Main Criticisms of Enhanced Games
Critics of Enhanced Games point to several key problems:
1. Normalizing doping - the biggest concern is the risk of normalizing banned substance use among young athletes. If millions of viewers watch athletes break records through PEDs, pressure on young athletes to use similar substances may dramatically increase.
2. Inequality of access - not everyone can afford high-quality legal sports pharmacology. Wealthy athletes from wealthy federations will have an advantage over athletes from developing countries, deepening existing inequalities.
3. Long-term health consequences - pre-competition tests minimize immediate risk but do not eliminate long-term effects of supraphysiological pharmacology. Who will bear the medical costs for athletes in 20–30 years?
4. Message to children - sport has traditionally served as a model for healthy lifestyle. Enhanced Games sends a signal that chemical enhancement is a normal part of the pursuit of excellence.
Organizers’ Arguments
Enhanced Games organizers (a Dubai-based company backed by VC funds) counter each criticism:
On normalization: doping is already widespread in elite sport - Enhanced Games legalizes and regulates it instead of hiding it. Controlled doping is better than underground doping.
On inequality: a support fund for athletes from developing countries will finance medical care and substances for the best athletes regardless of their finances.
On health: prohibition is ineffective - athletes use PEDs anyway, just without medical oversight. Enhanced Games provides monitoring that reduces complication risks.
On role models: Enhanced Games is not for children. It is an adult event, like Formula 1 - nobody expects 12-year-olds to drive F1 cars after watching a Grand Prix.
WADA and IOC Response
WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) has sharply condemned Enhanced Games, calling them a “fundamental threat to the integrity of sport.” The agency has no legal tools to block a private commercial initiative, however.
The IOC has taken a more cautious position. President Thomas Bach stated that athletes participating in Enhanced Games “are making a free choice as adults” but risk exclusion from future Olympic Games - though no official rules exist yet.
Several national Olympic committees (USA, Australia, Great Britain) have indicated that participation in Enhanced Games may result in suspension of Olympic eligibility. Others are silent - which is itself telling.
What Athletes Say
Opinions in the sporting community are divided:
Against: Eliud Kipchoge, Noah Lyles and most active athletes under Olympic contracts have publicly criticized Enhanced Games as a threat to clean sport.
For (anonymously): in interviews without naming themselves, many athletes admit they understand their colleagues’ motivations. “If I were 35 and knew this was my last chance at real money…” - this type of comment has appeared repeatedly.
Neutral: some athletes, particularly from strongman and weightlifting, see Enhanced Games as a natural evolution of strength sports that have always been closer to the pharmacological boundary.
The Question of Equality and Access
One of the more overlooked aspects: do Enhanced Games increase or decrease equality in sport?
On one hand, legal doping is expensive. Full high-quality sports pharmacology (EPO, HGH, testosterone, supplementation) costs $20,000–$50,000 per year - beyond the reach of most athletes from developing countries.
On the other hand, Enhanced Games funds cover these costs for confirmed athletes. Potentially West African or Caribbean sprinters who used doping in traditional sport while risking their careers can legally compete on equal terms.
Impact on Traditional Sport
Will Enhanced Games destroy Olympic sport? Experts are divided.
Pessimistic scenario: growing polarization of results between “clean” Olympic sport and Enhanced Games will make Olympic records look increasingly modest. Viewers may migrate to the more spectacular results.
Optimistic scenario: Enhanced Games and Olympic sport coexist in parallel like amateur and professional boxing. Different markets, different audiences, no direct competition.
Initial market research data suggests Enhanced Games attracts mainly new sports viewers, particularly younger ones who previously did not follow athletics or swimming.