So you’re a professional cycler. You skipped school and university to focus on your cycling. But as your professional career reaches its peak, you realise that you’re falling just short of what it takes. You have two options. First, throw in the towel and try another career. Second, take drugs. If you take drugs, the worse case scenario is that you get caught, have to throw in the towel and try another career. So why not take drugs? The worst-case scenario is exactly the same as your alternative. And if you get away with it, you achieve your dream. It’s a pretty good risk assessment!

I think the same thing happens in brain related fields. If I can’t quite get through my law degrees, my options are the same. Give up, or cheat my way though. Where is the incentive to do the ‘right’ thing when the risk analysis leans towards cheating?

In any sport it devalues not just the participant but the entire venue. Sports are supposed to be great because its “ideally” an average person accomplishing remarkable feats. Once you stray from the being average by doping the entire value and entertainment is lost. In NASCAR the point of a template is an “average” car competing in a level field.

Cheating on the road often results in a twisted pile of metal.