Introduction
This is going to be a controversial post but I think it is nice to sometimes turn things around and consider more unconventional points of view.
The issue I would like to consider is:
Do performance enhancing drugs (or other assistive technologies) really constitute cheating?
The conventional narrative would certainly suggest that. Indeed to even suggest otherwise would lead to extreme anger from most of those involved in sporting endeavours.
It is a sporting taboo but I think in a rational, free society we should be able to discuss any subject in a reasonable, adult and non-hysterical manner.
Just before we go on I want to make it clear that I am not endorsing taking performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) - they are in many cases illegal and have serious health risks.
My aim is more to have an interesting philosophical and moral discussion.
The Conventional Sporting View
Most athletic and sporting organisations put forth the view that keeping PED out of sports helps to maintain a level playing field.
"It makes things fair because nobody has an unfair advantage."
I would like to assert that this is complete nonsense.
There is no level playing field, because a level playing field assumes that everyone starts off at the same baseline level of ability and chances.
There are multiple factors that create differences between people but we can divide them into two main categories :
Genetics.
Environment (including economic advantages, phenotype etc).
Genetics
Genetics are a fairly obvious point. It doesn't matter how much training the average person has, they are unlikely to be able run the 100m as fast Usain Bolt.
They just don't have the physical makeup to make it possible and nothing (not even drugs) will change that. Not all cases are so extreme though.
Sometimes you may have two or more people who are roughly physically equivalent, in terms of height, weight etc but they have differing levels of certain hormones that have a direct bearing on their area of competition.
They may look very similar but this small difference may mean that one person has a shot at being a champion and the other will never make it.
For example some endurance athletes naturally produce higher levels of Erythropoietin (the hormone that stimulates red blood cell production).
This small difference can give them a huge boost and thus advantage when it comes to competing.
Many athletes already simulate this condition by training at high altitudes before an event (this boosts EPO levels) but someone who already has high levels can capitalise on this even more.
Strangely this is considered acceptable yet taking EPO is not - even though taking EPO artificially might actually make these hypothetical competitors level (physiologically speaking) - hence making it more fair.
In a similar vein, some champion bodybuilders have abnormally high "natural" levels of testosterone which enable them to build more muscle than the average person and to maintain it.
Yet if someone artificially boosted their testosterone to the same levels it would be considered cheating.
Testosterone related inequalities are even greater in female sports where some athletes have near male levels of testosterone giving them a massive physiological advantage.
If we segregate male and female athletes on the basis of fairness due to the natural physiological differences, how is it fair to let women who have freakishly high testosterone levels (akin to men) compete with other women?
It makes no sense.
Further there is the ethical issue that such women may be considered to be suffering from a medical disorder and celebrating them as athletes may create a disincentive to receiving treatment which may actually be beneficial to their long term health (e.g. cardiovascular risks, fertility etc).
I find the hypocrisies and inconsistencies in these issues quite striking.
There are many such cases which could be cited. The point is that genetics mean that there is no equality in sport and there never was.
Professional sport perpetuates the idea that it is all about effort and hard work. That anyone can make great achievements if they try hard enough.
Genetics alone makes a nonsense of that assertion.
Environment
Environment plays a huge part in what you can actually do with your genetic potential.
For example let's say you have the genetic potential to be a great basketball player. Well if you grow up in the wrong place - say a developing country where there are a lot of childhood diseases you may end up never achieving your full potential height.
Further there may not be the training facilities for you to practice early on in life to set you on the right path. You may not be able to afford the right kind of food, or enough food at all.
You may never even have the option to learn about a particular sport. You may not even live long enough to have the option.
Honestly there are so many ways in which your environment can hold you back, whether in terms of health, economic opportunities or otherwise that I can't list them here.
My point is that this is another source of inequality which squashes the myth of a "level playing field" in sport.
But Drugs Are Risky.
Yes they are - at least right now.
The technological potential exists for developing safer drugs that can enhance performance and drugs are not the only solution.
There could also be other alternatives to enhance performance that might use other forms of technology - e.g. exoskeleton type suits, special shoes and training equipment.
If some narratives are to be believed then sport is about testing mental resolve and the human spirit. If that is truly the case then what would be wrong in using a safe alternative to boost performance?
Of course I doubt most mainstream athletes and commentators would agree with that view but I doubt they could give a logical or coherent reason for their dissent.
Human nature is filled with hypocrisies and contradictions and they often favour the status quo.
Conclusion
I'm not suggesting that it is OK to take performance enhancing drugs.
