The Drug Issue ( a few not really researched thoughts )

In 1976 the IOC set out these three guidelines WRT doping in athletics (well Olympic but still)

1. Protection of the athletes' health
2. Respect for medical and sports ethics
3. Ensuring an equal chance for everyone during competition

The first point is rather obvious. Drugs are unregulated and have been proved to cause adverse long term effects to the user. The second point deals with various ethical concerns that can arise from future scientific testing that could cross biomedical ethics guidelines as well at individual sports rules of fair play. The final point seems to include the previous point; it ensures that by eliminating drugs the playing field is level, or as level as it can be pre-drug. This of course is a whole other issue where social economic status of countries comes into play as well as a respective countries dedication of resources to sports. Just to humor this notion think of the amount of money China pours into gymnastics versus the money put into Columbia's single marathon runner. However that debate is neither here nor there.  The idea is that the legalizing of drugs would make it harder for athletes to afford especially given that in most sports athletes don't receive $150 million salaries.

With a little background out of the way I would like to touch on the depressing state of American sports WRT the drug issue. People have been blasting Track as being a dirty sport, however what people failed to see is that track, just like cycling actually tests its athletes on a constant (and random) basis, as well as having harsh punishments for breaking the bylaws of the sport. If Marion Jones was only prohibited from competing in 2 months of meets no one would care, however a 2 year ban is a big deal. Think about how much money the average basketball player would lose in salary (including endorsements), as well as the loss in revenue for the team if their star player is out. Your right it would be a lot of money and could handicap a franchise. Imagine the Bulls without Jordan? Would that team have been the same? No it wouldn't. What I will loosely define as "True Olympic" sports, have harsh punishments and lengthy regulations when it comes to the use of PED's in and out of competition. I will often refer to track for that is what I know and I don't feel like doing too much research right now. Let me know if you have any info on other sports. In track, a second offense is a life time ban. You get two chances and after that you are done forever. Right now British 100m sensation  Dwain Chambers is fighting his way back after completing his 2 year ban from track. He has to try even harder because his reputation is tarnished, making it harder to gain entry to elite meets and to gain sponsorships. His effort is admirable and I applaud his efforts to make a clean start (excuse the pun). He has to work hard, for if he doesn't not only will he be done as a result of failure to gain income, but he could relapse into use of PED's to regain his old form, and then earn a life time ban. We blast these athletes because their failures are that much worse. A failed drug test in a "True Olympic" sport results in not only shame, but in the current culture in these sports a banishing effect. Take all the meets that refused to allow Marion Jones to compete because there were "rumors" that she might be connected to PED's.

This is where I am coming from when I see headlines such as those that graced the papers today. Manny Ramirez used drugs and got caught. His punishment is a 50 game suspension. Fox sports says his salary is $23,854,494 per year or for 162 games...what?????  He has been suspended for 1/3rd of the season which means he is losing just shy of $8 million in game play. However this isn't even mentioning those who will not come out to watch the LA squad play because he is not on the roster for those games, or who no deem this LA not worth their respect because they represent corruption in a sport that has fallen very far from its days as a game of skill and athleticism.  He is hurting the team that pays him. Not only that, but he is hurting the sport. I applaud the MLB for their attempt at a more "stringent" policy they adopted in 2006 with 50-100-Lifetime suspensions, however its still a failure.

Let us look at the incentive for "star" athletes to stop using. Manny will still earn 2/3 of his total salary at the least. This means his risk (no idea how long he has been taking) cost him $8 million, but he still makes $16 million on this gamble. Even his second gamble would cost him around $15 million, but he still makes $9 million! Then, yes a life time ban would cost him everything, but it still remains that he stands to only lose (assuming his salary stays constant and he is caught one time a season) about half his salary over two years. This means he can cheat (now) and once more in the future and still stand to make $25.5 million over the next two years while only playing 170 of the 320 games in the full season.  He could then go clean and be fine for the rest of his life time. Sure he will have a "*" but who cares when you have more cold hard cash than any of the USA automakers!

 Now lets see what would happen to him if he had been a track athlete (assuming same salary) and was caught using PED's. He would stand to loose a potential of $48 million over the next two years in possible earnings, period! This doesn't even include any other endorsements he may fail to receive. Not only that but every game he would have played in, the LA Dodgers would be forced to forfeit. Remember Marion Jones, well her positive tests cost her teammates on the relay squad their medals as well. Great teamwork.  I am not going to find the actual games he has played in, but assuming every game thus far in the season, would put LA at 0-27 with 123 games left to play. Last year LA won the West with a 100-62 record. This would mean that in order to equal last years performance LA would have to win the next 100 of 123 games or 81% of the rest of the season. To put that in context the 1906 Cubs have the best ever percentage of 76.3%. Beyond these issues come the possibility of criminal charges depending on what drugs have been used. Now lets assume by some random act of god Manny is able to come back to top form in 2 years and secure his old $23 million contract; is it worth risking this salary against never earning any money for playing professional baseball again? The MLB claims to have a "more stringent" policy, but really its not a big gamble considering that a player is never gone for longer than a season in the first two offenses and he still has the ability to earn money in those non suspended games. And considering the already over inflated salaries of our athletes these aren't large enough penalties compared to the financial incentives to continue to cheat.

