Game Theory Reflected in Doping in Sports
Doping has long been a critical issue in sports. Especially in competitive sports such as cycling and sprinting, where a short boost in performance can bring dramatic changes in results, doping is always tempting for the players. Naturally, those who are on the top of their field are prone to be suspected for doping. The accusation against the cyclist Lance Armstrong in 2005 is an example that well illustrates this point.
In 2005, Lance Armstrong was accused of having used an illegal performance-enhancing drug in 1999 to win Tours de France. The French sports newspaper L’Équipe reported that Lance Armstrong has used EPO, the test for which was unavailable in 1999. By 2005, however, drug test for EPO has been developed, and the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory, after a long, painstaking, and rigorous investigation, concluded that Armstrong used EPO during the 1999 Tour. This was possible because they had frozen urine samples taken from riders back then.
The controversy over the truth still goes on today, but whether Armstrong did use EPO or not, this article, combined with game theory that we learned in class, seems to bring some interesting insight on sports and doping.
First of all, doping can be directly linked to the prisoner’s dilemma. Suppose there are two players A and B. They both have 2 strategies—to dope or not dope. When a player dopes, he/she definitely guaranteed a better performance. Also, suppose that both players do not consider the probability of getting caught for doping.
Now consider player A. If player B does not dope, it is better for player A to dope because he will definitely have an advantage over player B. If player B dopes, it is still better for A to dope because he will be disadvantaged if he doesn’t, and he will at least be on the same ground if he does.
Player B will also go through the same reasoning as player A. No matter what strategy the other player uses, the dominant strategy for both A and B is to dope. Therefore, the Nash Equilibrium for this game is both players taking performance-enhancing drug.
This is the reason why many sports players take performance-enhancing drugs, despite the fact that it is illegal. But we have excluded an important factor in the game described above—the possibility of getting caught. If the players are confident that they will pass the drug test, they will, undoubtedly, take drugs. However, in real life, there is the possibility of detecting doping, and this probability determines the mixed equilibrium. The higher the expected probability of getting caught is, the more likely that players will not dope.
In this sense, this article has an important implication. Since the sports committee can now freeze urine and blood sample, they can detect illegal drug use that they cannot detect at the time in the future. This will increase the probability of athletes getting caught for doping. The new mixed equilibrium, although we do not have definite numbers for now, will be reached such that players are less likely to dope.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/24/sports/othersports/24cycling.html
– Weigo