• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544

You are viewing page of 3.

Discussion Forum >>

Elementary School XC Super Meet
Reply to topic Go to last post
Avatar
Anonymous
Posts: 45906
thumbs_up 3
Report  ORIGINAL

Anonymous said 2 weeks ago

Dave Steen Love

Show Original Post
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #51 

    Andrew Jones said 1 week ago

    In any era, the vast majority of athletes run the other way from coaches and athletes strongly suspected of doping.

    I would agree, but I'm curious why some athletes feel the need to cheat. After reading the multitudes of drugs-in-sports stories, I've noticed some cheating "archetypes":

    1) The Amoral: This athlete cares not about the sport in which they participate, or sport in general. Purely out for themselves, they would do almost anything to win -- and in any arena and aspect of life.

    2) The Victim: This athlete looks the other way and plays dumb, even though they suspect their coach and/or handlers are giving them something more than "vitamins".

    3) The Insecure: This athlete, likely not an elite but more likely an age-group competitor or club athlete, will cheat to beat their cohorts, and probably go on to crow about the achievement on social networking. These are classic cases of status anxiety.

    4) The Bridesmaid: This elite athlete is simply tired of finishing second, off the podium, etc., and they strongly suspect that their vanquishers are cheating.

    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #52 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Andrew Jones
    "In any era, the vast majority of athletes run the other way from coaches and athletes strongly suspected of doping.

    I would agree, but I'm curious why some athletes feel the need to cheat. After reading the multitudes of drugs-in-sports stories, I've noticed some cheating "archetypes":

    1) The Amoral: This athlete cares not about the sport in which they participate, or sport in general. Purely out for themselves, they would do almost anything to win -- and in any arena and aspect of life.

    2) The Victim: This athlete looks the other way and plays dumb, even though they suspect their coach and/or handlers are giving them something more than "vitamins".

    3) The Insecure: This athlete, likely not an elite but more likely an age-group competitor or club athlete, will cheat to beat their cohorts, and probably go on to crow about the achievement on social networking. These are classic cases of status anxiety.

    4) The Bridesmaid: This elite athlete is simply tired of finishing second, off the podium, etc., and they strongly suspect that their vanquishers are cheating."


    This is a pretty good start on a typology, Andrew. From actual encounters, I would add:

    5) The "all-in" athlete: This athlete actually believes their willingness to dope indicates that they are more fully committed to success, more "hard core", than the loser "boy scout" types who refuse to cross over to the dark side. They also tend to believe they're already better than all the non-dopers, and thus are not taking anything away from anyone by becoming that little bit better still through doping.

    6) The talented but inherently lazy athlete: For this athlete, drugs are simply a way to get better with less training effort, or to do well at an even he/she finds easier and more enjoyable (e.g. dope to stay in the short sprints when you're naturally better suited to the 800m).

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #53 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Oldster
    "This is a pretty good start on a typology, Andrew. From actual encounters, I would add:

    6) The talented but inherently lazy athlete: For this athlete, drugs are simply a way to get better with less training effort, or to do well at an even he/she finds easier and more enjoyable (e.g. dope to stay in the short sprints when you're naturally better suited to the 800m)."

    Seriously, this actually happens!? Please tell more. Steve, you need to write a book one day!

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #54 

    Anonymous said 1 week ago

    Ahutch, I was wondering opinions you might have about this interview and the Lauren Fleshmen article.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7pI0mar5rA

    Not trolling, just respect your opinion.

    Quote comment
  • ahutch User since:
    Feb 21st, 2011
    Posts: 222
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #55 

    ahutch said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Ahutch, I was wondering opinions you might have about this interview and the Lauren Fleshmen article.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7pI0mar5rA

    Not trolling, just respect your opinion."


    Sure, I have lots of opinions, and am happy to share them if you have specific questions.

    In general, I think my attitudes line up pretty closely with Lauren's. In other words, I see how people can easily go down this path, with each step being justifiable in your head and no rules being broken, until you realize that what you're doing is no longer consistent with your beliefs about sport.