Consider how many drug cheats we hear about from MLB or the NFL or NHL for that matter. There is little transparency in their testing methods or the research that goes into seeking out new testing techniques to help thwart new designer drugs, such as CERA. After reading Freakanomics a few years ago I have become a big propionate of the power of incentives. Lets look at baseball again. The incentives to cheat, the huge paycheck, outweigh the unlikely chance of being caught cheating or even the punishments for being caught twice. We as the public will forgive him, as we have done with countless other drug cheats in our overpaid sports and allow him to come back, because as long as someone can hit the long ball we don't care (see Barry Bonds). Remember these days?

 Now I would like to say on record that I feel the restrictions on Track are too week. I think one transgression should be a much longer ban, or even a life time ban for a single infraction. Take Bold the 100m, 4x100m and 200m Olympic Champion, who is looking to go big and wants to earn an unprecedented $10 million a year. Do you think he would want to gamble his $10 million / year and his countless hours and years of training against a lifetime ban? I think not, and why would Manny do the same with a $23 million/year salary. The answer is no one would. Not even the fresh out of college distance runner pulling in $20k a year and working out of a local running store. Not only that but most athletes have to pay back their earnings generated during the illegal usage period. This means they could no only lose potential earnings, but owe all their previous earnings. Could you imagine if Manny had to pay back years of earnings because of his infractions? Screw the asterisk the MLB puts next to records, he will lose millions upon millions of dollars. Perhaps the main argument against harsher standards (then the current IAAF, no the joke MLB ones) would be that at current there is not a good idea of what is illegal, since the supplement industry is unregulated. Here is a good/quick read on that subject. The blog is of Trey Hardee a University of Texas graduate and US Olympian in the Decathlon. Essentially he touches on the idea of a regulated supplement industry so athletes not going for performance enhancing drugs can remain safe from positive A and B tests. However this does not touch on Designer PED's. You can't accidentally take CERA or blood dope, and those are infractions for which a stricter ban could be put in place.

Ultimately the problem is not the athletes or the originations that represent or pay them. The problem is you. The incentive for any athlete to cheat is to gain an unfair advantage to gain the victor's seat. And in professional athletics that means more money, because we as a society reward our winners. Sure we will pay athletes who do well, but those who excel are the one's everyone wants to be, because they are famous, and they bring in the cash. Now I am not against this, however I am against continued support for cheaters. I am against continued support for organizations with lax regulations that allow for less risk adverse athletes to cheat. In the end of the summer, when Manny steps back on the field with that LA uniform on he should be chastised for letting the fans down, for hurting his team and sport and should be docked his large salary until he can prove he deserves the right be be paid that much. People should protest the MLB (and all other sports) until it (they) adopts realistic regulations against PED's and implements an intense and comprehensive (and random) drug testing policy. We can't as a society aren't allowed to get this pissed at an athlete who is simply taking advantage of a flawed system we have allowed. We have the power since we pay these people and thus it is our fault.  We almost have to applaud Manny Ramirez because he is just playing the game the way its allowed to be played.

In conclusion I understand that the issue of PED's in sports is a much more complex subject than I gave justice to. Here I am trying not to give a argument for or against the use of PED's however I tried to present a jumbled rhetoric covering the issues given the current rules and illegality of PED's. Also I tried to touch on the lack of consistencies from one sport to the next and point blame at the true culprit, ourselves. Perhaps the most fun of all this was analyzing the punishment as a monetary value. Sure a 50 game suspension seems like a lot, but its really not in terms of money, and in reality neither is a 100 game suspension. A possible reason for these brief ban's it the fan not wanting to see their favorite athlete gone for too long. Its hard to argue anything else since the IAAF 2-strike policy (2 year - lifetime) has been a precedent long before the MLB even cared about the use of PED's. And trust me, the argument that this is just to confusing and too hard to regulate across all sports so we should just legalize it all is a pretty poor choice of logic.

In summary, I want you to start thing about your opinions on this subject. And perhaps to think a bit more about what the repercussions really are for cheating.

Also you suck Rashid Ramzi thanks for robbing people of their chance at a medal ceremony at the Olympics. I almost hope for their sakes and the sake of the sport your B sample comes back negative for CERA.