They should have it in Bogata, Columbia and Kevin Neelon should report live on the proceedings.

"He's pulled his arms off!"

I don't see any athlete who is both close enough to world records and willing to forfeit the rest of their career to enter this clownshow.

Let's say steroids give a 5% improvement in the 100m sprint. Probably more in terms of absolute strength, but a sprint isn't pure strength. 9.58s is the WR, so you're looking for a runner who does 10.08s and is willing to juice up for a few years. Any runner doing 10.08 with a few years left in their career is 100% thinking an Olympic team and/or pro contract is in their future, if not already attained. No athletics governing board is ever letting somebody compete if they have so openly doped. You're going to get guys who run 11.5s and know they're never getting a pro contract. Doped to the gills what do they run? 10.9s at best?

Ross Tucker had a good take - Instead of spending millions of dollars on this CF, why not spend those millions on ~3 amazing top tier athletes, allow them to dope under the care of a sports medicine doctor as an actual observed experiment, and see if any of those 3 can break WR's.

This experiment has been going on for years in powerlifting. No arms pulled off, just women pissing themselves deadlifting.

And in fairness I'm not sure that's a steroids thing or just a woman thing.

In all fairness this is pretty much the same as the NFL or Olympics, just people are open about it.

It would be interesting to see the results of a study like that, but I would think you'd run into the same problem you mentioned above--where do you find 3 athletes who are top tier, but willing to forfeit the rest of their careers?

Agreed.

From all the previous athletes caught in just about every sport and the posts on here indicating a drug test is an IQ test, it's doubtful someone "juiced" could break the WR set by someone who was also juicing.

I'm disappointed in all the doping that seems to be going on because the athletes might as well be cutting the course or cheating in some other manner.

But when the UK doping agency says it "flies in the face of fair play", I snicker. It appears there's little fair play going on even with the testing.

---

Not a coach. Not a FOP Tri/swimmer/biker/runner. Barely a MOP AGer.
But I'm learning and making progress.

James Magnussen says he's in:
https://swimswam.com/...r-at-enhanced-games/

---

I wrote this, you should read it:
https://www.slowtwitch.com/...n_Swimming_6700.html

Maybe he'll croak it as a result then we can all point to the complete stupidity.

But lacks the prestige associated with events that aren’t open about it, which is why I think these will fail. If you get athletes at the peak of the career and throw LIV-like money at them, this has a chance of being successful.

They already have competitions where there is no drug testing and high level performance and that is masters racing

Doping isn't binary. The best cheating athletes are passing tests because of dosing and timing. Without rules, you can push doses higher and keep levels up until the competition.

Yes, but if your gain is 5%-10% over a non-juiced athlete, it seems significantly less against someone who juiced up to a deadline.

---

Not a coach. Not a FOP Tri/swimmer/biker/runner. Barely a MOP AGer.
But I'm learning and making progress.

 

Throws some nice shade:

"We're pretty aware as Olympians, particularly in Australia, that performance enhancements are going on in other countries, but it's not a level playing field internationally."

"I want to go to America, I want to get the right advice and take the right supplements."

---

***

Indeed!

To turn it on it's head.... If these athletes fail to get great results totally juiced up what does that say about the normal Olympics etc?

Let's hope they smash WRs.

If they don't it'll raise eyebrows for sure.

Eye brows are already raised imo

I don't think they'll destroy too many records. It'll only attract b-listers and those who couldn't make it legitimately. People often have this idea that if they took steroids they'd be the next Usain Bolt or Mike Trout but it just doesn't work like that. Yes, maybe if you took the person who came in fourth in the Olympic sprint, juiced them up to the gills, then they could get a record. However, the juiced Olympics won't likely attract even this level of athletes.

While this is not a direct reply to you:

A lot of people think it would be great to see what people could do but, would you be OK with it if it was your son or daughter?

That normally pisses people off enough that they stop and think.

Not sure. There's been quite a few athletes that have doped and have seen significant improvements in performance and rankings. Justin Gatlin was a pretty average sprinter 10.36 as a 19 year old which would place him 3450th in the world. 4 years later he's number 1 in the world. Same with Marion Jones, something like 1700th in the world as a 19 year old. Tyson Gay same same. 400th in the world in 2005 and then fastest in the world the next year. World Champion the year after that. And it's the same in other sports, the Irish swimmer Michelle Smith was way down the rankings (500th or something) for various events and ended up Olympic champion over a short period of time.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but NBA does not do any testing either?

On paper, UEFA also has a "rigorous" testing program, but I sometimes wonder if they just have to keep it for appearances and politics.

That is the argument of the organizers. It is not an even playing field at the moment unless it is allowed. e.g. the JV guy tests positive for something that seems to implicate a sophisticated program while some other pro in South America tests positive for a veterinarian grade steroid.

Can't think of a better example than the Armstrong days, where everyone around him were testing positive while he was "donating" funds to the UCI to allegedly cover positives.

I am not sure the enhanced games vision is the way to go though..

While not addressed to me, I absolutely would not be okay with my daughters doing anything like this. It's a dumb idea.

My opinion on the enhanced games.

Performance Insights: I’m genuinely curious about the expected performances and am eager to see detailed data on what athletes are taking and how it impacts their performance. I advocate for a data/science-driven approach to this exploration.

Ethical Concerns: I’m concerned about the “Black Mirror effect” of these games and the ethical and societal implications they might have, although I find it challenging to quantify these concerns.

Reputation vs. Record: Initially, I was skeptical that world records would be broken in the first edition, considering the reputational and sponsorship risks for top-tier athletes.

Economic Viability: I wonder how athletes plan to monetize their participation and foresee potential boosts in visibility and engagement through established podcast networks like Huberman and All-In.

Medical Advancements: I’m hopeful for positive medical outcomes from the games, such as gaining insights from enhanced athletes similar to Lance Armstrong cases, which could benefit broader medical applications.

Financial Influence: Reflecting on the broader implications, I’m pondering the impact of commercializing enhancement and making “juicing” more mainstream.

I guess this is where the spending millions on ~3 athletes comes in. I'm sure there would be enough top level athletes who are there or there abouts who would give up their career to be set up for the rest of their lives.

Read in their newsletter that they are now looking for 10 athletes to shoot a documentary. Each athlete gets $100k stipend. They are not kidding around at putting these games together!

https://enhanced.org/apply/