    Oldster seems to have a very black-and-white view of these things. In the view he has outlined in this thread, Lauren Fleshman is either a dirty cheater or someone who doesn't care about her reputation, based on her associations and her actions taking the max dose of asthma meds against the doctor's recommendation. To me, in contrast, Lauren is a fallible human who wrestled with the conflicting demands of maximizing her performance and staying true to her understanding of fair sport. I think a lot of elite and would-be-elite athletes, including Cam Levins, find themselves in similar situations. And of course, not all of them make the decision that Lauren eventually did.

    Ultimately, given the complexities of these decisions, my take is that you're a cheater if you break the rules. If you're doing a bunch of stuff that's just barely within the rules (like taking the max dose of asthma meds), that's a much trickier question. It's an approach that I hope I wouldn't take if I was in that position, but I don't think it's fair to brand someone as a cheater on that basis.

    (The other unanswered question is whether Salazar's theory about breathing the inhaler out your nose actually has any merit. He's notorious for latching onto every crackpot theory about performance enhancement, even with little or no evidence, so I wouldn't necessarily assume it's actually true.)

    Quote comment
  • lobster User since:
    Mar 17th, 2014
    Posts: 1088
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #56 

    Lobster said 1 week ago

    I’m not sure where this fits in Andrews codification of types, this is what I remember about athletes motivation to use steroids: If you didn’t use, you just weren’t committed.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #57 

    Andrew Jones said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Lobster
    "I’m not sure where this fits in Andrews codification of types, this is what I remember about athletes motivation to use steroids: If you didn’t use, you just weren’t committed."


    Lobster, I think Oldster accounted for this type in his #5 "The all-in athlete".

    Hutch mentioned that Salazar has historically - notoriously to some - used every possible new angle to try and produce improvements (both on himself and his athletes). It strikes me that his MO is rather similar to another questionable group - Dave Brailsford and the SKY team, with their "marginal gains" propaganda, ahem, I mean philosophy.

    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #58 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    Quoting: ahutch
    "Sure, I have lots of opinions, and am happy to share them if you have specific questions.

    In general, I think my attitudes line up pretty closely with Lauren's. In other words, I see how people can easily go down this path, with each step being justifiable in your head and no rules being broken, until you realize that what you're doing is no longer consistent with your beliefs about sport.

    Oldster seems to have a very black-and-white view of these things. In the view he has outlined in this thread, Lauren Fleshman is either a dirty cheater or someone who doesn't care about her reputation, based on her associations and her actions taking the max dose of asthma meds against the doctor's recommendation. To me, in contrast, Lauren is a fallible human who wrestled with the conflicting demands of maximizing her performance and staying true to her understanding of fair sport. I think a lot of elite and would-be-elite athletes, including Cam Levins, find themselves in similar situations. And of course, not all of them make the decision that Lauren eventually did.

    Ultimately, given the complexities of these decisions, my take is that you're a cheater if you break the rules. If you're doing a bunch of stuff that's just barely within the rules (like taking the max dose of asthma meds), that's a much trickier question. It's an approach that I hope I wouldn't take if I was in that position, but I don't think it's fair to brand someone as a cheater on that basis.

    (The other unanswered question is whether Salazar's theory about breathing the inhaler out your nose actually has any merit. He's notorious for latching onto every crackpot theory about performance enhancement, even with little or no evidence, so I wouldn't necessarily assume it's actually true.)"


    In my own defense, I don't think taking a hard line on doping precludes "an understanding of how...people can do down the path" towards cheating, and I do understand the difference between potentially getting caught for something like taking too much of an inhaler and going all-in with a doping program. But, no one who's been discussed in this thread (except for Levins, whom I said I believed was clean, albeit niave about the reputational damage associated with working the Salazar) has fallen into the grey area category. If Dave Steen was doing what the majority of Francis' athletes were doing, then he would clearly not have been a grey area case. And when it comes to concerns about reputational compromise, he's squarely in the black area. He worked with a coach whom everyone believed, and he knew, was doping athletes. What else would one call that?

