Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Not really, all this tells me is that Armstrong probably had a better team of doping doctors and a better drug regime then other competitors not that he was genetically superior, or trained better or had a more fierce mental state.
He just had a better quality of drugs.
|
Does that matter?
There is a direct link between dollars spent and medals won at the olympics. Is access to the best drug program any different between access to the best coaches, training, nutrition, and equipment?
Even going back to the origins of sport it was rich people competing against eachother because they have time and money. The poor didn't have time for sport. Why is drugs the hill people decide to die on.
There is no ideal competition that competes genetics and the will and determination of athletes without all of these other factors. Sport pretends to be this but it never has been.
Going back to cycling I think it is fair to assume that each of the well funded teams had equally well funded drug programs so that the top teams were always in fair competition with eachother.