They are dangerous and have real risks to physical and mental health. What I am suggesting is that this is not a simple black or white issue.
The "cheating" narrative is based on the false assumption that life is fair and that everyone has an equal chance.
This is complete nonsense and perpetuating it may actually make some people more likely to use performance enhancing drugs to try to give themselves a chance of being able to compete.
They may see drugs or other methods as the only option they have.
It is also ironic that certain training methods (e.g. altitude training) which replicate the effects of taking drugs are considered normal and acceptable.
In summary, whilst most people consider drugs to enhance performance to be cheating, an alternative perspective might suggest that they are actually a way of making things fairer.
Right now the health risks may mean that their use should be strongly discouraged, but what about the future? What if safer alternatives were found? What would be "wrong" with using them?
What do you think?
Thank you for reading
I have always been of the opinion that it is their body, their choices. Absolutely, it is heartbreaking when you hear of an athlete dying young due to poor past choices with PED's. But, it is their body and their choice to do so. If the sacrifice is made with complete knowledge of side effects, I have a hard time morally regulating the choices that other people make about their own bodies.
Exactly. I wouldn't do it and if it were done legally and above board it could be safer. The sad thing is that it will happen anyway and often using illegally produced and more dangerous drugs. Thanks for such a great answer.
the definition of cheating - may differ in many eyes :)
but I do think so :)
but then the any sport pip using drugs to "cheat" also pay a very high toll in doing so - healthwise
so I guess .. - that makes it somehow already ..even? or maybe actually more of unfair for the person who took drugs with the health risks and consequences involved in doing so
I don't care if a no-one dies of an overdose , but I do care when a tenis player for example is taking PED .
2 players in a tennis match, close skill set, one is taking drugs that make her run like crazy for 3 sets.
I don't think that is in any way fair to the other player, to the spectators that pay the tickets from which they get paid , for the people that watch at home, who pay the TV subscription that pay TV rights to the event that hosts them and again , pay them .
When you are a professional athlete you have a huge responsibility , just as doctors have the Hippocratic oath
The problem is you don't know who is taking drugs and who is not. Also why is it fair that some people have a natural advantage?
What do you mean by natural advantage ? The problem is easily solved. Everyone has to be tested
How do you test for new drugs that are unknown?
IMHO, PEDs are only an issue because of the negative views on recreational drugs.
Can there be personal health sacrifices due to taking PEDs? Yes.
Do people have negative effects on personal health due to the intense training and rigor required for high performance sports? Yes.
Do people who never take PEDs have massive and heart-breaking injuries which ruin their careers? Yes.
I don't see a difference. We need to get over it. It's actually possible that some of these PEDs will help athletes heal injuries or protect versus the injuries in the first place.
Excellent points. In fact extreme training can take a huge (negative) toll on the body.
These are all great points. Especially when you consider how different sporting bodies ban different substances, seemingly arbitrarily. For example, creatine has a long history of research that points to significant performance enhancements, yet is still legal for most athletes. Additionally, some bodies outlaw HGH supplementation, but allow athletes to supplement with IGF-1. Why is aniracetam allowed, but phenylpiracetam not? It seems silly.
Awesome points. The inconsistency makes it even more ridiculous. It is also a losing battle. So someone bans drug X, then someone starts using drug XY until they ban that.
They talk about athlete health and safety, but I think most athletes are already incentivized to be healthy. If for no other reason than their ability to play the sport they love for longer. Supplements like HGH have uses beyond simply doping. HGH can actually help athletes heal from injury faster.
Exactly, and in many cases drug X has more research available, research that describes proper dosage and gives a full picture of possible side effects. Drug XY is often more of an unknown and poses even greater risk. So athletes are placing themselves at even greater risk.
Exactly it is the same issue with legal highs - they are often more dangerous than the illegal drugs they are substituted for.
The documentary Bigger. Stronger. Faster. is really entertaining and has a pretty balanced look at all of this. The documentarian looks at a lot of these inconsistencies such as taking a PED, vs blood doping, vs altitude training, vs hyperbaric chamber. All do the same thing, 2 are legal, 2 are not.
Other strange contradictions exist like tennis players being able to openly take cortisol shots (a steroid) but not anabolic steroids, etc. After all, if your knees can't take the beating shouldn't that be a determining factor in whether you win or lose?
And of course why is performance enhancement unfair in sports but not in life. Orchestra musicians take drugs to calm nerves, students take drugs to focus and study for the SATs. If someone gets a job instead of you, or accepted to a university instead of you because they took a drug and you did not, is that fair?
