chess online

chess online

Play online chess!

Lance Armstrong to lose his Tour de France titles
« Back to club forum
Pages: 12
Go to the last post
FromMessage
mrmarmalade
24-Aug-12, 20:17

I would allow Dem Pirates to reach the 300th position on the Ladder, before I would tolerate ONE unsavory point advantage. Ain't my style, bro. I would dissolve our team so quickly if we ever took that path for a minute. It's not worth my time... We rise and we survive as a cohesive unit... I know how to manipulate the #1 ladder rankings, dude. I won't and I don't do it... We EARN our keep. As does Smashed Crabs.
brianinpdx
24-Aug-12, 20:19

Holy freaking peanut gallery. look at all the fun I've missed wake surfing in Texas these last days....
sad_but_true
24-Aug-12, 20:49

At the End of the day If ur going to Cheat ur way to a Podium Spot i hope u fall off & break ur legs. I hate to think of my team winning with the help of cheaters. it's very important to have some kind of activity where you can say to people 'this is on the level.' You respect the rules, you respect your opponents, you respect yourself. You play fair. I think that bleeds over into life as well. I don't want my grandchildren to have to become chemical stockpiles in order to be good at sports.

Honour, Honesty, Respect ... Im done, Peace out
johnclark
24-Aug-12, 21:34

None of you have yet to answer the question of why performance enhancing technology is OK in some areas but considered cheating in others.
chilliman
24-Aug-12, 21:54

sneakily taking drugs and masking agents is a lot different to buying state of the art running shoes, surely the difference does not need explanation
johnclark
24-Aug-12, 21:58

@chilliman: That still doesn't answer the question of why certain performance enhancers are accepted and others are considered cheating.
chilliman
24-Aug-12, 22:44

JC - are you asking for the sake of debate or are you asking because you do not understand?

if the latter then I would like to refer you to one of the many anti-doping bodies such as the WADA or USADA or even the NFL or MLB etc etc

if the former then I appreciate your need for discussion and the exchange of ideas. you are a smart man so I know this is the reason why you are seeking answers.

the use of PEDs is all about gaining an unfair advantage over your opponent. doping is unethical, unsportsmanlike, unhealthy and legislated against.

are you pro-doping John?
johnclark
25-Aug-12, 22:13

@chilliman: Yes to both. "sneakily taking drugs and masking agents..." Does not speak to the issue as to why some performance enhancers are OK and others or not. Plus, I don't understand that logic of saying yes to one and no to the other.

What is the unfair advantage if your opponent takes PEDs and you choose not too? Is that not the same as your opponent using an over sized tennis racket and you choose to use a smaller Arthur Ash version?

How do certain chemical compounds, that perhaps increase certain hormones in one's system, differ from other chemical compounds that promote other things, e.g., bone density, metabloism, etc? Logically, they both promote performance.

Playing football and boxing are unhealthy. So we can toss that.

Unethical? Ethics change.

Legislated against? Yep. I think that is the only argument that holds water against doping.

So who's with me FOR CHANGING THE DOPING RULES in atheletics?
sad_but_true
25-Aug-12, 22:59

YEah Mate that is a great idea, "CHANGING THE DOPING RULES in atheletics?" My little boy is 6. i might wait till hes atleast 10 thou before i start doping him up so he can be competitive
chilliman
25-Aug-12, 23:14

JC if you can't see there's a difference then I don't think I can explain it to you.
chilliman
26-Aug-12, 00:31

this topic is just a fraction of what's been written online about Lance and the USADA - maybe they should just publicize what evidence they have and end the speculation.
tactical_abyss
26-Aug-12, 12:42

I never followed the Tour De france,nor does it interest me at all.Its interesting on a side note however,how many legal steroidal drugs and other muscle enhancers you can purchase over the counter without a prescription.Notice I said... legal and without a prescription.Yes,those would still show up in tests,but for the average supplement user that is not into competition or will get tested,it dosen't matter then.

