I'm not actually sure how far you should go. Cheats certainly need to be identified, then what? I suppose in theory you'd want it to play out as follows:
-cheat gets identified
-cheat confesses
-cheat is DQed
-we move on
and that's it. But almost without fail the cheat does and says shit that ensures people stay interested. They continue to be abusive, lie, cheat, screw over people etc What amazed me about Julie Miller's situation is how poorly advised she was by friends and family. All she had to do was stick up her hand, admit she cut the course = no New York Times article. She and her family still deny she cheated , even though there's a fucking video camera that filmed all 1900 competitors at IM Canada apart from her.
-cheat gets identified
-cheat confesses
-cheat is DQed
-we move on
and that's it. But almost without fail the cheat does and says shit that ensures people stay interested. They continue to be abusive, lie, cheat, screw over people etc What amazed me about Julie Miller's situation is how poorly advised she was by friends and family. All she had to do was stick up her hand, admit she cut the course = no New York Times article. She and her family still deny she cheated , even though there's a fucking video camera that filmed all 1900 competitors at IM Canada apart from her.