Uneasy Rhetoric

You already know what this is about. Floyd Landis’ situation brings up two questions that are worth exploring. First, what’s the big deal about doping anyway, and second, is this really negatively affecting the sport of cycling or sports in general?

I admit, there’s a secret, very small, libertarian streak in me that thinks that, if an athlete wants to destroy his body and ruin his life in the long term for a short term boost, why not? It just makes the feats of daring-do more interesting and the physique of our professional athletes more exotic.

I’ll tell you why not. Because sports are competitive. If doping were suddenly legal in any sport, from individual sports like tennis or boxing to team sports like football or basketball to hybrids like cycling, then there would be pressure for every competitor to dope. It wouldn’t matter if the athlete wanted to remain healthy. Either he or she would be pressured to take performance enhancing drugs, or he or she would be out of a contract. Athletes would no longer be the fastest and the strongest. They would no longer be the ones featured in health magazines. They would be the ones who were willing to sacrifice themselves for their sport. Modern day gladiators.

There might be one or two athletes with just the right physique, or body chemistry, or superhuman dedication, that they could compete with the dopers. But we’d never get to know them. Performance enhancing drugs are a short cut, and in the impatient world of professional sports, in a world where doping is legal, coaches, trainers, and owners would not be willing to put the extra investment into a healthy athlete when they could get someone more quickly and easily with a few drugs.

Sports is a business, athletes are “labor,” and business proves time and again that “labor” is just a line on a spreadsheet.

But all of this is just speculation. Even if you did believe that doping should be legal, it wouldn’t matter. Competitions have rules, and doping is against the rules. If Landis did do something that was against the rules, then he needs to suffer the penalty. But until he is found guilty, I am presuming him innocent.

Unfortunately, Landis is already being skewered. Bicycling itself is being skewered. It is being called “the dirtiest sport.” Just by being a cyclist at the highest level, you are a suspect. I am not willing to dismiss the charges, as some would do, because they were leveled by a French laboratory (notice how the headline contains an implication not discussed in the story), and the French have had it in for American cyclists. Neither will I be willing to accept them without reservation if the second test comes up positive. Testosterone is a naturally occurring substance and, until other possible causes are fully explored, the doping charge remains in doubt.

Yes, I am a fan. Maybe my glasses are a suspicious shade of red. But I am not willing to take away from what was a spectacular tour, and one truly worth watching, for a change.

Now for the second question. Are the constant allegations of doping bad for cycling and for sports in general? Or as Scott Ostler of the San Francisco Chronicle asks, “does muck harm sports?”

Ostler says, and I tend to agree, that “the house of sports isn’t exactly collapsing.” Ostler seems to indicate that American sports fans, if not sports fans generally, take these scandals in stride and forget about them quickly.

I think there’s more to it than that. I think sports fans want scandal and intrigue. Fans love the conflict beyond the pitch. It creates a story beyond the competition and keeps what happened on Sunday in the news on Thursday.

Baseball practically builds extra-competitive intrigue into the fabric of the sport: the coach storming out to the pitcher’s mound or the manager getting in the umpire’s face. What would NASCAR be if drivers didn’t bad mouth each other (or worse)?

If cycling weren’t “the dirtiest sport,” as Ostler claims, would anyone (other than die hard cycling fans) even be interested? Lance Armstrong’s seven Tour victories were great, but didn’t all of the scandal surrounding those wins make his story so much more interesting?

Isn’t Basketball in the off-season more interesting when we’re arguing over a new arena? Who cares about the draft picks!

Time will tell whether Landis cheated the system or whether he has been wrongfully accused. As for me, I’ll be disappointed if he’s found guilty, but I’ll still follow the Tour next year. But if I can’t root for Landis, I think I’ll root for the guy from Luxembourg. That Alpe d’Huez win was très cool.