Should PED users be allowed in the HoF

I was watching an interesting discussion on ESPN on this topic and with Lance Armstrong's impending confession, its certainly a topic worth debating; in light of cheating, how should sporting "greats" be viewed?

The ESPN debate was quite simple: should known PED users be inducted into the HoF. The argument for was quite interesting. One commentator stated that certain PED users were too good to be excluded. The examples he gave were Jones Jr & Mosley.

I'm conflicted in my opinion so I'm interested to hear the thoughts of others.

On the one hand its cheating and it brings boxing into disrepute.

On the other hand, plenty of other previous inductees led less than clean lifestyles and some brought the sport into disrepute both inside and outside the ring.

RJJ appears to be something of a trump card in the argument. As excluding PED users means excluding him, which just doesn't feel right. Maybe if an argument can be made that their greatness outweighs their PED use then they can be included, but not otherwise.

That scumbag Armstrong (who, I'm sorry, is showing no genuine remorse whatsoever, regardless of how many crocodile tears he's cried on Oprah) is possibly the greatest disgrace to any sport ever and therefore should never be allowed near any sporting event again, let alone a hall of fame.

No, none of them should. EVER.

This is a difficult one. There's the moral relativism that it involves, for a start. We've already got Monzon the murderer, boxers who admitted to taking dives, boxers in the pay of the Mafia, the odd armed robber and plenty more besides. Therefore, why shouldn't we add a few little non-recreational drug-takers to add to those who did it for fun?

The argument against, of course, is that Monzon didn't use any of his nasty social habits to enhance his boxing career at the expense of others. Inside the ring, so far as we know, he didn't cheat. The Hall of Fame, quite rightly, deals with a fighter's exploits between the ropes and only that (at least it does in the participant categories, so Stallone doesn't count).

One would like to say, under these circumstances, toss out or exclude those who routinely cheated. I don't exactly know the full ins and outs of cases relevant to men such as Jones, Holyfield, Mosley and so on. Suspicion shouldn't be enough to debar someone, and even a single unconfirmed positive test ought not be sufficient to damn someone in perpetuity. However, if there is clear evidence that a fighter has systematically cooked the books with PEDs, then yes, by all means disbar him from the Hall for good.

captain carrantuohil wrote:

The Hall of Fame, quite rightly, deals with a fighter's exploits between the ropes and only that

They let Tyson in despite biting chunks out of Holyfield in the ring

Captain, I too am conflicted on this, but where does occasional become routine? It's the old question on does one grain of sand make a beach. Obviously not. What about two? Three? and so on. When does a pile of sand become a beach? It's all a matter of opinion. That said, not including Jones Jr goes against the grain for me. Too significant to be left out, but that is only my opinion.

As a general rule of thumb, I'd say no. But in certain circumstances, I'd be willing to make rare exceptions if it was justified.

Jones Jr, I feel, is a good example of this, and it's a very different scenario to someone like Armstrong who, instead of having their image ever so slightly tarnished is now completely disgraced. Jones tested positive for a substance not universally considered a no-no (of the sanctioning bodies, only the IBF deemed it illegal) for his fight against Hall. He'd passed tests which can pick up this substance many times before and would do so again several times after, and claimed that he'd taken the medication which contained the substance to help with an injury to his wrist suffered in his previous fight against Telesco.

However, Jones was able to provide proof that he'd fractured his wrist in that Telesco fight and that the medication in question had been suggested to him by a doctor. The medication was also available over the counter - it's not as if there was any secrecy and / or grand cover up to acquire it. After his positive sample, he continued to fight at the same excellent level for another four years, which also suggests that the substance he was picked up on didn't really enhance his performance all that much.

In a case like that, where it was very probably more just a case of Jones being a little naive and careless rather than seeking to deceive and outright cheat, I'd grant a little leeway. Disappointing from Jones, who should have known better, but not enough to cancel out his right to a Hall of Fame spot.

