increase their salaries by 1,000% by taking PED's, their risk of getting caught was low, and, oh by the way, many of your competitors will be taking them so you have zero chance of being at the absolute top level if you don't take PED's, well then, many would take them.

I think I effectively established that anyone would cheat if the reward (saving your life or a family member's life) were high enough.  The question then becomes, is money a sufficient motivation for cheating?

I should note that I love this kind of stuff.  It's the reason I so look forward to teaching my debate class.  I pick the topics and I assign students to debate one side or the other of a topic and they don't get to pick which side they're on.  PED's raise all kinds of wonderful ethical issues that are deceptively simple at the outset and devilishly complex once you begin to unravel all of the subtleties.

 

I agree that nothing is ever either black or white. I also enjoy these types of debates. We grow from them.

That's why I listen to opposite party talk shows. I learn where the party flaws are when I miss something or gives me a way to look differently at a situation.

As for PED's if I was an MLB player with a potential 5 year+ guaranteed contract at stake that could potentially support my family and I for the rest of my life I would do them. There have been days that I would have considered HGH to get over a frustrating running injury.

The source is obviously suspect but her estranged husband now says she started doping in 2011.

 

Link to story

Docket posted that a page back.  Come on, man...keep up.