Improving Performance Assessment: Task 1

Discuss whether performance enhancing drug use in sport is for personal success or because sport is “Big Business’
For some athletes, the risk of losing or even being less than the best is worse than the many consequences of doping in professional sports, and for decades, performance enhancing drug controversies have made headlines around the world. Drug use over the years in the sporting world has become a worldwide phenomenon due to the advancement in technology which has allowed for greater research and development of performance enhancing drugs. While drugs are generally categorized as detrimental to an individual’s health and social status, many athletes still choose to embark on experimenting with the opposing concept of drug use, in that it will supposedly benefit them in one way or another. Thus it has become a matter of issue to discuss whether performance enhancing drug use in sport is for either personal success or because sport is considered to be ‘Big Business’. I believe that while many athletes willingly take performance enhancing drugs for the concept of money, fame and recognition under the heading of ‘Big Business’, they first must have a desire to win and or ‘fit in’ for the benefit of personal success.
Predominantly, it is in an elite athlete’s best of intentions to want to be the best and to strive and commit themselves in order to achieve this optimal position. It is in their best interest to train to win with or without the influence of performance enhancing drugs. It has become increasingly common for an elite athlete to willingly decide to take such drugs to physically and psychologically aid in boosting their performance for personal success in the drive to win and to be at the top of their chosen sport. Due to an unavailability of access for all elite athletes worldwide, mainly in developing countries with limited technology available and knowledge of the harmful effects of performance enhancing drugs, they have been banned for use by all elite athletes to allow for fairer and safer competition. A recent drug scandal involving seven time winner of the Tour De France, Lance Armstrong was convicted of taking performance enhancing drugs during his career as a well-known American cyclist. In 1991, Armstrong competed in his first Tour DuPont (12-stage race, 1746km, 11 days) where he finished respectively in the middle of the pack. Armstrong went on to win not only the 1999 Tour De France, but the seven consecutive years that followed up until 2005. As a young cycling legend, Lance was an inspiration towards others not only for his incredible sporting talent, but also for becoming a survivor of cancer with only a 40% chance survival rate. In 2012, Armstrong’s Tour titles were placed under threat when the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency charged him for suspected illicit drug use. Although having denied all questions relating to using illegal drugs to boost his performance, in 2012, the USADA released vital evidence to confirm that he was in fact a drug cheat. Armstrong was officially stripped of all seven Tour De France titles with the International Cycling Union president stating that “Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling”. His statement is a clear indication of the representation of the general disgusted viewpoint of society at the time. It wasn’t until January 2013, during a television interview with Oprah Winfrey Armstrong confesses to taking hormones cortisone, testosterone and erythropoietin (EPO), and conducted blood transfusions to boost his oxygen levels. He confirms in the interview that he took illegal drugs as a professional athlete for personal success and a “ruthless desire to win at all costs…That desire, that attitude, that arrogance.” He characterises his actions whilst competing as “reckless” due to his naïve perception on the selfish, self-centred situation in which he placed himself. Armstrong furthermore concludes that he recognises the unnecessary extent to which he continued to enhance his cycling performance by taking the drugs and is willing to admit defeat and pay for his faults as well as to learn from his mistake. “The biggest challenge of the rest of my life is to not slip up again and not lose sight of what I have to do”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_0PSZ59Aws Lance Armstrong’s confession- Oprah’s Next Chapter-Oprah Winfrey Network.
Armstrong admits to taking illicit performance enhancing drugs during all 7 Tour De France races in the mid 1990’s and claims that he wouldn’t have been able to do it without the help of the drugs in his desire to win for personal success. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh6LoOqaIAQ Armstrong’s reckless behaviour and ruthless desire to win- Next Chapter- Oprah Winfrey Network
Correspondingly, the ambition to ‘fit in’ with society is categorized as personal success and is equally as significant as an athlete’s drive to succeed. Performance enhancing drugs may allow for an athlete to speed up their progress to match/overtake their competitors, placing less strain on training demands and allowing for a sense of normality/acceptance. In the 1988 Seoul Olympic Games, Canadian 100m sprinter Ben Johnson was up against American arch rival Carl Lewis. Johnson finished in 9.79 seconds, a new world record and was ecstatic that he had finally defeated the crowd favourite, Carl Lewis. However, in the same year his gold medal was stripped off him after the International Olympic Committee Medical Commission confirmed that Johnson had tested positive for the banned anabolic steroid Stanozolol. The news of his drug scandal shocked the nation. Johnson had fallen under the pressure to ‘fit in’ whilst also admittedly states that he wanted to “beat [his] rival, Carl Lewis”. He had made the risky commitment to take the steroid which would increase his strength, in turn, increasing his speed, under the athletics mantra of the time “if you don’t take it, you won’t make it”. Ben Johnson felt pressured in that 80% of the athletes during his time were taking performance enhancing drugs. He repeatedly questioned the motif “why should I train hard; doing it clean while the other [athletes] aren’t clean?” He was suspended from the sport of athletics for 2 years. Additionally, investigators had found that 6 out of the total 8 finalists that raced alongside Johnson in 1988, had also tested positive for doping, one of which being Carl Lewis. This outrageous evidence endorses that the majority of athletes were under the same pressure to ‘fit in’ with society’s demands for personal success. Johnson feels that he was “unlucky” and “unfairly picked for vilification” at the time of the widespread drug use in athletics. Johnson then goes on to say that “the world caved in on me …it cost me everything…I doped and I am sorry”. In 1993, when Johnson was banned for life from the sport after testing positive for drug use for a second time, he lost more than $3 million in athletic shoe and apparel contracts, endorsements and meet appearance fees. His drive for personal success was efficacious with the aid of extra pharmaceutical help, although he believed that he could have won the Olympic Games without the banned substance, highlighting the pressure to ‘fit in’.