The case of Mosley, however, is different. He's admitted that he was escaping without sanction for a prolonged period and, of course, was a beneficiary of the BALCO project - and there was nothing naive about that, as we know. Similarly, if we look at the case of Armstrong within his own sport, the overwhelming evidence points to an elaborate, prolonged series of doping and cover ups, rather than a one offwhich didn't seem to make a great deal of difference to the athlete's performance.

So no in general, unless there are extenuating circumstances (genuine ones, that is).

My own view is the hall of fame cannot really have a stance on this until the sport has a whole has consistent testing and uniformity across states, governing bodies and commissions as to what can and cannot be taken. Whilst I am always wary of the unwitting ignorance defence for as long as the approach by the powers that be is so haphazard it is an easy defence to adopt and hide behind, and as others have alluded to with Jones there does seem to be fighters who have fell foul of a lack of clarity as to what is and isn't acceptable.

Woudl dearly love the sport to adopt the approach baseball takes where every participant knows exactly what they can and can't take and anyone who gets caught finds themselves forever banished from the Hall of Fame but alas as a sport do not think boxing is there yet, however do think there is a case to be made for those who have clearly cheated such as Toney being exlcuded because the thought of him sitting alongside the likes of Armstrong, Ali and Robinson makes me feel sick.

Right you are about Tyson, Lionel. However, I would say that this was an infraction of the rules that was dealt with on the spot, rather as McEnroe was defaulted from a Grand Slam Tennis match for his behaviour. Had Tyson done that consistently throughout his career, he'd have been DQ'd every time and wouldn't have got anywhere near the Hall. The general principle stands - you don't punish someone twice for the same offence.

BHB, think Chris makes the perfect assessment of the relative cases of Mosley and Jones. Jones gets in on the single case premise, plus the fact that he was a fool rather than a knave. Mosley, ordinarily a shoo-in for the Hall, should not make it. Knew what he was doing, by his own admission, and did so over a long period of time.

Maybe they could build a separate wing for the "others"

The problem I think with PEDs is its not always a black and white issue. A serial cheater in the vein of Lance Armstrong should of course never be allowed entry but in some cases its not clear if something was taken by mistake or in ignorance. Or is one substance far worse than other? (diuletrics v PEDS). Its uncomfortable now because increasingly the feeling seems to be given whats at stake couple with a rubbish testing system that the problem is and may for some time be a case of widespread abuse rather than isolated incidents. Some boxers revered for their guts, character and likeability (Mosley and Morales for example) have fallen foul and its a shame especially to see a faded warrior like Morales trying to prolong a career for no good reason by taking banned substances.

Armstrong isn't a scumbag......

He's saved a lot of lives and he dabbled at a time when everybody else did.....

You guys don't understand PEDs you think you pop a pill and look like Arnie...

Sorry but it's hard work that gets results and Armmstrong worked harder..

Last time I checked a steroid didn't show you how to avoid a left hook and counter!!

I'll disagree there Truss.

Armstrong is most definitely a scumbag.
For all the good his Livestrong foundation may have achieved his actions as an individual mark him as a world class beeeeeeeeppppp.

He lied, bullied, intimidated and ruined careers.
His actions to other riders who tried to expose him are disgusting.

As to the OP...

No, regardless of sport if you're proven to have taken PEDs you should not be allowed into a HoF.

Armstrong was around in a time where everyone doped. Be was just the best doper.

So yes, given most pro athletes take them they should be inducted.

To get to the top of any sport you have to be selfish and bully to a certain extent.......

None of his team mates were forced into accepting his demands...

"If you're proven".....so we can look forward to seeing loads of guys who have indulged but have never been proven instead!! That's very good!!

I've taken peds.......and know lot's who have........Armstrong is the tip....

Funny how all those 100m runners are three metres quicker than Ben Johnson now by eating their greens!!!

Your 400m chick missed three tests in a row...but she can go into the HOF???

..and he has saved thousands of lives with his HUGE money raising..

