tjf1967 wrote
If professional athletes want to dope have at it. Playing field leveled.
There certainly is that argument that by eliminating all doping rules that it levels the playing field.
However, it only levels the playing field for those that are willing to stop at nothing to have the best performance. It screws up the playing field because any professional athlete at all concerned with long term personal health and safety can no longer be competitive with those producing the best results. If forces top athletes that would be the best without enhancement to either be sub-par and barely competitive or risk long term personal health risks up to and including premature death. It isn't fair to those that don't want to live on the edge of death.
Regarding the Lance issue, I think it is trite. All of the top cyclists were doping to the extreme in the Lance era. Lance just never got caught (or at least never had an official positive result). Testing seems much better now and many teams such as Garmin are stepping up apparently very tight internal guidelines and codes of conduct with true zero tolerance policies (which likely means they provide enhancements up to the point that is legal). But that is today. Cycling during Lance's run... you just couldn't post top results without doping. So whatever. I see no point in hunting him down. All the top cyclists did it and it was just the way things were (perhaps it still is but to a lesser extent).
It's funny in some ways... if Lance is found guilty of doping and looses his TdF titles, they just go to other cyclists who have been found guilty of doping but just weren't ruled against for the years they were runners up in the TdF. That really gets silly. Time to move on and worry about what is happening right now and look forward instead of in the rear view mirror.