    This post was edited by Oldster 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #59 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Lobster
    "I’m not sure where this fits in Andrews codification of types, this is what I remember about athletes motivation to use steroids: If you didn’t use, you just weren’t committed."


    See my type 5 above (the "all-in" athlete).

    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #60 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Seriously, this actually happens!? Please tell more. Steve, you need to write a book one day!"


    Well, it did at least once. And I would imagine quite few athletes who should have developed into 400m runners stayed in the 100/200 through doping.

    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 5
    Report    REPLY #61 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    Quoting: ahutch
    "Sure, I have lots of opinions, and am happy to share them if you have specific questions.

    In general, I think my attitudes line up pretty closely with Lauren's. In other words, I see how people can easily go down this path, with each step being justifiable in your head and no rules being broken, until you realize that what you're doing is no longer consistent with your beliefs about sport.

    Oldster seems to have a very black-and-white view of these things. In the view he has outlined in this thread, Lauren Fleshman is either a dirty cheater or someone who doesn't care about her reputation, based on her associations and her actions taking the max dose of asthma meds against the doctor's recommendation. To me, in contrast, Lauren is a fallible human who wrestled with the conflicting demands of maximizing her performance and staying true to her understanding of fair sport. I think a lot of elite and would-be-elite athletes, including Cam Levins, find themselves in similar situations. And of course, not all of them make the decision that Lauren eventually did.

    Ultimately, given the complexities of these decisions, my take is that you're a cheater if you break the rules. If you're doing a bunch of stuff that's just barely within the rules (like taking the max dose of asthma meds), that's a much trickier question. It's an approach that I hope I wouldn't take if I was in that position, but I don't think it's fair to brand someone as a cheater on that basis.

    (The other unanswered question is whether Salazar's theory about breathing the inhaler out your nose actually has any merit. He's notorious for latching onto every crackpot theory about performance enhancement, even with little or no evidence, so I wouldn't necessarily assume it's actually true.)"


    And I think Fleshman lost a lot of credibility on this issue following her spurious defense of Paula Radcliffe in her little twitter tiff with Ross Tucker. (ANd Radcliffe herself lost ALL credibility when she continued a professional relationship with a former British IAAF official who was implicated in Lamine Diack's extortion scam-- saying "everyone makes mistakes". When you're a former top athlete and the "mistake" is accepting bribes to ignore doping positives, it speaks very poorly of your basic ethics, and even worse of your concern for your own reputation.

    This post was edited by Oldster 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • oldster User since:
    Sep 25th, 2013
    Posts: 2214
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #62 

    Oldster said 1 week ago

    This post was edited by Oldster 1 week ago . 
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #63 

    Anonymous said 6 days ago

    Quoting: Oldster
    "We've also learned that it's possible to dope without even one's spouse being aware of it (or so we have been asked to believe in at least one instance in Canadian athletics)."

    We’re being asked to believe a lot here.

    Quote comment
  • runningman User since:
    Feb 23rd, 2018
    Posts: 207
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #64 

    Runningman said 6 days ago

    Anyone care to guess how many Canadian athletes have been suspended for the use of prohibited substances?

    Quick research shows as follows:

    Athletics 17
    All sports 45

    Is that higher or lower than you would have thought?

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 45906
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #65 

    Anonymous said 4 days ago

    Quoting: Runningman
    "Anyone care to guess how many Canadian athletes have been suspended for the use of prohibited substances?

    Quick research shows as follows:

    Athletics 17
    All sports 45

    Is that higher or lower than you would have thought?"

    Considering the NHL has the most inept drug testing out of the major sports leagues I’m not surprised at the low number.
    https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/sports-columns/ed-graney/media-drop-puck-for-not-calling-out-nhl-on-inept-drug-program/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    Quote comment
Previous | 1 | 2 | 3
Anonymous

says…    

Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1