Doping seems to have become a fixture at major sports
events. As the organizers deploy increasingly sophisticated means to detect the
use of illegal substances by athletes, the athletes seem to come out with
techniques that are ever harder to detect. It looks like an endless cat and
mouse game.
I would like to
propose a radical solution and say---let us stop policing this “abuse”.
First, it costs an enormous amount of money and there is no
guarantee that we are catching everyone. The technology is marching forward,
and it is quite possible that the next generation of doping substances may
become completely undetectable. Someone recently mentioned, “Only the stupid
are getting caught.” So, that day may already be here. On the other hand, I am
also sure that we probably are punishing innocent athletes who end up
testing positive as a result of perfectly legal drug or something they ate.
Second, and more to the point, I do not buy into the
argument that sports are fair and those using banned substances are
getting an unfair advantage. At some level, sports have never been fair. If the
playing ground needs to be leveled, how about every athlete competing in a
sport being provided access to identical training
and facility? Is it fair that an American marathon runner gets the advantage of
the most modern sports technology and medicine, while someone training in Kenya
can only afford to run around in his neighborhood? (The irony is that the
Kenyan still beats the American---imagine what he would do if he had access to
the best training and tools.)
And, how about legal
prosthesis? Oscar Pristorous, the South African “Blade Runner”, who runs on leg
prosthesis, may be able to gain an advantage over a regular runner. Is that
cheating? Instead of admiring his heroism and grit, should he be banned from
competing? Where will we draw the line?
Also, what if we suddenly discover that a legal medicine---say that required for controlling blood
pressure--- provides an athlete that small edge? Will we ban that medicine and
deprive the athlete of what he needs to remain healthy?
Finally, there is an argument that the doping substances are harmful to athlete’s health. I am sure some of them are. However, we
have not banned alcohol, and the cigarettes are banned only for the minors. The
users of these potentially harmful substances know the risk and are willing to
take it. Why don’t we apply the same logic to the doping substances, at least
those that are on the borderline in terms of potential for adverse reaction? If
an athlete wants to take a chance…let him.
I remember that Wimbledon used to be open only for amateurs.
The fear was that if professionals were allowed, it would not be a fair
competition. The problem was that it became harder and harder to seperate amateurs
from professionals, and the participants went through all types of Shenanigans
to prove that they were not professionals. Finally, they opened up the game and
guess what? It just became a better event.
It is time to do the
same in case of doping.
