Beginners and Beyond

1234

Cheating (Read 298 times)

     

    So if I get this right, you admit it is wrong but you would do it anyway if that was the only way you would win.

     

    I see little difference in that and any other form of cheating (be it marriage, taxes). By throwing in a caveat that it is "ok" because it isn't criminal is merely justification for an action.

     

    Either you live by a moral code of some sort, or you don't. Doesn't have to be a religious one, but it can be.

     

    I'm glad to know you never exceed the speed limit.

    Short term goal: 17:59 5K

    Mid term goal:  2:54:59 marathon

    Long term goal: To say I've been a runner half my life.  (I started running at age 45).

    Better I Leave


       

      I'm glad to know you never exceed the speed limit.

       

      Which is why I brought into the discussion..."situational ethics"

        I'm not saying it's morally right but I do know that if I was a professional athlete and couldn't be competitive without using PED's, I'd use them.  The Bernie Madoff analogy is not apt as he committed criminal acts.  Cheating in a sport is not a criminal offense.

         

        The use of PED's is illegal, and a criminal offense in France. Hmmm... where was that bike race?

        notimeforthat


           

          I'm glad to know you never exceed the speed limit.

          Getting defensive doesn't do anything for discussion. I never have and will never claim to say that I do not make poor choices, speeding included. I merely said that there is a moral code that dictates right from wrong. Moral relativity, or "situational ethics", is what is it. It is a way that people use to justify their actions when they are blatantly wrong. Speeding is wrong, it doesn't matter if I am late. Being late doesn't change the fact that I was wrong, it is merely a justification.

           

          In the same way I would use that pesky marriage example. "I am not being paid attention to. My spouse doesn't support me or understand me anymore. There is a new person that is showering me with attention and wants to hang on my every word, so now I will use my emotions to make poor decisions and do something morally wrong." The person that is choosing to commit adultery still is making a wrong choice, they are making excuses for why they are making their choice.

           

          Armstrong has owned up to the fact that HE chose to make wrong decisions. I commend him for owning his wrong. Before now, it was merely "everyone cheated, so I was just being part of a level playing field". I believe that to be true in cycling btw, but it doesn't excuse wrong behavior.

          Butter Tart


            I'm not saying it's morally right but I do know that if I was a professional athlete and couldn't be competitive without using PED's, I'd use them.  

             

            A professional athlete who can't be competitive without doping can get a regular job like the rest of us.


            Labrat

              I'm not saying it's morally right but I do know that if I was a professional athlete and couldn't be competitive without using PED's, I'd use them.  The Bernie Madoff analogy is not apt as he committed criminal acts.  Cheating in a sport is not a criminal offense.

               

              It can be, depending on the jurisdiction and the substances involved.

              Using the Lance example, it IS a criminal offense in France to use EPO and steroids for doping.

              5K  23:21*  (Vdot 41.53)   10/13/12

              10K  46:35  (Vdot 43.47)  10/4/14

              HM 1:42:41 (Vdot 43.72) 10/25/14

              FM 4:24:33 (Vdot 33.59) 11/8/14

              *Gun time, all others are chip time

              skygazer


                 

                A professional athlete who can't be competitive without doping can get a regular job like the rest of us.

                 

                ^^^ Exactly.

                And exactly not by forcing others out of the game if they don't comply (cheat/dope) with you.

                 

                In LA's case though (Re: the OP), I think UCI should bear more blame for the doping in cycling than a single rider (LA) does. If not for the corrupt UCI, professional cycling wouldn't have been so doped up. And yes to those who argue that doping (and the doped Lance), brought money and popularity to the sport. I suspect that was what the UCI was thinking when they covered up for LA's positive test.

                 

                 

                BTW, I hope my exceeding speed limit don't get equated with murdering a person in the next round argument. Joking

                Hipfan


                Proud Calgarian

                  They can take back all the medals and awards that LA won, but in the meantime, he had years and years of living in luxury, having the best that money can buy and going to the best parties. If I was on the outside with a chance to look in, why not sell your soul for 10-20 years of living on top?

                  2014 Goals and PRs:

                  5k - 17:59 (18:17);  10k - 37:00 (36:42);   HM - 1:21:59 (1:24:21);   FM - whatever (3:05:46)


                  The Chairman

                    Did people watch the interview?

                     

                    I don't know why so much is made of whether or not he was justified in doping to win when 90% of the reason Lance is a sleazeball is because he sued, bullied, and ruined people for the mere act of telling the truth and threatening to expose his lie. Those are his own words, paraphrased. And that is the real travesty in the whole Armstrong saga.

                     

                    If he was just some regular doper who never screwed with anybody, like Tyler or Floyd, this would have all been forgotten by now, and he would have been running his bike shop and giving out training lessons to happy customers for a living like those two.


                    @runjerseygirl

                      Did people watch the interview?

                       

                      I don't know why so much is made of whether or not he was justified in doping to win when 90% of the reason Lance is a sleazeball is because he sued, bullied, and ruined people for the mere act of telling the truth and threatening to expose his lie. Those are his own words, paraphrased. And that is the real travesty in the whole Armstrong saga.