The documentary debunks many health concerns and I always hate that myth that the drugs are the cause of an athletes success. At the elite levels we are talking about the winners are already at peak performance through loads of hard work and willing to take substances to push it .5% more as these contests can be decided by hundredths of a second.
I'm definitely anti drug, but on a lot of this issue I'm surprisingly open. I have a hard time differentiating between a steroid or PED and a lot of other modern sports science and nutrition.
That being said it's definitely a professional level, adult decision. Seeing it in any kind of youth sport is troubling.
Thanks for such a great response. It is a strange situation as we all use drugs to some extent. I have my regular coffee to help me with thinking and to get going - imagine what would happen to intellectual pursuits if coffee was banned? I think many of the arguments that are made against drugs are as you point out inconsistent and logically flawed. I will see if I can hunt out that documentary.
I just checked and it's still on Netflix streaming if you have it. Very well done. It's made by Chris Bell who documents himself and his two brothers, all athletes. While he quit steroids because of his moral struggles with them, his brothers continued on. It has some real poignant moments and interviews, especially when you see some guys who just can't let go of a dream that has passed.
Cool I will take a look:)
It is cheating others as long as you compete. If you do sport just for yourself with no intention to compete than you only cheat yourself ;-) Interesting post (as usual)
If other people already have big advantage due to genetics and/or other factors it could be seen as a means to even the odds. Thank you:)
They may have but the problem denominates to competitive society. The issue is not a difference in genetic abilities between people but primitive value system focused on importance of proving who is better and ignoring people's differences or even seeing them as negative.
Yes I think you are correct. I suppose the fairest system would look at how well people perform based on their own potential.
Yes :-) As you see, that does nit even apply in schools. It already starts with kids being thrown to one bag regardless of individual abilities and interests. Then forced to compete for grades and all harshly judged for failures.
Yes. The only sport I can think of that does it differently - at least to a degree is golf - it is rare for kids to play that though. I think our society either focuses on rewarding absolute achievement or goes too far the other way and rewards people for being themselves which is not helpful either. There seems to be little regard for actual personal improvement and meeting potential - I think in part it may due to under-staffing in most schools and the factory style of teaching.
Golf quite competitive too. Any sport is. I myself find golf really mindless. Ridiculous amount of space being transformed/wasted into ecologically barren landscape so someone can drill few holes and try to fit tiny ball in them. At the same time zillions of fresh water is being wasted to keep that crap growing? On top of that it increases the price of land. Basically, massive amounts of land are being wasted while many people are so poor that even own 1 m2.
Interesting.
I have always remembered the comedy sketch by someone I can't remember the name - "we should require performance enhancing drugs in sports. Professional athletes are supposed to be at the tops of their game, unless they take steroids they are not at the top.
I want to go to a baseball game and see the dude hit a ball out of the park into the ocean. Now that I'd pay to see."
I think at some point there will be two divisions for certain sports. Assisted and unassisted. The unassisted will show us the limits of humankind as we know today. The assisted will show what humankind is capable as a whole.
Being "assisted" where no assistance is assumed is cheating.
Lol. I suppose given human nature if you have two divisions then the assisted will try to compete in the unassisted without getting found out.
Yeah I guess you are right.
I just want to see someone run like a 1:30 marathon or throw a javelin a half mile lmao
Think of it this way. What if 100 years down the lane, a certain substance is banned. Will it mean we go back the past century and cleanup records based on who used that drug?
The problem with this is PED is like a platform which continually keeps shifting its base. I think the sporting bodies need to give a solid guideline that will hold the test of time - say something like naming an enhancement drug that will hold true for at least 30 years. Then we should consider name & shame.
Right now it is best left to the player, coach and physiotherapist. The media and us cannot be the right judge of it.
But that is exactly why the current system doesn't work. There are probably records in place now that were set using currently banned substances. That in itself isn't fair.
I think I'd come under the category of genetics as I've always been sporty from a little girl to now like most of my family. Though environment could have played an important factor to as I also grew up in a large countryside, lol.
Hope you are doing very well, @thecryptofiend. Great article. :)
Nice to hear from you:)
I think it is cheating, but I think we should just allow the use. It will make the overall level of the sport better....Think about the history of humans. We are always trying to better ourselves and perform larger and larger tasks. It is in our DNA.
^^^UPVOTED^^^
Interesting perspective. Thanks!