Not a scumbag...Always be an idol to me.

captain carrantuohil wrote:BHB, think Chris makes the perfect assessment of the relative cases of Mosley and Jones. Jones gets in on the single case premise, plus the fact that he was a fool rather than a knave. Mosley, ordinarily a shoo-in for the Hall, should not make it. Knew what he was doing, by his own admission, and did so over a long period of time.

Good summary, well put. I am in total agreement.

captain carrantuohil wrote: One would like to say, under these circumstances, toss out or exclude those who routinely cheated. I don't exactly know the full ins and outs of cases relevant to men such as Jones, Holyfield, Mosley and so on. Suspicion shouldn't be enough to debar someone, and even a single unconfirmed positive test ought not be sufficient to damn someone in perpetuity. However, if there is clear evidence that a fighter has systematically cooked the books with PEDs, then yes, by all means disbar him from the Hall for good.

You've got to be dumb to be caught more than once, and I fear being caught "just once" is a lot more sinister than the "just once" implies.

3 year ban. No entry to HoF.

Absolutely not under any circumstances. What kind of message does that send out if you allow cheats into a Hall of Fame? Cheapens the whole thing and is an insult to the great fighters who really belong there. hy should some cheat be allowed into the HoF with great fighters like Ali, Lewis, Sugar Ray Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Marciano and many others?

Aaron Pryor is in the HOF..

yes, they should. its harsh but what kind of message is it giving out to the fighters? boxing recently has seen a surge in big names been discovered using PEDs (peterson, morales, berto to name a few), and if its to stop a clear message needs to be sent. imagine manny vs floyd happened and only one got into the HoF, and manny won a SD. if it there emerged manny was using PEDs, he would effectively have robbed a spot from somebody. that situation cannot be allowed, and the excuse that everybody else is doing it so lets look the other way is why the problem exists in the first place.

"What message is it giving out to fighters???"

Fighters are quite intelligent people and are aware I'm sure of PEDS and the effect they can have on the body......

I'm sure Boxing gyms are like Weight gyms in so far as lot's of stuff is being passed around!!

Armstrong avoided being caught all his career.....It's about beating the system.

You're naive, .Fighters don't need to get a message.....they know the drill.

Personally think Jones gets away too lightly with failing a test, even if it was just one test I agree with Mackem that's it's a strong indicator he may have been more guilty than we know.

This is the whole problem with having so many governing bodies and commissions dipping their hand into this, is too easy for a fighter like Jones to say they did not know it was banned and it to be plausible. If you compete in atheltics or baseball or a sport with proper testing you get a list every so often that tells you what you can and can't take, if you take something off the list you shouldn't is far harder to make an argument as it is black and white.

Woah there Rowley don't go mentioning drug testing and baseball in the same sentence.

To be fair ghosty the sport has improved massively over the last few years, is not half as bad as the days of Bonds and Mcguire

To be fair I would like to see boxing progress in the same way, was a time when boxing and Baseball were the worst offenders for drug testing and for substances not deemed illegal.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Armstrong isn't a scumbag......

He's saved a lot of lives and he dabbled at a time when everybody else did.....

You guys don't understand PEDs you think you pop a pill and look like Arnie...

Sorry but it's hard work that gets results and Armmstrong worked harder..

Last time I checked a steroid didn't show you how to avoid a left hook and counter!!

That's a BS argument and you should know better. PEDs make you train harder and build up greater stamina. Yes taking PEDs and sitting on your 'arris wont make you do anything other than grow fat. But a PED used will have greater stamina and increase fast twitch muscles which can make you avoid a left hook and counter it with one of your own. It will also give the fighter greater stamina to be able to throw more punches than he ordinarily would.

In boxing a known PED user should be jailed for attempted manslaughter or assault with intent given the nature of the sport.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:To get to the top of any sport you have to be selfish and bully to a certain extent.......

None of his team mates were forced into accepting his demands...

"If you're proven".....so we can look forward to seeing loads of guys who have indulged but have never been proven instead!! That's very good!!

