• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wipe out all pre 2005 world records?

Should pre 2005 Sports World Records be wiped out?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 1 11.1%

  • No.

    Votes: 8 88.9%

  • Other.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    9
Infinite Chaos

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
23,801
Reaction score
16,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If the proposals are accepted by the IAAF, a world record would only be recognised if it meets all three of the following criteria:
  • It was achieved at a competition on a list of approved international events where the highest standards of officiating and technical equipment can be guaranteed;
  • The athlete had been subject to an agreed number of doping control tests in the months leading up to it;
  • The doping control sample taken after the record was stored and available for re-testing for 10 years.

The IAAF has stored blood and urine samples only since 2005 and current records that do not meet the new criteria would remain on an "all-time list", but not be officially recognised as records.Link.
Click to expand...

I can't agree this terrible idea, I think there may be better ways to deal with doping cheating and fake records - for one, why not allow a separate "anything goes" world championship where drugs are allowed? That way, we could at least see how far the human body could be developed in contrast to a "clean" championship.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
I can't agree this terrible idea, I think there may be better ways to deal with doping cheating and fake records - for one, why not allow a separate "anything goes" world championship where drugs are allowed? That way, we could at least see how far the human body could be developed in contrast to a "clean" championship.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's ethical... gives incentive to people going way overboard with doping. And you don't want to encourage that kind of competition.
 
So many world records were set in this era before stricter testing, look at Paula for example her WR is two minutes faster than anyone else. If Paula was Russian we would be up in arms.
 
Higgins86 said:
So many world records were set in this era before stricter testing, look at Paula for example her WR is two minutes faster than anyone else. If Paula was Russian we would be up in arms.
Click to expand...

Do you think Paula Radcliffe doped up? I am still not convinced wiping out a whole lot of records just because of a few dope cheats is the way to go.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Do you think Paula Radcliffe doped up? I am still not convinced wiping out a whole lot of records just because of a few dope cheats is the way to go.
Click to expand...

I think there are questions about her intergrity given the lack of transparency, the blood doping results/allegations and the fact she trained alone.
Even athletes who didn't break records are now being looked at in a different light, look at golden girl Dame Kelly Holmes for example. Struggling to win races,gets injured a lot and then in the run up to 2004 Athens she starts training with Mutola in Africa and comes back absolutely shredded and wins two Golds. Seriously look at pictures of Kelly from Athens she's ripped.
I think it's sad but the doping was so wide spread in this era that it's needs to be addressed. Maybe put a * next to their records.
 
No. If they decide to adopt these standards then record holders prior to that should be grandfathered.
 
Higgins86 said:
I think there are questions about her intergrity given the lack of transparency, the blood doping results/allegations and the fact she trained alone.
Even athletes who didn't break records are now being looked at in a different light, look at golden girl Dame Kelly Holmes for example. Struggling to win races,gets injured a lot and then in the run up to 2004 Athens she starts training with Mutola in Africa and comes back absolutely shredded and wins two Golds. Seriously look at pictures of Kelly from Athens she's ripped.
I think it's sad but the doping was so wide spread in this era that it's needs to be addressed. Maybe put a * next to their records.
Click to expand...

Yes but pre 2005 means absolutely everything where there weren't full records of testing. This means records pre doping too. It tarnishes the good alongside the bad with no way to ever redeem themselves.

I like the * next to records though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom