Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

'Roids in Sports

theitalianstallion
Posts: 1,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2009 10:01:18 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
A-Rod as just admitted to using performance enhancing drugs. Andy Pettitte did last year.

Should baseball put an asterisk next to their names, or just let it be?

Who else do you think is juicing? (Besides the obvious Barry Bonds)
When Reach fell, I came.
crackofdawn_Jr
Posts: 1,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2009 1:44:36 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Almost everybody is doing it. If they get dozens of people from random testings then there's a lot more doing it.
There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics"
-Mark Twain

"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"

"Therefore love moderately. Long love doth so.
Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."
- William Shakespeare

"There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man."
- Adolf Hitler
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2009 9:13:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Agreed.

I'm not sure how I feel about putting asterisks next to their names, if only because these people made it to the top amongst OTHER drug performance enhancing users. So clearly, some talent/skill was involved. However, I believe this problem is pretty widespread, and it's important to put an end to it somehow (perhaps random testing + asterisks are the key) because it's definitely setting an important precedent as well as sending a message to the fans, younger athletes, etc.
President of DDO
patsox834
Posts: 406
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2009 11:38:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/18/2009 10:01:18 AM, theitalianstallion wrote:
A-Rod as just admitted to using performance enhancing drugs. Andy Pettitte did last year.

Should baseball put an asterisk next to their names, or just let it be?

Who else do you think is juicing? (Besides the obvious Barry Bonds)

1: they should just let it be, for God's sake.

2: I honestly don't care. Whether a player takes banned substances (notice how I didn't call them PEDs) or not is entirely irrelevant to me.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/18/2009 8:41:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Are they gonna put asterisks next to the names of people who flop in basketball or soccer?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
theitalianstallion
Posts: 1,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2009 8:34:56 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I would laugh so hard if they did.

I can't stand it when huge, seven foot centers flop after a six foot forward taps them; it's not even believable. At least in soccer they're decent actors.
When Reach fell, I came.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2009 8:42:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I watched a youtube video of the Ultimate Warrior on Hannity and Combs a while back, and although the Warrior is completely nuts, I did like how he defended the use of steroids in "Elite Athletes".

I'm not so sure that they should be banned. I mean, if I decided that I wanted to take myself to the edge and max out my physical potential, who should stop me? I am expecting that the ability for us to improve our bodies and minds is going to be multiplied in the next century. We need to be open to the fact that there will be a response to this inevitable revolution of the body and mind. Evolution is not a factor anymore; first of all, natural selection is completely compromised in the modern human and second of all evolution is a very slow process; we can evolve ourselves much faster than the Darwinian chance evolution that has been occuring for billions of years. As we start evolving ourselves, there will be resistance. This resistance will inevitably fail, and there is really no point joining the failing side now. Cybernetics is not only becoming more possible everyday (there is a professor in Canada who has not used his own eyes to look at the world without his cybernetic apparatus in 30 years), it becoming more inescapable everyday. We are becoming more and more specialized, and we are multiplying rapidly. It was once possible for a wise man to be just about the best person to go to for any need. This wise man could know the entire body of knowledge of the culture he was in. Our culture is headed rapidly in the other direction; people know less and less about the general body of knowledge. We become increasingly specialized. I don't believe this trend can continue. Disciplines are spreading further apart. Technicians are able to know and understand less and less about what other technicians are doing. What will happen when books and papers are being produced in every field so rapidly that no one will have time to review them? The only answer is that we are going to find a way to change ourselves. Changing the mind and changing the body are not significantly different concepts.

Is any use of steroids "abuse"? People need steroids for medical purposes, so the answer is no. The Warrior was arguing that people like Arnold Schwarzenneger, who approached steroid use "holistically", used steroids successfully without any bad repercussions. Do we really have the right to tell the governator that he had no right to use the substances he did? For someone who is against the drug war, like myself, it is especially hard to say yes. Giving the government the ability to tell us what is legal and what is illegal to put in our bodies is the greater evil at work here, and it is a moral failure and a crying shame that the people who call themselves conservative are not working to keep the government out of our business in this fashion.

Sports is a trickier case. Sports stars are role models for children, and if they use steroids then the children might be inclined to use as well. Also, how can an athlete who wants to stay clean possibly compete with a steroids user? These are troubling issues, but are more of the result of our artificial obsession with sports then an actual ethical dilemma. Why are sports stars payed so much? Why are they worshipped by children? I mean, if a guy decided that he wanted to play sports and get jacked up on steroids, we are honestly going to tell him he can't because if he gets too popular people might follow him? And as far as competition goes, if we were to successfully cut out all steroid use in the NBA, NFL, and MLB, then what is stopping another organization from being created to house the steroid users? If the steroid users are throwing faster pitches, hitting farther home runs, running faster, tackling more spectacularly... then it's only a matter of time before they become the spotlight anyway. Don't forget, Vince McMahon already made a try at the "XFL" a few years back, so don't think it isn't a possibility.

The best thing we can do is educate the public on this matter.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/19/2009 5:28:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
As Tommy Tiernan says "If a guy wants to run the 200m in half a second, F**king let him!"
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.