I've taken peds.......and know lot's who have........Armstrong is the tip....

Funny how all those 100m runners are three metres quicker than Ben Johnson now by eating their greens!!!

Your 400m chick missed three tests in a row...but she can go into the HOF???

..and he has saved thousands of lives with his HUGE money raising..

Not a scumbag...Always be an idol to me.

We're not talking viagra here.

Took that as well...works!!

azania wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Armstrong isn't a scumbag......

He's saved a lot of lives and he dabbled at a time when everybody else did.....

You guys don't understand PEDs you think you pop a pill and look like Arnie...

Sorry but it's hard work that gets results and Armmstrong worked harder..

Last time I checked a steroid didn't show you how to avoid a left hook and counter!!

That's a BS argument and you should know better. PEDs make you train harder and build up greater stamina. Yes taking PEDs and sitting on your 'arris wont make you do anything other than grow fat. But a PED used will have greater stamina and increase fast twitch muscles which can make you avoid a left hook and counter it with one of your own. It will also give the fighter greater stamina to be able to throw more punches than he ordinarily would.

In boxing a known PED user should be jailed for attempted manslaughter or assault with intent given the nature of the sport.

Couldn't resist this - have to agree with azania.

Hard work gets results and PEDs help you work harder. Having competed against PED users and lost - it is soul destroying for those athletes who are clean, who know they are clean and know they are competing against someone who is fighting dirty. Its taking a tough sport and handing the opponent a chair to beat you with as well as his fists.

If we are objecting to PED use on the moral and ethical grounds of cheating - I'd say that is a pretty weak argument. We have Tyson in - and countless other great fighters guilty of some bending and breaking of rules in the ring.

If we are objecting to PED use on the grounds that they are providing an unfair advantage and thus augmenting an individual's standing - I'd say that is a fair and reasonable objection.

Who can say for sure that Jones' ability to cope and not be outpowered by naturally bigger men at LHW were not secondary to anabolic abuse in the light of his failed test? Should Toney's victory over Jirov be ignored in the light of his subsequent positive tests at heavyweight? I'd say yes. Much as I love RJJ's ability - he does indeed get off lightly for a failed test. By electing these people to the Hall of fame, we are granting them an extra reward for their cheating.

Oxy, whether temporary or a little more permanent is good to see you back, hope you are keeping well.

Second that. How'd the exams go??! (if memory serves me that was your excuse for the prolonged hiatus!)

TopHat24/7 wrote:Second that. How'd the exams go??! (if memory serves me that was your excuse for the prolonged hiatus!)

It was only a medical degree top hat, how hard can it be?

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Armstrong isn't a scumbag......

He's saved a lot of lives and he dabbled at a time when everybody else did.....

You guys don't understand PEDs you think you pop a pill and look like Arnie...

Sorry but it's hard work that gets results and Armmstrong worked harder..

Last time I checked a steroid didn't show you how to avoid a left hook and counter!!

That's a BS argument and you should know better. PEDs make you train harder and build up greater stamina. Yes taking PEDs and sitting on your 'arris wont make you do anything other than grow fat. But a PED used will have greater stamina and increase fast twitch muscles which can make you avoid a left hook and counter it with one of your own. It will also give the fighter greater stamina to be able to throw more punches than he ordinarily would.

In boxing a known PED user should be jailed for attempted manslaughter or assault with intent given the nature of the sport.

Couldn't resist this - have to agree with azania.

Hard work gets results and PEDs help you work harder. Having competed against PED users and lost - it is soul destroying for those athletes who are clean, who know they are clean and know they are competing against someone who is fighting dirty. Its taking a tough sport and handing the opponent a chair to beat you with as well as his fists.

If we are objecting to PED use on the moral and ethical grounds of cheating - I'd say that is a pretty weak argument. We have Tyson in - and countless other great fighters guilty of some bending and breaking of rules in the ring.

If we are objecting to PED use on the grounds that they are providing an unfair advantage and thus augmenting an individual's standing - I'd say that is a fair and reasonable objection.

