By "stupid" I mean unintelligent, premature, arbitrary, and weak. Rules such as "don't kill thy neighbor" are pretty obvious and don't need to be law for most p

By "stupid" I mean unintelligent, premature, arbitrary, and weak. Rules such as "don't kill thy neighbor" are pretty obvious and don't need to be law for most people to get it. But being imprisoned for smoking weed when alcohol is legal is almost as "stupid" as a moving pick or doping. Those who get away with it have an advantage. Those that don't get pulled over by a man in stripes blowing a whistle. Then rules change, as they should, but that doesn't reverse the "stupid" past. Not killing comes naturally. Referees are not very natural, but we need them to uphold rules that don't come naturally. Rules don't have to be bad to be stupid or somewhat arbitrary, and they do shape the game/society. But cycling definitely was a stupid game knowing what we all know now. Almost as stupid as pro-wrestling, but at least they don't hide it, which makes them far more respectable than cycling ever was. Armstrong could only do what he did with the higher-ups knowing, and with the leverage he had against them and the entire sport. No one idolizes the International Cycling Union[1] as one does an athlete, but they made the beast that was Lance Armstrong. The takeaway is that it's wrong to look just at the players. When cheating is a prerequisite to success, it's often the game that is already rigged. --- [1] http://www.foxsports.com/cycling/story/investigation-international-cycling-union-allowed-lance-armstrong-to-cheat-but-no-evidence-of-payments-for-cover-up-030815 http://www.foxsports.com/cycling/story/investigation-interna...