Dopes in sport

'Dopes in sport' is an adequate term for sneering at participants who enhance performances, artificially, with chemicals.

There was a time (not so very long ago?) when all kinds of individual competition brought to the fore those who could achieve by dint of their own ability, effort, and skill.

What they accomplished, they did by their own personal talent. It was probably the climax of long times of training, practice, skill learning, and most possibly a determined will to succeed despite any physical or mental challenges.

Success was not achieved by relying on chemicals to make up for personal shortfalls.

That was in 'more honest' times, when sport and its significance had not been taken over by greedy, almost maniacal sports marketing.

Healthy competition was founded on true accomplishment; the challenge of striving to better one's own natural performance, and not by relying on drugs and chemicals to fit in with the growing demands of the demand to win at any cost.

This idea of mandatory winning is one of the things that turns me off much modern sport, as it stresses ego, the quest for triumph at all costs, and the abandonment of competing for the sheer enjoyment of achieving the very best of which one is capable.

The score at the end of the 'match', or whatever, becomes the only measurable factor of ability, not personal competence, or individual aptitude.

Much competitive challenging is crippled by the dogma of the 'team' concept, where it is considered more important to be a team player than to rely on superior personal competence.

In truth, the risk of the "tall poppy" syndrome comes into play where less able players or competitors are shielded from the fact of their relative rankings by the rigorous leveling of the playing field, so that each may regard themselves as one of the best.

There is also the old cliché about there being "no prizes for coming second".

Rubbish! The very act of striving is what counts, not winning.

At least, it does in the growingly rare world of true amateurism, where that French term, amateur, describes a person who does something for the love of it.

So, the foregoing leads me to criticise the increasingly publicised use of drugs in sport in present times, not just by minor players at a local perhaps less significant level, but by international 'leaders' in their chosen field.

Along with this, some reporting has raised the suggestion that it was OK to use drugs 'because everyone else did'.

So?

Does this mean that personal principles, and a lifetime of learning of the rules of whatever activity is practiced, as well as morality, is to be subsumed by the mob mentality of pack conformity?

I suspect that the same argument can be leveled at any kind social behaviour which emerges over time; the argument being that change is inevitable and we must accept it.

To which I would reply, "change to what?"

That answer demands serious consideration of just how any change should occur, and what its outcome is likely to be.

I doubt if an argument can be sustained that the use of performance enhancing substances in any kind of competition is acceptable. This is because the very peak of personal competence is thrown out the door by that use.

It's not the player who is winning, it's the chemicals.

I can brood over hypothetical acts of deliberate deception if they had taken place in my previous recreation of gliding.

Apart from personal flying skill contest, there was always the challenge of pitting oneself against nature by seeking to understand and use rising warm air to achieve height, winds to assist (or reduce) speed, the need for a high degree of competence in navigation, and the awareness of safety limitations on man, machine, and environment.

It was an activity which encouraged healthy competition for cross-country distance achieved, speed - thus time - over a course, possibly competition for the altitude reached (albeit assisted by oxygen for personal safety, not performance enhancement), and also the challenges of temperature.

It can be a daunting experience to begin a flight in sweltering hot conditions which promote thermal activity, then to reach an altitude where the air temperature is much, much colder – perhaps down to freezing.

Imagine if I had decided to secrete a small engine somehow in my glider so that I could use it to gain altitude, achieve a high speed across country, remove any risks of having to outland if I could no longer find the thermals needed to stay aloft, and then use this performance-enhancer during flying competitions. When I won, the acclaim would be mine, but not any honour!

That's what drugs in sport do to competitors – let them win, but not attain!