3 ms·
> It actually became a contest, not just of bicycling, but of doping, because getting away with it was quite difficult and it took years for the world of cyclin
by Graziano_M 3y ago
> It actually became a contest, not just of bicycling, but of doping, because getting away with it was quite difficult and it took years for the world of cycling to get good enough countermeasures to shift the advantage to non-doping.
Not just a contest of hiding doping, but of winning against others who were doping. If everyone is doping, then you could argue it's still a fair playing field, just with a higher skill ceiling.
- noah_buddy 3y agoIt’s not a fair playing field because there were still people who did not cheat.
- Graziano_M 3y agoThat's why I said, "If everyone is doping" :)
- optimalsolver 3y agoBut that's not what you were actually implying.
- DrBenCarson 3y agoAs long as they knew others were doping, I would argue it was still a fair playing field. The real advantage is in others not knowing you are illegally enhancing performance.
- jnsaff2 3y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Bassons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Bassons
- friendzis 3y ago> If everyone is doping, then you could argue it's still a fair playing field, just with a higher skill ceiling. No, because now you have at least two contests in parallel: the race event for the cyclist and through-the-year "doping and not getting caught" for medical/management team. For example one prominent olympic level swimmer was disqualified because they failed to appear for testing multiple times. Why would one do that just to come back after disqualification?