                       

                      If he was just some regular doper who never screwed with anybody, like Tyler or Floyd, this would have all been forgotten by now, and he would have been running his bike shop and giving out training lessons to happy customers for a living like those two.

                       

                      I agree.  I haven't really had an opinion one way or the other about the actual use of PED's.  But he made himself a victim through this whole charade, and brought down a lot of people in the process.  Not to mention that he had a large following of fans who stood by him through everything, and who he lied to, gained loyalty and sympathy from, only to essentially spit in their faces.  It's humiliating for anyone who stood by his side all these years.  He's an ass.

                      Do you even run?

                      notimeforthat


                        Did people watch the interview?

                         

                        I don't know why so much is made of whether or not he was justified in doping to win when 90% of the reason Lance is a sleazeball is because he sued, bullied, and ruined people for the mere act of telling the truth and threatening to expose his lie. Those are his own words, paraphrased. And that is the real travesty in the whole Armstrong saga.

                         

                        If he was just some regular doper who never screwed with anybody, like Tyler or Floyd, this would have all been forgotten by now, and he would have been running his bike shop and giving out training lessons to happy customers for a living like those two.

                         

                        Thank you for getting the point. It is about character flaws and the inability to be empathetic or have any idea of how depraved you have to be to just run roughshod over people. People justify actions on a daily basis with a myriad of excuses. They can run the gamut, but at the end of the day, the character flaw is not any different. The fall out can most certainly be, based on the scope of the lie.

                         

                        PED's are the red herring in this case.

                        skygazer


                          I want to add that while I agree with Butter Tart, in reality doping is quite prevalent in professional sports (not saying everybody is doing it), simply because there are no anti-drug policies or nothing done to enforce the policies and/or no drug testing programs installed at all (EDIT: in some pro sports). That kind of situation does leave the players on their own as to dope or not. And in that case, doping may not violet the ethic code in that particular sports since there's no rule against it.

                           

                          Now, UCI did have anti-drug policies and a testing program, though probably more for decoration now that we look back at it. LA did break the ethic code of his sport. Plus, he did way more than just doping (drug trafficking, bullying, defaming, forcing riders not willing to dope out of the game/team). On top of all that, he also used his doped achievement to benefit way beyond the sport. Livestrong has a .com company along side the not-for-profit .org, for example*. His "lying" about doping, attacking those who spoke the truth, and his manipulating the public (well the public is always highly manipulable. so it may not be his fault alone) break the ethic code of the mundane world.

                           

                           

                          *I don't think he should return his endorsement money back to the sponsors though. It was business and the sponsors already had got what they paid for. But it is this kind of ecosystem that encourages pro players to continue to cheat/dope--the money will stay even if they get caught later.

                          perfectform


                            Did people watch the interview?

                             

                            I don't know why so much is made of whether or not he was justified in doping to win when 90% of the reason Lance is a sleazeball is because he sued, bullied, and ruined people for the mere act of telling the truth and threatening to expose his lie. Those are his own words, paraphrased. And that is the real travesty in the whole Armstrong saga.

                             

                            If he was just some regular doper who never screwed with anybody, like Tyler or Floyd, this would have all been forgotten by now, and he would have been running his bike shop and giving out training lessons to happy customers for a living like those two.

                             

                            Off topic, technically.  That being said, I agree with you.  I believe LA to be incapable of any kind of heartfelt apology.

                              Did people watch the interview?

                               

                              I don't know why so much is made of whether or not he was justified in doping to win when 90% of the reason Lance is a sleazeball is because he sued, bullied, and ruined people for the mere act of telling the truth and threatening to expose his lie. Those are his own words, paraphrased. And that is the real travesty in the whole Armstrong saga.

                               

                              If he was just some regular doper who never screwed with anybody, like Tyler or Floyd, this would have all been forgotten by now, and he would have been running his bike shop and giving out training lessons to happy customers for a living like those two.

                               

                              Agreed.  The reality is that doping tests are more IQ tests than anything else.  Are you smart enough to figure out how to avoid getting caught?  I have serious doubts that it is possible to be at the absolute peak in any sport using nothing but food.

                               

                              But you are right that Lance is a sleazeball.

                              Short term goal: 17:59 5K

                              Mid term goal:  2:54:59 marathon

                              Long term goal: To say I've been a runner half my life.  (I started running at age 45).


                              The Chairman

                                 

                                Agreed.  The reality is that doping tests are more IQ tests than anything else.  Are you smart enough to figure out how to avoid getting caught?  I have serious doubts that it is possible to be at the absolute peak in any sport using nothing but food.

                                 

                                But you are right that Lance is a sleazeball.

                                 

                                Not even. Lance himself  last night that he never worried about testing positive because in his day, they only regularly tested at races, and at races everyone was clean. He believed it was just about impossible to get caught.

                                 

                                He did this with a psychopathic smirk on his face, but that's another story. After listening to the interview, I am pretty much convinced the guy is a legit psychopath.

                                1234