Hacker News Reader

Comment by nashequilibrium | Hacker News Reader

This is an oversimplification, in reality you looking for a certain ratio of weight, muscle mass, lactic acid buildup and other blood markers. This ratio can only be sustained for a short period of time, which is why you ramp up to competitions and peak during competition week. I dont see why experienced coaches would keep an athlete in this peak state since they know its not possible. In another sport, cyclist get so low in weight that they become very susceptible to illness but once again, it's only maintained for a very short period of time.

View on HN

It's also a combination of drug management. Almost all competitive athletes at a high level use some type of steroids in off seasons.

It's not even competitive athletes. It's folks doing the local race.

Years ago, when I was an avid cyclist, I was turned off my first local race, a meaningless city race. Three guys, and two girls were doping in the parking lot. To this day I have yet to be at a single race where people aren't doping prior.

What does “doping in the parking lot” mean exactly?

I believe the parent meant people literally doping in the parking lot space.

Using performance enhancing drugs in the parking lot prior to the race.

I do not understand the mindset where you would cheat for essentially no payoff.

What do you mean by, "no payoff?"

Are you aware that winning is itself a payoff for certain people? And they want to win at everything, at every level?

You may not sympathize with these people, or agree with them, but they are not difficult to understand. In fact, they are easy to understand.

When people ask me why there is doping in masters bicycle racing, I quote: "Why are University Politics so vicious? Because the stakes are so small."

People's desire to "win," and the lengths they will go to "win," are not tied to economic or power rewards.

I think the university politics part is different because there is at least some "power" or "influence" that you get to field no matter how small. I look at individual sports like running / cycling in an amateur setting as a pure outlet for self improvement. If the only person who is looking at my time is me, then whom am I really cheating by improving it using steroids?

"I look at individual sports like running / cycling in an amateur setting as a pure outlet for self improvement."

Well, naturally if you look at it like that, then why cheat except possibly because you are curious about how far you can take your body with assistance?

But we are not the ones cheating, and the people who cheat do not look at amateur sports they way we do. To them, there is a top dog in everything, And it's meaningful to them to be the top dog.

No matter how small the pond, there's always somebody who cares very deeply about being the biggest fish.

Thanks for explaining patiently.

Used to compete in very high level amateur races in another sport. Winning for the sake of winning alone is addictive, though not always in a bad way. Some just become more obsessed than others.

I should add, not everyone dopes though. My sport was relatively clean due to the amateur nature and the limited efficacy. Those of us who leaned toward technical competency were usually able to take on the roid-dudes without too much difficulty.

But could you take on roid-dudes who also leaned toward technical competency?

Sure, but it's really complex. They existed but were somewhat rare because there just wasn't that much incentive because there wasn't any money. The ones who went that direction tended to either be in a different part of the sport that favored technical competency less (sorry US mens 8+...) or were just extremely frustrated with their performance because they didn't understand the multifaceted nature of the competition.

What sport, if you don't mind the question?

Rowing. Used to race the 1x/2x at the 'elite' level.

Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is also very niche, very little money in competing, yet there are hundreds of professionals who build their schools (with paying students) based on their competition record. There is no way to compete at the top (and even sub top) without juicing, because the top guys are extremely technical and very strong (and they can train 6 days a week, 2 times a day, plus s&c, which no normal human can sustain for months or years).

there is plenty of payoff, and I'm not just talking about the social aspect of it. contrived example: they could do a youtube channel and winning those races gets them the cred from viewers to bring them thousands a month.

Since everything is monitizible, we'll probably see cheating in many places we dont traditionally see it. It reminds me of the movie limitless, everyone successful was doing the drug

This is basically the fitness industry as it exists today.

>Almost all competitive athletes at a high level use some type of steroids

Wow. Surprised someone's willing to "go there" so to speak.

Yeah, a lot of these athletes are doping. And, well, let's just say that I think Mary is putting forth a narrative that renders herself in the best light possible. Everyone knows what NOP is about vis-a-vis drug use. Mary knew too, which tells you a lot about her.

But I also think this can be a cautionary tale for young athletes. (Though I'm not naive. I realize that very few will pay it any heed in the run up to Olympic trials.)

Everybody knows now that the NOP was about managed doping.

That wasn't known back then when she started the program in 2012. Per the NYT article on the NOP, Salazar didn't actually begin the illegally doping NOP athletes until late 2010 or 2011 (though he had begun experimenting on himself and his son by then). [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/sports/nike-oregon-projec...]

Is this speculation, an accusation, an inference or what?

I guess I'm saying: you need a source for this or at least a cogent argument or STFU.

When you get to the very pinnacle of athletic performance, freak genetics plays an outsized role. Michael Phelps is one obvious example to point at, or Usain Bolt, but another is Eero Mantryranta[1], who had a natural gene variant that was equivalent in effect on red blood cell effectiveness to massive EPO doping.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eero_M%C3%A4ntyranta#Genetics_...

This is one of the areas where the system is heavily weighted against some female athletes. Phelps has a genetic thing that means his blood is more efficient at carrying oxygen and he is called lucky and lauded for his (still impressive) efforts anyway. A woman who naturally produces more testosterone than the normal range is either not permitted to compete or has to be "drugged down" to do so.

source? I don't recall any sports that limit the amount of testosterone women can have. By women I mean people with XX chromosomes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/sports/caster-semenya-los...

Paywall bypass: http://archive.is/oEC0q

Track & field (governed the IAAF):

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/26/606039409...

And this has, in fact, affected actual (not merely theoretical) XX females:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/sports/caster-semenya-los...

Caster Semenya is an XY female, she wasn't lucky she just got male genes.

wow, that's crazy

Reply on news.ycombinator.com