I just think no mater what, we are born with the drive to succeed and to be competitive. With or without steroids.... I just think we should allow everything in sports. What happens when we start saying "protein" or "training hard" is enhancing sports.
Yes there is also not necessarily a strict dividing line between supplements and what constitutes drugs.
Tell me about it! I tried to sign up to compete in the badminton competition in the 2020 Olympic Games. Aside from telling me that Tatooine didn't have a team competing, they said that using the Force is illegal, even if it is part of my religious practice! So unfair!
Lol. I think you should have asked your father for advice on that one:)
We aren't talking right now. It's a whole big thing. #familyproblems
Your premise doesn't hold up. Sure we all start with different levels of ability. But, if everyone would take PED's it would make the people with better genetics and environments that much stronger.
That is always a risk.
Drugs are a meance in the society which are making it hollow from inside.... Speaking of PED, i personally dont see a valid enough reason to use them by a sportsperson who is enthusiastic. Only the failures use them. That being said, competition should always be between the equals..... There is no competition between a human and a super human
That may be but banning things does not improve the situation.
No that may not....but it can control the use to some extent. Plus there should be proper education regarding the subject..
Right but I think most people know the risks.
Yes. But people are still using this stuff...y?
They are.
Baseball was more fun to watch when a few guys that will remain unnamed were crushing homerun records year after year after year. Having said that PED seem to be causing many side affects that hurt the players later in life. The diminished quality of life in these players latter years should be thought of more then the few years of playing a game.
Thing is we don't know how many people are actually clean and how many people are taking things that can't be spotted or tested for.
I enjoyed the game of baseball back then. On the flip side I have read baseball doesn't discourage the use of weed. They overlook alcohol and pain killer addictions also. So if PED make the game fun to watch, and have the same side affects as these other stimulates, let them play.
Awesome point. Addiction to other drugs and their misuse is a huge problem in many sports and the consequences can be equally bad if not worse.
I stand on the point of all stimulates are that stimulates. So what makes one safer then the other.
Great read! Very interesting
Cyclist do it all the time, where I come from Its absolutely normal for them to have a positive result on doping tests... Is it fair? Is it to be ashamed of? Well... it is a tricky one, But as a spectator I would rather see poorer performances with clean competitors than these monster like doped ones.
Just my 0.02c :D
Thanks for sharing!
I don't think your perspective is wrong either. Just a different point of view. I just don't like the myth that sporting organisations push about it being a matter of fairness.
Hey great article I enjoyed it.
It is also ironic that certain training methods (e.g. altitude training) which replicate the effects of taking drugs are considered normal and acceptable.
I don't understand this part. How is putting your body to test in different environments any closer to simply taking drugs ?
I condemn and have no mercy towards athletes that take PED. I think that in most cases they should be expelled from sport. With 1y -2y bans the risk over reward is not that high .
Take Sharapova fox example, what is she still doing playing tennis. I'm glad Rolland Garos did not let her play.
Also , it's mind blowing what is happening in cycling . This list of doping cases is crazy
Altitude increases your EPO levels. Taking EPO by injecting it does the same thing. Neither is natural or not exactly - also they may both have certain risks from a health perspective as increasing the amount of red blood cells makes your blood thicker.
Very true. I think it is not just cycling through - I suspect if there was some perfect method of knowing who was using and who was not the results would be shocking.
I like what you wrote about "the right environment" because I believe that can pertain to all facets of life, in addition to sports & athletes. Thanks so much for your eye-opening post! Very interesting! :)
@thecryptofiend
Upvoted
You're welcome. Yes it applies to everything really.
I think the reason these drugs are banned is that it overshadows the natural ability of human body. Furthermore, some athletes may not be able to afford these enhancers so that may create a difference in performance of the athletes.
Yes I understand that but "natural" is a matter of perspective - what of people who produce abnormal levels of testosterone or growth hormone. Natural is not necessarily healthy, nor is it fair.
All Is Fair in Love and War. It's my view on the subject.
Thank you.
Interesting article I remember when I was doing surgery and I would say that almost every doctor that I worked with was on drugs. Oh but its OK its for high blood pressure. Ha ha Morons. If people want to poison themselves for the entertainment industry because that is what sports is let them Idiots!
From a libertarian perspective I would say it is a matter of free will as long as it doesn't hurt others.
I have no religious or political perspective Using drugs harms society. Test the water where you live Its really hard to find water that does not have drug metabolites in it. They are all pissing their drugs into the water supply. They are hurting others but they are not aware enough to know. The cumulative effect of this whole society taking drugs everyday for health and enhancement is a joke. Awesome article by the way You do a great job I enjoy reading your posts!