Who can say for sure that Jones' ability to cope and not be outpowered by naturally bigger men at LHW were not secondary to anabolic abuse in the light of his failed test? Should Toney's victory over Jirov be ignored in the light of his subsequent positive tests at heavyweight? I'd say yes. Much as I love RJJ's ability - he does indeed get off lightly for a failed test. By electing these people to the Hall of fame, we are granting them an extra reward for their cheating.

W...T...F

I don't know what surprises me more. Oxy returning or Oxy agreeing with me! It had to happen anyway. His time off has lead to a radical reflection of old views.

Now for that Rocky fella.........

Welcome back Oxy.

PED'S only make the people prepared to do the hard work...work harder!!

You'd know If you've ever taken them.....Lot's of crud written about steroids...

Armstrong won because he worked the hardest in a PED era.....

For all we know Floyd Patterson could have taken them...

Tip of the iceberg is Lance..

I think some British cycling bint said it perfectly. He denied people their rightful place on the podium.

"Some British cycling bint"...can't argue with sources like that!!

Or maybe I can...All the top cyclists were taking PEDS then.....wake up!!!

PED eaters like Tyler Hamilton couldn't even make the top 20!!

Apparantly Armstrong bullied, intimidated and threatened alot of people involved in order to maintain his status so whilst Im sure he put in the work, he also appears to have manipulated his whole environment from the very highest level down to make himself top dog. He is a cheat of pretty much the highest level, on a scale seldom witnessed thus far. The damage he did cycling is almost catastrophic. I hear they might be giving it the chop from the Olympics now such is the disgrace.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:"Some British cycling bint"...can't argue with sources like that!!

Or maybe I can...All the top cyclists were taking PEDS then.....wake up!!!

PED eaters like Tyler Hamilton couldn't even make the top 20!!

Nicole Cook I believe her name is. She was interviewed on Sky Sports.

Bint........Never heard that word before..Is it a term for an "Attractive female" ???

If I go home and say "Come here Bint" when I go home will she be happy???

Has the Oprah interview been screened yet?

Given some of the feedback so far it doesn't sound like he's remotely remorseful for cheating. Number of legal cases pending against him though. Hopefully he gets the pants sued off him and then locked up for perjury.

I bet If he was British....You wouldn't be sticking the boot in.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I bet If he was British....You wouldn't be sticking the boot in.

I would

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Bint........Never heard that word before..Is it a term for an "Attractive female" ???

If I go home and say "Come here Bint" when I go home will she be happy???

Depends if you're using PEDs or returning from the Oyster

Group Cpt Lionel Mandrake wrote:

captain carrantuohil wrote:

The Hall of Fame, quite rightly, deals with a fighter's exploits between the ropes and only that

They let Tyson in despite biting chunks out of Holyfield in the ring

I've never seen the big deal in all that. The guy lost a piece of ear. Far worse has happened. I knew someone who lost half a ear in a car accident so they nicknamed him 18 months!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I bet If he was British....You wouldn't be sticking the boot in.

Couldn't be more wrong if you tried. If anything being British makes me an even more staunch believer in fair play, I backed Chambers' life ban for example, irrespective of his nationality I thought it was wrong to be over-turned.

Am I correct in thinking that Armstrong never tested positive for anything despite being the most tested athlete in the history of sport? Think I read that somewhere but not sure how true it is. It does make me question every top level boxer when the punishment is near non existent, the testing is pathetic and the rewards are immense (Floyd being the highest paid sports star in the world) and losing can set your career back a year or so like Khan. No one seems to care that Marquez hires a convicted steroid dealer the knocks a guy with a cast iron chin out cold after not really hurting him for 36 rounds of boxing.

I've never seen the big deal..The guy lost a piece of ear"

It's Boxing........we don't bite ears off regardless of how strict your diet has been!!

I admire British fairplay......You just forget to turn up for three tests in a row over here....

and then get applauded for winning a 400m gold...