In the late 1970's to about the late 1990's,I was working out very hard at the gym,3 times a week,sometimes 4 times a week.But I wasen't getting that big muscle mass I was seeking.Genetics plays a role of course,and I knew that,but I wanted more.Some guys at the gym were shooting up full strength steroids.I said no,no to that!But then,if you look closely in the better supplement stores,you can find a small shelve that contains LEGAL steroids made from Rye Germ oils(betastita sterols),andresole(spelled wrong but something like that!),sublinguals,creatine,concentrated amino's(orthinine,arginine and a few others I cannot remember anymore),that will definitely increase muscle mass and performance).Of course,there are the expensive and better whey powders that contain some of the above ingredients.All legal and without a prescription.What some guys were doing was loading up on these things above the recommended dosages,to get very close to the results of the illegal stuff,but it simply took longer to show the results.
I stopped taking that crap over 10 years ago after I noticed that my liver was becoming enlarged,probably due to overloading the processing of this crap.Its not worth it!So,later in the years the so called "greek look"was more popular.....smaller,lean with definition,rather than the "big massive V shaped monster look"!Atleast on the east coast of the US!So,the same muscle mass increasing steroids are not nearly as popular as they were 20 years ago.

Its strange,but some of the supplement stores would even sell a type of paint thinner(yes,paint thinner!),that when applied to a sore elbow,for instance would practically evaporate the pain instantly,better than any prescription pain killers or regular over the counter pill.I can't remember the name of the stuff,but it could NOT be put on the store shelves,since it was not considered a "legal"supplement to be sold in a vitamin store.BUT,somehow a loophole in the local law ALLOWED to to be sold BEHIND the counter and NOT sitting on top of the counter,as long as it was NOT openly visible to the customer.But you had to ASK for it,it could not be listed or promoted by the stores.There were cancer causing ingredients in the stuff,but serious body builders still bought the stuff,figuring a bit here and there on their extremities would not be harmful.

What people do,to look and perform,is amazing and dangerous.I was one of them back then!
Yes,got the women by the boat loads...but the risk was not worth it!
kneilca2
26-Aug-12, 21:09

@JC
You ask a legitimate question and it has set off a barrage of reactions. I think, though, for starters, the difference between bigger raquets, special training and psychological gamesmanship and the use of steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs might boil down to transparency, saftey (health risks) and having a level playing-field.

The drugs are invisible during the competition. Not the biggest deal, since the training is also not necessarily public, but still a factor. Safety and health risks are a more serious consideration. Sports bodies should not encourage risky practices that create the potential for long-term side affects and health issues for athletes. There are already some, and perhaps the bodies need to look at a few, but they've made progress in women's gymnastics, for example, by raising the minimum age from 14 to 16 to compete in the Olympics. Do we really want to create an atmosphere where the doctors and chemists are the determining factors in winning? Let's at least maintain the myth that character and hard work are the deciding factors when it comes to winning.
johnclark
26-Aug-12, 21:38

@I_Have_Arrived: I (and I'm sure the other contributors also) thank you for your comment. Your description of legal performance enhancing supplements is very informative. And it is clear that you would not recommend certain compounds in excessive quantities.

@chilliman: Quit thinking with your heart and use your brain.
tactical_abyss
26-Aug-12, 21:48

thanks johnclark.
Yes,while there are legal steroids out there,I would recommend taking absolute zero on those supplements.I do recommend a good whey powder protein after a workout,but thats about it.
A good protein is necessary to actually help build tissue fiber after a workout.Many people do not even realize that you actually micro tear muscle fibers after an intense workout(your suppose to!)...and then a protein will help mend and further develop those tears with increased growth as your muscles get bigger.I'm not working out anymore,but hope to get back into it soon.My job (nightshift)burns me out,so i have no energy left to do a good workout.When i worked dayshift,well,that was a different story.
tactical_abyss
26-Aug-12, 22:02

