Handling the Problem of Cheating | C-Squared

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 17 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 14

  • @jdmaines2682
    @jdmaines2682 3 місяці тому

    Should call this episode C cubed

  • @babstra55
    @babstra55 3 місяці тому

    the 'tainted supplements' in sports is ALWAYS an excuse to cover for secondary metabolic remnants of steroids. the steroids themselves disappear in HOURS so it's almost impossible to catch those in a test, but the secondary remnants are detectable for long times. so the game is always about providing an excuse, an alternative source for those secondary detectable elements.
    so in ways it's very similar to chess, you only catch the dumbest and most incompetent doping users, and once in a blue moon even the competent ones because someone in their team made a stupid mistake. most of them don't get caught and it's super difficult to prove it.
    another thing people should understand about competitive cheaters: they're not affected by harsher punishments. they will take the risk, whatever it is, because they're so competitive they'll take ANY advantage they can. this also means that even the best are just as likely to cheat, if not more than others. carl lewis gave positive sample in EVERY olympics he took part in, armstrong saw his cancer as just another way to hide cheating. for people like that there are no limits, there are no risks they won't take. losing their career means nothing to them compared to winning.
    in the head of someone who burns to be the world champion, the thought is not "I'm only the best ever if I can do it fairly" but "if I don't cheat others will, and as I AM the best anyway it's only fair that I cheat too."

  • @GoldenAgeAnime
    @GoldenAgeAnime 3 місяці тому

    Major League Baseball (MLB)
    Steroid Use: MLB has had several high-profile steroid scandals, most notably during the late 1990s and early 2000s. The Mitchell Report, released in 2007, named 89 MLB players who were linked to steroid use. However, it’s impossible to know the exact percentage of players using steroids at that time, but it's widely acknowledged that steroid use was rampant.
    Estimated Impact: Some estimates suggest that up to 20-50% of players might have used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) during the height of the steroid era, though exact numbers are speculative.
    National Football League (NFL)
    Steroid Use: The NFL has also had issues with steroid and PED use, though the prevalence is harder to gauge. In 2011, the NFL reported that about 7% of players tested positive for PEDs during the season, but this number might underrepresent actual usage due to the limitations of testing protocols.
    Overall Perspective: The NFL's use of PEDs may be underreported, as players might use substances that are harder to detect or cycle them to avoid testing positive.
    National Basketball Association (NBA)
    Steroid Use: The NBA has a lower reported incidence of steroid use compared to the NFL and MLB. However, there have been cases of players being caught using PEDs. The percentage of players caught or suspected of using steroids is likely much lower than in other sports, but exact figures are difficult to obtain.
    General Trend: Basketball relies heavily on skill and agility rather than brute strength, which may reduce the incentive for steroid use, although it is still present.

  • @jsrjsr
    @jsrjsr 3 місяці тому

    An Easy way of dealing with non online cheating, is having harder post game analysis with the players. They should be able to give coherent live analysis about critical moments of the game they were playing. Do not give credit to a player if they cannot explain their moves. They may win, but their wins willl become irrelevant in the eyes of the community of players. A cheater will never be able to explain their own games on a live interview context, so exclude chess players who cannot explain their own games and you will expel the cheaters indirectly.

    • @Kreycea
      @Kreycea 3 місяці тому

      As a player you are not obligated to have a reasoning behind making every single move. I mean of course you should have a reason to make a move but it shouldn't be illegal to make a move just because "it felt right" or whatever. Also in my opinion post interviews should not affect under any circumstance the result of a game. The game is what is important for the players and the interview afterwards is just additional content for the viewers.

    • @jsrjsr
      @jsrjsr 3 місяці тому

      @@Kreycea the criteria of live analysis is well within reason as it is the case that the overwhelming majority of super gms can explain the reasons behind their decisions. Even if they use intuition they can explain it in context of their position. You are not a super gm so no worries.

    • @Kreycea
      @Kreycea 3 місяці тому

      @@jsrjsr I understand that. That doesn't take away anything I said.

    • @saqlainalvi3333
      @saqlainalvi3333 3 місяці тому +4

      Post game analysis means nothing. A player could be playing on intuition at times and if hes not able to explain his moves doesnt mean he cheated. To have such an arbitrary metric to analyse cheating can back fire and make us doubt genuine players. Even 1% error in the method would mean 1000's of innocent players will be doubted as cheaters

    • @jsrjsr
      @jsrjsr 3 місяці тому

      @@saqlainalvi3333 there is a large sample of cases in which a super gm can give coherent lines in the post game analysis, even if they played some moves intuitively. They still showed overall understanding of the position( we don't evaluate move by move,as you suggested). "You won? Who cares, you even don't understand why you made critical decisions. We may replace you with an engine for that matter". Anyway , is easy for a super gm to explain themselves as revealed by recorded history. Therefore we can require the very best to not have problem with that.

  • @tonyclements
    @tonyclements 3 місяці тому +1

    Everyone makes mistakes. One Mulligan, then you're gone!

    • @Scaw
      @Scaw 3 місяці тому +2

      A person whose value system allows them to cheat does not make an unintentional mistake. To describe cheating as a "mistake" is a euphemism, and wrong.

    • @polielie
      @polielie 3 місяці тому

      @@Scawprobably most Olympic swimmers including Phelps have cheated using substances. I remember the Tour de France cheating scandals where 90 % of all athletes caught cheating

    • @babstra55
      @babstra55 3 місяці тому

      cheating isn't a mistake though, it's a deliberate premeditated action. to cheat you need to research cheating software, install it, and learn to use it. you can't do any of that by a mistake, and you can't do it because you had a momentarily lapse of judgement. a mistake is when you grab someone else's coat because it looked similar.