Oliver Morton, a science-fiction writer, has come up with one of the most controversial ideas for Olympic sport. He has suggested that after the Athens 2004 games, the Olympics should be split into two; an Open Olympics, where athletes can use all the drugs they can get their hands onto, and for nostalgics, an Olympic classic, where all the old rules apply. Despite this idea is unlikely to be embraced, it has shown that at least Mr Morton has accepted the "modern era". And so should we.
Should drugs be allowed, it will deliver even competition. There won't be a case of anybody gaining an unfair advantage, because everybody will use drugs. The world records would tumble. Athletes that did not have a chance could now have a better chance to be closer to the world's best. And the competition would still remain justified. .
There is also the "no fuss" argument. Had drugs become legal in competitive sport, there will no longer be a fuss about drugs. Drug tests would be abolished, which means the organisers can concentrate on other issues, rather than "drug-free" games or updating drug tests. Wouldn't that make life less stressful for organisers?.
Furthermore, some drugs cannot be detected under the current drug test system. That means many athletes can already use it without being detected. So why bother trying to find athletes who are using drugs when they can't be detected? Why not take the easy and sensible route of allowing the athletes to use drugs?.
Drugs are readily used everyday by common people to cure their colds or headaches. So why not allow athletes use drugs to allow them to perform better? Drugs are used to improve something, such as a cold. If athletes used drugs to enhance their performance, it is still serving its purpose, which is to improve something.
But there will be those who will reject the use of drugs in sport. "Using drugs is cheating," they say. But if you allow everybody to use drugs, it is fair as everybody is allowed to use it.