[Closed] Guilty until proven innocent

Nor I, those that were clean during that period suffered from having to compete against dirty athletes and now they are being punished for what the others did.
I guess that the authorities don't want spend the legal fees in pursuing the dodgy ones.

They should just let people dope how they want. At least then there'd be no doubt. Plus it'd be more exciting seeing how far people can push themselves to set new records.

Plus it me more exciting seeing how [s]far[/s] people can [b]die to[/b] push themselves to set new records.

Prefer it clean

Chemical olympics? athletes wearing shirts "Sponsored by Glaxo". maybe not so good once they all start keeling over halfway through the race.

I guess that the authorities don't want spend the legal fees in pursuing the dodgy ones.

Or is it that they just don't have the ability to get the evidence? Post 2005 samples still exist and can be tested with the latest methods. Can they be kept forever? Can't imagine so - they must go 'off' at some point.

Would suck to be a clean WR holder who was effectively stripped like this but then again it must suck to be a clean female 100m sprinter now with effectively no chance of a WR.

They should just let people dope how they want.

16

Maybe 18.

Hard to say really.

I find it amazing that so many records of 'clean' athletes has stood for such a long time - through a time period of heavy doping by other athletes.

The idea that records are meaningless if not believed puzzles me. Who doesn't believe? The general public doesn't have a clue about doping so on the whole they are not worried.
I'm with Paula. The records stood under the conditions of the time and if doping created them but couldn't be detected then lets sleeping dogs lie. I would like to bet that somebody somewhere is today using something that is naughty but as it hasn't been spotted yet that's fair enough.
I can actually see some, I say some, validity in the "let them dope" idea. So much of an athletes life is artificial nowadays. Eg consuming any food supplement not found in the average diet is to some extent abnormal. Also I can also see a validity in the idea that its the athlete s body. I will not accept that society has to be responsible for our every move. If we chose to do something to harm ourselves then so be it. If you think that its worth a heart attack to win a bike race then good luck to you in my opinion. Of course that will be countered by saying that this will encourage the young to dope and I do agree there. However as in any sport there is choice.
Not condoning it all but trying to see both sides of an argument which is something most people won't bother to do.

There have been several examples of records being reset, ie when the javelinists started throwing so far they were endangering the crowd the spear was redesigned to create shorter throws.

Those records just can't be trusted, even the ones by the Brits, so I have no problem with them being reset and starting a new era.

I can see some logic to it to be honest. For sure expunging any records set by people who earlier or later had a doping conviction would be a start but maybe it doesn't go far enough. That said it is unfair on the clean athletes with WRs but a drastic WR reset would at least give a fresh starting point. I can see an awkward phase akin to altitude records where the main WR referenced is the post-wipe one but commentators also mention from time to time what the pre-wipe record was.

Only 2005 backwards?
Shirley it should be from 2016...

What happens when the next doping scandal emerges? Will they be re-setting the records every few years or so?

What happens when the next doping scandal emerges?

They will retest the samples collected for the purpose of retrospective testing, it is actually explained as part of the proposal.

Are athletes automatically tested if and when they set a new world record to validate the new record? I dont think it is a good idea because as stated above, where do you draw the line? Every time a test is developed that can detect something that enhances performance, do we reset the records again? Another thing is, although WR's have generally been bettered, do people like Roger Bannister fall foul of this along the lines of 'was he really the first man to run a 4 minute mile? He was a Dr after-all, who knows what he may have been doing to enhance his performance?'

[i]current records that do not meet the new criteria would remain on an "all-time list", but not be officially recognised as records.[/i]

What's the big deal then? There can't be that many records still standing from before 2005 (only 3 mentioned in the article) - and those that are will be on the All Time list, for whoever cares about these things.

What happens when the next doping scandal emerges? Will they be re-setting the records every few years or so?

And perhaps they should hold the medal ceremony some time after the race (say 25 years) so they can be sure nobody doped.

Every time a test is developed that can detect something that enhances performance, do we reset the records again?

The idea is that samples are retrospectively tested for 10 years, it is unlikely that any PED will go unknown for 10 years.

Where it is missing the point is as with Russia, athletes were able to go home in the off season take PEDS and have their samples falsified or as with Kenya, Ethiopia and Jamaica not be tested. Then with the benefit of all that PED supported training clean up before the in competition testing.

I guess the question is, is the will to protect the past clean or dirty, stronger than the will to protect the current and future potential record holders.