Thank you!
We need a mutant league!
There have been some great points made here. Being an athlete myself, I've personally believed that there is no room for "doping" in professional sports. The amount of time professional athletes put into perfecting their art should be their sole focus when it comes to improving their game. Those atheletes who have been blessed with incredible genetics, talent and will power to improve should not be put in a position where they have to start considering PED's to compete at a high level. Eat clean, train hard and be relentless.
:)
Very well thought out post. I agree with both genetics and environment factors. I think the main issue is more of safety. Yes, there are holes in the system like with the EPO case but perhaps they're looking at it from a bigger view like focusing on the bigger fish. If they allow the use of PED, then most likely a lot of those managing the athletes would push them to take PEDs. Sure, they can say no but I don't think they're "allowed" to say no. Like how some (college) athletes who get caught ultimately say it was the coach who pushed them to it. The "even playing field" is probably just a good front/face that people would accept and very rarely think much about. After all, who doesnt like "fair"?
Yes I think you are right.
The question of whether or not it's cheating is, to me, simple. If everyone is able to get them, it doesn't give one athlete an unfair advantage over another... taking into account differences in hormone levels, physical size and strength, etc..
However, this doesn't address the ethical issues surrounding "doping." That is a completely separate issue altogether. so as far as cheating goes, my answer is no... provided they are available to everyone.
Good points :)
Interesting subject! I always thought Bolt got a raw deal. I RS'd so I can see some more input! Interesting!!!
I think with Bolt being such a massive star it is natural that he will get a lot of negative attention - I think in many cases it is jealousy.
I can't believe I'm defending the guy! I think he's an arrogant jerk- BUT I still think he got a raw deal. Ethically, I'm not sure how I feel about women athletes taking testosterone and male hormones. Women athletes should be women athletes not men in women's bodies (just my opinion). I keep thing of all those women from East Germany back in the 70's They were HUGE!
Yes I don't think it is a good idea but I suspect it still happens. It is rife in bodybuilding and strength related activities.
I know... I saw a picture of a "woman" bodybuilder who looked like an over-developed man with tiny boobs. Not attractive!!!
@thecryptofiend you put in quite valid points in defending your case. I might agree to some extent about genetics, but with regard to environment, perhaps it may not really be a deciding factor.
I put forth the example of a 8 year old Kashmiri girl Tajamul who faced every problem that you mentioned above, No training facilities, no proper food, nothing. But she eventually trumped her US opponent to win gold at world kickboxing championship.
here is just a link to her achievement:
http://www.firstpost.com/sports/8-year-old-kashmiri-girl-battles-all-odds-wins-gold-at-world-kickboxing-championship-3102392.html
I have read or heard quite a few people who fought adversity and came out on top. Genetics of course is not in one's control and the perceived disadvantage is true but environment, I feel may not be a big factor in this matter.
Picking out a single exceptional case is a spurious means of arguing for something. I think it is ridiculous to assert that environment makes little difference. What if that little girl died from cholera at the age of 2? Some people will always get lucky despite adversity the same way that someone will usually win the lottery, that is not the same thing as having equal chances.
I don't think it is a single exceptional case. I just happened to remember it and was fresh in my mind.
If environment did really make the difference then there shouldn't be or wouldn't be any champions or such stories from the poor third world countries at all. There are quite a few such inspiring stories around about the resilience of a human mind and body and fighting adversary .
I of course agree that environment does make a difference else USA wouldn't be leading the medal tally in olympics but then I wouldn't agree to the extent that is made out in the post.
That makes no sense really. You think it does make a difference but not to the extent in the post. How are you measuring the extent in the post? Further what data is your argument based on? One 8 year old girl? It is not a rational argument as I see it but rather an attempt to justify your personal belief using a single example. The effect of environment on both physical and other factors is well studied (here is just one example) and is not something that is considered controversial.
@thecryptofiend I give up
Don't give up. It is just friendly discussion - I don't mean to come across harsh it is hard to convey tone in writing.
@thecryptofiend that's a good learning for me - ' Don't give up' .
But then perhaps it was a personal belief that I was trying to impose here. I don't have any facts and figures in this matter. My deductions were solely based on facts that I have been seeing around here in India.
Athletics fighting with no training, no food but still they emerge victorious against all odds. well that set the tone to my replies. I agree I could be wrong.
thanks for your kind words. I am a friend of @firepower. and I have been following you right from the day I came here, that's a week or two. It's been a great learning experience till now for a first time blogger like me.
Things are looking great for me. awesome people and amazing quality of posts.
Thanks again @thecryptofiend.
I have often thought about this myself. How level a playing field is it really and what does it all mean anyway - to be able to do something "better" or "faster" than another. Why not just let everyone use drugs and then see how that would play out.
I think safety will be the major issue, but paradoxically if it is all above board it could actually be safer.
Well they could take enhanced the drugs at their own risk perhaps? In this way the medical proffession would also learn from the affects or side affects.
That is a possibility.
Great read! Very interesting! Thank You For Sharing.
Your welcome:)
I think that Performance Enhancing Drugs should not be considered as cheating as most of an athletes speed comes down to training and dedication but some drugs although may enhance one's performance significantly they can be ridiculed with pain as some sinister side effects kick in.
I think it's better for no PED rather than yes to PED
What about the unfair advantage of genetics or just disorders which result in overproduction of e.g. growth hormone or testosterone - is that not cheating too?
That tell's right there...(Just before we go on I want to make it clear that I am not endorsing taking performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) - they are in many cases illegal and have serious health risks.), Is it cheating? Many would say YES.
Being illegal or unhealthy is not the same as cheating though.
I really share your point of view, I mean certain individuals possess genetic traits that set them apart from others abd the use of enhancers actually levels the playing field in a way. I am not endorsing drugs though
Absolutely and I'm not endorsing drugs either the risks are great. I think it would be better to concentrate on health risks rather than on calling it cheating.
precisely, because logically speaking people with certain advantages are already technically cheating, so those taking enhancers are trying to keep up.
Your point's are very impressive. Upvoted your post.
Thanks!
It's worth noting that another reason the "fair playing field" is nonsense is that, unless we have truly Orwellian control over all athlete's bodies, we will never have 100% enforcement.
In other words, the playing field will be uneven by definition. In a hypothetical anything-goes scenario, at least an even "chemical" field is open to everyone, rather than the current situation, where it depends on the individual's appetite for risk (dodging tests, etc.)
It's also tough to deny that legalization of some PEDs would reduce risks of tainted chemicals, needle sharing, and other health risks that mostly are created by criminilization or banned substance lists.
On the other hand, it would raise the athletic bar higher in such a way that competition may not be an option for those unwilling to take the physical risks, and further degrade the quality of "sports icons as role models", whatever there may be left.
Excellent points.
Genes can play as an important role as drugs. I see no difference. Is someone cheating for having dealt random genes from their parents?
Exactly - why should someone be rewarded for something which they had no control over.
Engaging write up as usual @thecryptofiend. I read through almost every comment/argument in an adult and non-hysterical manner. : ) You posed a very good argument and almost got me but I agree with @bek's previous comment. If it was legal and fair use, all we would see is just an even faster version of Usain Bolt. Great discussions here.
Thank you:)
I recently retired from a 15-year professional career and over the years have witnessed first hand the extreme benefit received by athletes that take PED's, especially drugs like anabolic steroids. You can't even compare the performance gains these athlete receive to
Interesting.
ofc using drugs is somehow cheating.You are not actually showing what You are capable of instead of boosted performance .It is illeagal and why not cuz it should be
That's not the same thing as cheating though.
Great post @thecryptofiend 100% upvote. I guess I won't be using any STEEMIT enchancers to win any races. lol. I noticed steemit.chat is down and i wanted to share a breakthrough with you. I'm sure you will enjoy it, i finally got a business to advertise steemit in their store and hopefully accept steem as a form of payment check it out. Sorry for link dropping, but steemit.chat is down and i figured this would peak your interest.
Thanks!
One other thing that would be impossible to put on the same ''level playing field'' for every athlete, other than genetics, environment, ''mental toughness'' and the ''will to win'', is the instinct of eye-hand coordination.
Maybe Barry Bonds added a couple of yards to the balls he hitted, and maybe he losted speed due to an increase of muscle mass, but one thing is for sure: steroids never helped him with timing to hit the ball in the first place, which is a condition before sending it as far as possible and running the bases.
Very true. I think it is one of the most important aspects for any sport.
Congratulations @thecryptofiend! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPBy upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!
Congratulations @thecryptofiend
You took 73 place in my Top 100 of posts
Yes...
https://steemit.com/drugs/@pratikchordia/dont-do-the-crime-if-you-can-t-do-the-time
Posting unrelated links is spam.