Ok, I finally get to return to this one. The New Lean in Corporate America is killing me...
Two stories...
My brother has always been a good athlete. We grew up near Walnut Creek Country Club, and my brother moved there on the course. He has played that course since he was a kid, and was right at a par (or a little below) golfer.
A few years ago (John Daly was in the top 50 at the time) the golf pro called my brother to tell him John was coming to play Walnut Creek. He had never seen the course, stepped onto it, and in my brother's words, he tore that course up. He 'laid up' like my brother had never seen. John played that course two levels above anyone else my brother had ever seen.
A friend of mine (and IT techie geek, BTW) is an avid cyclist. He got the opportunity to ride the Tour de France course (not to compete). He said there were bikers in their group that he did not feel worthy to hold their water bottle. Their best times still were not anywhere near the requirements to enter the Tour De France. Enter Lance Armstrong.
I just find it interesting to observe the 'thinning of the herd' so to speak as they move up the pyramid. So if you take the top 10 bikers in the world (based on previous competition times and rankings), is Lance Armstrong enough better than them to beat them more than 50% of the time? I'm inclined to say "yes".
Is he doping? Don't know. But I will give a man (or a woman) the benefit of the doubt; until proved otherwise. I think once in a while people are that good at what they do. Tiger Woods doesn't dope.
Now... enter Pudge Rodriguez. I'll admit extreme bias here; I think he hung the moon. Was he doping like the rest? Don't know. I would like to think he wasn't.
I could certainly "understand" (but not condone; ever... ) doping in baseball. Take 20 guys who have been playing the game all their life, similar body build, same bats, same distance, same pitches. How do you gain the advantage over the others??
That "advantage" translates to money; and sometimes lots of it.