Boxing folklore is littered with bouts who will always have a asterik mark because of use of or suspicious activity of PEDs , stimulants , painkillers or diuretics. Marquez vs Pacquiano 4 fight PEDS Pryor vs Arguello first fight stimulants what did Panama Lewis have in the mystery blue bottle ? Kinchen vs Hearns Kinchen tested postive for painkiller lidocaine. Gatti vs Gamache Diuretics Gatti came in 15lbs heavier and Gamache as a result of ko got brain damage and won lawsuit.
Lots of people use the copout of "they're all using" so we get a level playing field again. That falls flat on so many levels though. First there's the sudden change in body type issue, often combined with more power like Povetkin, JMM and Holyfield for example. You can't tell me they were always on that stuff and after years and years it suddenly kicked in. Also the sudden duracell bunny thing after stamina issues shows that they weren't on peds before or maybe something with far less effectiveness. There's the thing that not everybody reacts the same on peds. Some have a much higher benefit from it as others due to their genetical makeup. And last but not least, the glaring weakness thing, that removes a guy's chances to ever become world level, which in some cases can be solved by using peds, like huge stamina issues for example. So if a guy that could never, ever make the step without medication, suddely is in the mix due to ped use, how can anyone act like it's a level playing field if everyone uses with that in mind?!
Here is my major concern of PED use in sports. It is no secret that yes, many athletes have taken some type of PEDs in their career. However, we should never make it acceptable to use these substances. If this becomes the norm or accepted, the use of PEDs will increase in other ways of life. When you use some of these types of drugs, it may have side effects on your body, many of them permanent. Just look at the long term effects of some steroids. Although they become safer when monitored by a doctor, you have to wonder if the body is perfectly healthy after discontinuing use. We are putting foreign substances into our body which we did not evolve or adapt to over hundreds of thousands of years, so there will always be negative side effects. I fear that eventually, if PED use is accepted, all kids will be on some kind of drug to improve learning (adderall or concerta), and every guy is gonna be taking something to make his willy longer. This is a problem because in order to compete with other humans, you will have to take these things. But taking them may actually decrease your quality of life over time. It's sad that because of cheaters like Lance Armstrong, the guy whos excuse was "everyone else is doing it" we may soon end up in this situation as a species. Another example of the creep of PED's is finasteride. When male humans are competing for mates, baldness is looked at as a negative feature by many females. So men take a drug called finasteride, which ironically, can make it so you can never experience an erection again. Pretty sad that people are so willing to cheat their genetics they may ruin their life. Also don't be the smart *** who says "OK I just won't take them I don't care what others do." You are missing the whole point, they are gaining advantage over you by undercutting your honor and you may possibly be forced into a situation where you must destroy your body to compete in some task. I believe all athletes and all humans should be banned from taking these substances to keep us from falling into another disgusting race to the bottom.
There's no such thing as a level playing field in professional boxing. The entire sport is based on building up stars by unfair advantages. Talented or marketable prospects are given every conceivable advantage. If it was a level playing field it would be far more difficult for promoters to get any fighter to stand out from the bunch and most fans would lose interest. Therefore they make sure there is no level playing field. Drugs should be the least concern. Anyone can get drugs. I don't see why athletes are stigmatized for taking drugs that might make them better when the rest of society is allowed to take drugs to get on with their life demands.
I don't believe many boxing fans are truly concerned with boxers punching too hard. If PEDS are bad for the reason you describe then purposefully training to increase punching power is immoral too. Maybe punching anyone in the head, even lightly, is fundamentally wrong anyway. Let's not pretend it's drugs that made boxing immoral.
Without the drugs pumping through his veins, he'd be resigned to freak shows fighting his own fans for 100k a pop.
The problem with all these anti-PED arguments is they almost assume these professional sports champions aren't living a completely extreme existence anyway. The general public seems to want it both ways. You want your superhuman super-driven champions, full-time professionals, idealised heroes who perform incredible feats, dedicating themselves with single-minded focus. But you want them to appear as happy, balanced and natural doing what they do. These are unrealistic and contradictory expectations. Unless you support a return to pure amateurism and an end to sport as we know it, you are absolutely condoning extreme lifestyles to supply us with 'great' athletes. It seems odd to me that people then draw the line so strongly at performance enhancing drugs.
Manny Pacquiao leads the way for clean boxing. Golovkin, Lomachenko, and Kovalev are all shining examples of clean boxing in a dark, shady world rife with PEDs.
As long as they pass the fight night test I can't care less of what they do or are "on" the rest of the time. It's too much testing nowadays, enjoy the fights and stop concentrating on what everyone is doing all the time.
Professional athletes have always done whatever it took to win. The idea that there's this great honour and morality in sports, or was once upon a time, is utterly naive. There are stories of Olympians back in Ancient Greece who were caught cheating to win contests. There are countless stories of boxers cheating in the most horrendous ways long before PEDs came on the scene. The competitive spirit and morality do not go together. One is focused on purely personal gain, the other on societal harmony. A truly moral athlete would be one who isn't concerned whether he wins or loses, and is therefore not likely to ever reach the pinnacle of any sport. You can't be focussed on trying to be the best and stop short at any stage because of moral scruples. It's all or nothing. I find it particularly amusing how boxing fans, people who get their jollies from watching two men beating each other to a pulp, suddenly become Sensitive Susies when the issue of PEDs is raised, resorting to cornball lines like, "taking food off the fighter's table," as if that's never been the case throughout the whole history of boxing. Do PEDs increase the likelihood of causing physical harm to the opponent? Of course they do. So does training to increase punching power through bag work and extreme physical exercise. Why is one more acceptable than another?
I agree with the sentiment for testing needs to catch up to it. Lance Armstrong was an absolute God and he never failed a test but look at him now.
Oh lord lol you do know that that one time Richard hall also tested positive and his levels were 2x as high? Have you seen the fight?