Ooh, I got John Lennon’s MBE!
I was only four at the time, but I was a very good girl!
I win at life. Take that!
Weren’t we all Time Magazine’s Man of the Year last year or something?
I dimly remember…
I’m not sure the Olympics people even have an official policy on this. I think that for the most part they prefer to stick their heads in the sand and say ‘Not happening! Not happening!’. I believe they take the view that if they started trying to retrospectively make amends whenever evidence of cheating came to light, this activity would quickly swamp all else and become a never-ending quagmire of claim and counter-claim.
Here in the UK we have a former Olympic swimmer called Sharon Davies who won a silver medal in 1980, when an East German swimmer took the gold. In subsequent years, it became abundantly clear that the East German team had all been cheating. This was beyond dispute… there was a TV documentary made about it, and former members of the German squad were right there on screen, admitting that they had taken drugs and cheated (although the gold ‘winner’ herself was not featured). Sharon took all her evidence to meet a representative of the Olympic committee (this was also televised) and he just didn’t want to know… in fact, he stormed out of the meeting in a huff. Later, Davies got an ‘official statement’ asserting that no change could be made to the results as they stood.
I guess it’s possible that in this case, with Marion Jones herself admitting it and ‘voluntarily’ handing back her medals and evidently wanting things to be put right, maybe they’ll do something (maybe they already have… sorry if I’m a bit behind with the news), but in general, if there’s anything less than a full confession like Jones’s, directly from the so-called ‘winner’, I think the committee prefer to ignore such matters, while busy arranging another overblown, commercially-suffocated caricature of the Olympic ideal where more cheats will win glory and more honest athletes will get nothing for their years of self-sacrifice and dedication.
Given what’s known about widespread doping and cheating, I think there should be a change of policy. Everyone lines up at the start, they fire the gun, whoever gets to the finishing tape first is the winner. How you get there is up to you, and no questions asked. If you’re taking steroids or Zeus knows what else, that’s up to you. It’s a chemical enhancement, but the athlete still has to train hard to win. Unfair advantage? Well, at one time, starting blocks were considered ‘an unfair advantage’ and there was serious debate about whether they should be permitted. It’s all arbitrary. You don’t want any artifical aids? Fine… let’s have the high jump without a specially designed crash mat/air bag on the other side.
Too big a change in the rules, too much a violation of the spirit of the thing? Well, remember that at one time Olympic atheletes were all supposed to be amateurs. They eventually had to scrap that rule, because it was clear that there was such widespread cheating and fraud on this point that if they started to really impose the rule, they’d hardly have any competition left worth the name. So they said ‘amateur or pro, we don’t care’. Likewise, they could say, ‘doped up or not, we don’t care’.
Unthinkable? Wait and see…
I won at risk over T/Sgt Doors. Your point?
I think they have a standard policy for stripping medals, and have had one for a very long time. They stripped Jim Thorpe of his medals from the 1912 Olympics, and bumped the next three fellows up a spot. They reinstated Jim’s medals in 1982, so there are two golds listed for Pentathlon and Decathlon, and the person who came in 4th still is listed as a Bronze medal winner.
This situation has the added problem of team events being involved, do you punish the entire team, or just the cheater.
I win at Pretty Pretty Princess, so there!
The athletes do get notified, and they have upgrade ceremonies although I’m not sure if Beckie Scott ended up getting two ceremonies as she was moved from bronze to silver to gold for the 5k pursuit.
Now that Landis has lost his case in front of the USADA (US Anti Doping Agency) the runner up from 2006, Oscar Pererio, will get a new ceremony.
After a flurry of disqualifications, I’m now Major League Baseball’s official record holder for “most home runs hit during the 1990s.”
{sidetrack}
The US has an Anti-Doping Agency?
Must be in constant crisis mode to work there.
Then I’ll lay claim to the 2000 Oscar for Best Actor in a Leading Role on the grounds that any group of people high enough to give it to Russell Crowe for Gladiator deserves to be overruled.
I just recently won the Fields Medal. Let’s not mention the fact that I abhor math and that the medal itself is crayon on cardboard.
Don’t judge me!
Scoff I’m simply not a sports person in general, but the Olympics holds a special place of utter contempt in my heart. All it is is seeing who can best do performance-enhancing drugs and get away with it. Ability seems not to matter at all. Sportsmanship indeed. A pox on all their houses!
Perhaps you should try to watch a few new sports. There is little reason for male swimmers to cheat. There are plenty of guys with the necessary power, it is technique that matters most. (This is not true for women, hence the East German and Chinese scandals.) Amusingly, when Gary Hall (the dominant 50m swimmer of the past decade) heavily criticized Landis, Bonds essentially called him a spoiled rich kid.
Diving almost has to be clean, too. I can’t imagine anyone bothers to dope for the modern pentathlon. I should ask some volleyball players; the only thing I can think of that would really help is Human Growth Hormone.
Yeah, if their parents gave it to them when they were 8. 
Every sport has opportunities for cheating. You’re running at the highest possible level of physical achievement, enhancing your body (by whatever method) is going to help you eek out that tiny bit more performance that separates gold from silver. It may help more in powerlifting and cycling than golf, but don’t think any physical sport is exempt.
The only time steroids don’t help is in a sport where you don’t get injured and don’t need to be very fit to succeed. Curling, for instance, maybe archery.
Let’s put it this way, if steroids were legal and socially acceptable training aids (like protein shakes), do you think swimmers wouldn’t bother with them?
This would seem to answer to the possibility of steroid abuse in swimming, but there are plenty of other ways to cheat. What about EPO or blood packing?
I do not believe most would use them. Maybe HS kids, who wouldn’t really using them for swimming but for looks. Possibly the free style sprint specialists, for whom power is most important. Flexibility, range of motion, and feel for the water (the real reason swimmers shave) are much more important. For example, I am bigger and stronger than all but two or three guys in my Masters swim group, but I’m one of the slower guys. Since injuries have compounded my natural inflexibility, my lack of speed is predictable. In this country, in addition, swimming is not a socially empowering sport like football, which also reduces the incentive to dope.
Shoulder injuries are the only real problem in swimming, generally from too much stress too often on the shoulders. I would think steroids would actually be detrimental. I would think increased power would also stress the shoulder joints even more, and make you more likely to get injured. Increased bulk increases drag without commiserate power to overcome it, and would increase the stress on the shoulder.
Steroids that aid recovery would seem to be the biggest thing, as you could, in theory, practice harder more often. But the elites already spend so much time in the water, and you can swim hard every day, so I wouldn’t think it would buy you much.