Also,I do not mean to get off the subject too far in regards to Armstrong,but just made some sidenotes on the subject.I must again admit,however,unlike others,I have no care either way about a cyclist in France.Being from America,we are the football,baseball and boxing freaks.I haven't rode a bike since 1968.And no offense,but when someone from England or those other countries mention the word "Cricket",I have as much interest in that sport as the desire to find one particular speck of sand under 50 million tons of sand.
kneilca2
26-Aug-12, 22:12

@i_have_arrived
I think the topic here is more about the concept of sport and its role in society vs. any particular sport, or perhaps it's integrity in sport, or yet still, whether sports icons are heroic figures who deserve our attention or just lucky shmchuks who got lucky and parlayed their success into riches and fame.
Come to think of it, where's that beach with the 50 million tons of sand? There's a particular grain that has attracted my attention. LOL!
johnclark
26-Aug-12, 22:19

@iha: So, speaking to PERFORMANCE ENHANCERS, what are your thoughts on banned substances? How do you see the difference between technologically advanced equipment, diet, training, and analysis, which I consider to enhance athletic performance from performance enhancing supplements? Should all of it be banned?
tactical_abyss
26-Aug-12, 22:26

I think any big beach has 50 million tons of sand if it is miles long and many feet deep!
Antiqua,for example,has 365 beaches,according to the travel brochure!

Its the only humor I could think of right now....since I am a real beach bum!
I do not disagree with you kneilca,just blurting out some things about drugs in general and other sports.Can you imagine in the 40's and 50's the amount of drugs used before all this testing became absolute?Boxing and other sports,i'm sure.
chilliman
26-Aug-12, 22:59

@JC - I am. how is it that the rest of the world is wrong in their thinking about drugs/doping and you are the only one with clear thinking?

hahaha - no problem though, we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't mean all opinions are correct.
johnclark
26-Aug-12, 23:10

@chilliman: Just pointing out that you comments are opinions and preconceptions without logical foundations. I ask WHY some performance enhancers are considered cheating and others are not and you respond that some are evil, unhealthy, an unethical. Your responses seem terribly subjective.
chilliman
26-Aug-12, 23:29

JC - the opinions and preconceptions are not exclusively mine, modern society has dictated what is acceptable in regards to what is a competitive advantage and what is considered cheating - not me. it is fine that you don't agree with what society says is acceptable but please don't single me out as being the only one who disagrees with doping/steroids/drugs.

I support your position in being outspoken in challenging society's view John even if you have taken the unpopular position on this subject. feel free to try to change society's opinion if you want to but like you, I'm not changing my opinion.

maybe in 100 years pharmaceuticals will be an acceptable part of sport but as of right now they are not whether you agree or not.
chilliman
15-Jan-13, 13:04

and now
it appears we will soon see the much awaited Oprah induced confession... this will be interesting!
pennsylvaniadan
15-Jan-13, 13:32

I've tried about everything---steroids, blood transfusions, brain stimulation---and I still can't keep my rating above 1500--what the hell---lol
johnclark
15-Jan-13, 17:12

LOL!!, penndan. 
chilliman
15-Jan-13, 23:13

you know, I was going to make some mention of CEDs (chess enhancing drugs) but you beat me to it - good one!!!
pennsylvaniadan
15-Jan-13, 23:54

Lol---Reminds me of the old Jefferson Airplane song "White Rabbit"-----trying to play Chess on acid and the Kights get up and tell you where to go---lol---in my case it would be the Bishops---I'm always getting told off by them----lol
sad_but_true
17-Jan-13, 02:22

haha .. i keep trripping over my pawns  
mikesiva
03-Feb-13, 05:09

Athletics now has a very good drug-testing programme...it would suit other sports to adopt it.
Pages: 12
Go to the last post



GameKnot: play chess online, chess clubs, Internet chess league, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.