Inversely, performance enhancing drug use in sport is not always about personal success, but rather for ‘Big Business’. A continuation to take drugs, in my opinion, is because of ‘Big Business’. Remaining at the top of your sport brings about a sense of power for the individual which countenances recognition leading to financial gain through prize money and endorsements. Lance Armstrong’s surprising drug scandal (as mentioned above) was formerly influenced by his ruthless desire to win for personal success, but then took a turn when he was consecutively successful in the Tour De France over several years. His incredible determination developed into a reckless act in his new ambition to be recognised, earning himself millions of dollars with the continuous aid of performance enhancing drugs. In his confession interview with Oprah Winfrey, Armstrong stated that “two things scare me: The first is getting hurt. But that's not nearly as scary as the second, which is losing.” Through many of his confessions, it is made clear that his instinct had developed into a concern for loss of reputation and fame. “Fame magnifies whoever you really are”. Oprah continued her interview with Armstrong as he answered “I was both a jerk and a humanitarian” Armstrong deeply regrets the decision he made as a young immature professional cyclist, sharing his thought process with the public in attempt to persuade other young athletes to control their actions in a world of ‘Big Business’ which stripped him of his seven victories. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMOJJmgfa0U ABC New, New York http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dxqQq6OaKY By the Numbers: Lance Armstrong’s fall from fame. The ListShowTV
Moreover, in many situations, the athlete may be (supposedly) unaware of the substances they are taking to boost their performance. This creates an opposing viewpoint in that the provider of the drug, a coach for example, is heavily influenced by the idea of ‘Big Business’, followed by the success rate of the athlete. American elite athlete Marian Jones, is an example of a fallen track and field athletics star who was unaware of the illegal substance she was taking, handed to her by her coach prior to the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. Jones was the first woman to win five track and field medals at a single Olympics. She had been a suspect to illicit drug use, yet claimed she was clean, having only taking necessary vitamin/mineral supplements. In 2006, she tested positive for a banned substance known as ‘the clear’, a type of performance enhancing anabolic steroid, but was later cleared by a follow-up test. Then in the following year, she pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators about her drug use and admitted to having taken steroids. The International Association of Athletics Federation withdrew all of Jones’ results and achievements since September 2000, including her 5 Olympic titles. She was sentenced to six months in prison in January 2008 for providing false statements to federal investigators. In a number of interviews, including one with Oprah Winfrey, Jones willingly opens up about her naïve and irreversible decision to “hire him as a coach” (referring to her coach Trevor Graham). Jones felt she was in an environment where she trusted the people around her, thus consenting to so called ‘flaxseed oil’ which was given to her by her coach as a perceived legal vitamin booster supplement. Jones’ claimed that “there were a number of vitamins that I needed to balance my system out, so I could be on an even plain field with everybody else”. At the time, she was completely unaware that she had been taking an illicit performance enhancing drug. She did not believe it was necessary for her to be involved in taking such substances as she was satisfied with her training and performance. She goes on to say that by taking the drug “nothing felt different”. In her statement, Jones is convinced that even though she was under the influence of performance enhancing drugs during her Olympic success, she did not feel as if it improved her performance and would not have altered the results if she’d been clean. She strongly believes that her coach was aware of the drug she had been given but holds herself responsible for “not being more careful with the people I associated with”. Under immense investigation, Trevor Graham was announced as being involved in a check-fraud scheme which destroyed Jones’ personal ambition to succeed in the sport she loved. Graham encouraged the use of the banned substance to enhance Jones’ muscle strength, therefore improving her overall performance and creating a world of ‘Big Business’, where he took financial advantage of her success. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ewja4q0z7s – Oprah interviews Marion Jones
Conclusively, it is evident from the discussion delivered that performance enhancing drug use in sport, if wittingly taken by an athlete is for personal success in aim to strive to be the best or to ‘fit in’ under the pressure placed by society’s demands. A continuation in the use of drugs then provides means for an alteration in the mindset of the athlete, linking successful performance to financial and reputation gains, creating ‘Big Business’.