Cheating isn’t new. Ever since the dawn of man’s physical challenge against another, there have been ways of overcoming a stronger, fitter force by guile, stealth and dirty tricks.

Modern sport only exists because of the rules and regulations that determine each and every game. Yet, cheating is at the centre of many professional sports and prevalent in the amateurs ranks too. So it is worth considering what kind of sports person you want to be?

While we’ve been talking about adopting a tough winning mentality – does this mean that you will stop at nothing to win? While we embrace the slogan: ‘Winning is Everything’ – does that now mean at all cost?
 
The rules of golf, of rugby union, association football, and boxing were all created and refined in Victorian Britain to combat the rogues and bounders who were prevalent in society. Of course, the rules have changed and evolved since then, but the Corinthian spirit of sport was set in the 1850s and 1860s. Then the moral value of sport was seen as a way of solving many of the social problems of its day.
 
Charles Booth, who set up the Salvation Army, wrote in Life and Labour in London that “obligatory attendance at a Bible-class administered medicinally with cricket and football to take the taste away” was a wholesome way of developing unruly young men.
 
The Bible studies soon died out, but football and cricket spread like wildfire.
Cricket was commended because “such invaluable ideas as co-operation, division of labour, specialisation, obedience to a single organiser, national character, geography and its influences, arts and artistic anatomy, physiology and hygiene, ethics and even – if play can be learned rightly - general educational methods.”
 
So sport was good – but in every field there have been cheats trying to be winners. This has lead to changes in the way games have been played. Boxing, for example, was intended as a noble sport embodying self-discipline and fair play, but prize-fighting fell into criminal hands and disrepute until the Marquess of Queensberry drew up his rules for modern boxing – and organised the first Amateur Boxing Association.

The rules, introduced in 1866, eliminated wrestling and throwing, brought the use of gloves and the three-minute round and one-minute intervals, and the ten-second count. Yet, even this hasn’t stopped pro fighters trying to bend the rules in the intervening decades.
 
In recent years, headlines about drugs cheats have dominated professional sport, with athletes becoming increasingly willing to flaunt the rules and take their chance to stay one step ahead of the drug-testing authorities. For a while at least, until they are caught.

Athletics is littered with those who have taken performance-enhancing substances to achieve the glory of winning. The post-war Olympics were really a hypocritical contest between Eastern Bloc human machines on steroids prescribed by state doctors and by some Americans, Britons and others who lived on the edge of competing fairly. The pursuit of winning had driven many professional sports people way beyond the boundaries of fair play and into the realm of chemical combatants.
 
And the 2007 Tour de France is a prime example of how cheating eventually threatens to destroy a sports’ own credibility. The 94th tour has been seriously damaged by the doping scandals involving leading riders Michael Rasmussen, Alexandre Vinokourov and Cristian Moreni.

This followed the previous tour’s scandal when Floyd Landis, the winner in Paris, subsequently tested positive for an illegal drug. But drug-taking is nearly as old as the event itself, yet it still captures the imagination of cyclists and millions of race fans around the world.
 
One tongue-in-check suggestion by Times columnist Giles Smith has a grain of truth. He suggests that Belgian rider Wim Vansevenant should be celebrated after the 2007 tour. Who? Well, he was 141st in the gruelling race and 3 hours 52 minutes of the pace. He was the Eddie ‘the Eagle’ Edwards of the race. Edwards was a British ski-jumper who took part in the Winter Olympics in 1988 in Calgary. He was second last, after the last guy was disqualified.
 
The Belgian came last too. “The great thing about that is that, accordingly, Wim is the rider who, demonstrably, rode clean. Unless, of course, he is taking everything and it’s not working. In which case, there may well be a question mark over his chemist,” said Giles Smith.
 
It was said we should make Wim, who was la lanterne rouge, the brake light of the Tour, the plucky saviour of this sport. Is this a bad idea? There is now even suggestion of a Slipstream cycle team, an overtly drug-free professional team, committed to leaving drugs alone and doing their best.
 
But the serious point that was to be made was: “If cycling is going to clean itself up, it’s going to have to rethink its attitude to winning.”
That is an interesting concept.
 
No sport can claim the moral high ground. What has been shocking was allegations made by the great South African golfer Gary Player in July 2007 before the Open golf championship in Carnoustie that professional golfers were cheating by taking drugs.
 
The R&A’s rules talk about “the Spirit of the Game” saying: ‘Unlike many sports, golf is played, for the most part, without the supervision of a referee or umpire. The game relies on the integrity of the individual to show consideration for other players and to abide by the Rules. All players should conduct themselves in a disciplined manner, demonstrating courtesy and sportsmanship at all times, irrespective of how competitive they may be. This is the spirit of the game of golf.’
 
There is little in the rules about performance-enhancing drugs – and some commentators scoffed at the idea of middle-class golfers taken banned substances, although the golf authorities are now taking this kind of cheating very seriously indeed.
 
A cheat who wins without getting caught demeans the value of all sport. It defeats the purpose of a fair contest. So would you be tempted if an incremental improvement is the difference between success and failure. Would temptation be too much? This is really for everyone who wants to be winner. And it remains a question for each individual and his or her conscience. How far should they go to reach the top? If it means cheating to win, should it be allowed?
 
In the Winning Zone’s view it is far better to have a nation of solid and fair sportspeople who push themselves to their natural limits using their natural ability rather than cheats who will stop at nothing to gain glory. Yes, winning is Everything – but only if you do it fairly.
 
 
KK

© Copyright In The Winning Zone, MMVII, All Rights Reserved